Church History [3]

Citation preview

CHURCH

HISTORY by

Dr. Katl Bihlmeyer late Professor at the University of Tiibingen

revised by

Drt. Hermann Tachle Professor at the University of Munich

translated from the seventeenth German

edition

by

Victor E. Mills, O.F.M., M. A., Litt. D., Province of the Most Holy Name and

Francis J. Muller, O.F.M.,,M. A, ].C.D,, Province of the Most Holy Name

Volume Thtee

Modern and Recent Times

1966

NEWMAN

PRESS

- WESTMINSTER

The original and further German editions of CHURCH HISTORY under the title KIRCHENGESCHICHTE by Ferdinand Schéningh at Paderbotn Germany

were

published

Nihil obstat: Damian Blaher, O.F. M., J.C. D. Censor Deputatus

Imprimi potest:

Donaldus Hoag, O.F. M. Minister Provincialis

New Yotk March 9, 1965

Imprimatur;

1 Patrick A. O'Boyle Archbishop of Washington Washington, D. C. March

9, 1965

"The nibil obstat and imprimatar are official declarations that a book or pamphlet is free

of docttinal or motal error. No implication is contained thercin that those who have granted the nibil obstat and the imprimatur agree with the content, opinions or statements expressed,

All rights reserved. € Ferdinand Schéningh, Paderborn 1966 Printed by Ferdinand Schoningh at Padetbotn, Getmany

FROM With

THE

PREFACE

sincere thanks to God,

TO

THE

TENTH

EDITION

and after several unavoidable

de-

lays, this final volume of Church History is presented to the public.

Everyone in the field knows that the portrayal of recent church history has its own special difficulties, and that it is quite a risky venture to attempt to outline a sketch of the very recent past with its events and struggles that still affect us to the depths of our souls, I hope, however, that I have remained true to the guiding light and the great spirit of the historical school of Tiibingen, symbolized by the names Mohler, Hefele and Funk. With reference to church history, I consider myself a warm friend of research into the history of thought; yet I must also

emphasize

my conviction that an exact

statement

of the more

important facts will ever remain the indispensable foundation for the formation of sound judgment. True, as Funk remarked in his first edition, this limits a textbook considerably. I believe, however, that

we

have

given

a starting

point

for constructive

synthesis.

Anything beyond that must be left to the lectures of the professor and to appropriate books and other writings. As to the bibliography, the author made a special effort to give a careful selection of the best and latest so as not only to satisfy

the inquiring student, but also to serve the scholar and the expert.

Failure here is unavoidable (especially with foreign publications) ; the output is so vast that one cannot easily keep pace with the current literary harvest. Even before publication was completed there had already appeared many new and valuable items worthy of entry,

In these troubled times, signaling a turning point in the history of the Church, may this book go forth with the blessing of God to help awaken and stimulate young theologians to a love for the Church and an interest in her history.

Tiibingen, October 1433 Karl Bihlmeyer

FOREWORD

TO

THE

ELEVENTH

EDITION

The present reviser, with the same genuine thanks to God, puts into the hands of the reader this concluding part of Bihlmeyer’s

Church History. The difficulties inherent in a work treating of the recent past are no less today than two decades ago, but the text brought up to date may well meet the challenge of a critical and pragmatic history. The reviser felt that he dare not abandon the original aim of an historical orientation. A conscientious exposition, though fragmentary and somewhat superficial, can contribute to the clarification of difficulties, and lend a helping hand lest “‘the grace of being able to forget be supplanted by the willingness to forget” (Heuss).

Munich,

Hermann

July 1956

TRANSLATOR’S

The

renowned

Tiichle

PREFACE

Kirchengeschichte

of Dr. Karl

Bihlmeyer,

often revised by Dr. Hermann Tiichle, has been widely acclaimed in

both French and Italian versions. This English translation of the

three volume work was begun some ten years ago by Father Victor Mills, late Professor of Church History at Holy Name College in Washington, D. C. Volume One appeared in 1958. The untimely death of Fr. Mills delayed the publication of Volume Two until 1963. Much of the translation of Volume Three was found among his manuscripts. In matters of very recent church history, this English version goes beyond the material found in the latest (seventeenth) German edition. Many facts have been added regarding the Church in America. The present translator has brought the work to completion out of esteem for Fr. Mills, Washington, Febrnary 1966

VI

Francis J. Muller, O.F.M.

TABLE OF CONTENTS PART

MODERN

AND TO

III

RECENT TIMES FROM REFORMATION THE PRESENT (1517—1960) First Period

FROM

REVOLT OF LUTHER TO PEACE OF WESTPHALIA. PERIOD OF REFORMATION AND COUNTER-REFORMATION (1517—1648).

Chapter 1

Religious Revolt in Germany and Elsewhere to Middle of Sixteenth Century

§ 159. Martin Luther,

His

Theological

Development,

His

Conduct

in

Controversy over Indulgences . . . . . . . . . . . § 160. Rome Examines Luther's Doctrine. Leipzig Disputation (1519). Luther’s Principal Writings (1520); His Excommunication (1521)

$ I61I. Diet and Edict of Worms, 1521. Luther at the Wartburg and again in Wittenberg . . . . . . . . . . . .. § 162, Progress of Reformation ment VII. Peasants"War

to 1524, Pnpes Adrian VI and . . . . . . . . . . .

Cle-

§ 163. Religious Leagues. Establishment of Lutheran Natmna] Churcth

§ 164.

(1525—1529). Diets of Spever (1526, 1520) . . . . . Reformation and Empire from Diet of Augsburg 1530 to Religious

Truce of Niirnberg 1532

§ 165. Anabaptists

and

Other

.

.

.

.

Fanatics.

.

C e

e

Course

e

e

e

of

Reformation

to

Luther’s Death (1546). Religious Discussions (1540—1546) . § 166. From Schmalkaldic War to Peace of Augsburg (1546—1555) . . § 167, Zwingli and Reformation in German Switzerland

.

.

§ 168. Reformation in Geneva. Calvin and the Reformed Churches § 169. Doctrinal Controversies of Protestants. Antitrinitarians

.

.

.

§ 170, Reformation in Northern and Eastern Countries § 171, Schism in England under Henry VIII and Edward VI. Beginnings

of Reformationin Scotland

. . . . . . . .

. .

Ce

e

VII

Chapter II Counter-Reformation

§ 172. Revival of Religious Life

.

§ 173. Society of Jesusor Jesuits.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

..

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

§ 174. Popes from Paul 11l to Pius IV. Council of Trent

..

83 .

03 99

§ 175, Three Great Reform Popes after Trent: Pius V, Gregory XIII and SixtusV {1566—1550). . . . . . . ... .. . A

&

§ 176. Popes from End of Sixteenth to Mlddle of Seventeenth Century

117

§ 177. Missions among Pagans in America, Africa and Eastern Asia § 178. Revival of Ecclesiastical Pietyand Morals . . . .

.

Learning. Theological Controversies. . . . . . . .. . . . .. ... . 130

§ 179. Literature and Art (RRenaissance and Baroque) in Service of the Church,

. 123

Ecclesiastical Music

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. I46

Chapter III Reformation versus Counter-Reformation, from Religious Peace of Augsburg to

Peace of Westphalia (1555—1648).

Development of Protestantism.

Greco-Russian

Church

§ 180, Progress of Reformation m Germany and Catholic CounterReformation to Beginning of Seventeenth Century . . . . . . 154 § 181. Thurty Years' War, and Peace of Westphalia

.

.

.

.

...

§ 182, Religious Conflicts in France to Middle of Seventeenth Centur}r § 183. Catholic Church in England

(to 1689},

§ 184. Revolt

Religious

of the

Netherlands,

Hungaryand

Sweden

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Scotland .

Disturbances

.

§ 165. Controversies over Lutheran Orthodoxy. § 186. Greek and Russian Schismatic Churches Second

and

.

.

.

.

.

Ireland in

..

I62

168 . 178

Poland,

...

189

New Protestant Sects . 196 .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. 203

Period

FROM PEACE OF WESTPHALIA TO FRENCH REVOLUTION. AGE OF ROYAL ABSOLUTISM, OF STATE AND NATIONAL CHURCHES, AND AGE OF ENLIGHTENMENT (1648—148g) Survey . . . . . . .

1+

14

Chapter 1

Papacy and Catholicism, France at Time of Louis XIV § 187. Papacy. Efforts toward Reunion and Conversions. Russian Ortho-

dox Church . . . . . . . . . .. : § 188. Science and Education. Conventual Life, PlE—'t}?’ and Art in Catholic Church

.

.

.

.

.

C e e

e

e

e

e

\

.

.

a . 220

§ 189. France in Age of Loms XIV. Suppression ef Huguenete Quarrel over Regalia. Gallican Liberties . . . . . , . . . . . . . . 230 § 190. Jansenism in France and Holland. Quietism

VIII

.

.

,

.

.

.

.

.

. 236

Chapter II

Enlightenment and Protestantism § 191. Enlightenment.

Its Origin and Spread in England and France .

§ 192. Pietism and Protestant Revival in Germany and England

.

. 245

.

. 253

§ 193. Enlightenment in Protestant Germany. Religicus Poetry, Music and Art in Protestantism . . . . . . . . e e e e e e

259

Chapter 111 Catholic Church during Period of Enlighfenment

§ 194. Attacks on Jesuits, their Suppresion {773}

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. 266

§ 195. Enlightenment in Catholic Germany . . . . . . . . . . . . 270 § 196. Episcopalism in Germany. Febronius and ““Punctuation of Ems” 276 § 197. Relations between Church and State in Austria and Ecclesiastical

Reforms under Maria Theresa and Joseph I1. Leopold of Tuscany and Synod of Pistota {2786y . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 280 Third

Period

FROM FRENCH REVOLUTION TO FIRST WORLD WAR. TRIUMPH OF INDIVIDUALISM AND RELIGIOUS SUBJECTIVISM. DECHRISTIANIZATION OF SOCIETY (178g—1g14) Survey .

. . .

.

.

.

e e e e

e

e

ee e

First Half of Third FROM

FRENCH

ERA

REVOLUTION CENTURY

OF REVOLUTIONS

PARTIAL

CHAPTER

e

.

.

. 285

OF

NINETEENTH

Period

TO MIDDLE (1789—1850).

AND

e e

RESTORATION

I

The Catholic Church

§ 108. France in Age of the Revolution and Pope Pius VI {1780—1800)

288

§ 199. Pius VII and Napoleon Bonaparte. French Concordat {(18o01) . . 206 § 200. Secularization of Church in Germany (r803) . . . . . . . . . 304 § 201. Reorganization of Church in Germany and Switzerland . . . . 308 § 202. Popes Leo XII, Pius VIII, Gregory XVI § 203. Catholicism

Grows

Sirong

in

against State Control of Church

Germany

.

.

.

and Pius IX (to 1850). and

. . .

§ 204, Catholic Church in Other Countries of Europe

Austria,

Struggle

.

.

.

e

.

.

.

.

§ 205. Catholic Church in North, Central and South America § 2006, Catholic Missions

.

.

«

.

«

«

v

¢

¢

«

v

¢

o

o

«

&

&

318

¥--

.

.

.

. 334

.

.

.

. 345

«

+

+

+ 351

§ 207. Inner Life of Church: Legal Status, Discipline, Cult, Christian Art

and Piety (Religious Orders)

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. 355

§ 208. Ecclesiastical Learning. Theological Errors and Religious Dissensions. Greek Schismatic Church, . . . . ., . . ., ., . . . 362

Chapter 11 Protestantism:

§ 209. Protestant Churches in Germany, England and North America. Alliances, Trends and Sects. Home and Foreign Missions . . . 369

§ 210. Protestant Theology, Especially in Germany . .

.

.

.

. .

. . 377

Second Half of Third Period

FROM MIDDLE OF NINETEENTH WAR

(1850—1g14).

CHURCH

CENTURY TO FIRST WORLD

GROWS

STRONGER.

INCREASING

SECULARIZATION OF STATE, SOCIETY AND CULTURE Chapter I The Catholic Church

§ 211, Pius IX after 1850. Italy and End of Papal States

.

§ z12. First Vatican Council {(1869—1870). The Old Catholics.

§213.

Leo

XITT

and

Pius

X ,

.

.

.

.

.

.

-

.

.

.

. 381

.

.

.

. 386

.

. 303

.

§ 214. Catholic Church in Germany from 1850 to 1914. Kulturkampf and

its Consequences

.

.

.,

Coe

§ 215. Catholics Church in Ausma

§ 216. Catholic

Church

in

e

R

R

and Smtzerland

France,

Other States of Europe

.

England

C

e

Belglum

. . . . . . , ,

e

e

.

HoIIa.nd

§ 218, Catholic

Missions

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. 400

and

S

§ 217. Catholic Church in North, Central and South Amen{:a

1 1.

P

...

11 T3

...

..

428

§ 219. Inner Life of Church: Organization, Cult, Art, Devotions, Religious Orders and Societies . . . . . . . . ., . . . . . . . . .. 438 § 220. Sacred Sciences. Theological Errors. Modernism. . . . . . . . 449

Chapter 11

Changes in Social Qutlook and in History of Thought during this Period. Protestantism and Greek-Russian Church

§ 22r. Anti-Christian and Antiecclesiastical Movements: Liberalism, Materialism, Existentialism, Socialism and Communism . , . . 457

§ 222, Protestantism, especially in Germany, England and America. Spiritual Life, Movements, Sects, and Theology

§ 223. Greek Orthodox and Russian Orthodox Churches

X

.

,

.

North . . . 468 .

.

.

. 474

Fourth

FROM

FIRST

WORLD

WAR

Period

TO

PRESENT

TIME

(1014—1060).

§ 224. First World War, its Importance and its Cflnsequences in General, Pope Benedict XV , , , ., . . e e e e . . .. § 225. Popes Pius X1, Pius XII and John XKXIIT

.

§ 226. Catholic Church in Germany and Austria . . § 227. Situation of Catholic Church in other Nations § 228, Nazism and the Church . . . . . \

.

.

.

.

.

470

.

.

. 487

. . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . .«

. 496 . 502 . 5IT

§ 229, Reconstruction after Second World War., Church be]:und the Iron Curtain . . . . . . .., L L. . ... L. .. ... .. 521 § 230. CatholicMissions . . . . . . . . . . . .. . ... ... . 53T

§ 231. Protestantism, Union

.

.

.

especially

.

.

.

in Germany.

..,

.

...

Ecumenical

...

...

...

Efforts

at

....3539

§

232. Eastern Church. Bolshevism . . . . . . . ., . . . . . . . 548 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . ... ... ... ... .....554 Chronological Tables GeneralIndex

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

..

..

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

..

...

... ..

...555 ...

564

N. B. — The three volumes of this work are arranged in sections num-

bered consecutively throughout and indicated by §. All references and cross references are to the sections, Thus (§ 224, 3) within or at the end of a sentence

means that the same or related matter will be found in the third numbered paragraph of section 224.

X1

ABBREVIATIONS Al

= Analecta

Bollandiana

ADbh. = Abhandlungen der Akademie

bzw. Gescllschaft der Wissenschaf-

ten, philos -histor.

Klasse, in Ber-

lin, Gottingen, Heidelberg, Leipz1g, Miinchen, Wien. AR = Archiv {ir katholisches Kirchenrecht. AnnHVNicdRh = Annalen des historischen Vereins fiir den Niederthein.

AntChrist

=

Antike

und

Christen-

tum, Kultur-u, Religionsgeschichtliche Studien by F. ]. Délger (1929 ff.},

Archi"H

= Archivum

Franciscanum

Historicum,

ArchI'P* = Archivum

Tfratrum Prae-

dicatorum.

ArchHistMA

=

Archives

d'histoire

doctrinale et littéraire du

moyen

=

Litera-

Apge. ArchLKGMA

Archiv

fiir

tur-und Kirchengeschichte des Mittelalters,

ArchRelW

=

Archiv

wissenschaft, ArchSRom = Archivio

ciet, Romana

ASS

= Acta

fiir Religionsdella

R.

di storia patria.

Sanctorum

So-

of the Bol-

landists (§ 2, 8). BeitrGdSL = eitrige zur Gesch, der deutschen Sprache und Literatur.

BenMS = Benediktinische Monatsschrift. BV = Biblicthek der Kirchenviiter,

new adaptation (§ 2, g).

BlwiirttKG

=

Bliitter fiir wiirttem-

bergische Kirchengeschichte.

BullLA

=

Bulietin

d’ancienne

litté-

rature et d'archéologie chrétiennes.

BullLE

=

Bulletin

ecclésiastique.,

CIC

= Codex

de

litterature

iuris canonici,

CivCatt = Civilt. Cattolica.

C3CO

=

Corpus

Scriptorum

stian. Orientalium.

Chri-

CSEL = Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiastocorum Latinorum (§ 2, od).

XII

DAGM = Deutsches Archiv fiir Geschichte des MA (continuation of NA 1937 {f.). DictAC = Dictionnaire d'archéologie

chrétienne et de liturgie (§ 2, 1). DictApol = Dictionnaire apologéti-

que {§ 2, 11}, DictDC = Dictionnaire de Droit Canonique. IhictHE = Dictionnaire d’histoire et

de géographie ecclésiastiques (§ 2, 11).

Dictf)ipir = IMctionnaire de spiritua1it¢ ascétique et mystique (§ 2, 11).

DictThC = Dictionnaire de théologie catholique (§ 2, 11}.

DI.Z

= Deutsche

DVSLGG

=

Literaturzeitung.

Deutsche

Vierteljahrs-

schrift fiir Literaturwissenschaft und Geistegeschichte.

EphThlLov

=

Ephemerides

Theo-

logicae Lovanienses. FranzSt = Franziskanische Studien. FreilDA = TFreiburger DitzesanArchiv.

FunkAU

= Funk, Kirchengeschicht-

liche Abhandlungen und Untersuchungen, 3 vols. 1897—1g07. GeschAL = Geschichte der altkirch-

lichen (Bardenhewer) or altchristlichen (Harnack) Literatur,

Harduinus = Acta conciliorum ed. J. Harduinus (§ 2, 2). HarvThR = Harvard Theological Review. Hauck =

A.

Hauck,

Kirchen-

geschichte Deutschlands. Hefele, Hefele-Leclercq = Konziliengeschichte by C. ]J. von Hefele, znd

ed.,

or

of the same

HJG

=

the

French

(§ 2, 2).

Historisches

Gorresgesellschait.

revision

Jahrbuch

der

HistVS = Historische Vierteljahrsschrift, HpBl = Historisch-politische Blitter HZ = Historische Zeitschrift. IntkZ = Internationale kirchliche Zeitschrift,

Janssen = J. Janssen, Geschichte des deutschen Volkes seit dem Ausgang des Mittelalters,

JbLLW = TJahrbuch fiir Liturgiewissenschaft (§ 2, 5). JThSt = Journal of Theological Studies.

Kath. = Der Katholik {(Mainz). KL = Kirchenlexikon 20d ed. (§2, 11). MElAH = Mélanges d’archéologie et

d’histoire. MG = Monumenta

Germaniae histo-

rica (§ 2, 10); SS = Scriptores.

MIOG

= Mitteilungen des Instituts

fiir Osterreichische schung.

MissWRelW und

Geschichtsfor-

= Missionswissenschaft

Religionswissenschaft

nuation of the ZMW

{conti-

1938 fi.).

MSR = Mélanges de science religienuse. NA = Neues Archiv der Gesellschaft fir altere deutsche Geschichtskunde. Nachr, = Nachrichten (see Abh.). NedAKG = Nederlandsch Archief

voor Kerkgeschiedenis. NJklIA = Neue Jahrbiicher

fiir das

klassische Altertum, Geschichte und deuwtsche Literatur. NkZ = Neue kirchliche Zeitschrift. OrChrAn = Orientalia Christ. Analecta. OrChrPer = Orientalia Christ. Periodica. Pastor = L. v. Pastor, Geschichte der Pipste seit dem Ausgang des Mittelalters. PG, PL = Migne, Patrologiae cursus, series graeca, series latina (§ 2, 9c).

QFItalAB RE

= Quellen und Forschun-

gen aus italienischen Archiven und Bibliotheken.

= Realenzyklopidie fiir protest.

Theologie 3rd ed. (§ 2, 11).

REKraus

= Realenzykl. der christl.

(§ 3, 5).

RCIFr = Revue du clergé frangais. RechSR = Recherches de science religieuse. RechThAM = Recherches

de Théo-

logie ancienne et medievale. RevAM = Revue d'ascétique et de mystique,

RevBén

= Revue Bénédictine.

RevHEFrance = Revue de I'Eglise de France.

d'histoire

= Revue

d’histoire et de

philosophie religieuses,

RevHR

=

reiigions.

RevOC

=

tien.

Revue

Revue

RevEPhTh

=

de

de

U'histoire

1'Orient

Revue

des

des chré-

sciences

phiiosophiques et théologiques.

RevSR = Revue des sciences religleuses. RHE = Revue d’'histoire ecclésiastique. RHLR = Revue d'histoire et de

littérature religieuses. RLAntChr = Reallexikon tike und Christentum,.

fiir

An-

RivArchCrist = Rivista di archeologla cristiana. RottMS = Rottenburger

Monats-

schrift fiir praktische Theologie. RQ = Rb&mische Quartalschrift fiir

christliche Altertumskunde wund Kirchengeschichte. RHQ = Revue des guestions histor:ques. Sb = Proccedings of the Academies mentioned under Abh. Sp = Speculum. StMBen(Q = Studien und Mitteilungen aus dem Benediktiner- und Zisterzienserorden, bzw. zur Geschichte des DBenediktinerordens und seiner Zweige.

StML, StZ = Stimmen aus Laach, Stimmen der Zeit.

ThGl

ThLZ

tung

Maria-

= Theologie und Glaube

derborn).

= Theologische

(Pa-

Literaturzei-

Th(} = Theologische Quartalschrift,

ThRev = Theologische Revue. ThStKr = Theologische Studien und Kritiken. TU = Texte nnd Untersuchungen

Altertiimer, ed. F. X. Kraus § 2, 1)

Pauly-Wissowa = Paulys Realenzyklopidie des klassischen Altertums, revised by G. Wissowa et al,

RE

RevHPhR

VC

zur Geschichte der altchristlichen Literatur (§ 2, 9). = Vigilae Christianae.

Wolf, QKdRG

= G. Wolf, Quellen-

kundeder deutschenReformationsgeschichte, 2z vols. in 3 parts 1915

to 1923.

WirttVLG

=

Wiirttembergische

Vierteljahreshefte fiir Landesgeschichte. ZAszMyst = Zeitschrift fiir Aszese

und Mystik.

ZfdA = Zeitschrift fiir deutsches Altertum und deutsche Literatur,

£1dGeistG = Zeitschrift fiir deutsche Geistesgeschichte,

XII1

LZGORh = Zeitschrift fir schichte des Oberrheines.

ZKG = Zeitschrift geschichte, ZkTh

=

Zeitschrift

fiir

=

Zeitschrift

wissenschaft =

fir

Missions-

fiir

Religions-

Zeitschrift

fiir

{die)

testamentliche die Kunde

XIV

Kirchen-

(und

wissenschaft).

ZntW

Ge-

fiir katholische

Theologie (Innsbruck).

IMW

die

Wissenschaft

neu-

(und

der dlteren Kirche).

ZRGkan = Zeitschrift der Savignystiftung fiir Rechtsgeschichte, kanonistische Abteilung.

ZThS = Zeitschrift fiir Theologie und Seelsorge (Bonn). ZwTh = Zeitschrift fiir wissenschaftliche Theologie. ZwiitttLG = Zeitschrift

tembergische (continuation

1937 ff.).

fiir wiirt-

Landesgeschichte of the WirttVLG

PART

III

MODERN AND RECENT TIMES FROM REFORMATION TO THE PRESENT (1517—1960)* Note

1: see foot of p. 1

FIRST

PERIOD

FROM REVOLT OF LUTHER TO PEACE OF WESTPHALIA. PERIOD OF REFORMATION AND COUNTER-REFORMATION (1517—1648) Survey.

Since the needed reform of the Church so ardently desired by the majority of Christians did not take place at the proper time, there occurred in the second decade of the sixteenth century that

appalling catastrophe which is usually, but not correctly, designated

1 General sources and aids; reference works and surveys; see Part 1 2—4. K. HEUSSI, Altertum, MA. u, Neuzeit in der KG., 1921. G. v. BELOW,

ber

hist.

Periodisierungen,

1925

(contra

Heussi).

DAHLMANN-WAITZ,

Quellenkunde der deutschen Gesch., °1g31. BIBLIOGRAPHIE DE LA REFORME (1450—1648), LEIDEN 1958 ff, G. WOLF, Quellenkunde der deutschen Reformationsgesch.

(abbrev.

QKdRG),

z

vols.

1915/23.

K. SCHOTTEN-

LOHER, Bibliographie zur deutschen Gesch. im Zeitalter d. Glaubensspaltung

1517—1I585, 7 vols. 1933/62; Zeittafel z. deutschen Gesch. des 16. Jhs., 1934.

FR.

SCHNABEL,

Deutschlands

geschichtl. Quellen

u. Darstellungen

in

der

Neuzeit I (1500/50), 1931. G. WOLF, Einfiihrung in das Studium d. neueren Gesch., 1910. E.FUETER, Gesch. der neuneren Historiographie, 31936.

E. MENKE-GLUKERT,

reformation, 1912.

Die Geschichtsschreibung der Reformation u. Gegen-

M. RITTER, Die Entwicklung der Geschichtswissenschaft,

1919. K.VOLKER, Die Kirchengeschichtsschreibung der Aufklirung, rgzi. CL. SCHERER, Gesch. u. KG. an den deutschen Universititen [15.—18. Th.], 1927. C. MIRBT, Quellen z. Gesch. des Papsttums u. des rém. Katholizismus,

‘1924. H. DENZINGER, 32, par. A. Schonmetzer,

Times:

J. KARDINAL

Enchiridion symbolorum, definitionum etc., ed. 1963. General works on Church History of Modern

HERGENROTHER,

Handbuch

d.

allgemeinen

KG.,

revised by J. P. Kirsch vols, ITI—IV, %1925; revised by J. P. Kirsch, vol. I11, 2 (1555-—1648) by K. Eder, 1949, IV, 1 (1648—1800) and IV, 2 {to the present} by L. A. Veit, 1931/33. W. NEUSS, Die Kirche der Neuzeit, 3 1959.

HISTOIRE DE L'EGLISE, publ. by A, Fliche, etc. t. X VI ff., Paris 1948 ff. A, DUFOURCQ, L’Avenir du Christianisme VIII—X, Paris 1933/54. CH.POU-

LET, Hist. du Christianisme III, Paris 1936 f{. A. BOULENGER,

Hist. gene-

rale de I'église 111, 7 Paris 1939/40. A. LEMAN, L’église dans les temps modernes (1447—1789), Paris 1928. L.V. PASTOR, Gesch. der Pipste seit dem Ausgang des MA.s vols, IV—XVI (Leo X — Pius VI, 1513—17g9), 1906/33.

Engl.

transl.

Papstgesch.

18 vols.

London

and

St.. Louis,

der neuesten Zeit. 4 vols. 1933/39

2 Biblneyer-Tachle, Church History I

189z—1g30.

J. SCHMIDLIN,

F. X. SEPPELT,

Gesch.

des

1

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517—1648)

as the Reformation; for the original desire to improve

conditions

in the Church ended in downright revolution. It shattered the unity and universal dominion of the Catholic Church in the West and destroyed the harmony between Church and culture which had given the Middle Ages their specific character. From then on Christianity was divided into two camps — Catholic and Protestant. The Reformation must, therefore, be considered the most significant

event to mark the beginning of the history of modern times, although the ground for 1t had been prepared long before and its consequences not fully realized until long afterward. It began in Germany where

for a long time not only religio-ecclesiastical affairs but also political, social and cultural interests had been in a state of turmoil (cfr. § 158, 5). Martin

Luther as the self-appointed

spokesman

of the

German nation raised the banner of revolt against the Church; and within the incredibly short space of a few decades the subversive Papsttums

V

tholisches

ligion”

(1534—1789),

u. prot.

(Kultur

wW. MOLLER,

*1959.

Christentum

der Gegenwart

Lehrbuch

d.

KG.

A. EHRHARD

and

E.TROELTSCH,

Ka-

in der Neuzeit in “Gesch.

der christl. Re-

vol. III;

Gegenref.,

I, 4), 21909,

268/792:

Reformation

enlarged ed. u.

rgzz. 3.

A.v. G, KAWERAU 1907, Handbuch der KG., ed by G. Kriiger vol. I11: Ref. u, Gegenred, by H. Hermelink and W. Maurer, ®1931; vol. IV by H. Stephan, ?1931. K. ANER, KG. II1—IV {Sammlung Gdschen], 1929/31. J.V.WAL-

TER,

Die

Gesch,

des

Christentums

II,

%1g50.

J. W.C. WAND,

the modern Church from 1500, New York 1955. —

BRUCK,

by

Weltgesch.

W. Goetz

V

III—V

(1517/1888),

(1500/1660),

1930.

1926/28.

E.LAVISSE

A

history

of

General History: H. DEL-

Propylien-Weltgesch.,

et A. RAMBAUD,

Histoire

générale du iVesiecle & nos jours t. IV—XII, Paris 1894/1904. J. PIRENNE, Les grands courants de 1'hist. universelle, II/I11, Neuchatel 1944/51. Peuples et civilizations, Hist. générale publ. by L. HALPHEN et PH. SAGNAC, VIII[/XI (1492/1793). Paris 1929/37. Hist. générale des civilisations ed. by M. Crouzet, 1V, Paris *1961. — The Cambridge Modern History ed. by A. Ward et al.

Vol. I--XII1,

Cambr.

1904/11;

Atlas 1g12. The NEW

CAMBRIDGE

HISTORY,

Cambr. 1950 ff, C. J. H. HAYES, History of Europe since 1500, New York *r1956. D. SCHAFER, Weltgesch. der Neuzeit, 1'1922: Deuntsche Gesch., 2 vol. 1932. E. FUETER, Gesch. des europ. Staatensystems 14921559, I19I9.

W.

PLATZHCOFF,

1905. G. MENTZ, Elisabeth, r921. 1660),

1922.

H. Grundmann

same

BR.

title,

1559/1660,

1928.

M. IMMICH,

also

16606/178g,

Europ. Gesch. im Zeitalter Karls V, Philipps II. und der K. KASER, Das Zecitalter der Ref. u. Gegenref. (I517%/ GEBHARDT,

in 2 vols,

1955.

Handb.

d.

Deutschen

0. BRANDT,

Handb.

Gesch.,

8.

ed.

by

der deutschen (resch.,

ed. by L. Just, 1935 {f. Deutsche Gesch. im Uberblick, ed. by P, Rassow, 1953.

JOH. JANSSEN,

Gesch.

des

deutschen

Volkes

seit d. Ausgang

des

MA.s (to 1618), ed. by L. Pastor: I—TJ[ie-20 191317, IV—VI 11924, VII—VIII® 1924. English transl. by M. A. Mitchell, St. Louis, 1896 1T, F. HEER, Europiische Geistesgesch., 1953, G.STEINHAUSEN, Gesch. der

deutschen

Kultur,

Kirche

Kultur

1932.

F.ZOEPFL, u.

*1936.

C. GEBAUER,

Deutsche

Deutsche

Kulturgesch.

in der Barockzeit,

1937;

Kulturgesch.

II, 21937. im

der Neuzeit,

G.SCHNURER,

18. Jh.,

194x.

Kath.

H. E. FEINE,

Deutsche Verfassungsgesch. der Neuzeit, ?1940. F.HARTUNG, Deutsche Verfassungsgeschichte vom 15. Jahrh. bis zur Gegenwart, *1950. H. HAUSS-

HERR,

2

Wirtschaftsgesch.

der Neuzeit,

*1960.

Survey

religious notions which he preached had severed the greater part of Germany, especially the central and northern parts of the kingdom, as well as Denmark and the Scandinavian and Baltic countries

from the old Mother Church. Somewhat later the preaching of Zwingly and Calvin in German and French Switzerland (centering around Ziirich and Geneva) effected the mass apostasy of the people of these regions. Calvinism or the “Reformed Creed” developed a tremendous impact; within a short time it had made notable conquests not only in the western part of Switzerland, a considerable part of France,

England,

Scotland

and the Netherlands,

but had

even spread through some of the German states, Poland, Hungary and Transylvania and had crossed the Atlantic to the shores of

America. The separation from the Church of a large portion of the

German nation not only considerably weakened Germany’s Catholic solidanty, but also very definitely lessened that nation’s influence ini the Church,

Meanwhile, in order to heal her ills and to defend herself against external attacks the Church again organized and consolidated her own (od-given potentialities. The resulting upsurge forms one of the most interesting phenomena of the Church’s history. Beginning in Italy and Spain it showed itself especially in the revival of religious life, in the reform activity of the Council of Trent and of capable popes, in shining examples of sanctity, in the marvelous progress made in foreign missions where peoples of hitherto unknown lands were incorporated into the Church, and in outstanding accomplishments in the fields of ecclesiastical learning and the arts. During the second half of the sixteenth century the further spread of Protestantism was checked even in Germany. The religious wars which resulted from the contest between Reformation and Counter-Reformation (more exactly expressed, the Catholic Restoration), in France (the Huguenot Wars), in the Netherlands (the revolt against Spain) and in Germany (the Thirty Years War) laid these countries waste. The only result was that by about the middle of the seventeenth century (in England not until 1688) the territortal limits of the various religious groups had been quite definitely fixed. But whereas the Catholic Church had recovered her vitality and preserved her unbroken unity, Protestantism never achieved a unified ecclesiastical organization; rather it broke up into a number of national churches and, in keeping with its subjectivism, gave rise to as many sects as there were divergent theological opinions. 3

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517 —1648) CHAPTER

1

RELIGIOUS TO

MIDDLE

REVOLT IN GERMANY AND ELSEWHERE OF THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY?

§ 150.

Martin Luther, His Theological Development and His Conduct in Controversy over Indulgences.

I. While the underlying causes of the German Reformation reach back over a long period of time, the event itself seemed to happen suddenly and unexpectedly. It seemed, moreover, to be the work ! Cfr. lit., csp. Schottenloher and Wolf above p. 1{. G. KRUGER, Kef, u. Gegenref., in, “Die evang. Theologie, ihr jetziger Stand und ihre Auf-

gaben”

111, 2, 1g2g.

gesch. seit 1876,

1931.

H. JEDIN,

Die Erforschung

E. ROTH, ThLZ

der kirchl. Reformations-

1950, 760/65

(New material on the

history of the Ref.}.

H. LAEMMER, Monumenta Vaticana historiam ecclesiast,

in

der

s. XV illustrantia (1521{46), 1861. NUNTIATURBERICHTE AUS DEUTSCHLAND (1533/1635), in mchreren Abteilungen ed. by d. Preufl. hist. Institut Rom,

der

Akad.

gesellschaft

in

Rom,

Wiss.

189z ff.

in Wien

u.

DEUTSCHE

dem

Hist,

Institut

der

Gérres-

REICHSTAGSAKTEN

UNTER

KARLYV,, revised by A. Kluckhohn and A. Wrede I IV (to1 524}, 1893/1906. ACTA REFORMATIONIS CATHOLICAE ecclesiam Germaniae concernentia s. XVI,

ed. by G. Pleilschifter,

1959 {f.

HEFELE-HERGEN ROTHER,

Kongzilien-

gesch, IX (to 1541), 18go. CORPUS CATHOLICORUM, Works of Catholic authors of the Reformation period, 1919 ff. (for a plan of the whole work

cir.

J. Greving,

ThRev

1915

No. 17/18;

1917

No. 7/8,

REFORMATIONS-

GLESCHICHTL. STUDIEN u. TEXTE, begun by J. GREVING, ed. by A. Ehrhard, 1906 ff.

B. J. KIDD,

Documents

illustrative of the Continental

Reformation,

Oxford 1911. Quellen zur neueven Geschichle, BERN, H. 3: Kaiser, Reich und Reformation 1517—1525, ®1952; H. 7/8: Religionsvergleiche des 16. Jh., 1945/46. J.T. MULLER, Die symbol. Biicher der evang.-luth. Kirche, 121928,

-— Die Bekenntnisschriften der evang.-luth. Kirche, ed. by the Deutsc hen evang. Kirchenausschuss, %1959, E. F, K. MULLER, Die Bekenntnissc hriften

der reformierten Kirche, 1903, CORPUS CONFESSIONUM, Die Bekenntnisse der Christenheit, ed. by C. Fabricius, 1928 ff. Schriften des VEREINS FUR REFORMATIONSGESCHICHTE, 1883 ff. Archiv f. Reformationsgesch. 1903 ff.

J. FICKER

1902{5.

Works.

Die

ARG

u.,

O. WINCKELMANN,

G. MENTZ,

Handschriftenproben

Handschriften

der

d.

16. Jh.,

Reformationszeit,

1912,

2z

wols.

Catholic

S, MERKLE, Reformationsgeschichtliche Streitfragen, 1904. J. LORTZ

Reformation

1940,

in Deutschland,

61/76).

Protestantisme,

Paris

2 vols 41963,

A.BAUDRILLART, 51905.

P. IMBART

L’Eglise DE

LA

(standard;

also G. Ritter,

TOUR,

origines

cath.,

la Renaissance,

lLes

de

le

Reforme I1I (1521/38), Paris 1914. E. DE MOREAU et al. La crise religieusela du 16® s, Paris 1950 (Hist. de L'eglise, publ. by A. Fliche et al,, XVI). R. CESSI, Lineamenti

di storia della riforma Luterana,

et al., Le 16° s, Paris 1950.

la Reforme. Kampi

16. Jh.,

4

2 vol. Paris 1955.

gegen

19¥r.

Luther

J. LECLER,

F.LAUCHERT,

Hist, de la Tolérance

N. PAULUS,

(151 8/63),

1903;

Die italen,

Padova

1939. H. SEE

au sidcle de

Die deutschen Dominikaner im

Protestantismus

literar.

Gegner

u.

Toleranz

Luthers,

im

1912,

§ 158, Luther's Theological Development

of one man — Martin Luther!, an Augustinian Hermit and professor

of theology at the University of Wittenberg — but a man who knew how to turn every situation to the advantage of the movement he set on foot. In the beginning Luther’s revolt appeared to be a purely personal religious aberration; but as it ran its course it developed G. LOHR, Die Kapitel der Saxonia (O. Praed.) im Zeitalter der Glaubensspaltung (1513/40), 1930. Protestant Works: L.V. RANKE Deutsche Gosch .

im

Zeitalter

der

Reformation,

6 vols.

1839/47,

crit.

ed.

der

Deutschen

Akademie 1925/26. Engl. transl. 3 vols. London, 1845—1847, later ed. R. A. Johnston, 1 vol., London and N. Y. 1905. TH. M, LINDSAY, Histo by of the Reformation, 2 vol. London I1906/7. G. MENTZ, Deutsche Gesch ry Zeitalter der Ref., der Gegenref. u. des 30j. Krieges (r403/1648), . im 1gr3.

J. V. PFLUGK-HARTTUNG et al.,, Im Morgenrot H. SMITH, The Age of the Reformation, New

der Ref., 2 York 1023,

vols. *1g:6. K, BIRANDI,

Deutsche Gesch. im Zeitalter der Ref. u. Gegenref., 2 vols. 31942, J. BOHLER,

Deutsche

Gesch.

I11,

1938,

G. RITTER,

Dic

Weltwirkung

Die Neugestaltung Europas im 16. Jh., Ig50,

Epoche

der

deutschen

sch.,

1951.

the XVIth. century, Boston 1952.” 1559),

Cambr.

LEONARD, GER, Die

1958, A. ROBERTSON,

Hist. générale du Kulturaufgaben

I'. JOACHIMSEN,

R. H. BAINTON,

G. R. ELTON, The

der Ref.,

The

Die Ref, als

Reformation

The Reformation

Reformation,

t1g59;

Lond.

of

(1520 to

196o.

L. G.

rotestantisme, 3 vol. Paris 1961 ff. A. E.BERder Reformation, ?1¢o8. I, TROELTSCEH, Die

Bedeutung des Protestantismus f. dic Entstehung der modernen Welt, 1928; Die Soziallehren der christl. Kirchen u. Gruppen, 1912 [Ges. Schrif ten 1], Aufsitze zur Geistesgesch. u. Religionssoziologie, 1924/25 |Ges.Schriften IV]. K.VOLKER, Toleranz u. Intoleranz im Zeitalter der Ref., 1912.

F. ARNOLD,

Die deutsche Ref. in ihren Beziehungen

zu

den

Kultu

verhiltnissen des MA.s, 1917. A.V.HARNACK, Die Ref. u. ihre Voran rssetzung, in “Erforschtes und Erlebtes,” 1923, 72f140. R, HOLTZMANN, Deutsche Gesch. u. konfessionelle Spaltung, 1928. G. AUBIN, Der Einfl uss der Ref. in der Gesch. der deutschen Wirtschaft, 1929. W.ELERT, Morph ologie des Luthertums, 2 vols. %1g952/53. ! I. Luther’'s Works: 1. Erlanger edition ed. J. G. Plochmann J. A. Irmischer, 67 vols. German and 38 vols Latin, 1826/86 (Bd. 1—20 and and 24—206 in 2. ed. by E. L. Enders, Frankfort 1862/85). Luthers BRIEFWECHSEL ed. by. E. L. Enders, G. Kawareau et al., 18 vols. 1884/ 1023. — 2. Weimarer kritische Gesamtausg. by J. K. F. Knaake, G. Kaweran et al. 1883 ff. (thus far 93 vols.).

Wacz

and Buchheim,

London,

Engl.

transl.

of Luthers

1896, his correspondence,

rimary

works

by

I?hila., IGI3—1928.

Luthers Tischreden ed. by E. Kroker and O. Brenner, 6 vols. 1912/2 0. SCHEEL, Dokumente zu Luthers Entwicklung (to 1519), 91920. 1, II. Bibliographies: G. KAWERAU, Luthers Schriften nach der Reihenfolge der Jahre, %1929. X.ALAND, Hilfsbuch zum Lutherstudium, 1957.

W. KOEHLER,

Das

kath.

L.-Bild

4. Gegenwart,

1922.

192x, 102f35. H, HERMELINK, Theol. Rundschau research). H. BORNKAMM, Festschrift G. Ritter,

of Catholic research on Luther).

H, SMITH,

HarvThR

1935, 1951, 1952 (recent 1950, 2I10{31 (400 years

W.V,LOEWENICH.

ThLZ

1956,

705/16

. E, BENZ, Z. f. Religions- u. Geistesgesch. 1952, 1/19 {view of Luther in French Catholicism). Luther-Jahrbuch 1919 ff. (after 1926 with Biblio gr.). WOLFE , QRARG

705 ff.

(bibliogr.

1II, 1, 167/276;

survey).

—

11, 2, 282 ff,

III, Catholic

wW. V. LOEWENICH,

Works:

ThLZ

JOH, COCHLAUS,

1956,

mentaria de actis et scriptis M. Lutheri, Mainz 1 540 (cir. A. Herte, L.-Kommentare des Joh. Cochlius, 1935; Das kath. L.-Bild im Bann

L.-Kommentare

des Cochl.,,

3 vols.

1943).

Die

a endling.

Luthertum in der ersten Enhvicklun%I,

supplement,

I by

H. Denifle,

H.DENIFLE,

OP,

Luther

17904/6; I1 by A. M. Weiss,

Schriftausleger

Com-

bis

Die der

u.

1909;

Luther

5

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517—1648)

into a religious and political revolution of prodigious dimensions.

However, the movement did not effect the real reform of the Church

“in head and members” which had been so long and so ardently desired, a reform consisting of the removal of ecclesiastical abuses iiber

Iustitia

Dei

(Rome

I, 17)

u.

lustificatio,

rgos,

II

by

A. M. Weiss,

Luther-psychologie, 1906. H. GRISAR, S], Luther, 3 vols. 31924/25: M. Luthers Leben u. s. Werk zusammenfass, dargestellt, 21927; Der deutsche I.. Im Weltkrieg u. in der Gegenwart, %1925. H. GRISAR [with Fr. Heege], L.-studien,

tisme

6 fasc.

{1517/28),

DictThC

IX,

1921/23.

Paris

1146/1335.

1911.

L.CRISTIANI,

J. PAQUIER,

E. BUONAIUTI,

Du

Luthéranisme

M. Luther,

vie

an Protestan-

et théologie,

Lutero e la Riforma in (Germania,

Rome 1945 [modernistic]. J. HESSEN, L. in kath. Sicht, 21949, E.W.ZEEDEN, M. Luther u. die Reformation im Urteil des deutschen Luthertums,

2 vols.

1950/52.

Averbode-Tilburg

Lutherhistorien

cir. H. Volz, GRAPHS

H. DUYNSTEE, 1927/20.

220/40);

IV.

Die Lutherpredigten

on

Luther

OTTO

H.LILJE,

—

Protestant

en de kritiek,

Works:

JOH.

3 vols.

MATHESIUS,

[17 sermons], Niirnberg 1566, new ed. by G. Lésche 1g06: by

°1913/14 [reprint 1924]; I911;

O. 8. A., M. Luther

SCHEEL

W.KOEHLER,

*1948;

J. KOSTLIN,

des J. Mathesius, 2 vols

G. BUCHWALD,

I—II

[to

?1917;

1513],

f1go3;

AD.

RECENT

MONO-

HAUSRATH,

2z wvols.

31917, A. C. MCGIFFERT, New York

*1921/30

J.MACKINNON,

E. G. SCHWIEBERT,

I930.

St. Louis

(also

4

1950;

J. Lortz,

vols,

Lond.

HJG

1933,

1925/30;

R, H. BAINTON,

New

York 1950; K. A. MEISSINGER, Der kath. Luther, 1952; L., die deutsche Tragddie 1521, 1953. H. BOEHMER, L. im Lichte der neueren Forschung, °1918;

Der

junge

Luther,

Luther, New York 1957.

®1954.

R.H. FIFE,

A. K. SWIHART,

The

revolution

of

Martin

Luther and the Lutheran Church,

Lond. 1961, W.WALTER, L.s Charakter, ?1917. G. RITTER, Luther, Gestalt u. Tat, ’1949. H, WENDORF, M. L., der Aufban s. Persénlichkeit, 1930. A.V. MARTIN et al,, L. in 6kumen. Sicht, 192q. J.LORTZING, Wie ist die

abendlind. Glaubensspaltung entstanden? 1929 [Catholic view]. W. G. MOORE, La Réforme allemande et la litterature francaise, Notoriété de Luther en France, Strasbourg 1930. 0. WOLFF, Die Haupttypen der neueren L.-Deutung,

1938.

H. STROHL,

Luther, sa vie et sa pensée,

Strasbourg 1953.

E. HIRSCH, Lutherstudien, 2 vols. 1954. — Special Studies: H. STEPHAN, L.in den Wandlungen s. Kirche, 21951. j. HASHAGEN, HistVs 1939, 625/50

(Apologet.

L.-Forschung

und

L.-Renaissance).

FR.LOOFS,

L.s

Stellung

zumm MA. u. zur Neuzeit, 1907. R, WOLFF, Stadien zu L.s Weltanschavung, 1920. P. JOACHIMSEN, Sozialethik des Luthertums, 1g927. ©O. DITTRICH, Gesch. der Ethik IV, 1932. O.CLEMEN, L. u. die Volksfrommigkeit s. Zeit,

1933. H. DANNENBAUER, L. als relig. Volksschriftsteller 1517/20, 1930. J. GOTTSCHICK, L.s Theologie, 1914 [Nachtrige in ThStKr 191 5, 131 ff,

271 f.). FR. LOOFS, Der articulus stantis et cadentis ecclesiae, ThStKr 1917, 323/420. P. WERNLE, Der evang. Glaube I: Luther, 1918. K. HOLL,

Luther

[Ges. Aufsitze zur KG.

1), 1921, "1948.

C. STANGE,

Studien zu L.§

Theologie I, 1928. F, KATTENBUSCH, Die Doppelschichtigkeit in L.s Kirchen begriff, 1928. FR. BLANKE, Der verborgene Gott bei L., 1928. ER. SEE-

BERG, L.s Theologie, 2 vols. 192¢/37; L.s Theologie in ihren Grundziigen,

®1950.

J.V.WALTER, Die Theologie L. s., 1940.

Welt, %1959.

W.V.LOEWENICH,

H. BORNKAMM,

L.s Theologia crucis, 41954.

L.s

H. M.

eistige

MULLER,

Erfahrung und Glaube bei L., 1929.

P.SCHEMPP, L.s Stellung zur HI. Schrift,

1929.

"Gerecht

1929.

K. MATTHES, Das Corpus Christianum bei L. im Lichte s. Erforschung, R, HERRMANN,

F. X. ARNOLD,

L.s

These

1u.

Siinder

Zur Frage des Naturrechts bei M. I.,, 193%7.

zugleich,”

1930.

J. HECKEL, Lex

charitatis, 1953. H. J. IWAND, Glaubensgerechtigkeit nach L.s Lehre, ?1951. P. ALTHAUS, Festschr. E. Brunner 1950, 31/47 (criticism of Luther's doc-

trine on justification), Cfr. also § 169

6

§ 159. Luther's Theological Development

without attacking the Church’s dogma or organization. Rather it rapidly assumed the form of an actual revolution aimed at the complete annihilation of the Church herself. It opened the door to religious individualism and, although Luther and his followers retained some of the fundamental Christian dogmas, they exalted religious subjectivism over the objective authority of dogmas, the sacraments and the hierarchy. These fatal consequences of the innovation reached their culmination only in the movement called the Enlighienment of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Martin Luther was

born November 10, 1483 at Eisleben in the Electorate

of Saxony, the son of Hans Luder (Lothar), a farmer and miner, and his

wife Margaret Ziegler. His childhood was restrained and cheerless; the discipline at home and in school was extremely severe. After the usual preparatory courses in the school at Mansfeld, where the family had taken residence,

and

after further

studies

at Magdeburg

versity of Erfuri in the spring of 1501

and

Eisenach,

he entered

the

Uuni-

and completed the prescribed course

of philosophy. In 1502 he received the bachelor’s, and in 1505, the master’s degree. Philosophy was taught at Erfurt in the form of the Via moderna,

1. ., of Nominalism and Occamism

(cfr. § 145, 3—4). Young Luther devoted

himself zealously to the study of the ancient classics, but seems not to have

been

intimately

associated

with

the

frivolous

humanists

then

comprising

the greater part of the faculty and student body. In July 1505, shortly after beginning the study of law, he entered the monastery of the Augustinian Hermits at Erfurt much to the surprise of his friends and contrary to the wishes of his father. For some time he had been inwardly disturbed and occupied himself with thoughts of the severity of God’s judgment, and during a violent storm (July 2, 1505), believing his life to be in danger, he made a ‘“forced” vow to St. Anne to enter religious life, although as later became evident, he did not have a true vocation.

After the novitiate

he made profession and in 1507 was ordained to the priesthood. The young Augustinian continued his theological studies, during which Gabriel Biel's cominentary on the sentences (cfr. § 145, 4a) led him deeper into Occamism, and in the autumn of 1508 Jokn von Staupitz, vicar of the German Augustinians, who thought highly of Luther, sent him to the newly established

University of Wittenberg to pursue his studies and to teach. During this time (1508—1i509) Luther devoted himself especially to the study of scrip-

ture and the works of 5t. Augustine. Recalled to Erfurt in 1509, he was sent to Rome on business of the order in 1510 or 1511; but, contrary to assertions

sometimes

made,

the mission

loyalty to the Church.

Upon

to¢ Rome

did

not

weaken

his return he resumed

his faith nor his

his duties as teacher

at Wittenberg and in 1512 was advanced to the doctorate. In 1513 he was appointed to succeed Staupitz as professor of Scripture and while holding

that post he preached frequently in the principal churches of the city. Cfr. also lit. cited

Th., Neubauer,

L.s

above

Friihzeit,

(esp. Scheel,

Boekmer

s. Universitits-

u.

and

Meissinger)

Klosterjahre,

1917.

also

—

7

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517—1648)

R, Weijenborg, Antonianum 1956, 247/300; 1957, 147/202; RHE 1960, 819/75. — Fr. Benary, Zur Gesch. der Stadt u. Univ. Erfurt im Ausgang des

MA s, 1919. — P. Kalkoff, Hummanismus u. Reformation in Erfurt {1500/30),

1926. —

M. Burgdorf, Der EinfluB der Erfurter Humanisten

auf L.s Ent-

wicklung bis 1510, 1928. W. Friedensburg, Gesch, der Univ. Wittenberg, 1917; Urkundenbuch der Univ. Wittenberg I (1502/1611), 1926. — K. Bauer, Die Wittenberger Universititstheologie u. die Anfinge der deutschen Refor-

mation, 1928. — . Boehmer, L.s Romfahrt {1510/11), 1914. — J. Ficker, L. als Professor, 1928. — H. Degering, Luthers Randbemerkungen zu G. Biels

Collectorium, 1933. — P. Vignaux, L. commentateur des Sentences, Paris 1935. L. and Occam: P. Vignaux, FS 1950, 21 {30; L. Meier, ArchFH 1950, 56/67; R. Weijenborg, RHE 1950, 617/69. — W. Link, Das Ringen 1.5 um

die Freiheit der Theologie v. der Philosophie, 1940. — A. Jeremias, Joh. v. Staupitz, 1926. — E. Wolf, Staupitz u. L., 1927. J. Staupitz’ Tiibinger Predigten, ed. by G. Buchwald and E. Wolf,

1927.

2. As lector biblicus Luther lectured on the Psalms and the Pauline Epistles (Romans, Galatians and Hebrews) from 1 513 to 1518. He early abandoned the usual allegorical-mystical interpretation and adhered to the literal-historical exposition of Scripture. It was during these years that the new doctrine, which eventually

caused his break with the Church,

began to take form. The first

definite signs that his fundamental concepts were undergoing a change appear in his commentary on the Epistle to the Romans (1515—1516), which was rediscovered in 1899, Most probably, how-

ever, these ideas had begun to take root as early as 1513—14 when

he was constantly brooding over grace, justification and predestination, and were conditioned by his personal scruples and fears regarding salvation; but they certainly had no basis in Scholastictsm nor in the theological tradition of his order. Luther's

discovery (the so-called “Experience in the tower”) resulted from a new understanding of Romans 1 : 17, where Paul speaks of the “justice of God” revealed from faith. The new reformer insisted that this must not be understood in the sense in which the “philosophers” speak of the vindictive and remunerative justice of God,

but only in the sense of an entirely unmerited divine acquittal. Man

has been completely corrupted by original sin, Luther said,

and can do nothing else but sin. Concupiscence is invincible and remains as a personal sin even in the soul of a baptized person. All personal effort is useless; good works are of no avail for salvation; they are only the fruit of living faith, not a condition for justification. There is no such thing as “‘merit.” Faith alone, i. e.,

“fiduciary faith” in the merits of Christ’s death, justifies and makes

8

§ 159, Luther’s Theological Development

us holy. The justice of Christ is “imputed” to the sinner, whose guilt is merely cloaked by it; but he remains the same sinner that he was before (homo simul peccator, simul justus). Hence justifi-

cation

1s not,

as the

Catholic

Church

teaches,

a purification,

a

regeneration and a sanctification of the soul; it is only a concealing

{(non-imputatio) of sin; it is not an active, but a passive grace i. e., misericordia or favor Dex. Because of Luther’s eccentric character and his unmethodical thinking it is impossible to understand in detail the chain of causes which gave rise to his doctrine. He himself used to say (after 1530) that while he was in the

monastery

he prayed,

fasted,

watched

and

otherwise

mortified

himself

in

later that

he

an effort to lay hold of a “merciful God.” Bat it was all in vain until the Lord delivered him by means of the ““Gospel” of justification by faith alone and thus threw open to him “‘the gates of Paradise.” It is easy to see here the tendency of the obstinate reformer to trace his attitude back to his days in the monastery. There is much earlier evidence that in the beginning of his religious life Luther found peace and happiness and that he was exact

in the

became

had

observance

somewhat

entered

the

of his

remiss.

monastic

monastery

As

obligations.

a nervous,

without

a true

It was

sensitive

vocation,

only

young

religious

Luther,

no

who

doubt,

had to struggle against many trials and temptations; he was tormented by a constant sense of sinfulness in spite of contrition and penance, and by the thought of his own unworthiness in the sight of God’s awful majesty. It is not surprising that this anxiety complex induced a chronic psychopathic

state. But no one is justified in designating worldliness and *‘depravity”’ (Denifle) or excessive spiritual pride (Grisar} as the principal cause of the change which came over him. Certainly the harsh, uncharitable criticism of the real or alleged abuses in the Church of which he was guilty, his raving and ranting about the “self-complacency’” and “hypocrisy’’ in religious life and in the world had a baneful effect on his character. Neither was he unaffected by his intellectual environment, especially by Nominalistic philosophy and theology (Occam, d’Ailly, Biel; cfr. § 145, 3. 4a), with their sharp distinction between faith and knowledge, their distrust of the powers

of reason, their erroneous

notion that God's will is a sort of capriciousness,

and their, “‘eclectic’’ theory of grace and the plan of salvation. Lutherridiculed Aristotle and the Scholastics, although he was acquainted with the works of only the lesser ones, He liked to consider himself a ‘‘disciple of Augustine” and demanded that theological studies be reformed by again basing them on the Bible (literal interpretation only) and the Fathers (Augustine). His hyperspiritualistic ideas were stimulated by a desultory reading of the German mystics, especially the sermons of Tauler and the so-catled Theologie Deutsche which he edited and published in 1515 and again in 1518 {cfr. § 146, 2}. Yet he never became acquainted with the Neo-Platonic mysticism

of the third and fourth centuries. He took from the mystics only those ideas which accorded with his own state of soul and which are at times very in-

correctly conceived by some of the mystics; such as the absolute nothingness

9

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517—1648) of man before God and passive surrender to Him (Quietism). However, as was mentioned above, the most important factor in the evolution of Luther’s

doctrine

was

his

misunderstanding

of

St.

Augustine’s

writings

against Pelagianismn on sin, grace and predestination and his one-sided interpretation of texts from St. Paul on justification found in the Epistles to the Romans and Galatians. One thing remains clear: Luther’s theology 1s a true mirror of his personal perplexities regarding salvation and his idea of reform was at the same time an act of self-emancipation from the intense spiritual suffering he was undergoing. It appealed to him as an entirely new sort of faith. Cir. sources in 0. Scheel, Dokumente zu Luthers Entwicklung (to 1519), *1929. — H. Boehmer,

Luthers erste Vorlesung [iiber die Psalmen,

Sb. Leipzig 75, 1923, I. Also G. Ebeling, ZThK

Die Anfinge

1 513/15],

1953, 43/99. — E. Vogelsang,

von L.s Christologie nach der ersten Psalmenvorlesung,

19zg.

Luthers Vorlesung iiber den Romerbrief (1515/16), ed. by . Ficker, 1938 (Weimarer Ausg. 56). Luthers Vorlesung iiber den Galaterbrief (1516/17), ed. by K. A. Meissinger, 1939 (W. A. 57, 2). H. Volz ZKG 1954/55, 72/96 (students’ notes from the lectures on the Ep. to the Galatians). Luthers Vorlesung iiber den Hebréerbrief (1517/18), ed. by J. Ficker, 1939 (W. A. 57, 3),

also

E. Hirsch

and

2. Psalmenvorlesung

Luthers

theol.

J. Kaftan L.s

H. Riicker!,

{1518),

Quellen,

1g912;

ed.

L.

bis

zum

u.

E. Vogelsang,

Tauler,

Turmerlebnis,

u. Katastrophe M. Luthers, HZ de la réforme,

Der relig.

reformator. Eckhart

by

Unbekannte 1918

Fragmente

1940.

(also

—

auws

L.s

A. V. Miiller,

O. Scheel,

Festgabe

1920, 298/318 and A. Bigelmair in “L. in dkam. Sicht” 239/52);

Werdegang

1934/35.

1929.

—

1920.

—

A. Freitag,

Entwicklung

119, 1918, 247/82. — H. Strokl, La pensée

Paris 1951; Luther jusqu’en 1520, Paris 21962, — J. v. Waller,

Entwicklungsgang Luther,

1926,

H.Quiring,

u. L., 1936. —

—

L.

des jungen

A. Hamel,

u. die

L.,

1925

Der junge

Mystik,

I. Heckel, ZRGEkan

—

A. Merz,

Der

L. u. Angustin,

Diss. 1936.

1937, 285/375

—

vor-

2 vols.

H. Bornkamm,

(law and right in

Luther before 1517). — L. Pinomaa, Der existentielle Charakter der Theo-

logie L.s, 1940. ~— A. Gyllenkrok, Rechtfertigung u. Heiligung in der friihen Theologie L.s, 1952. — . Miiiler, Die Rechtfertigungslehre nominalist, Reformationsgegner, 1040. — E. Stracke, Luthers grosses Selbstzeugnis 1545

iiber s. Entwicklung zum Reformator, 1926 (also XK. A. Metssinger, Der Kathol. L., 1952, 288 ff., who rejects L.s experience in the tower (at Erfurt).

E. Bizer, Fides ex auditu, 1958 (also H. Bornkamm, P. Althaus, Die Theologie M. Luthers, 1962.

ARG

1961, 16/29). —

3. The doctrine of justification by faith alone to which was soon added a denial of the freedom of the will, supplemented by the postulate that everyone having fiduciary faith was ceriain of salvation (15167), became the central point of Luther’s theological system. With the self-conceit for which he was noted, Luther referred to this doctrine as “my Gospel’’; later it became known as the material principle of Protestantism or the articulus stantis et

cadentis Hcclesiae. But because 10

of the general confusion in his

§ 159, Luther’s Theological Development

theological thinking, Luther did not at first realize the consequences

of s discovery and did not even consider the possibility of a conflict with the Church. He did not perceive that he was taking the road to religious subjectivism and shallow spiritualism; nor that his doctrine that salvation is the work of God alone to the exclusion

of all created means, implied the rejection of the sacraments, the

priesthood, sacrifice, indulgences and the hierarchy; in a word, the entire order of the divinely established Church. Luther’s strong conviction and impetuosity made a clash inevitable, especially since he strove to propagate his “correct theology” by means of letters, sermons and the writings of his disciples. His first followers were found among his colleagues in Wittenberg (Andrew Bodenstein of Karlstadt, Nicholas of Amsdorf, Wenzel Link). Even while lecturing on the Epistles to the Romans and Galatians he did not hesitate to assume a fwofold predestination of man by God: to bliss and damnation. The Roman indulgences which were proclaimed at this time became the fortuitous occasion for Luther to publicize

his new doctrine. This step, which was contrary to Luther’s own wishes, became the signal for battle and for mass apostasy from the Church.

The Indulgence Controversy!. According to a long established custom, Pope Julius I in 1507 and Pope Leo X in 1514 announced

a plenary indulgence for all Christendom in order to procure funds

for the building of a new basilica at Rome in honor of Si. Peter. 1 W. KOEHLER, Dokumente zum AblaBstreit v. 1517, 21934. JAK. MAY, Kard. Albrecht I1 v. Mainz u. Magdeburg u. s. Zeit, 2 vols 1865/75. AL.

SCHULTE,

ZkTh

1907,

Die

Fugger

267/302.

in Rom

1495/1523,

2 vols

G.FRH.V,POLNITZ,

Jakob

Igo4;

Fugger,

also

H, SCHRORS,

2 vols

P, KALKOFF, Wilh. Capito im Dienste EB. Albrechts v. Mainz,

1949/51.

1g07. K. RUN-

GE, Die Wahlen Albrechts v. Brand. z. EB. v. Magdeburg u. Mainz, Diss. 1g22. FR. HERRMANN, Die Protokolle des Mainzer Domkapitels TII {1514/

45),

1929 ff.

N. PAULUS,

Joh. Tetzel,

189g;

Kath.

1899

I, 484/510;

1901

1,

453 . 554 ff.; H]G 1921, 80/86. K.LOFFLER, Deutsche Geschichtsbl. 1913, 201f15. E. KROKER, ARG 1917, 263/76. G. KRUGER, Christl. Welt 1917, 761 1f. 776 ff. K, BAUER, ZKG 1924, 174/70. J. M. LENHART, Franciscan Studies

1958,

82/88.

P. KALKOFF,

Ablass

u. Reliquienverehrung

an

der

Schlosskirche zu Wittenberg unter Friedrich dem Weisen, 1go7 Cir. also lit. on indulgences in § 152,2 (esp. N. PAULUS and E. GOLLER). W. KOEHLER, Luthers g5 Thesen samt den Resolutionen u. Gegenschriften, 1go3. TH. BRIEGER,

Festschr. M. Lenz 1910, 1/37 {form of the theses).

Festschr. Th. Brieger 1914,

23/26

(posti%% of the theses).

bereitung u. Verbreitung von M. L.s 95

Thesen, 1933.

O.CLEMEN,

J.LUTHER,

H. VOLZ,

Vor-

M. Luthers

Thesenanschlag n. dessen Vorgeschichte, 1959. E.ISERLOH, Luthers Thesenanschlag, Tatsachen oder Legende ? 1g62. P. KALKOFF, Luther u. die Entscheidungsjahre der Reformation (1517/21), 1917. A. M. R0QSSI, Lutero e Roma 1517—19, Rome 1924 (Bilychnis),

11

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517—1648)

The indulgence could be gained by everyone who made a contrite confession, received Communion and made an offering for the erection of the basilica. In 1515 the Pope appointed the young Hohen-

zollern prince, Albrecht of Brandenburg,

to direct the preaching of

the indulgence in a large part of Germany. Albrecht had been appointed archbishop of Magdeburg and administrator of the diocese of Halberstadt in 1513, and in 1514 had been elected arch-

bishop of Mainz. He was friend and patron of the humanists and artists and a man of questionable morals. His procrastination and

indifference in the beginning of the innovation did much to injure the Catholic cause. Half of the proceeds from the indulgence was

to go toward the building of St. Peter’s and half was to be retained

by Albrecht so that he could be in a position to repay a loan of 29,000 gulden from the Fugger bank of Augsburg, He had borrowed the money to pay the Roman Curia for his preconization as archbishop of Mainz and for the privilege of holding three sees

(14,000

and

10,000 ducats).

The

shameful

arrangement

for the

division of the proceeds realized from the preaching of the indulgence was suggested by a Roman representative of the Fugger bank. For a long time there had been an aversion to mdulgences even among well-disposed people in Germany because they had been used too often for money-making purposes, and the preaching of

indulgences was often attended by scandalous abuses (cfr. § 152, 2).

Even the Dominican Jokn Tetzel, whom Albrecht appointed to preach the indulgence, was not entirely guiltless on this score. He exercised his office “with great energy and clamor” and, actin g on the instructions he received from Albrecht,

announced

to his

hearers that in order to gain the indulgence for the deceased, the state of grace was not necessary; a money offering alone would obtain the desired boon. While Tetzel was preaching at Jiite rbog

near Wittenberg,

Luther,

whose

theological system

no longer ad-

mitted indulgences, began his attack. On the eve of All Saint s, October 31, 1517, in keeping with an academic practice of the times, Luther posted ninety-five Latin theses on the door of the Unive rsity Church at Wittenberg. The theses dealt with the value and efficacy of tndulgences (de virtute indulgentiarum) and related matters

(penance, guilt and punishment, purgatory, and the primacy). Although he intended only to attack abuses and elucidate the “correct” doctrine, actually his theses not only rejected indulgences but also

called into question the power of the Church over things spiri tual, 12

§ 15%. Luther's Theological Development Of the ninety-five points on which Luther challenged to debate, one declared that the Pope could not remit any penalty except one which he had imposed by his own authority or in application of the canons of the Church (thesis 5); several others (theses 8—29) denied the effect of indulgences on the souls in purgatory; two theses {36,37) declared that every Christian who was truly contrite received full remission of sin and punishment without an indulgence; thesis 58 rejected the doctrine of the Thesaurus Ecclesiae,

consisting of the merits

of Christ and

the supererogatory

merits

of the saints (cir. § 119, 4); and a portent of the conflict that was to ensue was contained in thesis 86, which asked why the pope who was as rich as Croesus did not build the basilica with his own money instead of taking the money of the poor.

5. The disputation to which Luther extended an invitation by

posting his theses never took place. But the mere act of posting them had a tremendous effect. Within a few weeks the theses were circulated throughout Germany and were received with quite

general

and

hearty

approval.

The audacious Augustinian became

the hero of the day. Many who had had trouble with the Curia or were otherwise dissatisfied with the existing state of affairs, hoped that Luther’s challenge would result in a real reform of the Church. Luther made the most of the national attitude toward Rome; very few saw the dire consequences of his doctrine. However, within a

short time some refutations were publishedl. The secular priest Conrad Wimpina (Conrad Koch of Wimpfen), rector of the Univer-

sity of Frrankfort on the Oder, exposed the errors of Luther’s theses

by publishing antitheses. Teizel defended Wimpina's antitheses and in 1518 published fifty theses in which the principal points of dogma were proposed as held by the Church and the theses were submitted

to her infallible judgment. At the request of John Eck (John Maier of Eck, 1486—1543) versy. Eck was professor of theology in the and an erudite humanist. He eventually

the bishop of Eichstitt, entered into the controUnsversity of Ingolstadt became the foremost

champion of the Catholic cause in Germany. ! J. NEGWER,

lek V1I,

works

1909.

K. Wimpina,

In the Adnotationes

in Kirchengesch. Abhandl. ed. by M. Sdra-

P. P. ALBERT, K. Koch Wimpina v, Buchen,

of Eck in Corp.

Cath.

1, 2, 6, 13, 14,

16

(with.

1931. — Several

bibliogr.).

WOLF,

KAdRG II, 2z, 233/38. J. GREVING, ]J..Eck als junger Gelehrter, 1906; . Ecks Pfarrbuch {. die Kirche U. L. Frau zu Ingolstadt, 1go8. A. BRANDT,

. Ecks

Predi%ttfitigkeit

SCHLECHT,

J.

an

Ecks Anfinge,

U.

L.

H]JG

Frau

1915,

zu

1/36.

Ingolst.

(1525/42),

H. SCHAURRTE,

1914.

Die

J.

Buss-

lehre des J. Eck, 1919. E.ISERLOH, Die Eucharistie in der Darstellung des J. Eck, 1950; also A. Kolping, ThQ 1952, 327/42. O, HILTBRUNNER, ZKG 195253, 312/z20 (titles of the pamphlets). FR. MICHALSKI, De Silvestri

Prieriatis vita et scriptis, Diss. 1892. Luthers,

1912, 7/30.

F,LAUCHERT,

Die ital, liter. Gegner

13

Modern and Recent Times. First Peviod (1517—1648)

on the ninety-five theses Eck pointed out that Luther’s theses closely resembled the teachings of the Bohemian heretic, John Hus.

Luther called Eck’s work “Obelisci’ i. e. critical notes, and retorted

with

his

“Asterisci”.

The

Dominican

of the Sacred Palace in Rome

Sylvester

Prierias,

Master

and a strict Thomist, was obliged

by reason of his office to examine and report on Luther’s theses.

In June 1518 he issued his Dialogus 15 praesumptuosas M. Lutheri conclusiones de potestate papae, to which Luther gave a sharp

rebuttal,

In the meantime the Curia requested the superiors of the Augustimian Hermits to induce Luther to abandon his erroneous doctrine. But in April 1518 Luther held a public disputation on the “Theology of the Cross” at a Chapter of his Order at Heidelberg and won many of his fellow religious to his cause. The following month, May 1518, he wrote Resolutiones de virtute indulgentiarum, a detailed exposition of the ninety-five theses, and sent it to Rome. The work was accompanied by a letter to Pope Leo X in which Luther expressed abject submission but at the same time let it be known that he

would never retract.

§ 160.

Rome Examines Luther’s Doctrine®. The Leipzig Disputation (1519).

Luther’s Principal Writings (1520); His Excommunication (1521).

I. In December 1517 Archbishop Albrecht of Mainz informed Rome of Luther’s theses; and in June 1518 a curial trial was instituted against Luther for propagating a new doctrine and for being suspected of keresy. He was ordered to appear in Rome within sixty days to answer the charges in person. However, Luther’s sovereign, the Prince Elector Frederick the Wise of Saxony (1486—1525), who 1 K. MULLER,

QFItalAB

6, 1904,

Prozess, 1905;

Ref.,

1917;

Friedrich

179/208;

rom.

Prozess,

32 ff. 174 ff. 374 ff.

Zu L.s rém. Prozess,

cir. ZKG

der

HZ

Luthers

Weise,

1925,

213/25.

Beschiitzer

132, 1925, 29/42.

1923, 331/90; cir. A, KOCH, ARG

ZKG

1903,

P. KALKOFF,

46/85.

Forsch.

AL.SCHULTE,

zu L.s rom.

1912; L. u. die Entscheidungsjahre der

PASTOR

Luthers,

ARG

BL.WAGNER,

1926, 213/60.

IV,

1, 247 ff.

1917,

249162;

P. KALKOFF, ZKG

1024,

L. u. Friedrich 4. W., ZKG P.KIRN,

Friedrich d. Weise

u. die Kirche, 1926. I, HOESS, Georg Spalatin, 1956. A.COSSIO, Il Cardinale Gaetano e la Riforma, Cividale 1902. F, LAUCHERT, Die ital. literar. Gegner Luthers, 1912, 133/77 and in Corp. Cath. 10. J].F. GRONER, Kardinal Cajetan, 1951. P. KALKOFF, ZKG 1912, 240/67 (Luther’s trial). N, PAULUS, ZkTh 1913, 394/400 (Bull of 1518). ST.EHSES, H]G 1919, 740/48 (Luther's appeal to a Gen. Council). H.A.CREUTZBERG, Kar! v. Miltitz, 1907, P. KALKOFF,

14

Die Miltitziade,

1911.

§ 160. Rome examines Luther’s Doctrine. Leipzig Disputation 1517

still held the medieval reverence for relics and indulgences, never-

theless took Luther and

his followers under his protection

and

began to favor the new doctrine. Hence instead of the Roman trial, an arrangement was made to have a hearing before the Cardinal-

legate Cajetan at the Diet of Augsburg to be held October 12—14, 1518. Cajetan (Thomas de Vio of Gaeta, O,P.) was one of the most

learned theologians of his day

(§ 145, 4 b). But nothing was ac-

complished at the Diet. Luther refused to retract his teaching regarding the spiritual treasury of the Church (the 58th thesis)

and asserted that it is faith alone that gives the sacraments their

efficacy (7th resolution). Fearing arrest, he fled from Augsburg

but left behind an appeal executed by a notary “a papa non bene

informato ad melus informandum.” A papal Bull on indulgences appeared on November

g, 1518 which prevented Luther from pro-

testing that the Church had never spoken authoritatively on the subject. The Bull was drafted by Cajetan, who had already published

learned treatises on indulgences and the primacy against the in-

novators. Toward

the end of November,

Luther, realizing that he

would soon be condemned, appealed to a general council, Cajetan’s

request to the Elector to surrender or banish Luther was refused

on the grounds that he had not yet been proved to be a heretic. The Curia then resorted to other means to attain the goal. The conceited and ambitious Saxon nobleman, Car! von Miltitz, a papal chamberlain and a Roman notary, was appointed to bring the

Golden Rose to the Elector with the grant of rich indulgences for

the castle church of Wittenberg and to ask in return for the surrender of Luther to the ecclesiastical court. But the plan miscarried. Instead, the undiplomatic Miltitz, overstepping his authority in the matter, endeavored to negotiate personally with Luther at Altenburg in January 1519. All he accomplished was to extract a promise that Luther would keep silent if his opponents did the same, and that he would accept a German bishop as arbiter. After

this fiasco, Leo X made no further move in the affair for a time, since a political matter of greatest importance entirely absorbed

his attention. Maximilian

I died on January 12, 1519 and the

election of a new emperor was to take place soon. For a time Leo’s candidate was none other than the Elector Frederick of Saxony;

hence it would be inadvisable to put further pressure on the prince to surrender Luther.

15

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517—1648)

2. Agitation had now reached such a pitch that

it could no

longer be reasonably expected that either side would observe silence. As early as the Augsburg Diet a disputation between fohn Eck and Luther’s colleague Karistadt was agreed upon'. It took place in June and July 1519 in the castle Pleissenburg at Leipzig with the permission and in the presence of Duke George of Saxony. Since the subject matter proposed by Eck was evidently directed

against Luther, the latter felt that he was no longer held to his promise of silence, and drew up a number of antitheses and took part in the disputation. The debate between Eck and Karlstadt on grace and free will was followed by a dispute between Eck and

Luther chiefly on the primacy of the pope (13th thesis). Luther denied that the primacy was of divine institution and that it was necessary for salvation. When Eck pointed out that he was reviving the heresy of Wyclif and Hus which had been condemned by the Church, Luther denied the infallibility of general councils, especially of Constance, which had condemned the heresy. Since he thus

rejected the teaching authority of the Church and tradition, he was forced to fall back on the Gospel as the only support of his principles. As a matter of fact it was then that Luther deliberately formulated what has since become the formal principle of Protestantism: that nothing is to be accepted as religious truth except what can be proved from Scripture. The Leipzig disputation, therefore, became a turning point in Luther’s career since it forced him to a definite expression of his heretical views regarding the Church and the papacy. From now on it became evident that Luther had voluntarily repudiated the great body of Catholic teaching. The affair could no longer be viewed as an academic quartel over petty theories; it was an absolute denial of the teaching and divine orgamzation of the Church. 1 0, SEITZ, Der authentische Text der Leipziger Disputation, 1903, J. LORTZ, Die Leipz. Disp., ZThS 1926, 12{36. H.BARGE, A. Bodenstein v. Karlstadt, 2 vols. 1905. K. MULLER, Luther u. Karlstadt, 1go7. W. KOEHLER, Gott. Gel. Anz. 1912, 505/50. E. HERTZSCH, Karlstadt u, s. Bedeutung f. das Luthertum, 1932. E.KAHLER, K. u. Augustin, 1952. Corp. Cath. I, 191g.

WOLF, QKdRG

politik Herzog

Georgs

DAUNS, QFItalAB

11, 2, 77/8g.

v. Sachsen

10, 1907,

101/51;

F.GESS,

I—II

Akten

(1517/27),

H. BECKER,

u. Brieie zur Kirchen-

1905/17.

Cir. L.CAR-

in Harnack-Ehrung

1921,

308/16; ARG 1927, 161/269 (Duke George of Saxony as literary opponent P.POLMAN, Die polemische of L)}; O.VOSSLER, HZ 184, 1957, 272/91. Methode der ersten Gegner der Reformation, 1931; L’élément historique dans la controverse ecclésiastique du

16

16¢ s., Gembloux

1932,

§ 160, Rome examines Luther’s Dactrine. Principal Writings

3. Eck, who was skilled in dialectics, proved his points easily and lucidly, but Luther’s irascibility and obduracy prevented the parties from reaching an agreement. The conflict was continued by means of the printed word. Soon there appeared a veritable flood of polemic literature 1 the form of pamphlets illustrated with hateful caricatures aimed at vilifying and belittling the pope, the cardinals, priests and monks and all who opposed the new doctrine. These pamphlets did much to promote the cause of the Reformation among the people. Yet the old faith did not lack champions. The theological faculties of Cologne and Louvain condemned a number of sentences from Luther’s writings. Duke George of Saxony (1 1539}, whose faith and loyalty to the Church had been strengthened by the disputation, 1 Flugschriften

4 vols. 1906/11. phlets to 1522).

Flugschriften

der Ref.,

1938:

aus

den

ersten

Jahren

der

Ref.,

ed

by

O. Clemen,

G, BLOCHWITZ, ARG 1930, 145,’254 (Anti- RDm&n pAammA.E.BERGER, Die Sturmtruppen der Ref., ausgewihlte

(1520/25},

IQ93E; Lied-, Spruch-

Die Schaubiihne

ziige wider die Ref.,

1933.

im Diemt

H. JEDIN,

HJG

u. Fabeldlchtung

der Rei,,

1933,

1936;

70/97

1m Dienst

Satirische

(Catholic

Feld-

contro-

versial literature). 5. SCHARFE, Relig. Bildpropaganda der Reformationszeit, 1951, H, GRISAR and FR.HEEGE, Luthers Kampfbilder, 4 parts 1922/23

druck,

Luther

1921,

(L.-Studien

1930.

A.CENTGRAF,

u. Emscr,

28,

2, 3, 5—6).

1959.

O.CLEMEN,

M. Luther

thre Streitschriften

COCHLAUS,

als

1521,

Corp. Cath.

Die luther.

Ref.

Publizist,

2 vols

1040.

1889/91.

u. der BuchL.ENDERS,

Corp.

3, 15, 17, 18, 1g920/32.

Cath.

4,

H. JEDIN,

Des J. Cochl. Streitschrift De libero arbitrio hominis (152:,) 1927. A. HERTE,

see p. 6. Th., Murners deutsche 5Schriften, ed. by FR. SCHULTZ et al., g vols. 1918/29. Murner-Auswahl by G. SCHUHMANN, 1915; cfr. Z. f. schwetz. KG. 1922, 81f/1o1. Corp. Cath. 22, 1939. F.LANDMANN, Arch. f. elsdss. KG. 1935, 205/368; 1043, 199/210. ALFELD, Corp. Cath. 11, 1926. L. LEMMENS, P. Aug. v. Alfeld, 1899, cfr. G. HESSE, in '‘Arbeiten des kirchenhist. Semi-

nars der Franziskaner zu Paderborn,” 1630, 57/75. TABRRI, Corp. Cath. 23/26, 1941/52. Monogr. by L. HELBING, 1941. — Melanchthon: Opera in Corp. Reformatorum Vol 1—28, 1834/60. Werke in Auswahl ed. by R. STUPPERICH,

1910 ff.

1951

WOLF,

ff.

QKd4dRG

O.

CLEMEN

1I,

et al., Supplementa

1, 277/95.

G.ELLINGER,

Melanchthoniana,

Phil.

Melanchthon,

1902. R.STUPPERICH, Melanchthon, 1960. W.ELLIGER, Ph. Melanchthon. Forschungsbeitrage, 1961. W.BENESZEWICZ, Melanchthoniana, Sb. Miin-

chen

1934,

heutige

7.

M.KOHLER,

deutsche

Ulrich v. Hutten: P. KALKOFF,

M.

u. der Islam,

Staatskirchenrecht,

see lit. § 155,

U.v. Hutten

u.

2.

die

1g50.

1938.

Cir. also

WOLF, QKdRG

Reformation,

J. HECKEL, § 161,

I, 376/38;

1gzo;

M.

2 and

Huttens

u. das

169.

—

11, 2, 274 {. Vaganten-

zeit u. Untergang, 1925; Die Stellung der deutschen Humanisten zur IReformation, ZKG 1927, 161/231. Monographs on H. by P.HELD, 1928, O.FLAKE, 1929; H. HOLBORN, 1929. FR. WALSER, Die polit. Entwicklung U. v. HUTTENS, 1928. W. KAEGI, Hutten u. Erasmus, HistVS 1924/25, zoo ff. 4611f. K.BUCHNER, Die Freundschaft zwischen H. u. Erasmus, 1948. H. G. KELLER,

H. u. Zwingli, 1952. B. MOELLER, ZKG 1959 44/61 {German humanists and the beginnings of the Reformation). N. HARING, Die Theologie des Erfurter Aug.-Eremiten Barth. Arnoldi v. Usingen, 1939 (Luther’s teacher, later his {I? ponent). 0. MULLER, cfr. p. 10. H. WILMS, Der Kdlner Univ.-Prof. Konrad ollin OP (t 1536}, 1041. E. ISERLOH, Der Kampf um die Messein den ersten Jahren der Auseinandersetzung mit L 1952. 3

Bihimeyer-Tichle, Church History III

17

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517 —1648)

became one of the most resolute anti-Lutherans among the German nobility and himself undertook a literary campaign against the innovators. His court became a center for Catholic polemicists. Foremost

among

these were Jerome

Emser

of Weidenstetien

near

Ulm (} 1527) and John Cochléus {(whose real name was John Dobe-

neck of Wendelstein, { 1552); both were chaplains and secretaries of Duke George. The Strasbourg Franciscan, Thomas Murner {t 1537), the most talented and prolific satirist of the Reformation period, began in 1520 to publish a series of popular, witty and often caustic pamphlets against Luther. The best known of these, published in 1522 bore the title “Von dem groBen lutherischen Narren” (The great Lutheran fool). Another Franciscan, Augustine Alfeld,

lector of Sacred Scripture at Leipzig (t after 1532), the Dominican

Hochstraten, well known because of the part he took in the ReuchlinPfefferkorn controversy, john Faber, vicar-general of Constance

(1 1541 as bishop of Wiener Neustadt)

and many

others wrote

boldly against Luther in defense of the Church. Others, like the renowned artist Albrecht Diirer of Niirnberg, who had no thought of separating themselves from the Church, espoused Luther’s cause because they hoped that his protest would result in the reform

of ecclesiastical abuses. Luther’s opposition to Scholasticism and his

demand

sympathy

for the reform of scriptural studies gained for him of the Humanists. Among

the

these was the man who was

to influence the Lutheran movement almost as much as Luther himself, Philtp Schwarzert of Bretten (1497—1560), better known as Melanchihon. He was a grandnephew of Reuchlin and at the age of twenty-one was professor of Greek at the University of Tiibingen. In 1518 he was called to Wittenberg where he met Luther and almost irnmediately became his most loyal disciple. Among the radical young Humanists, Ulrich von Hutten (1523) was a prominent adherent

of Luther and in inflamatory pamphlets {Vadiscus seu Trias Romana, etc.} declared war on the “foreign pope.”” He was not interested

in the religious issue but was inspired rather by the national hatred

of Rome, a desire to promote pagan Humanism and the special

class interests of the lower nobility, It was this latter consideration that induced the revolutionary knights such as Franz von Sickingen and Sylvester von Schaumburg to join the movement and to offer

Luther their support and asylum in their castles.

4. The German Reformation may be said to have reached its peak and acquired its definite character in 1520. Under the influence of

18

§ 160. Rome examines Luther’s Doctrine. Principal Writings

his humanistic friends, Luther assumed a more radical attitude and became the standard-bearer of a national revolt and of a relentless war on the Roman pontiffs. From this time on he referred publicly to the pope as Antichrist (cfr. 11 Thess. z : 4). In fact the eschatological trend 1n his thinking from this point on is significant. He took advantage of the widespread dissatisfaction with the Curia and the general discontent arising from the fact that the Gravamina

of the

German

nation

(§ 158, 5) had

been

ignored,

to draw

the

masses after him in his apostasy from the Mother Church. This is evident especially from the three important appeals! which he addressed to his “beloved Germans™ in 1520. In August of that year

he published in German a letter “'To the Christtan Nobles of the German Nation.”” It was “‘an inflammatory manifesto to the Emperor, the princes and the lower nobility on the abuses in Church and State’ with proposals of the most radical nature; ‘it was an appeal to attack all the possessions of the papacy’” (K. Miller). Luther

demanded

that

the princes

themselves

undertake

the

reform

of

Chnistendom since the clergy had failed to do so; that they assume all authority over dioceses and churches, over clergy and laity; that they set up an independent national church in Germany; that they ignore canon law, forbid sending money to Rome, and abolish celibacy, Masses for the dead, pilgrimages, indulgences, fraternities and all holydays except Sundays.

Luther denied that an essential

change takes place at the consecration in the Mass and began to stress the idea of a universal priesthood. This was followed in October 1520 by an equally fiery pamphlet ““De capiivitate Baby-

lonica

Ecclesiae

praeludium”

which

also

appeared

in

German

translation. In it Luther argued that by all sorts of human accretions to her sacraments, such as denying the chalice to the laity, 1 E, KOHLMEYER, Die Entstehung der Schrift Luthers “An den christl. Adel deutscher Nation,” 1922; ZKG 1925, 582/04 (also W.KOEHLER, ZRGkan 1925, 1/38; 1927, 486/93; K.BAUER, ARG 1935, 167/217). O. SCHEEL, HZ 161, 1940, 477/97. M. RADE u. W, KOEHLER, Z. {. Theol. u. Kirche 1923, 266 fi. 399 ff. (Mysticism

menschen ?'’).

W. MAURER,

R.WILL,

Von

der

Die Vorstellungen vom

konfesstonellen Polemik,

KOFF,

Die

Bulle

134 ff.; 1926,

J.

JORDAN,

Freiheit eines

Antichrist i 1906.

Exsurge,

382fg9;

in Luther’s “Freiheit eines Christen-

La liberté chrétienne

HJG

L. u. der Bann,

1927,

spiteren MA.,

1914,

1920.

Luther,

Christenmenschen,

K. BAUER,

ZKG

chez

1917,

O.STARCK,

1910,

89/174;

(also N. PAULUS,

rgea.

H. PREUSS,

bei Luther

Luther u. d. Papst,

166/203;

353/58

1949.

Strasb.

u. in der P. KAL-

1921,

1 ff.

ibid. 733 f.).

Luthers Stellung

zur Insti-

tution d. Papsttums 1520/46, Diss. 1930. J. LUTHER, ARG 1954, 260/5 {Luther’s words while burning the Bull of Excommunication), H, ROOS, Festschrift M. Schmaus,

1957, 909/26

(The sources

of the Bull

“Exsurge™).

19

Modern and Recent Times. First Pertod (1517 —1648)

the doctrines of transubstantiation and the sacrificial character of the Mass, the Church had drawn the faithful into a deplorable state of slavery from which they must now be emancipated. He

retained

only

baptism,

the

Last

Bull

“Exsurge

Domine”

of June

with

resistance

Supper

and,

to

some

extent,

penance as sacraments, which naturally received their efficacy from faith; and demanded communion under both species. Meanwhile the snvestigation had dragged on at Rome, but under Eck’s personal prodding 1t was finally brought to a close. In the 15,

1520,

forty-one

of Luther’s

sentences were condemned partly as heretical, partly as false and offensive; Luther’s writings containing the errors were ordered to be burned and he and his followers were threatened with excommunication unless they submitted within sixty days. Eck and the Italian Girolamo Aleandro were appointed papal nuncios to publish the Bull north of the Alps; but in many places they met and

contempt.

Many

German

bishops

failed

to

enforce the injunctions of the Bull, some out of sheer indifference, others because they hoped to gain some perscnal advantages from

the innovation. In the Netherlands, tke patrimonial realm of Charles V', Luther’s writings were burned in several cities (Antwerp,Louvain, Liége) which served only to increase the Reformer’s ire. In October 1520, at the urging of Miltitz, Luther addressed another letter to Leo X. After stigmatizing the Roman Church in the most abusive language, Luther protested that he had not attacked the person of the pope, whom he claimed to esteem; but at the same time he explicitly refused to recant. The work “Against the Bull of the Antichrist”

(published

in Latin

and

German

in November

1520)

gives full expression to Luther’s vehement passion. He renewed his appeal to a general council and at the same time composed the third of his principal reformatory works, ““Tractatus de libertate christiana.” This also appeared in German and contains the summary of his doctrine on faith, justification and good works. This tract,

too, was sent to the pope. In a calm tone, reminiscent of the German mystics, Luther painted his new ideal of Christian hife “free from all earthly kings, yet placed at the service of all in charity.” He took the final step in proclaiming rebellion against ecclesiastical authority when he burned the ‘“‘irreligious” books of canon law together with the Bull threatening excommunication at the Elser Gate of Wittenberg on December 10, 1520. The Bull “Decet Roma-

num Pontificem’ dated January 3, 1521, contained the formal decree

20

§ 161. The Diet and Edict of Worms. Luther at the Warthurg

of excommunication.

Little attention was paid to it in Germany.

Nevertheless it had the effect of gradually inducing some of Luther’s

adherents to realize the seriousness of the situation and to repudiate

him. But at the same time it became evident that the movement which Luther had inaugurated and which had engulfed the German nation could no longer be suppressed. § 161,

The Diet and Edict of Worms, 1521. Luther at the Wartburg and again in Wittenberg.

I. In spite of the opposition of Francis I of France and Pope

Leo X, the electors present at Frankfort on June 28, 1 519 to choose

a successor to Emperor Maximilian I, elected Maximilian’s nineteen year old grandson, Charles V of Spain (1519—1556)™. He was the heir to a vast empire which comprised Spain and its colonies in America, Naples, Sicily and the Netherlands. He was crowned at Aachen in October 1520. The gifted and strong-willed YOURg emperor earnestly endeavored to measure up to the gigantic task. He was tully aware of what the imperial dignity implied, was imbued with strong Catholic convictions and was determined as he promised 1 A. MOREL-FATIO, Historiographie de Charles V, Paris 1913. E. ARMSTRONG, The Emperor Charles V, 2z vol. Lond. ?igro. R.EB. MERRIMAN,

The Rise of the Spanish Empire, 3 vol. Lond. 1g22f26. K. BRANDI, Kaiser Karl V, 2 vols. 1937/41 (standard). J. CALMETTE, Charles V, Paris 1945.

R.TYLER,

The emperor Charles the Fifth, Lond.

u. seine Zeit, publ. by P. Rassow

1933, 35/36 (The XVI

letzte

I9IT.

1925;

Kaiser

Die

also K. BRANDI,

and F, Schalk, 1960,

cent. concept of emperor}.”

des Mittelalters,

P.KALKOFF,

1956. Karl V. Der Kaiser

1957.

Kaiserwahl

Nachr.

Gétt.

A. WALTHER,

P. RASSOW,

Friedrichs IV

1925,

169/73

W. KGHLER,

Die

[I] u.

and

HZ

140,

Karl V. Der

Anfinge

Karls

G, WOLF,

V

Karls

ZKG

V,

{r519), 1026,

22[26. — Diet of Worms 1521: Deutsche Reichstagsakten 11, 1896. P. KALKOFF, Briefe, Depeschen u. Berichte iiber Luther vom Wormser Reichstag, 1898; Aleander gegen L., 1908: Die Entstehung des Wormser Edikts, 1913; Das W. Edikt u. die Erlasse des Reichsregiments u. einzelner Reichs-

fiirsten,

1917; Der Wormser

Reichstag

v. 1421,

1922.

J. KUHN,

Luther

u.

der W. Reichstag, 1916 [Quellenbiicher 73]. "J. PAQUIER, Jéréme Aléandre, Paris 1900; cfr. P. KALKOFF, ZGK 1924, 209/19. H.V.SCHUBERT, Reich

u. Reformation, rg11: Die Vorgesch. der Berufung Luthers auf d. Reichstag v. Worms, Sb. Heidelberg 1912, F. BOLLER, Luthers Berufung nach Worms, Diss. 1912. J.XKUHN, ZKG 1914, 372 ff. 529 {f. {Edict of Worms); cfr.

N. PAULUS, H]JG 1919, 269/77.

Studien

LOHER,

1].

B. MARKGRAF,

H. GRISAR, Luther zu Worms,

Luthers

Zentralbl, {. Bibliothekswesen

Edict of Worms).

K. A, MEISSINGER,

Wormsfahrt,

1941,

198/214

1927.

Die

deutsche

Trigodie

1521,

Luther 29, 1958, 124/34 (Response of Luther at Worms). gabe P, Kirn,

1961,

172/90.

[Luther-

K. SCHOTTEN-

(official edition of the

Cfr. lit. on Frederick the Wise of Saxony Luther.

1921

§ 160,

1953.

1 and

B. Lohse,

E. KESSEL, Fest-

21

Modern and Recent Times, First Period (1517 —1648)

the pope, to use every means at his disposal to check the religious revolution. He had retained the medicval concept of the imperial office as a protectorship over the Church and the papacy. According to the old imperial law, Charles's first imperial Diet (held at Worms from January until May 1521), was obliged to take civil action 1n the matter of Luther’s excommunication. The papal legate Aleandro, who was present at the Diet, had been much maligned since his arrival in Germany. He was a well-educated humanist and an accomplished diplomat, although not entirely free from a certain amount

of cunning

in his diplomatic dealings.

He

cudeavored

to

convince the assembled princes of the necessity of taking speedy and energetic measures; but before considering Luther’s case, the princes presented the hundred “Gravamina Nationis (zermanicae” (§ 158, 5) and demanded that the emperor give Luther a hearing or

run the risk of a popular revolt. Charles consented in the hope that Luther might be induced to retract or at least that an acceptabie agreement could be reached. Luther was provided with a letter of safo conduct to come to Worms where he appeared twice before the assembly (April 17 and 18, 1521). When commanded to retract he first asked for time to consider the matter; but on the following day he declared that he could not in conscience retract since the pages of Scripture and other strong reasons convinced him that he was right and that the pope and councils could crr. The words with which he is said to have concluded his address before the Diet: “Here I stand. I cannot do otherwise. So help me, God. Amen.” are admitted by Protestant researchers to be a bit of dramatic fiction; but they have somehow attained a deathless vitality. Charles V handed to the legate and other members of the Diet a written declaration that he was ready to sacrifice his crown and his life to preserve the religion of his fathers and to stamp out heresy. Further discussions of loyal Catholic princes with Luther achieved nothing since he continued to appeal to his conscience. After he had left Worms and most of the members of the Diet had departed, there appeared the now famous Edict of Worms, dated May 25, 1521.

In language which could not be misunderstood, the edict declared

that Luther and his adherents had fallen under the ban of the Empire and ordered that his writings be burned. There can be no doubt about the legality of this edict; but it was published in only a few countries, especially in the Emperor’s domains, and even in these places was not thoroughly enforced. Unfortunately, the 22

§ 161. The Diet and Edict of Worms. Luther at the Wartburg

emperor was then engaged in military conflicts which demanded all his attention and hence he was not in a position to proceed personally against the princes who favored Luther. For the next nine years Charles did not set foot on German soil. 2. The proscription ordered by the edict did Luther little harm

since by the time it was published he was in safe hiding. By a secret arrangement between the Elector of Saxony and some knights, Luther was “kidnapped” and spirited to the castle called ‘“‘the Wartburg”

near Eisenach.

Here

under the assumed

name

of “ Junker

Jorg™ (Squire George) he lived for almost a year (May 1521—March 1522) devoting himself to study and writing. In his “Patmos” he had to consider whether his bold and unprecedented attack on the Church was justified. His mood varied from high excitement to deep depression. However, he forced himself to view his distressing

doubts and reproaches of conscience as attacks of the devil who was

determined to crush him. This only served to increase his hatred of the papacy and to confirm his conviction that he had received a speclal mission from God. It was at this time that he wrote De votvs monasticis tudicium, a scandalous pamphlet on the religious vows which gained for his cause a great number of apostate monks and nuns. An even more sacrilegious pamphlet on the Mass was published in Latin and German (De abroganda Missa privata —

Vom Missbrauch der Messe) and addressed to the Angustinians of Wittenberg. In this work Luther attacked the Mass as a “shameful idolatry” and demanded that it be abolished. He then undertook 2 work of a more positive nature — the transiation of the Bible into German. In this work he used the original text as well as the Vulgate and the translation of Erasmus. The New Testament appeared in September 1522 and the Old Testament followed in parts from X523 to 1534'. — From a literary point of view Luther’s Bible was

not without merit. It soon attained wide circulation and formed a strong bond of unity among his followers. Catholics had nothing which could compete with it. However, in his translation Luther

showed that even Holy Scripture had no inviolable authority where

1 W.WALTHER, Die ersten Konkurrenten des Bibeliibersetzers Luther, 1917. AD. RISCH, L.s Bibelverdeutschung, 1922. EM, HIRSCH, L.s deutsche Eibel, 1928. G. ROETHE, Deutsche Reden, 1927, I34/203 (Luther’s im-

portance in German BEYER,

Theol.

Lit.;

Rundschau

L’s September Bible);

NF.

I, 1929,

313/60.

Sb. Berlin 1922.

M. REU,

Luther's

H.W.

German

Bible, Columbus (Ohio) 1934. H. BORNKAMM, ThLZ 1947, 23/28 (L's models). H.VOLZ,

100 Jahre Wittenberger Bibeldruck 1522—1626,

Luther auf der Wartburg,

1953,

1954.

K. WESSEL,

23

Modern and Recent Times, First Period (1517—1648)

it did not harmonize with his subjective views, since in the preface to the New Testament he rejected, among other things, the Epistle of St. James because of its teaching on good works, and called it “an Epistle of straw’” without any evangelical character. A second important work containing a systematic compilation of the new doctrines appeared about this time and proved of im-

mense

value

to the

Melanchthon

Reformation

published

1. e., a presentation

movement.

his Loct Communes

of the fundamental

In December

rerum

principles

1521

theologicarum,

of theology

according to the mind of Luther®, It treats of both dogma and ethics and clothes the essential ideas of the Reformer in a language that appealed to the humanists and other educated people of the day. The radical differences between the old and the new faith are quite evident in the work. The authorship of the Loct and other valuable services soon made Melanchthon the second most important personage among the German reformers. From the moment of their first meeting Melanchthon remained slavishly devoted to Luther, although they were entirely unlike in temperament: Melanchthon was suave, amiable and conciliatory and frequently showed an inclination to compromuise. His efforts to foster Humanism and to reorganize higher studies, which had declined badly during the disturbances of the Reformation, caused his friends to call him Praeceptor Germaniae. He stressed especially the necessity of the study of languages (Greek and Hebrew) for biblical exegesis, 3. Durning Luther’s absence serious disorders arose in Wittenberg which threatened the complete overthrow of all ecclesiastical order?, 1 PH. MELANCHTHON'S

by R. STUPPERICH,

1952/53.

Locl

communes,

ed.

Cir. P, JOACHIMSEN,

TH. HOPPE, Z. f. Systemat. Theol. 169, 1. H.VOLZ, ARG 1954, 196/233

by

1929, 599/615. (Melanchthon’s

PLITT-KOLDE,

Luther-Jb.

%1925;

1926, 27/06;

Cir. also § 160, 3 and part in the translation

of the Bible). C. L. MANSCHRECK, Melanchthon. The quiet reformer, New York 1958. P. MEINHOLD, Ph. Melanchthon. Der Lehrer der Kirche, 1960.

3 N.MULLER, Die Wittenberger Bewegung 1521/22, 21911. H. BARGE, Karlstadt, see § 160, 2; Aktenstiicke zur Wittenberger Bewegung 1522,

1912; Histvs

1014, 1/33.

TH. KNOLLE,

L.

Luther,

lésung 21937.

Luthers

1910.

K. MULLER,

ALFR.SCHULTZE,

u.

die

Stadtgemeinde

Bilderstiirmer,

der alten Gottesdienstformen

L. FENDT,

Der

Grundlegung

luth.

Kirche, Gemeinde u. Obrigkeit nach 1922.

einer evg.

Liturgik

Theologie des Gottesdienstes bei L., *1954. stiannm

bei

L.

im

Lichte

seiner

im

bis

Reformation,

P. GRAFF,

in der evg.

Gottesdienst

u.

Kirche

16. Jh.,

1523,

1923.

1926.

Gesch,

der

Auf-

Deutschlands AD.

I,

ALLWOHN,

V.VAJTA,

Die

XK. MATTHES, Das Corpus Chri-

Erforschung,

19z9.

H. WERDERMANN, .

L.s Wittenberger Gemeinde [nach s. Predigten)], 1929. E. KROKER, v. Bora, 41958, For lit, on the Anabaptists, cfr. § 165, 1. 24

1918,

Kath.

§ 161, The Diet and Edict of Worms. The Anabaptists

The logical consequences of Luther’s teaching were being applied literally. Priests began to marry, monks, especially the Augustinians, apostatized {the German congregation of Augustinians became

completely extinct in 1522), private Masses were seldom celebrated,

communion

was

received under both

species without

fasting or

previous confession, the laws of fast and abstinence were abolished,

pictures and images of the saints were removed and destroyed, and the funds of benefices and spiritual foundations were thrown into a common fund, supposedly for the support of the clergy and the poor. The disturbance increased with the appearance of the sect known as Anabaptisis. They denied the validity of infant baptism, since they held that baptism derived its efficacy from faith, and rebaptized all adults who jomed them. The special “inner light” which they claimed to be their guide led them to reject all authority, all

laws and all ecclesiastical organization, and induced them to adopt

a crude form of Chiliasm. The birthplace of the sect was the city of Zwickau, where Thomas Miinzer, an apostate priest, placed him-

self at the head of a group of revolutionary weavers, Their attempt to establish “a new Christian kingdom” proved abortive and the “prophets” were banished from the city. Some of them, especially Nicholas

went

Storch,

a weaver,

to Wittenberg

in

and

1521,

Mark

Stiibner,

where

Karlstadt

a former

was

student,

encouraging

the radical element. The city became a scene of tumult and rioting. War was declared on studies; artisans were to preach the Gospel, students were to learn handicrafts, and the university was on the point of closing its doors. In February 1522 a war against sacred images broke out, the first of many such vandalic protests of the Reformation which resulted in the irreparable destruction of great masterpieces of Christian art. Unable himself to check the viclence,

Melanchthon sent for Luther, who despite the imperial ban arrived

in Wittenberg early in March 1522 and by the power of his word and the help of the secular arm succeeded in restoring order. The vanquished ‘““fanatics” were expelled from the city. Luther was

allowed to remain in Wittenberg

and resumed his campaign

of

preaching and writing. He now saw it was necessary that he himself supervise the practical application of his teaching. The earlier

ordinances proscribing private Masses,

obligatory confession and

fasting remained in force. There was still a Mass on Sunday, but

all passages in the Canon referring to the sacrificial character of the Mass were deleted; although the Latin language, liturgical vest-

25

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517 —1648)

ments and the elevation of the host were temporarily retained. From

now

on

the

sermon

became

the

principal

part

of divine

worship. The laity who so desired could receive communion under both species. Luther also sanctioned the abolition of clerical celibacy and monastic vows. In 1524 he himself put aside the religious habit

and in June 1525 while the frightful Peasants’ War was still raging, he married Catherine von Bora, an apostate Cistercian nun, whose flight from the convent of Nimbschen he had abetted.

Melanchthon was at first deeply grieved by this brazen action and feared that it would lessen Luther’s prestige as a religious leader. 4. While the Lutheran movement gained ground among the great masses of the people in many places, men of learning and position who in the beginning had hailed it with joy gradually withdrew from it when they saw it was not the reform that they had desired, but was rather leading to the complete overthrow and dismemberment of the old Church. The attitude of Desiderius Erasmus® who was responsible for preparing the way for the Reformation (§ 155, 2. 3) is characteristic. In the beginning he seemed at times to be on the verge of placing his influence and

learning at the service of the movement, and even went so far as to

encourage Luther in his course of action. But now he became pro-

voked at the “aenigmata absurda’ of Luther’s doctrine as well as at

the vehemence of his polemics. With growing displeasure Erasmus saw the decline of his beloved humanistic studies and the deterioration of schools of higher learning as a result of the religious conflict. In 1524 he published his diatribe De libero arbitrio in which

he attacked Luther’'s denial of freedom of the will, one of the principal points of the Lutheran system. In his usual, coarse way Luther

replied with the treatise De servo arbitrio (1525) to which Erasmus

gave a bitter rejoinder in Hyperaspistes

(1526). The rupture be-

! For lit. on Erasmus, cfr. § 155, 2. ERASMUS, De libero arbitrio, ed. by. ].V.WALTER, 1910; German by 0. SCHUHMACHER, 1940. Inquisitio de Fide (1524), ed. by C. R, THOMSON, New Haven 1950. P. KALKOFF, Die

Vermittlungspolitik d. Weise,

1919;

des Erasmus, ARG 1904, 1/83; Er,. Tuther u, Friedrich

Erasmus

u. Hutten

I920,

260/67

(also E. KONIG,

Lond.

1920.

K. A, MEISSINGER,

HJG

in ihrem

1921,

52/75

Verh.

and

zu Luther,

HZ

122,

G.RITTER,

HZ

K. SCHATTI,

Erasmus

127,

1922, 393/453). K.ZICKENDRAHT, Der Streit zw. Erasmus u. Luther fiber dic Willensfreiheit, 1909. A. MEYER, Etude critique sur les relations d’Erasme et de Luther, Paris 1g0g. R.H.MURRAY, Erasmus and Luther, ARG

1940,

v. R. u. die Rém. Kurie, 1g54. K. H, OELRICH, Reformation,

1961.

J. BOISSET,

188/98.

Der spite Erasmus

Erasme ou Luther, Paris 1962.

und die

M. PEISKER,

ThStKr 1926, 212/58 &uther's De servo arbitrio). M.SCHULER, ZKG 532/93 L’s notion of God in De servo arb.). H. JEDIN, see § 160,3.

26

1936,

§ 162. Progress of the Reformation to 1524, Adrian VI and Clement VII

tween these two most famous men of the day was never healed. Erasmus

died in 1536.

In like manner

other humanists

(Conrad

Mutianus [Muth], Wellibald Pirkhesmer, Crotus Rubianus | johann Jiger] etc.) were induced by Erasmus’s example as well as by the trend of the reform itself to repudiate Luther and Lutheranism. § 162.

Progress of the Reformation to 1524. Popes Adrian VI and Clement VIIY, The Peasants’ War, 1. In spite of the edict against Luther and his followers, the years immediately following the Diet of Worms witnessed an almost

unchecked growth of the Reformation. It not only spread throughout central and southern Germany, but even crossed the German borders into Moravia and Hungary,

into Switzerland, the Nether-

lands and the Baltic countries. The Emperor’'s wars with France kept him away from Germany for nine years and made it 1mpossible for him to stop the religious revolt. The body of regents which met at Niirnberg under the presidency of Charles's brother, Ferdinand of Ausiria, was too weak to do anything. Moreover, the members of that body all had their own selfish motives for refraining from action, and at the same time, they all feared to cause discord among the German princes while the Turks threatened the German borders. Some princes definitely favored the innovation, for Lutheramsm promised them great material gain and increase of power through the confiscation of church property and the abolition of episcopal jurisdiction. The lesser nobles (knights) had long been rebellious and were plotting the overthrow of the princes, especially the spiritual princes, the bishops. However, Franz von Sickingen met a tragic end (1523) in a campaign against the archbishop of Trier, 1 PASTOR

E. HOCKS,

IV,

2,

1907,

1/157

(Adrian

VI),

Der letzte deutsche Papst, Adrian VI,

Archivio Vaticano II (Diaries

P. KALKOFF,

H]JG

1919,

of consistories

31/72.

EphThLov

(Clement

159/767

1939.

A. MERCATI,

under Adrian VI), Rome

1959,

fasc.

3

(Adrian

VII).

Dall’195I.

VI).

E. GOLLER, Festgabe I1. Finke 1925, 375/408 (Sale of oifices in the Caria). M.MONACO, Archivi R. MOLS, DictHE XII, 1175/1244 (Clement VII}. 1960, 184/223 (The reign of Clement VII). JANSSEN II. J. VOLK, Die Kirchenpolitik des 2. Niirnberger Reichsregiments 152124, Diss. 1910. K. SCHOTTENLOHER, Flugschriften zur Ritterschaftsbewegung des J. 1523, 1929. W. MULLER, Die Stellung der Kurpfalz zur luth. Bewegung (1517—25), 1937-

27

Modern and Recent Times. First Perviod (1517 —1648)

and Ulrich von Hutten was obliged to flee to Switzerland, where he dicd in 1523. The common people, for the most part, were induced to apostatize by the appeal made to them through the chalice for the laity, the German Bible and German hymns, The peasaniry hoped that the reform would bring them relief from oppressive taxation. A great number of apostate priests and monks preached

Luther’s doctrine and the new art of printing as well as the develop-

ment of the graphic arts (espectally woodcuts) were used to advan-

tage in popularizing it. Loyal Catholics were not able to organize s0 as to offer effective resistance. Most of the bishops were lacking in courage and religious enthusiasm and some were more concerned

about maintaming their authority and insuring their income and rights than they were about the suppression of ecclesiastical abuses.

There were Indeed many secular and religious priests who valiantly defended the Church by the spoken and written word; but their number was too small and their influence too feeble to dam the swelling stream of apostasy. 2, In the meantime a new pope ascended the throne of Peter. Leo X, the easygoing Medici pope, died on December 1, 1521 and was succeeded by Adrian Dedel who retained his baptismal name

and was known as Pope Adrian VI (1522—1523). He was a man of austere life, pious, learned and zealous for reform: but, unfortu-

nately, he reigned only twenty-one months. Adrian was the last non-Italian pope. He was born of poor parents in Utrecht, had taught theology for many years at Louvain, had been tutor of Charles V and later was bishop of Tortosa and vice-regent of the empire. After the death of Ferdinand the Catholic, he became regent of Spain and cardinal. Upon his election as pope he immediately took energetic measures to reform the Curia. No one knew better than Adrian the underlying causes of the schism in

Germany and he determined to exert every effort to heal it. When

he sent Francis Chieregati as his legate to the Diet of Nirnberg (1522—1523), Adrian gave him two documents to be read before

the assembly. In one of them

he admitted

with

unprecedented

frankness that it was the sins of ecclesiastics, the scandalous abuses

of the Curia, popes and prelates, that had caused the catastrophe.

In the other document he outlined his program of reform and ad-

dressed an eloquent appeal to the princes, as representatives of the

German people, to suppress the sedition and re-establish unity of faith and lasting peace. But owing to the already hostile attitude

28

§ 162. Progress of the Reformation to 1524, Adrian VI and Clement VII

toward Rome and the selfish considerations of the princes, temporal

and spiritual, little heed was paid to the pope’s urgent plea. Instead,

the assembly rudely insisted on repeating the Gravamina Nationis

Germanicae and decided that the settlement of the religious difficulties be left to a free German council to be held within a year. In the meantime Luther was to be restrained from extending his conquests and care was to be taken to have the Gospel preached only according to the exposition of ecclesiastically approved authors; apostate

priests

and

religious were

to be punished

canons and extant civil laws. The Edict of Worms

according

to

was not to be

enforced since an attempt to execute it would engender a civil war.

But even these halfhearted

pledges

of the Diet

were not kept.

Luther continued his violent attacks on the Church; it was at this

time that he wrote some of his most vicious pamphlets such as the “Monchskalb™ (the Monk-calf) and the “‘Papstesel’”’ (the Pope-ass). The council was never held ; the pope did not even succeed in uniting the Christian princes for the defense of Christendom against the advancing Twurks; in December 1522 Rhodes, the headquarters of

the Knights of St. John, fell into the hands of Sultan Suleiman II {§ 151, 1}). Although Adrian’s brief pontificate presents an almost

unbroken series of failures, yet to this noble-hearted pope belongs the credit of attacking the evil at its roots and of being the first to outline a plan which the Church was later to follow in achieving true reform. 3. Cardinal Julius de’ Médici, a cousin of Leo X,

was elected

pope as Clement VII (1523—1534) to succeed Adrian VI. He was a man of blameless morals and conscientious in the fulfillment of official duties, but was irresolute and lacking in courage and always bore himself as a powerful Italian prince rather than as the supreme head of the Church. Hence he gave little attention to ecclesiastical reform and could never arouse himself to take energetic measures

in combatting the religious innovation in Germany. Above all he would listen to no suggestion regarding a general council; he feared that a council would merely revive the old conflict between pope and council. In the beginning of the struggle between France and Germany he observed neutrality, but later on, dynastic interests induced him to abandon that policy and after the French had

entered Milan {October, 1524) he entered into an alliance with the

emperor's enemies, an action which proved disastrous to the interest of the Church. During this time apostasy assumed alarming

29

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517 —1648)

proportions in Germany. There was no longer any hope that the imperial government would offer any effective opposition to the

innovation. At the assembled indeed the law nal Campeggio,

the second Diel of Niirnberg in the spring of 1524 nobles acknowledged that the Edict of Worms was of the empire and promised the papal legate, Card:to enforce it ‘as far as possible,” and again demanded

“‘a general assembly of the German nation,” 1. e., a national council,

to be held at Speyer that same year. Both the pope and the emperor protested vigorously. Campeggio at least succeeded in untting some of the princes of southern Germany ({Archduke Ferdinand of Austria, Dukes William and Louis of Bavaria and twelve bishops) to agree to concerted action in enforcing the Edict of Worms and in checking the spread of the new religion in their domains. At the meeting of these princes with the legate at Regensburg in the

summer of 1524, a plan was drafted and accepted for the reform of

the clergy. But at the same time the young Landgrave Philip of Hesse openly acknowledged his acceptance of Luther’s doctrine (1524): and the fickle Eleclor Frederick of Saxony when dying

received the sacraments according to the Lutheran rite (1525).

4. The distress produced in Germany by the religious schism was still further increased in 1524 and 1525 by the frightful social

revolution known as the Peasants’ Warl. And between the two catastrophies there exists the relation of cause and effect. It is true there had been repeated uprisings of dissatisfied peasants in sou-

thern Germany since the end of the Middle Ages (1491—1493 and

1 JANSSEN 1I11#3¢ 1915, 475/609 [with earlier lit.]. H, BOEHMER, Urkunden z. Gesch. des Bauernkrieges u. der Wiedertdufer, *rg33 [Kleine Texte 50/51). H. BARGE, Der Bauernkr. in zeitgendss. Quellenzeugnissen, 2 parts 1914. O. H. BRANDT, Der grole Bauernkrieg [accounts, testimonies and acts], 1925. A.STERN, Sb. Berlin 1929, 184/98 {cnntemporarfl sources and accounts}. W.STOLZE, Der deutsche Bauernkrieg, 1go7 (¢cir. ZKG 1930,

189/97;

1932, 456/79); Bauernkr. u. Reformation,

1926.

H.HANTSCH, Der

deutsche Bauernkrieg, 1925. R. KREBS, Der Bauernkrieg in Franken, 1925. A, ROSENKRANZ, Der Bundschuh, die Erhebungen des siidwestdeutschen

Bauernstandes 1493/1517, 2 vols. 1927, H.OHLER, WirttVLG 1932, 401/86 (Armer Konrad 1514). G. FRANZ, Der deutsche Bauernkrieg, 2 vols. 41956

{standard); ARG 1939, 193/213. IRMG. SCHMIDT, Das g&ttl. Recht u, s Bedeutung im Bauernkr., 1939. 'W. ANDREAS, Der Bundschuh, 1953. On the

causes

of the

low,

1928,

221/53;

peasants’

war:

H. BAIER, ZGORhA 1924, 188/218;

H.WOPFNER,

0.

SCHIFF,

HistVS

1919,

1 ff.

189

ff.;

H. NABHOLZ, Gedichtnisschrift G. v, BeHZ

153,

1935,

Bg/106.

W, WIBBELING,

M. Luther u. der Bauernkrieg, 1925. H. V. SCHUBERT, Revolution u. Ref. im 16. Jh., 1927. E.BOHNENBLUST, Luthers Verhalten im Bauernkrieg, 192¢9. P.ALTHAUS, L.s Haltung im Bauernkr., 1953; cfr, also K. ALAND, ThLZ 1949, 299/303 and F.LAU, Luther-Jb. 1959, 109/34. W.WISWEDEL, B. Hubmaier,

30

1639.

T. Bergsten, B. Hubmaier,

1961,

§ 162, Progress of the Reformation to 1524, The Peasants® War

later

[1513—1514]

of the

so-called

“Bundschuh”

or

the

*Poor

Conrad™). But thesc disturbances had been confined to small sections of the country and had been easily suppressed. Now, however, a revolt on a far larger scale, and far more dangerous, began.

While the it cannot attacks on impetus to interested

apparent causcs were of an economic and social nature, be denicd that the religious revolt with its incessant the old Church, the hicrarchy and monasteries Zave this new insurrection, The peasants were not particularly in Luther’s theology; but the spiritual and temporal

had become inextricably mingled in the whirlpool of events and the

“freedom of the Christian” as proclaimed by Luther could all (oo easily be understood in the sense of absolute independence of

temporal

and

spiritual

landlords

and

freedom

from

oppressive

taxation and compulsory labor for the lord of the manor. Toward

the end of February 1525 the demands of the peasants of Swabia were formulated in the famous “Twelve Articles,” This was probably the work of the furrier, Sebastian Loizer of Memmingen, although it is often ascribed to Balthasar Hubmaier, a preacher of Waldshut, who had once been professor at Ingolstadt and pastor of the cathedral of Regenshurg. Chief among the demands of the peasiants was

the right of the people to choose and dismiss their pastors; the one chosen, howcever, was obliged to preach the Gospel "purely and

simply, without any human additions.” They further demanded the abolition

of taxes

and

serfdom

and

the free use of water,

woods

and pastures; and all of the “Twelve Articles” were declared to be “divine rights” bascd on the Old Testament. The inflammatory harangues of apostate priests against priests and monks, and numerous pamphlets of the same nature poured oil on the fire. Some of the preachers, like the fanatical Thomas Miinzer §( 161, 3),

not only preached sedition but even joined the ranks of the ferocious mob, The revolt began in May 1524 in the region of Lake Constance {Hegau) and gradually spread over gouthern Germany from Alsace to Carinthia (with the exception of Bavaria) and over the greater part of central Germany

(Thuringia, Hesse, Saxony, and Brunswick). Territories governed by a bishop met with a worse fate than others. More than a thousand castles and monasteries

were

destroyed.

Lutker's

attitude

toward

the Peasants’

War

was not consistent. After examining the Twelve Articles, in April 1525 he wrote an "Exhortation to Peace’ addressed to princes and peasants. In this work he declared that most of the peasants’ demands were justified and he threatened the lords with extinction if they remained obdurate toward the

31

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517—1648) Gospel and continued to "oppress and tax the common man.” But when he heard of the frightful atrocities committed by the peasants he wrote a

new

pamphlet

in May

murderous mobs of the to a new edition of the to strike the peasants pleasing to God. The blood in 1r525. On May

1525

entitled

“"Also

agatnst

the plundering

and

other peasants” (probably written as an appendix '"Exhortation’}, in which he called upon the princes down ‘like mad dogs’’ for that was now a work revolt, at least in great part. wuas drowned in 12 near Boblingen, and on Juno 2 near Kdnigshofon,

the captain of the Swabian League, George Truchsess of Waldburg (I3auorn-

jorg), conquered the army of peasants; the same was done by Duke Anthony of Lorraine on May 17 near Saverne in Alsace, and the Landgrave Philip of Hesse (the Magnanimous) with other princes on May 15 near Irankenhausen

and

in Thuringia.

Thomas

Miinzer,

Terrible

who

vengeance

was

talen

was

meted

prisoner,

was

out

to the

tortured

survivors,

and

then

beheaded. The hopes that had given rise to the Peasants” War were frustrated, The princes and territorial lords were more powerful than ever and the economic and social condition of the peasants remained unimprovad or even worse. All of this, naturally, was not without effect on tho course of the

Reformation. Many criticized Luther severcly and reforred to him as the “princes’ flunky,” and for a time his popularity declined. As a result of the anarchy of the Anabaptists and the dovastation ol the Peasants’ War, Luther himself lost confidence in the ability of the congregations of “legiti-

mate Chriatians’' to manage their own affairs. From then on he placed the superintendence of his church and the promotion of his cause in the hands

of princes

and

the

magistrates

of the

imperial

cities,

all ol whom

had long been exercising extensive anthority in ecelesiastical affairs (§ 158, 5).

Hence instead of a *‘church of the people” Luther’s new institution became

a “‘church of the princes"” with as many popes as there wero princes. The German Reformation thus entered upon a now phase,

§ 163, Religious Leagues.

Establishment of Lutheran National Churches (1525—1529). Diets of Speyer (1526, 1529)%,

I. The league formed at Regensburg in 1824 (§ 162, 3) was soon imitated elsewhere. In July 1525 several Catholic princes of central and northern Germany, the Elecior Joachim of Brandenburg, Duke 1 JANSSEN [I]1-48 (1526/53), 19I7. PASTOR 1V, 2, PERDINANDS I FAMILIENKORRESPONDENZ, ed. by W.BAUER and R,LACROIX, 2 vols, 1912/38.

H.LAMPARTER,

S. A. FISCHER-GALATI,

Lond.

1860.

Dis

Ottoman

H.BUCHANAN;

Stellung

ARG

Luthers

imperialism 1936,

and

143/60

zum

Tlrkenkrieg,

German

1940.

Protestantism

(Luther and the Turka),

F. KUCH, Das politische Archiv des Landgraten Philip v, Hessen 4 vols., 1904/59. Philipp-Festschriften 1904. G. EGELHAAP, Landgraf Philipp der

Grossmiit., 1904, Cir. WOLFE, QKdARG I, 527 ff.; II, 2, 278 1. W, FRIEDENS.

32

§ 163. Religious Leagues. Establishment of Lutheran National Churches

George of Saxony, Dukes Eric and Henry of Brunswick-Wolfenbiitlel and the Archbishop and Prince Elector Albert of Mainz met at Dessan and entered into an agreement to check the rebellious peasants and to destroy the ““root”’ of the rebellion, the ‘“‘Lutheran

sect.” While this policy can be easily understood and justified

as an effort to preserve the order that had prevailed for centuries and to avert a serious evil, yet it led to the permanent division of Germany into groups of princes, each group professing a different faith. Hence it gave rise to still further mistrust and antagonism.

Philip of Hesse (1509—1567),

called the ““Magnanimous’’

assumed

the leadership of the princes who adhered to or favored the new doctrine. Philip was an energetic and politically shrewd prince, but irrehgious, dissolute and with no regard for the rights of others. In 1526 he met at Gotha-Torgan with the Elector John the Constant of Saxony (1525—1532), brothers and successor of Frederick, and

laid plans for the formation of a league to protect and promote the

Reformation. Within the course of the year 1526 this league was joined by the princes of Brunswick-Liineburg, Brunswick-Gruben-

hagen, Mecklenburg, Anhalt, Mansfeld, Prussia {sce below) and the

city of Magdeburg. The partisans of the Reformation now controlled an impressive representation. This became evident in the Diet of Speyer, 1526. Since the Catholics were poorly represented it was decided at the recess of the Diet (August 27, 1526) that according to the Emperor’s instruction no changes could be introduced in matters of faith; but as far as the Edict of Worms was concerned, each prince could act as he considered himself “answerable to God and the imperial majesty,” until a general or national

council would decree a permanent settlement of the issue.

Prussia, the domain of the Teutonic knights, was the first German state to surrender corporately to the Reformation. The Order's days of glory had long since passed and the Church of Prussia was sadly in need of reform. Since the Peace of Torun {1466) the territory of the knights, despoiled of West Prussia and Ermeland, had been subject to Poland. The grand master Albert of Bramdenburg (1511—1568), who had been in communication BURG,

Der

BRIEGER,

W. Goetz,

Reichstag zu Speier

Der

1924,

Speierer 215/28.

1526,

Reichstag

ST. EHSES,

1887;

1526,

1958.

190og.

Gesch.

Philipp v. Hessen u. Otto v. Pack, 1886.

Luther-Jb.

der

Cfr.

1926,

J. KOHN,

Paclkschen

120f05.

TH.

Festschrift

Hindel,

1881;

K. DULFER, Die Packschen Handel,

J. KUHN, Die Gesch. des Speyerer Reichstags v. 1 520, 1929,

E.MAYER,

Der Speierer Reichstag 1529, 1929. H. DRESCHER, Die Protestation u. Appelation der evg. Stinde auf d. Reichstag zu Spever 1529, 1929. E. LIND, Speyer u. der Protestantismus II, r930. J. BOEHMER, ARG 1934, If22 {protestari 1529).

4

H.LEHNERT,

Bihlmeyer-Titchle, Church History 111

Kirchengut

u. Reformation,

1935.

33

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517 —1648) with Luther since 1523, accepted the Reformer’s advice and with the consent of his uncle and liege lord, King Sigismund I of Poland, proclaimed Prussia a scecular and hereditary dokedom in 1525, and in 1526 married Dorothy, daughter of King Frederick I of DDenmark. The secularization of the Knights’ domain was the signal for the introduction of the Lutheran Chuvch. Two of the principal preachers of the "Gospel” were Johm DBriessmann, apostate Franciscan, and Paul Speratus, formerly preacher in the cathedral of Wiirz-

burg.

George

of Folentz,

bishop

of Samland

(Samogitia),

and

Eberhard

of QQueiss, bishop of Pomerania, publicly announced their acceptance of Luther’s doctrine in 1524 and married — the first apostates of the German

hierarchy. The seat of the the grand master of the Teutonic Knights was transferred

from

Marienburg

to

Mergentheim.

In

1541

Duke

Albert

Tschackert,

Georg

v.

Polentz,

1887.

founded the Protestant University of Kénigsberg. In 1618 the dukedom of Prussia passed to the electorate of Brandenburg. P. Tschackert, UB. zur Ref.-Gesch. des Herzogtums Preussen, 3 vols 18go. F. Dittrich, Gesch. des Katholizismus in Altpreussen von 1525 bis zum Ausgang des 18. Jh., 2z Teile 1902/3. J. Vota, Der Untergang d. Ordensstaates Preussen und die Entstehung der preuss. Konigswiirde, 1911 (cfr. A. Seraphim, Forsch, z, brandenb. u. preuss. Gesch. 1913, 1/46). Fr. Blanke, Der innere Gang der ostpreuss. KG., 1927. F. Spitta, ARG 1909, 1/155 {Albert’s confessions). H. Laag, NkZ 1925, 845/73. K. Forstreuter, Vom Ordensstaat zum Fiirstentum (1498——1525), 1951. W, Hubatsch, Albrecht v.

Brandenburg-Ansbach,

M. Graf,

P.

Speratus,

518 £f.; II, 2, 188 1f,

1917,

1960.

Cir.

P.

Lit.

in

§ 127, 2 and

in

Wolf, QKARG

I,

2. Emperor Charies V defeated Francis I of France at Pavia in

February 1525, but almost immediately became involved in other serious political difficulties which prevented his returning to Germany. His protracted absence gave the new religionists an opportunity to make further progress. In May 1526 Pope Clement VII, apprehensive of the emperor’s power, formed the Holy League of Cognac with France, Venice and Milan, The quarrel which ensued between the two heads of Christendom had serious consequences, Pope and emperor exchanged trenchant notes and the emperor appealed from the pope to a general council. War broke out in full fury against the pope and the papal states. On May 6, 1527 the imperial forces entered Rome and plundered the city in the most dreadful manner (Sack of Rome). Clement was besieged in the Castle of St. Angelo and after being obliged to surrender was imprisoned for six months. Pope and emperor were finally reconciled by the Trealy of Barcelona in June 1529. The terrible tribulation that had befallen the Eternal City was considered by many to have been a justly deserved divine punishment. The ‘“‘sack of Rome” gave a crushing blow to the Renaissance; attempts were later made 34

§ 163. Religious Leagues. Establishment of Lutberan National Churches

to revive it, but its sway over Rome was at an end. The long and difficult process of reforming the Curia could now begin (§ 172, 1;

174).

Archduke Ferdinand of Austria, the Emperor's regent in Germany, was prevented by the Turkish threat from taking energeti c measures against the religious rebellion. Sultan Sulesman I'T defeated the Hungarians in the bloody battle of Mokdcs on August 29, 1526. King Louis II perished in flight. The crown of Hungary and Bohemia now passed to Ferdinand, his brother-in-law, who thus became the founder of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. He not only met with serious opposition in Hungary, but was constantly threatened by his Turkish neighbours. In order to obtain help so badly needed, he considered it necessary to make many concessions in the religious controversy.

3. The decision of Speyer in 1526 definitely stated that it was a

temporary measure and not a permanent settlement of the religious

issue. Yet the innovators immediately broadened its application and used it as a subterfuge in annihilating the Catholic Church in their territories and in establishing Lutheran National Churches!. But if these churches were to endure it was absolutely necessary that definite regulations be introduced. This meant perfecting and adopting as a principle the system which obtained in many places in Germany toward the end of the Middle Ages under which the local ruler supervised the government of the Church (§ 158, 5). ! E. SEHLING,

E.W. ZEEDEN,

Die evg.

Kath.

Kirchenordnungen

des

16. Jh.

gen

des

ZW.

1530 u. 1600, 3 vols. 1911/35. Cfr. WOLF, QKdARG

16, Jh.,

1959.

I—VI,

Uberlieferungen in den lutherischen P. GRAFF,

Gesch.

der

1902/55,

Kirchenordmiimi.

Auflésung

d.

alten

gotte

sdienstl. Formen in der evg. Kirche Deutschlands, I 21937. C. G. COHRS, Die evg. Katechismusversuche vor Luthers Enchiridion, 5 vols 1900/7. J.M. REU, Quelien zur Gesch. des kirchl. Unterrichts in der evg. Kirche Deutschlan ds

LING, Gesch. der protest. Kirchenverfassung, das landesherrl,

begriff, Festschr.

Kirchenregiment,

D. Schifer

1911:

Die

19135, 410/56.

11, 1, 19 ff.

21914.

K.HOLL,

Entstehung

N.PAULUS,

von

E. SEU-

Luther und

L.s Kirchen-

Protestantismus

Toleranz im 16. Jh., 1g911r. H. HOFFMANN, Reformation u. Gewissensfreihe u. it,

1932; ARG 1940, 170/88. H. JORDAN, Luthers Staatsauffassung, JUL. BINDER, L.s Staatsauffassung, 1924. G.HOLSTEIN, Die Grun 1917. dlagen des evg. Kirchenrechts, 1928. TH. PAULS, Luthers Anschauung v. Staat u.

Volk,

forme,

31927.

G.DE

Paris 1926.

formation, Lond.

LAGARDE,

Recherches

R.H. MURRAY,

1926.

K. MATTHES,

The

sur Vesprit

politique

Political Consequences

Luther u. die Obrigkeit,

de la Ré-

of the Re-

1937. E.BEN

Z, Bischofsamt u. Apostol, Sukzession im deutschen Frotestantismus, 1953. L. W. SPITZ, Church History 1953, 113/41 (Lay princes as heads of the

P, church).

W. BRUNOTTE,

Das geistliche Amt bei Luther,

Initia ijuris ecclesiastici Protestantium,

see § 160,3. Cir. lit. in § 161, 3.

Sbh. Miinchen

1949,

1959.

J.HECKEL,

5; Melanchthon

35

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517—1648)

At the same time it was the beginning of what was known later as the jus reformandi. Luther was obliged by circumstances to agree to this arrangement and in preaching and writing highly approved the Summepiskopat (summus episcopatus) of the princes and magi-

strates of imperial cities (“emergency bishops”). Frequently the new state churches could not be introduced until alli dissenters (Catholics) had been subjected to strong moral compulsion. Luther and the other reformers still held the medieval concept of “‘heresy” as a crime punishable by civil law (§ 132, 3). They declared that the state had the right and the duty to use force if necessary to compel the

to practice

its subjects

religion against heterodoxy. Hesse

Landgrave

at Homberg!

a synod

summoned

Philip of Hesse

In the fall of 1526

led the way.

the Electorate of Saxony

and

true

to protect

“‘true religion” and

was

which

presided over by the apostate Franciscan, Franz Lambert of Avignon, and which enacted new church laws for Hesse (Reformatic Hassiae). All monas-

the old religion was sup-

confiscated,

foundations were

teries and religious

pressed and *‘papist’” pastors replaced by Lutheran preachers. In many churches the pictures and statues of the saints were destroyed. Those who refused to conform to the mew laws were obliged to migrate. Neither

Catholics

Anabaptists

nor

all ecclesiastical

authority,

freedom

enjoyed

his

although

interest

was slight and his moral life was scandalous.

matters

in

usurped

Philip

of conscience.

religion

of

In 1527 he founded the Uns-

versity of Marburg as a Lutheran school of bigher learning. introduce

To

the new

Elector

of Saxony?®,

the FElectorate

into

religion

John in 1527 appointed four commitiees to travel through the territory and conduct church visitations in every c¢ity, town and village. About this same time Melanchthon compiled his “‘Instructions for Visitors of the Parochial Clergy,”” which was printed in 1528; Luther wrote a small catechism for the people and a large one for the pastors (1529). He had published a hymnal in 1524, and in 1526 a “‘German Mass” and a rite of baptism. He 1 G.FRANZ,

Urkundl.

zur hess. Reformationsgeschichte II/I1I,

Quellen

der Reformatio

Die Entstehung

1954.

J. FRIEDRICH,

1926,

W. MAURER, ZKG 1929, 208/60 (F1. Lambert).

v.

bert

1526,

W.SCHMIDT,

1905.

v. Avignon

u.

Nikolaus

Synode

Die

zu

Homberg

1950.

Herborn,

ecclesiarum Hassiae u. ihre

Vorgesch,

E. KURTEN, Fr, LamFranz

G. MULLER,

Lambert

v. Avignon u. die Reformation in Hessen, 1958. A. ZIMMERMANN, Der hess. Territorialstaat im Jh. der Ref., 1933. W.WOLFF, Die Sidkularisation der

W. DIEHL, Evangel. BeStifts- u. Klostergiiter in Hessen-Kassel, 1912. wegung u. Ref. im Gebiet der heutigen Hessen-Darmst, Lande, 1926. ]J. ADAM,

Evang.

KG.

der

S. A. KAEHLER,

hess,

Die

(to

Philipps-Universitit

2 P, BLANCKMEISTER,

1, ihre Wirkung

Territorien

Sachsische

KG.

in den Ernestinischen

178¢),

zu

21g06.

1928,

Marburg

Landen,

H. HERMELINK

(1527/1927),

G. SCHOLZ

3 parts

and

1927.

et al., Die Ref.

1917.

G. MENTZ,

Johann Friedrich d. Grossmiitige (1532—47), 3 vols 1903/8. F.H.LOSCHER, 0.ALKirche, Schule u. Obrigkeit im Reformationsjahrhundert, 1925. BRECHT, Luthers Katechismen, I..s kleinemn Katechismus, 1929.

36

1915,

JOH. MEYER,

Hist.

Kommentar

zu

§ 163. Religious Leagues, Diets of Speyer (1526, 1529)

placed great stress on the erection of schools and obliged princes and mag-

istrates to supervise and support them.

ments,

ceremonies, singing and Elevation

Solemn Mass with liturgical vestwere still retained, but the Canon

was omitted. “‘Superintendents” were appointed to exercise surveillance over the churches of each district. Those who refused to renounce allegiance to the Catholic Church were obliged to leave the territory, and with Luther’s

approval “fanatics” (Anabaptists) were punished or put to death.

In much the same manner as in Hesse and Saxony, Lutheran national churches and congregations were organized before 1529 in the dukedom of Brumswick-Lineburg, the Margraviate of Brandenburg-Kulmbach (Ansbach-Bayreuth), the districts of Mansfeld and Osifriesland and in a large number of cities {chiefly imperial cities) such as Bremen (1523}, Strasbourg and Magdeburg (1524), Niirnberg (1525), Reutlingen (1526), Memmingen.

Kempten,

Linden and Schwibisch-Hall

(all in 1528), Hamburg

(1529), etc,

J. B. Gétz, Die Glaubensspaltung im Gebiet der Markgrafschaft Ansbhach-

Kulmbach

(r520/{35),

1907;

Die relig. Bewegung

in der Oberpfalz

1520/60,

1914, H. Garrelts, Die Ref. Ostfrieslands, 1917. F. Wendel, L'église de Stras-

bourg

1532-—35,

in Nirnberg,

E. Kyabbel,

Paris

1942.

H.

v. Schubert,

1934. E. Engelhardt,

Caritas Pirckheimer

berg), *1940. Willib. Pirckheimer

Lazarus

Die Ref. in Niirnberg,

u. die Ref.

3 vols

1936/39.

{Abbess of the Poor Clare convent in Nirn-

{} 1530), Briefwechsel, ed. by E. Reicke I,

1940. L. Michel, Der Gang der Ref. in Franken,

in Hamburg,

Spengler

1929.

1930. K. Beckey,

Die Ref.

4. For a time it seemed that the so-called Pack affair (1527 to

1528) would lead to a religious war in Germany.

a substitute in the chancery of Duke

Otfo von Pack,

George of Saxony,

is said to

have informed Philip of Hesse of a plot of Catholic princes to exterminate the heresy and divide among themselves the domains of the evangelical princes. Philip immediately made elaborate preparations

for war. Although the Pack story was proved to be an unadulterated

hoax, Philip forced the and Mainz to bear part of incident served to shock the second Diet of Speyer

helpless bishops of Bamberg, Wiirzburg the cost of his military preparations. This the Catholics out of their listlessness. At in 1529 under the presidency of Archduke

Ferdinand it was decided to rescind the resolution of 1526: in those

places where the Edict of Worms had been enforced, this policy was to continue; in other places the innovation was not to be expanded

until a future

council

decided

otherwise;

Catholic

services were

to be permitted in such places and the Catholic clergy were to be protected in their rights and income; the Sacramentarians (Zwing-

lians) and Amnabaplists, however, were to enjoy no legal status. Although this new decision did not call for the suppression of Lutheranism in places where it was already established, but merely 37

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517—1648)

demanded the toleration of the Catholic Church, six princes and fourteen imperial cities of southern Germany entered a protest on April 19, 1529. From that time the adherents of the new faith who had called themselves “‘viri boni” or simply “the faithful” became known as Protestants, the name by which they have since been distinguished from Catholics. In order to strengthen the Protestant position, Philip of Hesse and the Elector of Saxony together with the imperial cities of Niirnberg, Ulm and Strasbourg made a secret treaty, while the Diet was still in session, for mutual defense. Philip sought to extend the league to German Switzerland,

in which the Reformation had, by this time, made headway (§ 167). He even plotted with Zwingli to form a great anti-Hapsburg

coalition, which, besides the German and Swiss Protestants, would

also

include

France,

Denmark

and

Venice.

But

before

such

an

alliance could be effected it was first of all necessary that the differences between the Lutheran and Zwinglian teachings regarding the Eucharist (§ 169, 1) be harmonized. For this purpose Philip arranged for a discussion with the Zwinglians to be held at Marburg early in October 1529, The leading theologians of both sects took part. But neither Luther nor Zwingli could be induced to depart an iota from their self-invented theories. Luther, moreover, was not

willing to become involved in the political machinations of Philip and Zwingli. It was not even possible to unite the cities of upper Germany in a league; Strasbourg and Ulm rejected the seventeen articles of Schwabach because they contained an attack on Zwingli's Eucharistic doctrine. § 164.

Reformation and Empire from the Diet of Augsburg 1530 to the Religious Truce of Niirnberg 15322

1. The protest made at Speyer in 1529 was clear indication that the religious schism in Germany was an accomplished fact. Charies V 1 ¥, W.SCHIRRMACHER,

DBriefe

n.

Akten

zur

Gesch.

des

Religions-

gespriachs zu Marburg 1520 u. d. Reichstags zu Augsburg 1530, H.V.SCHUBERT, Bekenntnisbildung u. Religionspolitik 1529/30,

1876. I19I0;

Das

Rekonstruktion,

1929;

Rel.-Gesprach

zn M.,

Die Anfinge der evg. Bekenntnisbildung bis 1529/30, Das

Marburger

Religionsgesprich,

Religionsgespriach zu M.,

Religionsgespriach

1520/1929,

1929.

1930.

Versuch

einer

H. HERMELINK

W. MENZEL,

Diss. 193I. F.W.SCHMIDT and K, SCHORNBAUM, eine Vorstufe der Augsb. Konfession, 1930.

Das

1928.

W, KOEHLER,

et al, Das Marburger

Die frink.

Bekenntnisse,

2 F.W.SCHIRRMACHER, see above. ST.EHSES, RQ 17/2x, 1903/7 (Campeggio’s report). Confessio Augustana ed. by Joh. Ficker, 1930; G.HERR-

38

§ 164. Reformation and Empire from Diet of Augsburg (1530) to 1532

now had to deal with the matter in person. He had made peace

with Clement VII and with France, and on February 24, 1530 was crowned emperor at Bologna, the last German ruler to receive the

imperial crown from a pope. He returned to Germany for the first time 1n nine years and at once gave his attention to the religious

problem. A settlement was to be made in the Diet of Augsburg 1530. The papal legate Campeggio (§ 162, 3) was present. Charles still hoped that 1t would be possible to reconcile the two groups.

But

from the beginning the Diet gave little reason for optimism. The Protestant princes bluntly rejected the emperor’s invitation to take part in the Corpus Christi procession which they called a blasphemous human imstitution.” When asked to explain their standpoint, the Protestants presented the so-called Augsburg Confession {Con-

fessio Augustana) in Latin and German, a document of conciliatory

tone prepared by Melanchthon and approved by Luther. Eventually the Confession achieved a deep symbolic significance in Luther-

MANN, 1654. H.BORNKAMM, Der authentische lat. Text Augustana, 1957, Confessio Aug. u. Apologia Confessionis Bekenntnisschriften der evang.-luth. Kirche” [§159] I, 141/406.

bekenntnisses NkZ

Quellen u. Forsch.

W. GUSSMANN,

1930,

I—II,

289/314

1911/30

zur Gesch.

[in vol. II the

(Melanchthon

and

Eck).

404

der Confessio Aug. in ‘'Die ig30, 31/137, Glaubens-

des Augsb.

Articles

of

J.V.WALTER,

Eck];

cir.

Die Depeschen

des venez. Gesandten N. Tiepolo v. Augsb. Reichstag, 1g28. V. V. TETLEBEN, Protokoil des Augsburger Reichstages 1530, 1958. H. GRUNDMANN, Landgraf Philipp v. Hessen auf dem Augsburger Reichstag, 1959.

L.

PASTOR

1V,

2z,

408fi.

(policy of Charles V 1530).

1932.

H. GRISAR,

E.

W.

MAYER,

P. RASSOW,

1921, 257/67

HJG

ARG

1916,

Die Kaiseridee

(Melanchthon's

Luthers Anteil an der Confessio Aug.,

W. E. NAGEL,

40

ff.,

124

ff.

Karls V 1528-—40,

deference to L. 1530).

Luther u. Melanchthon wihrend des Augsb. Reichstags,

1930.

1g31.

J..V.WALTIER, H. RUCKERT,

Deutsche Theol. 1936, 67/06 (L. u. der Augsb. Reichstag). G. HOFFMANN, Z. 1. syst. Theol. 1938, 419/90 (origin of the Augustana). W. MAURER, Fest161/209

schrift G. Ritter 1950,

Die Augsb.

K.THIMME,

Conf. Aug.).

(origin of the article on the Eucharist in the

Konfession u. Luthers

JOH. FICKER, Die Konfutation des Augsb. Bekenntn.,

1930.

Schweiz.

LER,

H. WEDEWER,

]. Dietenberger,

Augsb. im Zusammenhang I/90.

1930,

1953,

Z, 1. Gesch.

FR. HEILER

Katechismen,

18g1.

W. KOH-

170/89 {Augsburg Diet and Switzerland).

1888.

H.V.SCHUBERT,

der Ref.-Gesch.,

at al., Confessio

1930.

Aug.,

Reichstag

Der

J. V. WALTER,

1930

[extract

von

Luther-Jb.

from

‘“Hoch-

kirche”]. J.LORTZING, Die Augsb. Konfession, 1930. E.BOMINGHAUS, StZ 120, 1931, 275/86. L. CARDAUNS, Die Lehre vom Widerstandsrecht des Volkes gegen die rechtmiss. Obrigkeit im Luthertum u. Calvinismus des 16. Jh., Diss. 1903.

die

legitime

J. SCHLOSSER,

Fiirstengewalt

bei

Die Lehre vom

den

Katholiken

Widerstandsrecht gegen

im

16. Jh.,

Diss.

1914.

K.MULLER, Sb. Miinchen 1915, 8 {Luther on the right to revolt); c¢fr. F.KERN,

ZRGkan RICHS,

1916, 331/40 and J. HECKEL, Lex charitatis, 1953, 184/91. C. HIN-

Luther

u. Miintzer,

the right of revolt 1930).

Katechismus,

8., Yerfassung,

1954.

1956.

1952,

J. HOSS,

F. WINTER,

E.FABIAN,

ARG

1953,

64/86

Confessio Augustana

Die Entstehung

(Spalatin and

u. Heidelberger

des Smallk.

Bundes

und

39

Modern and Recent Times. First Perviod (1517 —1648)

anism. The first part (articles 1—21)

attempts to prove that the

new doctrines are in perfect accord with the old faith; not a word

is said about the rejection of the primacy, the sacrificial priesthood, purgatory, veneration of saints, and indulgences. The first part ends with the statement “tota dissensio est de paucis quibusdam abusibus(!)”’. These abuses are then mentioned in the second part

(articles 22—28):

Communion

under one species only, celibacy,

private Masses, compulsory confession, fasting, monastic vows and

the jurisdiction of bishops. Because of their adherence to Zwingli’s teaching regarding the Eucharist the four imperial cities:Strasbourg, Constance, Memmingen, and Lindau presented their own Confessio Tetrapoliiana composed by the Strasbourg reformers, Mariin Bucer and Wolfgang Capite. The emperor submitted the Confessio Augustana to twenty Catholic theologians (including Eck, Wimpina, Cochlius, Faber, John Diclenberger, O.P., and others) for examina-

tion and refutation. Ponitificia

was

Their reply, later known

also read

before

the

Diet.

as the Confulatio

Charles

then

declared

that the Augsburg confession had been fully refuted and, as protec-

tor of the Church, threatened to proceed drastically if the Protestants did not recant. A committee composed of fourteen theologians

— seven from each of the two parties — and later a committee of twelve members — six on each side — endeavored to compose

the differences by means of academic discussion; but no agreement

could be reached on such essential points of faith as the teaching office of the Church, the sacrifice of the Mass and monastic vows.

Melanchthon was ready to yield on many points and even agreed to acknowledge the jurisdiction of the Church if celibacy were

abolished and 1if the chalice would be granted to the laity and a new

liturgy introduced. But Luther, who was then staying at Coburg, would not hear of reconciliation with the ‘‘papists’” and declared

that the Augsburg Confession was too “weak-kneed.”

Philip of

Hesse had already secretly left the Diet and thereby registered in advance a protest against any eventual conciliation. The draft of

the solution proposed by the emperor was anticipated by Melanch-

thon who handed in an “Apology for the Augsburg Confession” in the nature of a reply to the Confutatio. The resolution was read before the emperor and the Catholic princes on November 19, 1530.

It renewed the Edict of Worms and demanded restitution of all

Church property as well as the restoration of ecclesiastical jurisdiction. The Protestants were given until April 16, 1531 to submit. 40

§ 164. Reformation and Empire from Diet of Augsburg (1530) to 1532

The emperor then began to treat with the pope regarding a general council for the removal of abuses and the reunion of those who had separated from the Church, 2. The day appointed by the emperor passed without the Protestants undergoing any change of heart. In fact they were determined to take up arms rather than yield, especially since Luther had been preaching the right to oppose the emperor for the sake of the Gospel because, he said, the emperor was only the elected head of the empire and was not chosen by God as were the territorial princes, The opposition could not prevent the election of Ferdinand of Ausiria as Roman king (Cologne, January 5, 1531),

but toward the end of 1530 the princes met to draft plans for a military alliance and in February 1531 formed the League of

Schmalkalden for six years as a defense against the emperor. Seven

princes of central and northern Germany, led by Philip of Hesse and the Elector of Saxony, together with the magistrates of eleven cities bound themselves and their subjects to the terms of the agreement. The Protestants now formed a self-governing politicomilitary power., They made alliances with foreign powers hostile to the emperor (France, England, Denmark and John Zapolya, claimant to the Hungarian crown) and took shameful advantage of the peril threatening the empire and their own nation. Austria was again in dire need of help against the Turks. In 1529 the Ottoman Turks conquered Ofen (Buda), with the greater part of Hungary, and laid siege, though unsuccessfully, to Vienna. In 1532 Suleiman II returned with a powerful army and threatened Styria. The Protestants refused to give the emperor any military support unless he would suppress the suits then in progress before the imperial courts over the church property which they had confiscated. Charles was forced to yield. In the so-called Truce of Niirnberg (July 1532) he promised the Protestants that they would not be molested before a general council, which was to meet soon, had examined and settled the religious issue; and in a secret agreement he promised to quash the suits then pending in court. Soon thereafter Charles again left Germany for eight years to carry on war with varying degrees of success against the French and the Turks. But in spite of the emperor’s endeavors, the council in which many Catholics placed their hope of seeing the great harm to the Church repaired, was not held owing to the pope’s insuperable mistrust and the intrigues of France. 41

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517—1648)

§ 105.

Anabaptists and Other Fanatics. Course of the Reformation to Luther’s Death (1546). Religious Discussions (1540—1546)% I. During the following years the Reformation in Germany was

able to expand unimpeded. The Schmalkaldic League was at the

height of 1ts power. But Luther’s church of theologians then in the process of formation was openly opposed by a religious movement of lay fanatics, especially the Anabaptists, who made their influence felt?. For a time these “ideal witnesses to the Reformation’™ formed the strongest party of innovators in Germany. They endeavored to revive the simple life of the early Church and claimed to represent the congregation of saints. Instead of insisting on the words of ! JANSSEN I1I. L. PASTOR V (Paul III 1534—49), 1909; G.MENTZ, Johann Friedrich der Grossmiitige [elector of Saxony 1532—47%], 3 vols.

1903/8.

W. ROSENBERG,

Der

Kaiser

u. die

Protestanten

1537/39,

1903.

.. CARDAUNS, Nuntiaturberichte aus Deutschland T, 5—#~ (1539/42), 1910/12; Zur Gesch. der kirchl. Unions- u. Reformbestebungen 1538/42, Rome 1910;

Von

Nizza

bis Crépy,

Europidische

Politik

1534/44,

1023.

W.FRIEDENS-

BURG, K. Karl V u. Papst Paul ITI, 1932. H. JEDIN, Gesch. des Konzils v. Trient 1, 19409. W.P. FUCHS, ARG 1948, 1/32 {Bavaria and Hapsburg 1534/36). P. HEIDRICH, Karl V u. die deutschen Protestanten am Vorabend

d. Schmalkald. Kriegs {1541/46), 2 parts rgrifi2. K.KORBER, Kirchengliterfrage n. Schmalkald. Bund, 1913. F. PRUSER, England u. die Schmal-

kaldener 1535/40, 1929. ® w. KOHLER, ARG graphie des Taufertums

1943. 1948 (reviews). H. J. HILLERBAND, Biblior520—1630, 1662. QUELLEN Z. GESCH. DER TAU-

FER, 6 vols. 1930/60 {Wiirttemberg, Bayern, Baden, Pfalz, Elsass). L.V. MURALT and W. SCHMID, Quellen zur Gesch. der Tdufer in der Schweiz I, 1952.

H. BOEHMER,

see § 162, 4.

der oberdeutschen

Taufgesinnten

J.LOSERTH,

im

16. Jh.,

Quellen

1929.

u. Forsch.

z. Gesch.

R. M. JONES,

Spiritual

Reformers in the 16tk and 17 Centuries, London, 1gog. H. BORNKAMM, Mystik, Spiritualismus u. die Anfinge des Pietismus, 1926. H.SCHONEBAUM,

Kommunismus

im

Reformation u. Revolution, aus dem

1935.

Taufertum,

H. 5. BENDER,

F. HEYER, Der himm]. Fleisch

ARG

1927.

1930,

W. WISWEDEL,

R. J. SMITHSON,

1953, 32/51

1919.

H.V.SCHUBERT,

Bilder u. Fiihrergestalten The Anabaptists,

Lond.

(Anabaptists and religious freedom).

Kirchenbegriif der Schwirmer, 1939. H. J. SCHOEPS, Vom Christi, 1951. F.FRITZ, BlwirttKG 1936, 6/109 (Anabap-

tists and Pietism). zur

2 vols

Reformationszeitalter,

P. WAPPLER,

Reformationszeit,

1908;

Die

Inquisition u. Ketzerprozesse in Zwickau Stellung

Kursachsens

u.

des

Landgrafen

Philipp v. Hessen zur Tauferbewegung, 1910; Die Tauferbewegung in Thiiringen 1526/84, 1913. K. SACHSE, Balth. Hubmalier als Theologe, 1914. H. NESTLER, Die Wiedertduferbewegung in Regensburg, 1926. M. KREBS, ZGORh

1931,

Upper Rhine). 1931;

566/761.

1952,

TH. MUNTZER,

400f0o2

(history

of the

Anabaptists

the

Briefwechsel ed. by H. Bshmer and P. Kirn,

Polit, Schriften ed by O. C. Hinrichs, 1950. Monogr. on Miintzer by

J. ZIMMERMANN, Entwicklung Th.

H. Boehmer,

Ges.

1925; O, H. BRANDT, 1949. A.LOHMANN, Zur geistigen Miintzers, 1931. C.HINRICHS, Luther u. M., 1952. Cfr.

Aufsdtze,

1922,

187/222.

WOLF,

QKdRG

P. PEACHEY, Die soziale Herkunft d. Schweizer Taufer, 1954.

42

on

II,

2,

123 ff,

§ 165. The Anabaptists. Course of Reformation to Luther’s Death

Scripture, they rather depended upon immediate inspiration of the Holy Ghost by means of an “interior light.” They denied the sub-

ordination of the Church to the State as well as any external

ecclesiastical organization;

they rejected

the

sacraments

except

baptism, which could be administered only to an adult, and the

Lord’s Supper. Another group was wholly devoted to communistic

and fanatical apocalyptic notions. Both Catholic and Protestant princes punished them, sometimes by death, as rebels against religious and civil authority. Nevertheless, after the execution of Thomas Miinzer, the leader of the radical group (1525: § 162, 4), the Anabaptists gained many adherents among the common people, especially in Upper Germany, Moravia, Tyrol, Switzerland (where Zwingli combatted them vigorously), Frisia, along the Lower Rhine and in Westphalia. Remnants of Anabaptist communities were absorbed by the Swabian Pietism of the eighteenth century; but many have survived to the present day. Among the leaders of the movement, besides Thomas Minzer and Balthasar Hubmaier {burned in Vienna 1528), mentioned in connection with the Peasants’ War, the following contributed to the spread of the sect: Hans Denk, the learned regent of a school in Niimnberg (} 1527, Monogr.

by A. M. Schwindt, 1924; A. Coutts, Edinburgh 1927%); Hans Hut in Upper Franconia (} 1527); Augustine Bader of Augsburg {executed at Stuttgart 1530}; fames Huter in Tyrol and Moravia (burned at Innsbruck 1536) and Melchior Hofmann of Schwibisch-Hall (t 1543), who was active in eastern and northern countries, especially in Frisia and Holland and who

with his followers (Melchiorites) held fantastic eschatological notions. Hofmann 1s the father of the radical Anabaptist group that plagued Holland and Westphalia. Jan Mathys, a baker of Haarlem, appeared as the Prophet Henoch and commissioned ‘“‘apostles.” From Holland the movement was transplanted to Westphalia, especially to Miinster. The Lutheran Reformation had gained ground here due to the preaching of the chaplain Bernard Roli-

many

in 1533.

The

following year

the Anabaptists

fromn Holland

entered

the city led by Mathys and Jan Bockelson, (John of Leiden). They won over Rottmann to the sect, elected one of their members, a weaver named Knipperdolling, as mayor and gained the majority of seats in the city council.

Miinster then became the scene of the worst excesses

community of goods, polygamy Sion with Bockelson as king).

of Waldeck,

(destruction of statues,

and the foundation of a new Kingdom of However, in June 1535, Bishop Francis

aided by Philip of Hesse, took the city after long siege and

meted out frightful justice. Miinster was restored to the Catholics, H.y. Kerssenbroich, Anababtistici furoris. . . historica narratio, ed. by H. Detmer, 2 vols 18g9/igc0. Ki. Ldiffler, Die Wiedertiufer zu Miinster ¥534/35,

Berichte,

Aussagen

und

Aktenstiicke,

den relig. u. sozialen Unruhen in M. wihrend

1923. H. Defmer,

Bilder aus

des 16. Jh., 3 parts 1903/4.

43

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517 —1648) E. B. Bax,

Rise and Fall of the Anabaptists,

Sb. Heidelberg

1919,

Lond.

1903.

H. v. Schuber?,

11 (Miinster and the rise of Communism).

/1. Rothert,

Das 1,000jihrige Reich der Wiedert. in M., *1948, Westfil. Gesch. I1, 1950, K. H. Becker,

Die

Reformatoren

u.

das

‘‘Reich

Christi

zu

M.,"”

1039.

M.

Ritschi, Die Hommune der Wiedert. in M., 1923, R. Stupperich, Das miinsterische TAufertum, Haarlem 1954.

1958, —

P. Kawerau,

Melchior Hofman :

als relig, Denker,

Sebastian Franck (t 1542 at Basle) had held a benefice in Augsburg, but became a Lutheran preacher in Niirnberg and Strasbourg. He was too self-willed to attract and held {followers. After being banished from Strasbourg

he lived as a soapmaker at Esslingen and as a printer at Ulm from which latter place he was banished in 1539 because of his pantheistic-mystic notions and

opposition

to

Scripture

and

all

ecclesiastical

organization.

Without

joining the Anabaptists he shared their views regarding abstention from violence and preached tolerance. His numerous writings are characterized by an uncompromising earnestness and the same ambiguity that marked his preaching. In spite of Luther's severe censure of Franck’s works they were widely read in the Netherlands. — Monogr. by W, Glawe, 1912; E.

Teufel,

1934

—

1954

H.

—

R. Kommoss,

Kérner,

Studien

8. Franck

und

zur geistesgesch.

Erasmus

Stellung

5.

von

Rotlerdam,

Francks,

193s.

Menno Stmons (1 1561), Cathoile pastor at Witmarsum {Frisia), joined the Anabaptists in 1536. He organized them as itinerant preachers in Frisia and Holland and induced them to adopt a more peaceable attitude toward society and to live a retired, industrious life. These moderate Anabaptists were called Mennonites. Besides forbidding infant baptism they also rejected

the

taking

of

oaths,

military

service,

public

office,

{except for adultery). After being persecuted for were finally tolerated im Holland, Switzerland especially along the Lower Rhine, and in East and they spread to southern Russia and especially present time the Mennonites number

lawsuits

and

divorce

a long time the Mennonites and in parts of Germany, West Prussia. By migration to North America, At the

about 500,000 souls.

Monogr. K. Vos, Leiden 1914, J. Horsch, Scottdale, Pa. 1016, C. Krahn, 1930. A. Brons, Ursprung, Entwickiung u. Schicksale der Taufgesinnten,

*1912.

Wedel,

Abriss

der Gesch.

der Mennoniten,

4 vols

Newton

(Kansas)

1900fz. J. Horsch, Mennonite history I, Scottdale, Pa. 1042. N. v. d. Zijpp, Geschiedenis der Doopsgezinden in Nederland, 1952. Chy. Hege and Chy. Neff,

Mennonit. Lexikon, 1913 ff. E. Handiger, Die Lehre der Mennoniten, E. H. Correll, Das schweizerische Tdufermennonitentum, 1925,

1921,

A spiritnalistic sect which was also apathetic toward external forms oi worship and relied on the ‘‘spirit’’ of Scripture and the “interior light' was founded by the Silesian nobleman, Kaspar Schwenckfeld of Ossig. At

tirst he was inclined to support Luther, but in 1521—I1522 he came in contact with the fanatics (Karlstadt, etc.} at Wittenberg and in 1524—1525 he forsook Luther

and developed

only a symbol

—

and without

Tiibingen

and in Silesia. After wandering about for a long time he

his own

doctrine of Christ's indwelling

in the faithful without the sacraments — the Last Supper was considered a visible church.

In spite of persecution

Schwenckfeld succeeded in gaining a following in Swabia

44

1535)

(disputation at

§ 165. The Anabaptists. Course of Reformation to Luther’s Death died at Ulm

in 1719 most

in 1561. When

of them

the Schwenckfeldians were driven out of Silegia

migrated

to North

Armerica

(Pennsylvania)

where

they still have several congregations with a total of about 1500 members.

Corpus

Leipzig

Schwenckfeldianorum

1907/39.

Monogr.

publ. by Ch. D. Hartranft et al, 1—XV,

by G. Schuliz,

Norristown,

Pa.

1946.

K. Eche,

Schwenclkfeld, Luther u. der Gedanke einer apostol. Reformation, 1gr1. E, Hirsch, Festgabe K. Miiller 1922, 145/70. P. L. Maier, C. Schwenckfeld

on the person and work of Christ, Assen 1954q.

2. During the fourth decade of the sixteenth century a number of important provinces of Germany forsook the old Church and went over to Lutheranism® These were the dukedoms of Wiirttem berg (see below), and Pomerania (1534—1535), where the reformer Johann Bugenhagen of Wittenberg (Dr. Pomeranus) introduced the

new

the

rite

which

principalities

he

of

had

drawn

up,

Mecklenburg

Awhalt-Dessan

(1533—1540),

(1532—1534),

Liegnitz

and

Brzeg in Silesia (1534), a part of Nassan (1533 ff.), the Palatine Zweibriicken (1538), the dukedom of Saxony and the Electorate

of Brandenburg (see below), and the archdiocese of Riga (153q) through the efforts of Margrave William of Brandenburg (§ 170, 3). About the same time a number of cities also accepted the new faith: Ulm,

Liibeck,

Esslingen,

Nordiingen,

Rostock,

Gittingen,

Frankfort (1534).

Bibevach,

Hanovey

Heilbronn

(1531—1532),

(all

in

1531),

Augsburg

and

In 1519 Duke Ulrich of Wiirttemberg (1498—1550) was deposed by the Swabian League for misrule and breach of public peace, and the administration of his domains was committed to Archduke Ferdinand of Austria, At the Diet of Augsburg in 1530 the emperor gave the territory to Ferdinand as a fief. In exile, Ulrich turned to Protestantism and did everything possible, with the support of Philip of Hesse, with whom he stayed, and money

grants from

France,

to regain his domains.

He

defeated

the Austrians

near

Lautfen on the Neckar on May 13, 1534. The Peace of Kadan (Kaaden) June 29, 1534 returned the duchy to Ulrich as a mesne-fief of Austria. Since

no conditions were made regarding religion, Ulrich immediately introduced Protestantism. He was greatly aided in this by the ex-Benedictine, Ambrose Blayer of Constance

(a Zwinglian),

and

the

professor

of theology,

Erhart

Schnepf of Heilbronn (a Lutheran). Blarer worked in the region around Tiibingen while Schnepf preached from Stuttgart through the lowlands. 1 0. PLANTICO,

Die pomm.

K. SCHMALTZ,

Kirchenordnung KG,

1939.

P. KONRAD,

1930),

2 vols,

H. SCHL.OSSER 21931.

Pommerische

v. 1535,

Mecklenburgs

II,

1937;

1936.

1922.

K. G. v. Pommern E.MAYER,

H. HEYDEN,

II, 21957.

Pfilzische

Die Einfithrung der Ref. in Breslau und Schiesien,

and W. NEUSER, 1931/33.

FR, ROTH,

Reformationsgesch.,

J. ENDRISS,

Augsburgs

KG. v. Frankfurt I, 1913.

Die evg. Kirche in Nassau-Oranien Das

Ref.-Gesch.,

Ulmer

4 vols.

Reformationsjahr 1901/11.

KG.,

1917.

(1530/ 1531,

H. DECHENT,

45

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517 —1648)

In the Concord of Stuttgart the two preachers had previously agreed upon a mutually satisfactory Eucharistic formula. Religious pictures and statues were removed, convents and other religious institutions were confiscated to provide money for the impoverished duke, and in 1535 the University

of Tiibingen was protestantized in spite of vigorous

were

but

forbidden

were

to attend

obliged

Catholic

to be present

devotions

opposition.

outside

at the sermons

of their

of Protestant

Catholics

own

homes,

preachers,

In 1537 Ulrich set up afund for the education of preachers and public officials and after 1547 the former Augustinian monastery of Tiibingen was used

for this purpose.

It soon became a theological institution exclusively. But

the real organizer of the Protestant Church in Wiirttemberg was Ulrich’s son, Duke Chrisiopher (1550—1568), whose efforts were encouraged by the

theologian Johann Brenz of Weil der Stadt. Brenz had introduced the Reform in the imperial city of Schwibisch-Hall (1522 1f.) and had played a part

in

the

E.

Bizer,

protestantizing

of

Wiirttemberg

and

was

now

appointed

provost

in Stuttgart {1553). Church government was centralized in a committee of wardens and made entirely dependent on the state. A comprehensive set of rules for the control of the church was published in 1559. From then on Wiirttemberg proved a strong support of Protestantism in southern Germany. J. Rauscher, Wiirttemb. Visitationsakten I {1536—40), 1932; Wiirttemb. Reformationsgesch., 1934 (= Wiirtt. KG. III). H. Hermelink, Gesch. der evang. Kirche in Wiirtt,, 1949. Confessio Virtembergica (1551), ed. by Wiirtt.

1952.

1533/34,

Alfr.

Diss.

Keller,

1912.

Die Wiedereinfithrung

Janssen

III

%20,

des Herzogs

327 ff. K.

Ulrich v.

Rothenhdusler,

Standhaftigkeit der altwiirtt. Klosterfranen im Reformationszeitalter,

1884.

Bricfwechsel der Briider Ambrosius und Thomas Blaurer (Blarer) (1509/67),

ed. by Tr. Schiess, Briefwechsel,

ed.

3 vols 1908/22.

by

V.

Ernst,

Christoph Herzog

4 vols

1899/1907.

v, Wiirtt.

Joh.

Brenz,

(1550—68)

Kommentar

zum Epheserbrief, ed. by W. Kohler, Abh. Heidelberg 10, 1935. W. Koehler, Bibliographia Brentiana, 1904. M. Leube, Gesch. des Tiibinger Stifts,

3 parts 1921/36. madtion).

K. Bauer,

BlwirttKG 1934,

3/51

(Wiirttemberg in Refor-

Upper Swabia was badly divided territorially and ecclesiastically. When the Reformation endeavored to make conquests there, several of the imperial cities accepted the new faith. For a long time Gerwig Blaver, Abbot of Weingarten

(1520—1567),

chaplain

and

counsellor

to the

emperor

(since

1530} opposed the innovation and tried to strengthen Catholic resistance to it. Unfortunately, however, his best efforts proved futile because his own moral life was by no means blameless. The bishop of Constance,

Hugo of

Landenberg (1496—1528), was a worthy man, but too old and weak to combat the {alse belief effectively.

Abt Gerwig Blavers Briefe und Akten, ed. by H. Giintey, 2 vols 1914/21; cfr. Festschrift G. v. Hertling 1913, 342/49. K. O. Miiller, Aktenstiicke zur Gesch.

d.

Rei.

in Ravensburg

(1523/77),

1914.

stanzer Bischtfe Hugo v. Landenberg, Balth. (1496—1537) u. die Glaubensspaltung, 1917.

A. Willburger,

Merklin,

Johann

Die

Xon-

v. Lupfen

Duke George the Bearded (1500—1539) of Saxomy (Dresden) was pious and a staunch Catholic. His heroic efforts had succeeded in preserving

46

§ 165. The Anabaptists. Course of Reformation to Luther’'s Death his domain to the Church. But when he died he was succeeded by his broth er Henry “The Pious” {1539—1541) who had long been a Protestant. Upon Henry’s accession the Catholic Church was suppressed and with Luther’s

help the Reformation was introduced. A similar thing happened in Branden-

burg. The Elector foachim I, always a resolute opponent of Luther and his doctrine,

died in 1535.

His wife Elizabeth

of Denmark

had formerly

been

a Lutheran (1527). In 1539 their son Joackim Il embraced Lutheranism despite the fact that he had sworn an oath to his father that he would never renounce the Catholic faith. From 1540 to 1542 the Electorate was thoroughly protestantized. For lit. on Duke George of Saxony, see § 160, 2. 0. 4. Hecker, Religion u. Politik in den letzten Lebensjahren Herzog Georgs v. Sachsen, 1912.

H. Bornkamm,

ARG

J. Heidemann,

Die

1948,

93/115

{Constitution

of the

Church

in Saxony).

O. Gross,

Wichmann

H. Helbig, Die Ref. d. Univ. Leipzig im 16. Jahrh., 1953, — L. Zscharnack, Das Werk Luthers in d. Mark Brand. bis z. Grossen Kurfiirsten, 1917, Ref.

in

der

Mark

Brand.,

1926.

Jahrb. 1953, 36/52 (Catholic resistance to the orders of Joachim IT),

3. The matter of the council finally began to make some Progress

under the new pope, Paul 111 (1534—1549; § 174, 1—2}, although ten years were to pass before the long desired convocation actually

took place. The summons to Mantua in 1536 and to Vicenza in 1537 met with no success. The invitation extended to the Protestants was rudely declined at the meeting of the League at Schmal-

kalden in February

1537. At the same

time Luther,

by order of

the Elector JoAn Frederick the Magnanimous of Saxony (1532 to 1547), outlined his doctrines in the so-called Schmalkaldic articlest so as to draw attention to their opposition to the Catholic faith: and this document also attained symbolic importance in later

Lutheranism

(§ 185, 1). In 1535 the members

of the Schmalkaldic

League renewed their oaths for another ten years and greatly strengthened the League by the admission of new members (Anhalt, Nassau, Wiirttemberg, Pomerania, etc.). Hence in 1538 at Niirnberg, the emperor and his brother Ferdinand entered into a defensive

alliance for eleven years with certain other Catholic princes (Bavaria, Saxony, Brunswick-Wolfenbiittel) and the archbishops of Mainz and Salzburg. It now seemed as if recourse to arms would be had to settle the religious difficulty. Philip of Hesse was especially 1 H,VOLZ,

potestate

Luthers

Papae,

1931;

schmalk.

Urkunden

Artikel und

u,

Melanchthons

Aktenstiicke

zur

Tractatus

Geschichte

de

von

M. Luthers Schmalkald. Artikeln, 1957 Corp. Cath. 18, 1932 (3 counter articles). J. STIER, Luthers Glaube u. Theologie in den Schmalk. Art., 1937. E. BIZER, ZKG

kaldic Art)).

1955—56, 61—02

(an historical interpretation of the Schmal-

47

Modern and Recent Times. First Peviod (1517—1648)

eager for war, but for the time was prevented from actually engaging

in conflict by a serious attack of venereal disease. The Turkish threat again forced the emperor to come to friendly terms with the Protestants. The result was the Truce of Frankfort in April 1539. The adherents of the Augsburg Confession were granted peace and the suspension for fifteen months of the lawsuits then in process in the imperial chancery. It was also decided to hold a reli-

gious conference the following summer, which, it was hoped would lead to “a praiseworthy, Christian concord.” This marked the beginning of an era of religions discussionst. But

it soon became

evident

that discussion would

never lead to

agreement nor to the halt of a movement so widespread. The colloquy, I which so much hope had been placed, began at Hagenan in June 1540, was continued at Worms in January 1541 and especial-

ly in April and May 1541 at the Diet of Regensburg in the presence of the emperor. The chief participants on the Catholic side were John Eck, Julius von Pflug of Naumburg and John Gropper of Cologne; while the Protestants were represented by Melanchthon, Bucer and John Pistorius of Hesse. The papal legates, Cardinal Gaspar Contarint and John Morone,

bishop of Modena, both learned

and zealous ecclesiastics, also took part in the discussions at Regensburg. Agreement was reached on such points as the original state of man, free will, the fall, original sin and justification, because the disputants on both sides used the most general terms possible, Even Contarini was misled into a dangerous position. He consented s "‘a private person” to a compromise between the Catholic and Protestant doctrine of justification arrived at by postulating a twofold justice (justitia imputata et inhaerens); but Rome

con-

demned the theory and Luther rejected it. There was absolutely no 1 E.ZIEHEN, ZKG 1940, 342/51. W.LIPGENS, ARG 1952, 28/51 (New sources on the meetmg at Worms). F, ROTH, ARG 1905/7 (Reichstag at Regensburg r541). R, STUPPERICH, Der Humanismus u. die Wiedervereinigung der Konfessionen

Counter-Reformation

[1541] I

writings).

6. CORP. CATH. 7, 1923 (Contarini's

NERMANN,

ThQ

1921,

1/22

(C's

teaching on justification). H RUCKI:RT Die theol. Entwicklung G. Contarinis, 1926. H. JEDIN, Kdl. Contarini als Kontroverstheologe, 1949, H]JG 1951, 115/30; Studien iiber die Schriftstellertiitigkeit Albert Pigges [niederlind. Vermittlungstheologe, + 1542], 1931; Contarini und Camaldoli, Rome 1953. H. Mackensen, ARG 1960, 36/57 (Cnntanms theological role at Regensburg). W. LIPGENS,

Kard. Joh. Gropper

(1503—59),

1951. H. GOL-

LOB, Friedr. Nausea, 1952, H.V.CAMMERER, Das Regensb. ReligionsgesPra.ch 1546, Diss, 1901. F. ROTH, ARG IgnB I ff. 375 ff. AD. HASEN-

CLE‘.f?fER ZGORh 253

48

1911, 491 ff. 715 ff.

H. NEBELSIECK,

ARG

1935, 127 {f.

§ 165.

The Anabaptists. Course of Reformation to Luther's Death

unamimity between the two parties on the nature of the Church, the Eucharist and the hierarchy, so that the colloquy ended without having achieved any worthwhile results. In the Interim in July 1541, the Niirnberg Truce was renewed until a decision of a general

council; and the lawsuits against Protestants were still further deferred. In order to obtain speedy help against the Turks the emperor, much to the vexation of many Catholics, made other important concessions to the Protestants: they were assured the permanent possession of the church property they had confiscated ; they were permitted to carry out a “Christian reformation’” of churches and monasteries in rural districts; and they were promised that Protestant judges would be appointed to the imperial court of chancery. 4. Just at the time that the Protestants were enjoying so much success,

the bigamous marriage of Philip of Hesse caused a terrible scandal and for

a time politically checkmated the most prominent champion of the Protestant

cause. In 1523 Philip had married Christine, a daughter of Duke

George of

Saxony, who bore him seven children; but for years he had been living in debauchery and adultery. Acting on an idea which he had entertained for

some time, he determined in 1539 to obtain the consent of his lawful wife to marry as his "‘conjugal concubine” the seventeen year old Margaret von

der baale,

a lady-in-waiting

to his sister, Philip then appealed

to Luther

and Melanchthon, who cited the example of the patriarchs of the Old Testa-

ment

be

and

kept

gave him

strictly

the

secret

'‘dispensations,”

as ‘“‘comscience

provided

advice.”

the whole

The

matter

wedding

took

would

place

on March 4, 1540, but by June it was noised abroad and aroused a general

indignation that was not allayed even by the ‘good stout lies of necessity" which Luther advised. Since the law of the empire punished bigamy by beheading, Philip was obliged to curry favor with the emperor and at Regensburg in June 1541 made a compact with Charles that was very

disadvantageous

to

the

Protestant

cause.

As

a result,

Charles

was

able

to force Duke William of Jilich-Cleve to desist from promoting Protestantism in his domains and Charles himseli toock possession of Geldern. At least the advance of Protestantism was checked in the dioceses of northwestern Germany. W. Rockwell,

Die Doppelehe

des Landgrafen

Philipp v. Hessen,

1904.

N. Paulus, HpBl 135, 1905 1. 147, 1911 I. W. Koehler, HZ 94, 1905, 385/411; Luther u. die Liige, 1912, 109 ff. (also H.Grisar, HJG 1913, 233/55). Th. Brieger, ZKG 1908, 174/96, 403/6. H. Grisar, Luther 11, 382 ff. S. Bava-

nowski, Luthers Lehre iiber die Ehe, 1913. L. Zarncke, Z. {. syst. Theol. 1934, 08/r77 (L. on divorce and polygamy). H. Bells, The Attitude of M. Bucer toward the Bigamy of Philip of Hesse, New Haven 1924.

5. But when Charles undertook his unsuccessful campaign against Algiers (October 1541) and was again obliged to fight the Turks 5

Bihlmeyer-Tlchle, Church History IIT

49

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517 —1648)

{ June 1542) and the French (1542—1544) Protestantism made great

headway!. The Elector John Frederick and Duke Maurice of Saxony

(1541—1553) seized and protestantized the Saxon bishoprics of Naumburg-Zeitz, Meissen and Merseburg. Julius von Pflug §( 165,3) had been elected bishop of Naumburg, but the Elector installed an evangelical bishop, the theologian Nicholas of Amsdorf, who had been “‘consecrated” by Luther. Duke Henry of Brunswick-Wolfenbiittel, a disselute individual, yet a convinced Catholic, was driven

from his domains by the Elector of Saxony and Philip of Hesse and with the help of John Bugenhagen, the Reformation was forcibly introduced into Henry's dukedom (1542). Thus almost

all of northern Germany from the Polish border to the Weser was

now in the hands of the Protestants. In the south the impoverished

Count Palatine, Oti-Hetnrich of Neuburg, confiscated Catholic church

property and proclaimed Protestantism as the religion of the land {1543). Even in the Palatinate the Reformation continued to gain ground and in 1544 and 1545 the Elecior Frederick II (1544—1556) embraced it. Even in the dioceses of northwest Germany, Protestantism had made forceful inroads. Count Franz von Waldeck, although 1 A, HASENCLEVER,

Die

Politik der Schmalkaldener

vor

Ausbruch

desg

Schmalk. Krieges, 19o1; Die Politik Karls V u, Philipps von Hessen vor Ausbruch des Schmalk. Krieges, 1903; ZKG 19206, 418/26 {secret article of Crépy

1544).

ER. BRANDENBURG,

u. Kurfiirsten Moritz v. Sachsen Herzog

u. Kurf.

zu Sachsen,

Politische

I—II,

2 vols

1931,

Korrespondenz

1900/4.

d.

Herzogs

HEIDRICH,

etc., see

F. A.V.LANGENN,

CARDAUNS,

Moritz,

p- 42 f. L. MOLLWO, Markgraf Hans v. Kiistrin (1535—71}, 1926. W, LINDEN, Luthers Kampfschriften gegen das Papsttum, 1935. D. KOHLER, Reformationspldne fir die geistl. Fiirstentiimer bei den Schmalkaldnern, 1912, G. HOFFMANN, Naumburg im Zeitalter der Ref., 1g901. J. B. GOTZ,

Die rel. Bewegung

in der Oberpialz

Pfalzgraf Ottheinrich u. das Buch,

bischof v. Eichstitt

MANN,

(1539—52)

Ref.-Gesch.

Westfalens

THERT, Westf. Gesch. II, des B. Franz v. Waldeck im d. Stadt Miinster, 1918. W. W, LIPGENS, ibid. 1950/5I,

1950/51,

298/312.

J. GREVEN,

Deutschland,

Die

1935.

1927.

1914.

K. SCHOTTENLOHER,

K. RIED, Meritz v. Hutten,

u. die Glaubensspaltung,

(r530/70),

ed by

1924.

Kl. Loffler,

H]JG

Kartause

H.FOERSTER,

1955,

u.

die

687/09

(ou

KG,

R. STUPPERICH,

1

{Reformation),

ARG

H. HAMEL-

1913.

Anfinge

Hermann

der

Reformbestrebungen

kath.

Schaumburg (x547/56) in der Kélner Kirchenprovinz, 1g25. Rheinische

Fiirst-

H. RO-

1950. FR. FISCHER, Die Reformationsversuche Bist, Miinster, 1goy. KL.LOFFLER, Ref.-Gesch, FRIEDENSBURG, AnnHVNiedRh 1937, 94/107; 46/73; J.NIESSEN, Rhein, Vierteljahrsbldtter

H. JEDIN,

Kéilner

1520/60,

1951,

244/59

1929.

BUCER:

{account

Opera

of research).

v.

Wied).

Reform

Adolfs

III

in

wv.

H. FORSTHOFF,

omnia,

Ein

1960 ff.

summatr.

Vergriff der christl. Lehre u. Religion, ed. F. WENDEL, Revue d’hist. et de philos. relig. 1951, I/101. J. V. POLLET, M. Bucer Etudes sur la correspondance, Paris 1958 ff. W. PAUCK, Das Reich Gottes auf Erden (Bucer’'s work

“De

1917;

regno

Christi”),

H.EELLS,

New

1928.

Haven

Monogr.

by

G. ANRICH,

1931; HarvThR

1931,

1914;

24/42.

M. Bucers Bedeutung £f. die europ. Reformationsgesch., 1952. Die Kelchbewegung

50

am Niederrhein,

rgss.

JOH.FICKER,

H. BORNKAMM,

A. FRANZEN,

§ 165. The Anabaptists. Conrse of Reformation to Luther's Death

a most unworthy ecclesiastic, was bishop of three dioceses — Min.-

den,

Miinster

and

Osnabriick.

He

asked

for admission

into

the

Schmalkaldic League and after permitting the new religion to be preached in the dioceses under his charge, tried to change the territory into a secular principality; but the cathedral chapter of Miinster successfully opposed the impious proposal. Even the

important diocese of Cologne was very nearly lost to the Chur ch in much the same way. Archbishop Hermann von Wied, besi des being extremely worldly, was almost cntirely ignorant of theo logy. He permitted Bucer to preach the Reformation at Bonn {154 2) and conferred with Melanchthon and Bucer regarding a plan for introducing the new religion into the entire diocese (1543). Here, too, the cathedral chapter supported by the university and the city council averted the calamity. The Carthusian monastery of St. Barbara in Cologne was a center of true Catholic reform and this

together with the work

of the first Jesuits (since 1543) gave rise

to a healthy revival of Catholic life in the Rhineland. In April 1546 Pope Paul I1] excommunicated and deposed Archbishop Hermann. 6. At the Diet of Speyer in the summer of 1 544 the emperor again made concessions to the Protestants in order to obtain help against France and the Turks. These concessions which were severely criticized by Pope Paul I11 included : permission for the Protesta nts to use the income from confiscated church property to finance their own churches and schools; the suspension of the luwsuits before the court of chancery and the annulment of any judgments alrcacly handed down, and a future final settlement of all difficultics in a “iree Christian council of the German Nation” or in g religiou s parley at a future Diet, for which both sides were to preparc suggestions for reform. Since the emperor was temporarily undistur bed by external foes (peace had been made with France at Crépy in September 1544 and a truce with the Turks in November 1545 ) he could now devote more attention to the religious problem in Germany. With Charles’s consent, Paul III summoned a gencral council to meet at Trent in March 1545. At the Diet of Worms in the

spring of 1545 the German Protestants discourteously declined the invitation to attend and Luther expressed his bitter hatred of the papacy in one of his most passionate and coarsest pamphlets “Against the Papacy at Rome, established by the Devil.” Charles continued his endeavors to arrive at a settlement by means of colloquies although he himself was convinced that the religious

51

Modern and Recent Times, First Period (1517—1648)

quarrel could now be settled only by the sword. As Charles had

arranged, a new colloquy was held at the Dief of Regensburg from January to March 1546 with no better results than previous ones.

The Protestants could scarcely be persuaded to take part in it.

7. Martin Luther!, the cause of the dissension, did not live to see the two parties take up arms. But until the end he remained con-

vinced that he was fighting a just war against the “papist abomi-

nation’’ and that he had received a special mission from God to preach the pure Gospel. His last years were clouded by illness and disappointments of all sorts. He was deeply distressed by the widespread dissoluteness in those places that had adopted the new faith, by the confusion and dissension in the ranks of the Protestants and by the despotic manner in which the princes and magistrates were interfering in the administration of his church. He died on February 18, 1546 in his sixty-third year at Eisleben, the place of his birth, whither he had gone to settle a family quarrel among the counts of Mansfeld. His remains were interred in the castle church at Wittenberg on the doors of which he had posted his theses twenty-seven years before. Death was probably due to a heart ailment of long standing. The rumor which spread twenty years later that Luther committed suicide has absolutely no historic basis.

Although recent serious research has led most scholars to agree on the principal facts of Luther’s life, opinions regarding his character will never agree so long as denominational differences exist; Protestants themselves have never been and are not now in accord regarding Luther’'s character. But no one questions his importance in world history or the infiuence which. he wielded. Déllinger (1861)was justified in calling him the “‘greatest German of his day’’ and the “most popular man of Germany."” He surrendered himself with utter abandon to the cause he had chosen and drove a wedge into Christendom which rent the Church asunder and left it split. From the time of his death his followers began to heap unqualified praise on Luther, the man, the rebel against the old Church and the spiritual leader of the new; and this paean of adulation has not ceased to the present day. But

191z

iiber

1 J. STRIEDER,

Authent.

(Kl Texte gg); HistVS Luthers

335/53;

Tod

H.GRISAR,

R. STAMMLER,

and W, SCHULZE,

u.

Berichte

1921,

Z. f. systemat. L.s Tod,

1933,

1917.

Cfr.

475/82;

Theol.

letzte

Lebensstunden,

CHR.SCHUBART,

1912, 379/96.

Begridbmis,

ZkTh

iiber Luthers

O. ALBRECHT,

O.CLEMEN,

1924,

(against Math.

595/604.

ZKG

Die Berichte

Th3tKr

1922,

1919,

73/83;

K.KAMPFFMEYER

Ludendorff).

TH, KNOLLE,

M. Luthers letzte Tage im Zeugnis s. Briefe, 1946. JOH. LUTHER, Legenden Alteste Bildnisse Luthers, 1920. G.STUHLum L., 1933. JOH. FICKER, FAUTH, Die Bildnisse L.s im Tode, 1927. K. BAUER, L.s Aussehen u. Bildnis, 1930.

52

§ 166. From Schmalkaldic War to Peace of Aungsburg it has created a caricature of Luther that is definitely not historical . Catholics on the other hand know that Luther’s effort was not a work of true reform and they fail to find in Luther the virtues and other qualities which are the identifying marks of the true “reformer” chosen and sent by God. Without doubt Luther possessed extraordinary talents and a deepl y

religious

nature.

He

was

cordial,

sympathetic,

simple-hearted,

unselfish,

benevolent and industrious; but he was also obstinate, excessively passionate, proud, disputatious, overbearing, quarrelsome and was often abusi ve and implacable toward his enemies. In many things he was conservati ve, even reactionary and scrupulous, so that some of his modern biographer s, (e. g. E.

Troeltsch),

assert that he seemed

to belong to the Middle

Ages

rather

than to modern times. But at the same time he was progressiv e, craved liberty and was contemptuous of authority. These opposite traits would be analyzed today as constituting a dual personality, and rende r it more difficult to pass an impartial judgment on the character of the man; the more so because he was swayed by moods and indulged in barbed expressions and exaggeration {“Dr. hyperbolicus”). But to overlook his fanlts because ke was “a man of extraordinary greatness” and had "‘vices of an heroic character,” as R. Seeberg asks us to do, would be to abanden the principles of sound Christian ethics. His vulgar, often indecent language canmot be

defended;

it is true

that,

at the

time,

others

wrote

with

equal

coarsness,

but Luther had set himself up as a religious educator, a preacher of morals, a God-sent prophet and a reformer of mankind, Biographers still question whether and to what degree his irascibility and neurosis can be attri buted to the nervous shock he sustained as a youth. The morbid dejection to which he often surrendered was due no doubt to his abnormal fear of the devil which caused him to ascribe his temptations and even external afflictions to the powers of darkness (cfr. H. Obendieck, Der Teufel bej M. Luther, 1931}). Toward the end of his life Luther inclined toward the opini cn that the end of the world was near; but even in the early days of his apostasy he was strongly influenced by eschatological notions and consi dered his own work as an important scene in the final act of history’s drama ,

§ 166.

From the Schmalkaldic War to the Peace of Augsburg

(1546—1555)".

I. When all efforts toward a peaceful settlement with the Protestants had proved vain, Charles V was forced to resort to war. For several years he had foreseen the trend that things would take 1 Cfr. lit. § 165.

WOLF,

QOKARG

I, 419 ff. 466 ff.

O. WALD

ECK, ARG 1909, 1/55; 1910, 44/133 (Political writing during the Sch. War). F.HARTUNG, Karl V u. die deutschen Reichsstinde 1 545/55, 1910. H, J. KIRCH, Die Fugg er F. SIEBERT,

H.LEHNERT,

n. d. Schmalk. Krieg, 1915. W, FRIEDENSBURG, see P- 42. Zwischen Kaiser u. Papst. Kdl, Truchsess v. Waldburg, 1941.

Kirchengut

u. Ref.,

1935.

G. BEUTEL,

Uber

den

Ursprung

a3

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517 —1648)

and had held himself in readiness. Besides his Catholic allies, his

brother King Ferdinand, Pope Paul II1 and Duke William IV of Bavaria, he was also assured of the help of several Protestant princes: The Margraves Albert Alcibiades of Brandenburg-Kulmbach and Hans of Brandenburg-Ciistrin, Duke Eric of BrunswickKalenberg

and

especially

Duke Maurice

of Saxony

(1541—1553),

the son-in-law of Philip of Hesse. Maurice, who was a scheming and religiously indifferent prince, had entered the service of the emperor in return for a promise

Electorate

of Saxony.

of the electoral dignity and a part of the

In July

1546

opened hostilities on the Danube,

when

the

Schmalkaldians

Charles placed the leaders, the

Elector of Saxony and Philip of Hesse under the ban of the empire as “violators of the public peace.” The Schmalkaldic war (1546 to 1547) ended quickly and most advantageously for the emperor. Duke Ulrich of Wiirttemberg and the imperial cities of southern Germany surrendered 1n 1546. When Maurice invaded the Electorate

of Saxony, John Frederick was oblhiged to go to the defense of his domain, but was defeated and taken prisoner by Charles in the battle of Miihlberg on the Elbe, April 24, 1547. John Frederick was

stripped of the Electoral dignity which was then given to Maurice

together with half of the Emestine lands in Saxony. Soon thereafter

Philip of Hesse also surrendered to Charles and was placed under

arrest. The Schmalkaldic League was then dissolved. Hermann, the

excommunicated archbishop of Cologne (§ 165, 5) was obliged to abdicate in February 1547 (he died a Protestant in 1552) and

was succeeded both as archbishop and elector by his coadjutor,

the worthy Adolf of Schaumburg. Bishop Julius von Pflug (§ 165, 5)

was able to take possession of his see of Naumburg (May 1547) and the exiled Duke Henry of Brunswick-Wolfenbiittel could return, although his domain remained Protestant to a large extent. des Augsburger Interims, 1888, F. HERRMANN, Das Int. in Hessen, 0. CHALIBAUS, Die Durchfithrung des Leipziger Interims, Diss.

rgol. 1gos.

206/64.

1906,

K. BRANDI,

Passaner

W.KUHNS,

G. BONWETSCH,

Vertrag

Gesch,

des

u.

Augsb.

Religionsfriede,

Passauischen Vertrags

Gesch. des Pass. Vertrags,

1907.

HZ

1552,

K. BRANDI,

¢35,

Diss.

1903,

Der Augsb.

Religionsiriede, krit. Text, %1927. E.WALDER, Religionsvergleiche des 16. Jh.s I, 1945. N.PAULUS, Religionsfreiheit u. Augsb. Religionsfriede,

HpBl 1912 I, 356 ff. 401 {ff. E. BRUCKNER, Phil. v. Hessen u. der Augsb. Religionsfriede, Diss. 1936. PASTOR VI, 564 ff. M. SIMON, Der Augsb. ReLigionsiriede,

1g955.

Zeitschrift des hist. Ver. f. Schwaben

1955,

211/389

(on

the Religious Peace of Augsburg). J. GRISAR StZ 1954—55 (attitude of the popes toward the Augsburg peace). M. HECKEL, ZRGkan 1959, 141/248 (The interpretation of the Augsburg peace during the Counter Reformation).

54

§ 166. From Schmalkaldic War to Peace of Angsburg

2. Thus it seemed that the emperor had achieved his purpose and was well on his way toward effecting the religious unity of

Germany.

defeated

As

only

a matter

of fact, however,

as a military-political

Protestantism

organization

and

had been

not

as a

religious-ecclesiastical power. The authoritative settlement of the religious issue had to be made at the council in conjunction with the Curia. But in the meantime (March 154%) the general council

was transferred from Trent to Bologna (§ 174, 4) and this action provoked a serious disagreement between the emperor and the pope.

Under these circumstances Charles determined to take matters into his own hands. At the Diet of Augsburg (1547-—1548) a provisional settlement called the Inferim was adopted on June 3o, 1548. The plan had been elaborated by Bishop Pflug of Naumburg, Michael Helding, auxiliary bishop of Mainz and the Protestant theologian Johannes Agricola (§ 169, 2). The points of doctrine mentioned in the plan were fundamentally Catholic, but it granted

to Protestants the right to a marred clergy and the chalice to the

laity until such time as the council might decide otherwise. No mention was made of the restitution of confiscated church property. When the Catholic princes rejected the Interim, Pflug drew up a “formula reformationis” for them which was read at the close of the Diet. As a matter of fact the “imperial religion of the Interim” was not accepted by either party. The pope was extremely indignant at

Charles’s high-handed exercise of powers which according to the canons belonged only to the pope and the council. Only in those places in which Charles was still able to enforce his will, as in

southern Germany, was the Interim observed; in most places, how-

ever, the people met it with passive resistance and the lack of

capable Catholic clerics to take control of the situation at the time proved a serious disadvantage for the Catholic cause. A number of princes and cities in the north led by Magdeburg (‘God’s chancery”) openly contemned the Interim. Even Saxony was hostile toward it. The new elector, Maurice, was induced by Melanchthon and other Protestant divines in December 1548 to publish the Lespzig Interim, a much modified version of the Augsburg statute. (For the controversy over the “Adiaphora,” see § 169, 2). 3. The final result was not at all what the emperor had hoped for.

When the council reconvened at Trent in 1551, envoys of the Ger-

man Protestants attended at Charles’s urging; but they had come

55

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517 —1648)

to dictate terms and make impossible demands

{(§ 174, 5). In the

meantime the situation had changed radically. In the winter of 1851—1552 the crafty Elector Maurice, who was despised by his coreligionists (‘the Judas of Meissen”), believing that Charles had wronged him, organized an anti-Hapsburg alliance consisting of several Protestant princes and King Henry II of France. Their purpose, as declared in their compact, was to throw off the “beastly,

intolerable and eternal bondage” of the emperor and “‘attain princely liberty” and to uphold and protect the religion. France as reward for her support was to get German territory consisting of the Lorraine dioceses of Metz, Toul and Verdun. In the spring of 1552 the allied armies advanced against southern Germany while the French king occupied the dioceses promised to him, and Sultan Soliman II, a confederate of France, prepared to invade Hungary. Charles V was obliged to flee from Innsbruck, and the sessions of the

Council of Trent were again deferred (§ 174, 5). In the Treaty of Passau, August 1552, between King Ferdinand and the allied

Protestant princes the Interim was repealed and the adherents of the Augsburg Confession were assured the free exercise of religion until the next Imperial Diet. Philip of Hesse was set free; John Frederick of Saxony had been liberated earlier. 4. The final settlement, however, was delayed by a number of disturbances (Charles’s unsuccessful campaign against France, the Turkish threat, the raids of the brutal Margrave Albert Alcibiades of Brandenburg-Kulmbach) and was not formally discussed again until the Diet of Augsburg in 1555. As at Passau, so at Augsburg

the emperor left the negotiations to his brother Ferdinand. Charles

had been grievously disappointed and did not wish to deal as a politician with a problem, the outcome of which he knew he could not approve as an emperor and a Catholic. He graduvally ceded the rule of Milan, Naples, Sicily, the Netherlands and Spain to his son

Philip (1554—1556) and in September 1556 he abdicated as emperor

in favor of Ferdinand, to whom he also left the Hapsburg possessions in Germany, He then retired to the Hieronymite monastery at San Yuste in Estremadura to spend his remaining days in exercises

of piety, and died there on September

21, 1558. Charles’s reign

marked the beginning of the decline of the universal German Empire of the Middle Ages — a decline that could never again be arrested. The Religious Peace of Augsburg, concluded on September 25, 1555, provided in the first place that between Catholics and ad56

§ 166. From Schmalkaldic War to Peace of Augsburg

herents of the Augsburg Confession “lasting” peace and harmony should be observed. Zwinglians and Anabaptists were not given the status of recognized religions. Princes, imperial cities and knights immediately subject to the empire were granted the right of choosing either of the two recognized religions and were entitled to tmpose the religion of their choice upon their subjects. This right, later called the jus reformands, was based on the resolution adopted at the Diet of Speyer in 1526 (§ 163, 1. 3) and was expressed in the aphonism: Cujus regio, ejus (et) religio. The lower nobility and all other subjects were

simply

Holland)

(jus emigrandi)

obliged to obey the orders of the

reigning prince. However, they were granted the right {except in of migrating

without

loss of honor

or

property 1f their migration did not prejudice the rights of the territorial prince over his peasantry. The minorities of a different faith (1. e. Catholics) who had resided in the smperial cities since

the introduction of the new faith, were to be tolerated for the future.

The spiritual jurisdiction of bishops in Protestant domains was transferred to the reigning princes. As far as church property was

concerned,

Protestants

could retain

all foundations,

monasteries

and churches which had been in their possession at the time of the Treaty of Passau (1552). An equal number of judges of both reli-

gions was to sit in the imperial courts. The question whether ecclesiastical princes also enjoyed the jus reformandi was of the

utmost

importance

to

the

Catholic

Church;

but

no

agreement

regarding it could be reached by the assembly. Hence Ferdinand,

in virtue of his imperial power, ruled that a bishop or abbot joining the Lutheran faith lost his office together with the lands and income attached to the office and that all such property and revenues were to remain under the control of the Catholic Church. This provision was called the reservatum ecclesiasticum, and although the Protestants did not assent, it was included in the official text of the

Treaty. As a sort of compensation for the reservatum, Ferdinand secretly declared (Declaratio Ferdinandea) that knights, cities and communes in such ecclesiastical principalities that had previously adhered to the Augsburg Confession should be permitted the free exercise of their religion in the future. The Peace of Augsburg consummated the religious schism in Germany and determined the relationships of the two faiths for many years. It was not a compromise, much less a peace. Neither side was satisfied and the concessions granted, especially the reser-

57

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517 —1648)

vatum ecclesiasticum and the Declaratio Ferdinandea contained the sceds of new and serious conflicts. As was to be expected, Pope Paul IV through his Nuncios protested strenuously that the Peace of Augsburg had seriously violated the ancient and inalienable rights of the Church. § 167.

Zwingli and the Reformation in German Switzerland!,

I. In the Swabian war of 1499, German Switzerland had gained its independence from the German empire. The condition of the Church in this part of Switzerland was far from satisfactory and there were many abuses calling for reform, so that the antecedents of the religious revolution in that country were very much the same as 1n Germany. However, political and humanistic aims played a more important part in the outbreak and course of the

revolt in Switzerland than in Germany. It was only gradually that

the magistrates of the cities began to accept the Bible as the supreme authority in matters of faith. But when they forbade the Mass, the lines of battle were drawn. The center of the reform movement

was Zurich, one of the most

important of the thirteen cantons of the Swiss Confederacy. Ulrich

(Huldreich) Zwingli (1884—1531)2, who incited the revolt was the - —

! J. STRICKLER,

5 vols,

1878/84.

1519/33,

ABHANDL,

1879;

W. KOEHLER,

ZUR

Aktensammlung

E.EGLI,

schweiz.

Aktensammlung

Analecta

SCHWEIZ,

1912 ff. —

zur

Reformatoria

zur

I—II,

REF.-GESCHICHTE,

Quellen

u. Studien

Ref.-Gesch.

Gesch.

der

Ziiricher

Ref.

G.

FINSLER

and

1899f190o1.

ed.

by

zur Gesch.

(1521/32).

QUELLEN

der helvet.

U,

Kirche,

ed. by L. WEISZ I—II, 1932. C. WIRZ, Akten iiber die diplomat. Bezieh. der rom. Kurie zur Schweiz 1s12/52, 1895. A. BUCHI, Korrespondenzen und

Akten

z. Gesch,

des Kardinals M. Schiner

{f 1522),

2 vols.

1920/25;

Kard.

M. Schiner [, *1934, 1T, 1937. ]. DIERAUER, Gesch. d. schweiz. Eidgenossenschalt 111 (1516/1648), 1907. E., GAGLIARDI, Gesch. d. Schweiz, z vols. *1934/37. MANN,

H. NABHOLZ et al., Gesch. der Schweiz, 2 vols 1932/38.

Gesch. der Schweiz,

der Schweiz,

1935.

1941.

TH. SCHWEGLER,

V. GITER-

Gesch, der kath. Kirche

E. EGLI, Schweiz. Reformationsgesch. I (1519/25), 1910,

B. FLEISCHLIN (Catholic), Schweizerische Ref.-Gesch., 2 wvols. 190%/9. O, VASELLA, Reform u. Reformation in der Schweiz, 1958. W.HADORN,

KG, der reform, A. WILLBURGER,

spaltung,

Schweiz, 1907; Die Ref. in d. deutschen Die Konstanzer Bischife 1496/1537 u.

1917, 32 ff. 146 ff.

R, HAURIJ, Die Ref. in der Schweiz im Urteil

der neueren schweizerischen Geschichtsschreibung ® WOLF, QKARG

W. KOEHLER,

11, 1, 296/337;

Theel. Rundsch.

trige z. allgem. Gesch.

geschichte 1960, 108/26.

HESS,

58

8 vols 1828/42,

Schweiz, 1928. die Glaubens-

II, 2, 204 .

1932, 329/69;

1946, 247/67;

x949.

REPORTS

L.V, MURALT,

R.STUPPERICH,

ON

RESEARCH:

Schweizer Bei-

Archiv fiir Kultur-

ZWINGLI'S WORKS ed. by M. SCHULER 1. J.SCHULT-

Suppl. 1861;

X¥.EGLI, G. FINSLER et al. im Corpus

§ 167. Zwingli and Reformation in German Switzerland

son of a bailiff of Wildhaus in Toggenburg. While preparing for the priesthood in Vienna and Basle he devoted himself chiefly to

humanistic

studies.

Even

before ordination he was named

pastor

of Glarus (r506). After a sojourn at the celebrated shrine of Maria-

Einsiedeln (1516}, early in 1519 he became secular preacher of the principal church in the city of Zurich. His duties at Glarus were

interrupted briefly in 1513 and 1515 when he accompanied the troops

of the city as chaplain on their Italian campaign. Zwingli was a liberal humanist rather than a theologian. He was personally acquainted with Erasmus and, like the latter, advocated the suppression of pilgrimages, devotion to saints, relics and all other such “hypocrisy’ in order to lead the Church back to the "philosophy of Christ.”

He

diligently studied

the Bible,

the ancient

classics and

the Fathers, especially Augustine and preached moral sermons on the Old and New Testaments. The abuses connected with the

preaching of the indulgence by the Franciscan, Bernardine Sanson of Milan

(1519), gave Zwingli the pretext for assuming

of reformer,

although

Reformatorum

Bd. 88 ff., rgos ff.

Hugo

of

Landenberg,

the role

the capable

bishop

of Constance (1496—1528) debarred Sanson from the pulpit and Pope Leo X recalled him at the request of the Confederacy. Luetc., 1940 ff. W. KOEHLER,

PRINCIPAL

WRITINGS,

ed by ¥, BLANKE

ZWINGLI’S LETTERS transl. by O. FARNER I—II, 1918/20. Das Buch der Reformation H. Zwinglis, 1926 and 193r.

ZWINGLIANA ed. by E. EGLI, W. KOEHLER et al., 1897 f. {11 vols.). E. GAG-

LIARDI et al., Joh. Stumpfs Schweizer- u. Ref.-Chronik [1547] 2 vols. 1953/55. RECENT

MONOGR.

ON

ZWINGLI:

B, FLEISCHLIN

(Cathfllic),

1903,

HARDT, 1018; W.XOEHLER, %1952 (cfr. O.VASELLA, Z. f. 1945, I61/81}; O.FARNER, 4 vols,, 1943/00; I.COURVOISIER,

L. CRISTIANI,

DictThC

H. ESCHER, 1919. II: Zwingli, 1919.

15,

3716/44.

U.ZWINGLI,

P.BURCK-

schweiz. KG. Geneva 1043 ;

Jubiliumswerk,

ed. by

E. EGLI, RE 21, 774/815. P. WERNLE, Der evang. Glanbe G. W.LOCHER, Die Theologie H. Zwinglis I, 1952, A.RICH,

Die Anfange der Theologie H. Zwinglis, 1949. H. SCHMID, Zwinglis Lehre von der gottlichen und menschlichen Gerechtigkeit, 1959. J.V. M. POLLET, Dic. ThC 15, 3745/928. J. KREUTZER, Zwinglis Lehre v. der Obrigkeit, 1gog. G.V. SCHULTHEISS-RECHBERG,

das

Verhidltnis

W. KOEHLER,

v.

Staat

u.

Die Geisteswelt

Luther, Zw. 1. Calvin in ihren Ansichten iiber

Kirche,

1910.

U. Zwinglis,

A,LANG,

1920;

Z.

Zwinglis

1.

Calvin,

Bibliothek,

19r13.

rgz21.

A.FARNER, Die Lehre v. Kirche u. Staat bhei Zw., 1930. B. BROCKELMANN, Das Corpus Christianum bei Zw., 1938, R.LEY, Kirchenzucht bei Zw., 1948. K. GUGGISBERG,

Das

Zwinglibild

des

Protestantismus

im

Wandel

der

Zeiten, 1934. F. SCHMIDT-CLAUSING, Zw. als Liturgiker, 1g52z. L.R.SCHMIDLIN, Bernh. Sanson, 1898; cfr. N, PAULUS, Kath. 18909 I1, 434/58. TH, PESTA-

LOZZI, Die Gegner Zwinglis am Grossmiinster in Ziirich, 1918.

I. FIGI, Die

innere Reorganisation des Grossmiinsterstiftes in Z. 1 516f31, 195I. G.GERIG,

Reislaufer u. Pensionsherren in Z. 1519/32 [Zwingli’s opponents], 1947. L. WEISZ, Leo Jud, U. Zwinglis Kampfgenosse, 1942. W. KOEHLER, Ziiricher Ehegericht

u. Genfer

by g Farner, 1955.

Consistorium I, I1932.

LEOQ JUD,

Katechismen,

revised

59

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517 —1648)

ther's example and writings encouraged Zwingli to continue in the course he had taken and impelled him to break with the Church.

He not only adopted the theological principles of the Wittenberg Reformer on faith, justification and the supreme authority of the Scriptures, but even went further.

He was,

in fact, a rationalist,

indulgent towards weaknesses of the flesh, a politician by choice and an ardent patriot, who knew how to turn to his own advantage

the great influence he wielded in Zurich. In 1520 he induced the

city council to enact a law that priests were forbidden to preach any doctrine not in harmony with Holy Wrt. As a result of his revolutionary preaching, some of his admirers in 1522 publicly defied the ecclesiastical law of fasting. When the bishop of Con-

stance remonstrated, Zwingli published the tract (a sermon) “Von

Erkiesen and Treiheit der Speisen” (On choice and freedom in the use of foods) and with ten other priests approached the bishop and the national assembly

with

a petition to allow nothing

but

secretly in 1522 and in 1524 celebrated his marriage publicly,

At

evangelical sermons and to abolish the law of clerical celibacy which none of them had observed for a long time. Zwingli himself married

his suggestion the council of Zurich arranged for a disputation to be held in January 1523. For this occasion Zwingli composed his sixty-seven

‘‘conclusions”

(theses), which

together with

the Com-

mentaries de vera et falsa religione (written in 1525 and dedicated

to Francis I of France) constitute his principal published works.,

In the Commentaries he impugned the Catholic teaching on the visible Church, tradition, the papacy, a special priesthood, the Mass, rebigious vows, purgatory, indulgences, fasting and feast days and maintained that civil rulers have the sole right to govern

the Church., As was to be expected the disputation ended with an easy victory for Zwingli; and another public debate on images and the Mass held in the fall of 1523 ended the same way. Between

1523 and 1525 Zwingli's new religion was adopted throughout the

canton of Zurich; images and pictures were destroyed, monasteries

and other religious institutions suppressed, Mass was prohibited and attendance at Catholic services was punished with heavy

fines. The

Anabaptists,

too, were

proscribed;

in fact, several of

them were executed. The Zwinglian services were extremely simple:

during the first years they consisted of prayer, scriptural reading

and a sermon

only;

organ music or singing was not permitted.

Communion was distributed four times a year under both species.

60

§ 167. Zwingli and Reformation in German Switzerland

Zwingl held that the Eucharist was merely a memorial of Christ’s passion (§ 169, 1). Even baptism did not confer grace, nor was it necessary; it was simply a ceremony of reception into the congregation. 2. For a time the other cantons of the Confederacy offered determined opposition to the new religion and in 1524 warned the magistrates of Zurich to suppress the movement?; but to no avail. Within the next few years the new religion spread widely throughout German Switzerland and even into southern Germany where Zwingli’s teaching on the Eucharist and marriage were embraced and defended (§163, 4; 164, 1). Only the predominantly rural cantons in the interior of the country (Uri, Schwyz, Unterwalden, Zug, Lucerne and Fribourg) remained true to the old Faith. They strove to remove existing abuses and, in an effort to strengthen the Catholic cause, arranged for a public disputation to be held

at Baden in Aargau during May and June 1526. The Catholic side was represented chiefly by John Eck (§ 159, 5), John Faber (§164, 1) and Thomas Murner (§ 160, 3). Murner was then residing in Switzerland (1525-—1529) and had published several very original and trenchant pamphlets against the new doctrines. Oecolampadius of Basel and Bertold Haller of Bern (see below) represented the Zwinglians. Zurich and Zwingli himself did not venture to appear. The disputation resulted in a clear victory for the Catholics (82 votes to 10); yet Zwingli’s doctrines continued to spread. Basel eagerly accepted the innovation; for the radical humanists (Erasmus and his associates) had prepared the way and from 1523 to 1531, Oecolampadius (Johannes Hiissgen) of Weinsberg, professor of theology and pastor, had disseminated the new teachings. In 1527 the city council accorded

to Zwinglianism the privileges of a recognized religion, and in 1529, after an

uprising of the guilds and a war against images, the old Faith was suppressed. Zwingli could also point to brilliant successes in Switzerland beginning in 1528, when the important canton of Bern, the city of St Gallen (Joachim of Watt or Vadianus, physician, mayor and humanist), the county of Toggen1 L. HELBLING,

Dr.

Joh.

Fabri

u.

die

schweiz.

Ref.,

Diss.

Fribourg,

1933. Th. Murner im Schweizer Glaubenskampf, ed. by W. PFEIFFERBELLI, 1939 {Corp. Cath.22). L.V.MURALT, Die Badener Disputation, 1926. L, WEISS, Z. {. Schweiz. KG. 1938, 213 ff. 272 {f. (Ziirich after Kappel I531). W.KOEHLER, Das Ehe-- u. Sittengericht in den siiddt., Reichs-

stidten,

dem

Herzogtum

Wiirtt. u. in Genf,

1942.

O. E. STRASSER,

Zwing-

liana 1949, 1/16 (Consensus Tigurinus). W, HERRENBRUCK, Coni. Helvet. posterior (1566), 1938. BULLINGER: Monogr. by G. V. SCHULTHESS-RECHBERG, 1904; TF. BLANCKE (to 1531), 1g942; A. BOUVIER, Paris 1940. 0. VASELLA, Osterreich u. die Biindnispolitik der kath. Orte 1527/29; 1951; Abt Theedul Schiegel v. Chur 1515/29, 1954.

61

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517—1648)

burg, the Rhine

Valley and Biel all followed the example of Zurich. In Bern

it was especially the gifted artist and satirist, Nichkolas Manuel

and Bertold

Halley of Rottweil, pastor of the minster, who defended and propagated the new

religion,

suggestion leaders

A

disputation

completed

of the Swiss

the

held

apostasy

Reformation

at Bern

of Bern.

in

Janunary

Zwingli

1528

himself

at Zwingli’s

tock part, while the Catholic

and

other

cause was

but poorly represented. In 1529 the cantons of Glarus (the greater part), Schaffhausen and Thurgau and in 1530 the county of Neuenburg embraced

Zwinglianism. In 1524 and 1525 the magistrates of Appenzell and Graubitnden granted individual parishes the right to choose between the old Faith and the new. Basel: E. Diiyvy and P. Roth, Aktensammliung z. Gesch. der Basler Reformation,

6 vols

E. Staehelin,

1925/50.

Briefe

u.

R, Wackernagel, Akten

Lebenswerk Okolampads,

in

Stadt

u.

Ref. in B.,

Landschaft

1942.

z.

Leben

(Gesch.

d.

Stadt

Ok{}lampa,ds,

2z

Basel II1, vols;

Das

1924. theol.

1939; Das Buch der Basler Ref., 1929; Die Ref.

B.,

1929.

A. Bigelmair,

P. Reotk,

Festschr.

Durchbruch

J. Schlecht,

u.

Festsetzung

1917,

14/44

der

(O. in

in the monastery of Altmiinster). — Bern: R. Sleck and G. Tobler, Aktensammlung z. Gesch. der Berner Ref, (1521/32), 2 vols 1923. — Th. d2 Quervain

et al., Gedenkschrift

der Bern.

Kirchenreformation,

1928.

W. Koehler,

Zwingli u. Bern, 1928. O. E. Strasser, Capitos Beziehungen zu Bern, 1928. G. Schuhmann, Z. f. schweiz, KG. 1909, 1gro (Bern Disputation 1528), H. Specker, Die Reformationswirren im Berner Oberland 1528. — St, Gallen: Th. Miiller, Die 5t. Gallische Glaunbensbhewegung 1520/31, 1913. 0. Fret, Die Ref. in Toggenburg, 1920. J. Ninck, Arzt u. Reformator Vadian, 1936. W. Ndf, Vadian u. seine Stadt II, 1957. . Heer, Die Ref. im Lande Glarus, 1919.

E.

Camentsch,

Biindnerische

Ref.-Gesch.,

1920;

Gesch.

der

Ref.

u,

Gegenref. in den italien. Siidtdlern Graublindens, 1950, J. Willi, Die Ref. im Lande Appenzell, 1924. J. Wipf, Ref.-Gesch. der Stadt u. Landschaft Schaffhansen,

1929.

3. As in Germany, so also in Switzerland, the religious schism gave 1ise to political divisions and dangerous dissensions. It was especially the smaller districts administered by bailiffs that caused the most trouble, since in these places the religious interests clashed with those of the cantons in which the districts were located. Both parties endeavored to hold their position by forming alliances with coreligionists elsewhere. Thus between 1527 and 1529 Zurich

united with Constance, Bern, St. Gallen and other Protestant cities,

while the five Catholic districts mentioned above formed an alliance with Archduke Ferdinand of Austria in 1529. The war which threatened was averted in good time, and not to the disadvantage of the Zwinglhians, by the first Peace of Kappel in June 1529. But Zwingls did not cease his efforts to suppress the Catholic Church throughout Switzerland, and to give Zurich the leadership of the

Swiss Confederacy. As the commanding personality in all political

62

§ 168. Reformation in Geneva. Calvin and the Reformed Churches

questions, Zwingli planned an international anti-Hapsburg leag ue

to mclude

Philip of Hesse,

France,

Denmark

and Venice:

but the

plan never materialized owing to the failure of the Disputation of Marburg in which the Lutheran and Zwinglian doctrines regarding the Eucharist could not be harmonized (§ 163, 4). Because of a blockade imposed by Zwingli, the Catholic cantons were again compelled to resort to arms. When Bern failed to come to the

aid of Zurich, the Catholics gained a decisive victory near Kappel on October

1I,

1531.

Zwingli

with

twenty-four

of his preachers

fell i battle. His body was quartered and burned. A second victory of the Catholics near Zug led to the second Peace of Kappel in November 1531. By the terms of this treaty each canton was left free to choose its religion, and in the districts administered by bailiffs the choice was left to the individual parishes. Under the protection of the original cantons many of these districts returned to the practice of the Catholic religion. The suppressed Abbey of St. Gallen was restored, but

the

city itself

remained

Protestant.

Zwinglianism did not long remain an independent sect of Protestantism. Under Hewry Bullinger (4} 1 575), Zwingli’s successor as head of the church of Zurich, the Consensus Tgurinus was accepted in 1549. The Consensus committed the Zwinglians to a somewhat modified version of Calvin’s Eucharistic doctrine. The cantons professing the same religious belief gradually united; and a still closer unien of the Protestants was effected by Ballinger’s Confessio Helvetica (1562, published in 1560) which was recognized by most of the Evangelical churches of Switzerland. However, the organization of the Protestant church in German Switzerland remained Zwinglian. § 168, The Reformation in Geneva. Calvin and the Reformed Churches?,

I. A new form of Protestantism originated in Geneva, the center of French Switzerland. During the fifteenth century the dukes of * WOLF, QKdRG I, 1, 337/62. — REPORTS OF RESEARCH:

Go6tt.

Gel.

Anz.

1934,

R. STUPPERICH,

Archiv

Calvin-Bibliographie, and

E. REUSS

im

265/83; fiir

1961.

Corp.

P.BARTH,

Theol.

Kulturgeschichte

CALVINS

WERKE

Reformatorum

Rundsch.

1960,

ed. by

vol. 2g—87,

108/26.

1934,

G. BAUM,

1863/1900.

A.LANG,

246/57.

W, NIESEL,

E.CUNITZ J.Cal

vini Opera selecta ed. by P. BARTH and W. NIESEL, 6 vols I1926/52. CALVI INSTITUTIO German by O.WEBER, 4 vols. 1936/52; French. (1541) NS by J. PANNIER, 2z vols. Paris 1936/37; J.-D.BENOIT, 3 vols. Paris 1957/60.

63

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517—1648)

Savoy succeeded, with the help of Rome, in bringing the episcopal see of Geneva into the hands of their own family. The result was a protracted quarrel between the bishop and the proud citizens of the wealthy commercial city. To assert their claim against Duke Charles 11T of Savoy the Genevans formed an alliance in 1526 with Bern

and Fribourg.

In 1531 Savoy was

forced to recognize Gene-

va’'s political independence, and the civil rule of the bishop ceased.

In 1532 the Frenchman Guillaume Farel, a forceful preacher (the “Thunderer”)

AUSLEGUNG DRUCKTE

from Dauphiné,

DER

HL. SCHRIFY,

GENFER

began to propagate the new

Ed.

PREDIGTEN,

ed.

by

b}r

H.

O. WEBER,

1937 {f.

RUCKERT,

1936 ff.

550

doc-

UNGE-

F. BUSSER,

Calvins Urteil iiber sich selbst, 1950, R. SCHWARZ, Calvins Lebenswerk in scinen Briefen, 2 vols. 190o9. A.L. HERMINJARD, Correspondance des Réformateurs dans les pays de langue frang., 9 vols. {1544) Paris 1866/97. TH. BEZA, Vie de Calvin, Geneva 1564, lat. 1575, im Corp. Ref. 49. RECENT MONOGR. ON CALVIN by F.W.KAMPSCHULTE, 2 vols. {to 1559) 1869/99g;

E. DOUMERGUE, VINIENNE, Laus.

2 vols. Milan 1934;

1934.

Strasb.

Lond.

1935;

I9e9;

7 vols. Lausanne-Paris 1899/1927; ICONOGRAPHIE CAL19g0g; P.IMBART DE LA TOUR, Paris 1935; R. FRESCHI,

J. MACKINNON, Lond.

1947;

H. HOFFMANN,

GENEVA

1958.

F. WENDEL, 1929;

E. DOUMERGUE,

E.STICKELBERGER, H. WENDORF,

1940 {lecture}.

B. B. WARFIELD,

KG.

254/84.

louse

1928,

1909;

Recherches

1950;

Neuilly 21931;

G.GLOEDE, Calvins

C, and Calvinism,

1923,

J. PANNIER,

]. D. BENOIT, Neuilly

Shorter treatises by A. LANG,

Die Bedeutung

BERT, in “Meister d. Politik™ II% 111,

1936/1962,

Paris 1g50.

65/95.

R. N. C. HUNT,

1953:

J.CADIER,

I931.

H.V.SCHU-

f. die protest.

Lond.

K. HOLL, Ges. Aufsitze

zur

L’enfance et la jeunesse de Calvin, Tou-

sur 1'évolution relig. de C.jusqu’a

Strasb., 1924; C. et I'épiscopat, intellectuelle de C., Paris 1931.

Welt,

sa conversion,

Paris 1927; Recherches sur la formation J. BOHATEC, Budé u. C., 1050. L. SMITS,

St. Augustin dans 'ceuvre de J. Calvin, 2 vols. Assen 1956/58.

K. MULLER,

Calvins Bekehrung, Nachr. Gétt. 1905, 188/255: cir. P. WERNLE, ZKG 1gob, 84/99; 1910, 556/83; P.SABATIER, Annales de philos. chrét. 1911, 245/71; P. DUDON, RechSR 1924, 411/28. GUILL. FAREL 14801565, Biographie

nouvelle, Neuchatel 1930. V. CARRIERE, Rev. d'hist. de I’égl. de France 1934, 37/78. R. MULOT, ThStKr 1908, 362 ff. 5r3 ff, (Farel}. G. ANRICH, trassburg und die Calvinische Kirchenverfassung, 19z28. Origines de la Réforme 3 Genéve, Geneva 1936. R. DELUZ,

H. NAEF, Les La Dispute de

Lausanne (1536), Laus. 1936. E. PFISTERER, Calvins Wirken in Genf. 1G40. J. SCHORER, ]J. Calvin et sa dictature d’aprés des historiens anciens et modernes, Geneva 1948. G. GOYAU, Une ville-église, Genéve (1535/1907%), 2 vols. Paris 1919. K.MULLER, C. u. die Libertiner, ZKG 1922, 83{129,

A. A. VAN SCHELVEN, 1943 ff. O. PFISTER, (1545),

1947.

Het Calvinisme gedurende zijn bloeitijd, Amsterdam C.s Eingreifen in die Hexer- und Hexenprozesse

H. HAUSSHERR,

Der Staat in C.s Gedankenwelt,

1923. H. BA-

RON, C.s Staatsanschaunung u. das konfessionelle Zeitalter, 1924. J. BOHATEC, C.s Lehre von Staat u. Kirche, 1937. M. E. CHENEVRIERE, La pensée politique

F. BARTH,

de

C.,

Calvin

Paris u.

1937.

Servet,

E. MULHAUPT,

1909.

Die

R.H. BAINTON,

Predigt

Calvins,

Castellioniana,

193I.

Leiden

1951; Michel Servet, Geneva 1953. B. BECKER et al. Autour de M. Servet ¢t de Séb. Castellion, Haarlem 1953. N.PAULUS, Protestantismus u. Toleranz, 1911, 228 ff, 275 ff.; HpBI 1909 I, 3209/45. CH. BORGEAUD, L'Académie

de

C.,

Geneva

1goo.

P.F, GEISENDQRF,

Théol.

de

Béze,

Geneva

1949. J. BRATTETA, The rise and development of Calvinism, Grand Rapids 1959. H.VUILLEUMIER, Hist. de I'église reformée du Pays de Vaud sous le régime bernois, 4 vols. Lausanne 1g927/32. Cfr. lit. in § 167.

64

§ 168. Reformation in Geneva. Calvin and the Reformed Churches

trines in the city. After two disputations had terminated badly for the Catholics, the prineipal churches of the city were seized by the Protestants (1535). The city council forbade the Mass and declared Protestantism as the state religion. The bishop (Pierre de la Baume

1523—1544)

and

the cathedral

chapter

of Geneva

then took up residence in Annecy in Savoy. z. As a result of the radical change that had taken place, there was a great deal of confusion and lawlessness in the city. The impetuous Farel had provoked 1t, but was unable to curb it. The credit

for restoring

order belongs

to the gifted Frenchman

Jean

Chauvin (Caulvin), better known as John Calvin (15090—1564). This third prominent “reformer” was more self-controlled and clear-sight-

ed than Luther, more deeply religious and morally upright than

Zwingli. He was born at Noyon in Picardy, the son of a lay official in the diocesan court. He studied law and literature at Paris, Orléans and Bourges where he came in contact with heralds of the

new gospel. By 1533 Calvin was definitely identified with the Protestant movement. He speaks of a “sudden conversion™ as occurring some years earlier, but the expression is not to be taken too

literally.

Since

the

French

government,

for political

reasons,

was persecuting Protestants, Calvin left France in 1534. At Basel in 1536 he published his principal theological work, Religionis christianae instiutio, with a masterful prologue in the form of a letter to the French king, Francis [ in defense of his coreligionists. In an orderly and concise manner the Institutio expresses his opposition to Catholicism in respect of dogma, the sacraments,

and worship. On his way to Basel Calvin passed through Geneva

(1536) where Farel implored him to remain and devote himself to

the service of the Genevan

congregation.

Farel

appointed

him

teacher and preacher, tasks to which Calvin gave himself with energy and zeal. He composed a catechism and a creed to which everyone was obliged to subscribe under oath and introduced a strict ecclesiastical discipline. However, he was not able, at first, to enforce the new regulations. The opposition was so strong that

both preachers were banished in 1538. Calvin spent the next three

years in Strasbourg as pastor of the French refugees. In 1541 he

was recalled to Geneva by the civil commissioner and became more influential than ever in public affairs. He was indefatigable

in teaching theology, writing, organizing and planning his ecclesiastical policy. Undoubtedly a man of genius, his ambition was 6 Biblmeyer-Tilchle, Churoh History III

65

Modern and Recent Timces, First Period (1517—1648)

to revive,

according

to his

own

ideas,

the

life

of the

primitive

Church. Basing himself partly on his experiences in Strashourg and

partly on what he had observed among the Zwinglians in Basel (Oecolampadius) he wrote a constitution for the Genevan church — the Ordonnances ecclésiastiques, — which were adnpted in November

1541,

and which gave

that

church

a presbyterian-demo-

cratic government. The Ordonnances provide for four classes of officers: pastors (preachers), teachers (doctors), elders and discons. At the head of the congregation are two committecs:

the Vindrable

Compagnie consisting of pastors and doctors whose duty it is to supervise the teaching and appoint the ministers; and the consistory, composud of preachers and twelve lay elders, which was to serve as a control board and a court similar to the medieval Inquisition and was to scrutinize the religious and moral life of the faithful in every detail. For this purpose the members of the consistory visited the homes several times a year, and did not disdain to encourage denunciation nor to employ paid spics. Trans-

gressors were admonished, censured, banned (i. ¢., excluded from

the Lord’s Supper) or forced to make public apology; those guilty

of grievous opponents

sin, such

of the new

as blasphemers,

faith,

were

adulterers

delivered

and

obstinate

to the secutlar

magi-

strates to be pumished. Numerous death scntences (fifty-cight betore 1540) and still more sentences of banishment were imposed, and the rack was used freely and mercilessly. All ecclesiastical feast days and holy days were abolished except Sundays, Religious worship was restricted to the sermon, prayer and the singing of

psalms without organ accompaniment; four times a year the mem-

bers partook of the Lord’s Supper in which ordinary bread and wine

were used. Social life in Geneva took an an air of gloom: modish

dress, dancing, card-playing, the theatre and all such forms of amusement were strictly prohibited. 3. However, the “theocracy” which Calvin had so cleverly introduced and which he so relentlessly enforced was not without

opponents. The old libertines and gay aristocrats found the yoke

too galling; but Calvin did not hesitate to employ the necessary means to silence them. He dealt no less severely with those who impugned his theology. The physician Jerome Bolsec, an apostate

Carmelite of Paris, who questioned Calvin’s doctrine of predestination, was banished in 1551; and the Spanish humanist and physician Mtchael Servetus (§ 169, 3), whom Calvin had previously 66

§ 168. Reformation in Geneva. Calvin and the Reformed Churches

denounced to the Inquisition at Lyons, was burned at the stake on October 27, 1553 for denying the dogma of the Trinity. By 1555 Calvin was victorious over all his enemies. His position as spiritual, and to some extent, ctvil, dictator of the “Protestant

Rome”

to

which flocked refugees from France, Italy and England, was never

again threatened. The Ordonnances were now enforced to the letter and perfected. To crown his work Calvin founded an academy (x559) for the study of theology. This institution was placed under the direction of the French nobleman, Théodore de Béze (1 1605), Calvin’s most loyal collaborator and later his successor. Young men of various nationalities were soon enrolled in the academy so that it became a Calvinistic “mission house for western Europe.” By means of his extensive correspondence, his writings and his disciples, Calvin wielded a mighty influence throughout Kurope.

The Consensus Tigurinus of 1549

(§ 167, 3) became the basis of a

union of Zwinghan German Switzerland with Calvinistic French Switzerland. Even during the lifetime of the Genevan Reformer, Calvinism spread with astonishing rapidity to France, England Scotland, Poland, Hungary, Transylvania and the Netherlands (§ 170, 171, 182—184) as well as to a number of German cities and

principalities

(the

Palatinate,

Nassau,

Bremen,

Anhalt,

Hesse-

Kassel, Brandenburg, § 180, 2); and everywhere copied the strict organization of the Geneva model. Crypto-Calvinism in Saxony and the controversies which it raised shows the far-reaching effect of Calvin's teachings (§ 169, 1; 185, 1). In France, England and Holland the Reformed churches, as the Calvinistic congregations were called in the latter half of the sixteenth century, developed into a great political power. These churches pursued a more definite aim and were much more enterprising than the Lutheran groups;

they formed a truly militant church with an international character and became the most bitter foe of Catholicism in the period of the Catholic Restoration (Counter Reformation). Numerically, too, the Reformed churches constituted at the time and still constitute the largest group in Protestantism. Basically Calvin's theology! agrees with the teachings of Luther and the other reformers, 1 W, NIESEL,

but in several points it is quite distinct,

Bekenntnisschriften

Wort ref. Kirchen (1542—1934), 31948.

u. Kirchenordnungen tn dt. Ubers.,

Calvin,

1926/27.

1919.

Aus

O. RITSCHL,

Theol.

u. Kirchenordnungen

P. JACOBS, Ref. Bekenntnisschriften

1949,

Dogmengesch.

u. Gesch.

der nach Gottes

P. WERNLE,

des

der ref. Kirche,

Der evg. Glaube

Protestantismus

Festgabe

II1:

III— 1V,

E. F. K. Miiller,

67

Modern and Recent Times. First Peviod (1517 —1648)

It attempts to harmonize individual and Church, Christian liberty and authority. Calvin’s concept of God is dominated by the thought of God's majestiy and self-glorification, and culminates in the doctrine of absolute predestination. Only the elect belong to the Church. Assured of their salvation, they feel themselves obliged as instruments in the hands of God to exert their moral powers to the utmost. Opinions still differ as to the influence of Calvin's ethics on the rise and development of Capitalism in the West, However, many belteve that it was the circumstances of the times: the increased cost of living in England due to the importation of precious metals from America, and the opposition to the absolutism of the King that induced the Puritans of the seventeenth century to engage in business and to cultivate the virtues that make for success in business, rather than a pious tendency to look upon close application to business as a service to God. On the doctrine of the Kucharist, the second peculiarity of his theology, Calvin stands midway between Luther and Zwingli. On the one hand he taught that bread and wine arec merely symbols of the body and blood of Christ, but on the other he admitted a ‘‘spiritual reception” of the glorified Christ in heaven (virtual presence). 1933.

A.M.HUNTER,

mahl,

1935.

Theologie C.s 1930.

The

TH., H.L, PARKER,

God. Lond. 1959.

C.,

1937.

of C.,

Lond.

%1950,

H,WHEBER,

Calvin's

doctrino

of the

J. BECKMANN, Vom Sakrament bei C., 1926.

C.4 doctrine of the Word Christian

Toaching

life, Lond.

H. OTTEN,

Die

N. NIESKEL, same title, %t9s7; C.8 Lehre vom Abend1959,

and Sacrament, P, JACOBS,

Cx theol,

Lond.

Praedest.

Anschauungen

knowledge

of

R. S, Wallace,

195\;; C.s doctrine of the

u.

vVerantwortlichkeit

v.

der

Praedest.,

bei

1938,

W. A. HAUCK, Die Erwi#hlten, 1g9s50. C. Friethoff (Catholic), Die Praed.I.ehre bei Thomas v, A. und Calvin, 1926. W.LUTTGE, Die Rechtfertigungs-

lehre C.s,

190g.

W.A.HAUCK,

laube u. Gottesoffenbarung

C. u. die

bei C., 1939,

Rechtiertigung,

P, BRUNNER,

11939;

Christus-

Vom Glauben bei

. 1925, J. FRITZ (Cathulic?, Der Glaubenabegriff bei C. u. den Modernisten, 1913. K, FR. FROHLICH, Gottesreich, Welt u. Kirche bei C., 1930. MAX

WEBER,

e

protest.

Ethik u. der Goist des Kapitalismus,

Archiv f. Sozial-

wissenschait u. Sozialpolitik 2o, 190%, 1/54; 21, 1905, 1/110. Cir. ¥. RACHFAHL,

Calvinismus

u. Kap.,

Internat.

Wochenschr.

rgog

Nr. 39/43;

1610

Nr, 22/25. E, TROELTSCH, Die Soziallehren der christl, Kirchen u. Gruppen, 1912, 6osff. J. B. KRAUS §.]J. Scholastik, Puritanismus u. Kap., 1930. A, FANFAN],

Cattolicdsimo

Capitalismo. Milan :g%.

e Protestantésimno

H. M. ROBERTSON,

nella formazione

nomic Individuation, N, York 1933, W.F,VAN u. Kap,, Amsterd. 1934, H.SHBE, Les origines Paris

%1951,

W, 8, HUDSON,

thesis re-examined,

1959, K.VONTOBEL, nachreform. Zeit bis

Church

R, W. Green,

Hiatury

del

Protestantism

GUNTEREN, Calvinismus du capitalisme moderne,

1661,

and

88/102

(The

Weber

Capitallsm,

Boston

W, KOEHLER,

Luther-

Das Arbeitsethos des dt. Protestantismus von der zur Aufklirung, 1946. H.LEUBE, Calvinismus und

Luthertum im Zeitalter der Orthodoxie, 2 vols, 1928,

tum, C. u. Puritanismus in ihrer weltgeschichtl. Bedeutung,

68

storica

Aspects of the Rise of Eco-

1931I.

§ 169. Doctrinal Controversies of Protestanis, Anti-Trinatarians

However,

only the elect received the heavenly nourishment

mentum),

the reprobate

(elementum).

received

nothing

but

bread

(al1-

and

wine

§ 100. Doctrinal Controversies of Protestants.

Anti-Trinitarians!,

I, As closely agreed as the Reformers were in rejecting a great part of the teaching and organization of the Catholic Church, they could not agree among themselves on many things., There were schisms within the Protestant bodies in the form of such sects as the Anabaptists § 161, 3; 165, 1), the Schwenckfeldians (§ 165, 1) and other fanatics. Serious doctrinal quarrels arose among the Lutherans of Germany which split the congregations and caused the civil authorities to intervene. Even during Luther’s lifetime the principle of religious subjectivism began to have disastrous

effect and created still more

lowers after his death.

serious disturbances among

his fol-

The most important of the controversies was the so-called Sacramentarian

Quarrel.

Although

Luther

' K. MULLER,

denied

a substantial

Kirchengesch.

II,

2z

change,

(1560/1688),

he held that

1919.

at the

R.H.GROUTZ-

MACHER, Textbuch zur deutschen systematischen Theologie u. ihrer Geschichte vom 16.-—20. Jahrhundert, 2 vols. %1955/61. K. ANER, Das Luthervolk, ein Gang durch fessionskunde, 21957,

1932].

R.SEEBERG,

die Gesch. s. Frommigkeit, 1917. H. MULERT, KonA.HARNACK, Lehrbuch d. DG, III4, 1910 [reprint

Lehrb.

d.

DG.

IV,

1

11933.

O. RITSCHL,

DG.

des

Protestantismus, 4 vols. 1908/27. FR. LOOFS, Leitfaden z. Studium 4. DG, *1906. W.KOEHLER, DG. als Gesch. des Christl. Selbstbewusstseins 11,

195I.

WOLF, QkdRG

G. J. PLANCK,

I, 2 (Protestant theologians during the Reformation).

Gesch,

der Entstehung,

d. Verdnderungen

u. d. Bildung

seres protest. Lehrbegriffs, 6 vols. 1781/1800, I-—III® 1791/92. Die Dogmatik der ev.-ref. Kirche [1861], ed. by E. Bizer, 1935. Gesch. der protest. Theologie, 4 vols. 1862/1905. K. HOLL, Die gungslehre im Lichte der Gesch. deg Protestantismus, 21922.

un-

H.HEPPE, G. FRANK, Rechtferti-

P. TSCHACKERT,

Die Entstehung der luth, u. reform. Kirchenlehre {to 1580), 1910. E. HIRSCH, Hilfsb. z. Studium der Dogmatik. Die Dogmatik der Reformation und der altevgl. Lehrer, 81958, J. KUUHN, Toleranz u. Offenbarung, . . ein Versuch

z. Neueren Religionsin d. deutschen luth.

Luthers

Theologie,

u. Geistesgesch., 1923. H.LEUBE, Die Reformideen Kirche z. Zeit d. Orthodoxie, 1924. ER. SEEBERG,

2 vols

1920/37;

Grundziige

der

Theol.

Luthers,

1g94o0.

W. ELERT, Morphologie des Luthertums, z vols 21952/53. E.SCHLINK, Theol. der luther. Bekenntnisschriften, 81948, H. E. WEBER, Reformation, Orthodoxie u. Relationalismus, 2 vols 1940/41. H. W. GENSICHEN, Damnamus. Die Verwerfung der Irrlehre bei Luther und im Luthertum des 16. Jh., 1955. O.DITTRICH, Gesch. der Ethik IV, 1932. W.ELERT, Das christl. Ethos, 1949. W.NIESEL, Das Evangelium u. die Kirchen, ¢1960.

K. HEUSS!,

Gesch.

I. DOLLINGER,

German

People

Die

IV,

der theol. Fakultit zu Jena, 1954.

bI{ }I R. Geiselmann,

Reformation

London, 2 vols.

III,

1848.

1896—1925.

1958/61.

CATHOLIC WORKS:

]. JANSSEN,

J. A. MOHLER,

L. CRISTIANI,

History

Symbolik,

DictThC

(Réforme). Cfr. lit. in § 2, 6, § 159 and p. 69 (Troeltsch, Leube

J. KOOPMANS,

Das

altkirchl.

Dogma

in der

Reformation,

of

I3,

the

ed.

2039/97

u. Vontobel)

1955.

69

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517—1648) time of reception of the Lord’s Supper Christ is present in, with and under the bread (impanation theoty}; and in explaining his theory he appealed to the ubiquity of Christ's body. Karistadt, JTouther's former colleague {§ 160, 2;

161, 3),

the Hucharist.

on

the

According

contrary,

to him,

denicd

when

the

real

presence

of Christ

Christ spoke the words

Hoc

in

est

corpus meumnt, He pointed to his own body. Karlstadt was banished by the Elector of Saxony, and Luther subjected Karlstadt’s theological notions

to a scathing criticism in the work

"“Wider die himmlischen

Propheten”

(Against the heavenly prophets) 1524-—1525. Karlstadt submitted and was allowed to return for a time (t at Basel 1541). Still more consequential

was the quarrel over the same subject between Luther and the Swiss. Influenced by the Epistola Christiana of Cornelius Hoen (Honius) of Holland,

the Swiss gave to Christ’s words of institution a figurative-symbolic meaning. In keeping

with his rationalistic tendency,

Zwingli

held that

'‘est” means

Usiguificat”; Oecolampadius in Basel (§ 167, 2) and Bucer in Strasbourg (§ 164, 1) understood “corpus” to mean “signum (figura) corporis.” From 1526—1528 Luther carried on a bitter dispute with Zwingli and, as usual, Luther resorted to invective. He constantly referred to Zwingli as a ‘‘fanatic" and an “infidel.” The attempt to harmonize the difference in doctrine in the disputation at Marburg in October 1529 (§ 163, 4) failed completely; and the difference was stressed in the Confessio Tetrapolitana which was presented

at the Diet of Augsburg

(§ 104, 1). Finally in tho

in 1530 in opposition

to the Confessio

Wittenberg Concord of May

Augustana

1536 Bucer concurred

with Luther on the basis of a Eucharist formula prepared by Melanchthon in such a way as to conceal Bucer’s true point of view. Strict Lutheranism

gradually prevailed in the cities of southern Germany; and this aided greatly toward the strengthening of the Schmalkaldic League. By publishing

his *‘Short Creed of the Holy Sacrament” in 1544 Luther revived the quarrel

with those who denied the presence of Christ in the Eucharist. The Zwing-

lians, however, did not long retain their original belief, but accepted Calvin's

teaching regarding the Lord’s Supper (§ 167, 3; 168, 3)W. Koehler,

Zwingli

u. Luther,

ihr Streit (ber das Abendmahl,

2 vols

1924/53. E. Somsmeriath, Der Sinn des Abendmahls nach Luthers Gedanken

1527/29 {1920). H. Gollwitzer, Coena Domini. Die altluth. A.-Lehre in ihrer Auseinandersetzung mit dem Calvinismus, 1937. E. Bizer, Studien z. Gesch.

des A.-Streits im 16, Jh., 1940; ARG 1940, 68/87 (Bucer’s attitude), H. Grass,

Die A.-Lehre bei Luther und Calvin,

‘1954. —

E. Bizer and

W, Kreck, Die

Abendmahlslehre in den reformator, Bekenntnisschriften, 19055. — J. Rott, Rev. HFhR 1934, 234/54 {Bucer's instruction of 1 525). Cfr. § 160, 2 (Karlstadt), and § 163, 4 (Marburg Disputation). J. Stumpf, Beschreibung des Abendmahlstreites, ed. by F. Blsser, 1960, A. Palers, Realpraesenz,

Luthers Zeugnis, 1960, Melanchthon occasioned

further discussion

on

the

Eucharist,

During

the course of thirty years he had been deviating more and more from Luther’s concept and drawing closer to Calvin’s (spiritual reception of Christ, as in

Att. 10 of the Confessio Augustana variata of 1 540) and had converted many

in Wittenberg and the Electorate to his point of view. The ropresentatives of "‘genuine” Lutheranism (Gnesio-Lutherans) with Matthias Flacius

70

§ 169. Doctrinal Controversies of Protestants. Anti-Trinatarians

({ilyricus) (} 1575), chief editor of the ‘‘Magdeburg Centuries” (§ 4, 4), at their head, vehemently opposed this “‘Crypto-Calvinism.” The “rabies Theologorum™ of which the dying Melanchthon complained, became more

obstreperous

after

his

letzte Lebenstage, Mel.,

1902.

H.

death

(April

19,

1560). —

N, Miiller,

ro10. H. Rimer, Die Entwicklung

Busch,

Mel.s

Kirchenbegriff,

Diss.

der Glaubenslehre

1018.

Glauben und Handeln, 1931. F. Hibner, Natiirl. Schwirmerei bei M., 1936. See also lit. § 160, 3.

Melanchthons

H. Engelland,

Theologie

und

bei

Mel.,

theokrat.

2. Besides the quarrels over the doctrine of the Lord’s Supper the Protestants of German lands were troubled by a number of lesser #keological controversies® after the fourth decade of the sixteenth century. In the regulations which Melanchthon prescribed for parish visitations

in the Electorate of Saxony in 1527, he ordered that a moral sermon on the

Commandments was to precede the doctrinal sermon. [Johannes Agricola (Johannes Sneider), a preacher of Eisleben, objected and maintained that the

law

of love

in the

Gospel

took precedence

over

everything

else.

The

Commmandments, he said, were laws for the Jews (*‘Juden Sachsenspiegel’’) and did not concern Christians. Luther felt that he was being attacked and entered the lists against Agricola and those who supported him (the Antinomian

Confroversy

1537—1I540).

drew to Brandenburg Joachim I1 (t 1566).

where

Agricola retracted

he served

(1538) and in 1540 with-

as court preacher

to the

Elector

The Adiaphovistic Comtroversy (1548—1555) was occasioned by the Leipzig Interim of 1548 (§ 166, 2). Maithias Flacius (Illyricus), Nicholas of

Amsdorf and their colleagues in Magdeburg attacked Melanchthon

and the

other Wittenberg theologians whorn they accused of heing the authors of the Interim. Flacius maintained that Melanchthon was undermining Pro-

testantistn by his willingness to accept the seven Sacraments and other Catholic practices such as devotion to saints, images, liturgical vestments,

feasts,

fasts,

etc.,

as indifferent

things

(dSudpepe = res

media).

—

The

Osiandrian Controversy (1550—1566) disturbed the Lutheran Church in Prussia. Andveas Osiander of Niirnberg, and since 1549 preacher and professor of theology at Kénigsberg, found fault with Melanchthon's idea of justification as a purely judicial act {a mere declaration that one is justified); and 1 See Lit. above

E. THIELE,

ThStKr

{(esp. O. RITSCHL

1907,

246/70

Streit iiber die Uberwindung

Lutherverstindnis,

1960.

27/73

historian).

Melanchthon

u.

{Flacius

das

as

Interim.

—

and WOLF, QKdRG).

(Agricela’s memoirs)

des Gesetzes, 1958. Adiaphoristic

ARG

1920,

62/66.

G.MOLDAENKE,

R. HERMANN,

J. ROGGE,

controversy:

P. POLMAN,

Gesetz u. Evangelium bei M. Flac. 111, Lund 1952. Heiligentage ... im Zusammenhang der reformator. Die

Gestalt

der

Kirche

Luthers,

E.

HIRSCH,

RHE

1931,

und

L. HEIKQOLA,

R.LANSEMANN, Die Anschauungen, 1939.

1940.

Ausgew. Schriften, ed. by 0. LERCHE, 1938. 0. NEBE, Amsdorf}, 1935. Osiander: W. MOLLER, A. Osiander,

1936.

Zum

J. Agricolas

Schriftverstindnis

Schriftdeutung im Zeitalter der Ref. I {Flac. I1l.), Lund H. CHR. V. HASE,

Antinomians:

N.V. AMSDCRFF,

Reine Lehre {N. v. Leben u. ausgew.

Schriften 1870. E. HIRSCH, Die Theologie des A. Osiander, 1919. A,L.MAYER, HJG 1921, 281/80 {a letter of O.). Majoristic controversy: G. KAWERAU,

RE 12, 85/91; 24, 57 (Major); ibid. 12, 577/81; 24, 84 (Menius). W. FRIEDENS-

BURG, ARG 1925, 192 ff.; 1927, 118 {f.; 1929, 21 {f. (Menius’ correspondence).

71

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517 —1648) held that it consists in a real indwelling of Christ in the soul, hence a true

justification. in fact one

The

controversy

of his disciples,

continued

fohn

after

Funck,

Osiander’s

a court preacher

death

(1552);

of Koénigsberg,

was beheaded in 1566 for preaching the doctrine. The Majorist Controversy (1552—1562) was concerned with the question of good works. Georg Major (Meier), a professor at Wittenberg and a follower of Melanchthon, maintained

that good works were superintendent Justus

necessary for salvation and was defended by the Mewnius of Gotha. Major’s opponent, Nicholas of

Amsdorf, went s0 far as to declare that good works were prejudicial to salva-

tion. Major (1 1574) retracted and Menius was obliged to resign (% 1558). — The Synergistic Contreversy (1555—1567) was led by John Pleffinger (1 1573), a superintendent and professor of Leipzig. Following Melanchthon, he insisted that in the process of justification man must cooperate with grace (ouvepyeiv).

He

was

opposed

after

the

by Nicholas

of Amsdorf and Matthias Flacius.

The latter held the opinion that original sin constitutes the substance of fallen man. This controversy was carried on with a great deal of personal animosity,

3. Shortly

beginning

of

the

new

religion,

some

individuals

denicd the dogma of the Trinity which Luther and the other Reformers had left untouched. These Anii-Trinitarians were mostly Anabaptists or freethinkers who had been radical humanists. The best known of these is the Spanish physician Michael Servetus, who worked chiefly in southern Francc. He taught a Neoplatonic Pantheism and endeavored to break down belief in the Trinity and to revise the Protestant teaching on justification (De Trinitatis erroribus,

1531; Christianismi restitutio, 1553). Calvin caused

Servetus to be burned as a heretic at Geneva (§ 168, 3). There were also Anti-Trinitarians in Italy: John Valeniine Gentile of Cosenza, who was executed as a heretic at Bern in 1566, George Blandraia of Piedmont and Laelius Socinus (Sczzini) of Siena. The latter two fled to Geneva, but when they were not aliowed to remain, went to Poland and Transylvania where they formed ‘'Unitarian’ congregations (§ 185, 4). See lit. above. The Two Treatises of Servetus on the Trinity, Engl. by

E. M.

Boston

1931,

Wilbur, Cambr. Mass. 1932. R, H. Bainton, Hunted heretic. M, Servet, 1953.

St. v. Dunin-Borkowski,

Festschr.

Stella Matutina,

I, g1 if.; IT, 103 fi. (Antecedents of the Unitarians);

Feldkirch

Scholastik 1932,

481 {f. (classes of Anti-Trinitarians). — J. F. Fulton, Michael Servetus, N.Y. 1953. H. Ley,

Festschrift E. Bloch,

nism of the XV and XVI centuries),

1955,

155—79

(antiecclesiastical illumi-

§ 170,

The Reformation in Northern and Eastern Countries. I. Asearly as the second decade of the sixteenth century Lutheranism gained a foothold in the countries to the north and within a short time had almost completely displaced the Catholic religion. From the beginning the princes of these countries organized and controlled the new church to suit their political purposes, 72

§ 170. Reformation in Northern and Eastern Countrics

In Denmark! King Christian [T {1513—1523) endeavored to use the

new teligion to break the power of the nobles avd prelates, In 1521 he

summoned Karlstadt from Wittenberg (§ 160, 2; 160, 1); but in 1523 he was deposed and banished because of his tyranny. His successor, Fredevick 1 of Holstein (1523—1%33) was obliged to promise in the

capitulation before his election to forbid Lutheranism to be preached.

Nevertheless, as soon as he felt secure on the throne he prometed it in seerot. The new gospel was preached in Denmark hy Luther’s disciple, Hans Tausen, o former Knight of $t. John, whom Frederick appointed his court chaplain, In the Diet of Odense in 1527 freedom to preach and organize was extended to Lutherans, The bishops of the country proved inndequate for the situation; they were more interested in their rights

and possessions than

in religion, and

made

no effort to save the faith,

Although the old Church found valiant defenders in such priests as the Carmwlite Pawl Heliae (1elgesen) and the Franciscan Nicholas of Herborn,

the innovation continued to make headway. Under Frederick’s son, Christian 111 (1534—155¢), Lutheranism became the state religion. All

seven Danish bishops were imprisoned and forced to resign, their places being tnken by superintendents. Churches and church properly were

confiscated

ns in Germany.

The Wittenberg

reformer,

Johann

BBugen-

hagen, was culled in to organize the new church according to the system prevuiling in the Electorate of Saxony (1537—1539). However, all the

old prelatinl and clerical titles as well as many Catholie ceremonies were

retained. Catholics were deprived of all political rights; monks who refused to couform were banished or exccuted. Under Christian IV {(1588—1648) Catholic priests were forbidden under penalty of death

to set foot on Danish soil. Conversion was punished by banishment and loss of property. Since the sccond half of the seventeenth century Rome appointed Apostolic Vicars to care for the few Catholics in the

missions of Denmark and the other Scandinavian countries. The Jearned

Niels Stensen (Steno; 1638—1086) 1 G, SCHWATGIR,

Die

Reformation

Acta Pontificum Dunica V-—V1 BAKRK, Coponh, 1913/18.

mark

V-V

(I};fl

1048},

was named to this office in 1677, in den

nordischen

Léndern,

196z

(1492/1530), ed. by A, KRARUP et J, LIND-

I'. C. DAHLMANN 1893/1g02.

— 1, SCHAFER, Gesch. von Dine-

L., SCHMIITT,

Dvr

Karmeliter

Paulus

Lutheranismi

Danici

Helilt, 1893; Joh. Tauken, 1894; Nik. Stagefyr u. Nik. Herborn, 1896! Die Vertoldigung der kath. Kirche in Didnemark gegen die Religionsnenerung, 18g9y,

NIC, STAGHEFYR

soy

HERBORN,

Confutatio

1530), ed. L, Schmitt, Quaracchi 1902, Corp. Cath. 12 (Herborn's Enchirilon 1529, od. by . SCHLAGER), 1929. J. SCHNGLL, Die diin. Iirchen-

ordnung

v. 18542

u. der Einfluss v. Wittenberg,

Philipptemus

u.

ordnung Kg.

Christians [11 v, 1837, 1934.

Luthertum

KG.

Schloswig-Holstelna

1980,

1:11/1g.

carum

&.

1341

in

II,

1 (rs19—19z1),

C, KORNURUP,

conscripta,

DAnemark

Confessio

Copenhagen

formation In %eninnrk, g‘mnd. 1048, (1430), Copenhagen

1019; N.

u.

1927.

Schleswig-Hoistein,

1035;

O. KARHLER, et

Die

Ordinatio

1953,

L. FEDDERSEN,

latein.

1929!

Kirchen-

Festschrift K. Haff, ecclesiarum

E.H. DUNGLEY,

The

Dani-

Re-

N. K. ANDERSEN, Confessio Hafnensis

1984. J. METZLER, Die apostol, Vikariate des Nordens,

Stensen, Copenh.

1929,

NIC, STENONIS,

Opera theologica, 2 vols,

Copenh. 1941 /ggii ed, g( Larsen et G, Scherz; Epistolae et epistolae ad eum datae,

od.

G.

ERZ,

formation in Norway).

1932.

0. GARSTEIN,

The

Month

1959,

95/103

(Re-

73

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517—1648)

Norway, which was then a Danish province, was opened to Lutheran preachers by Chnistian II i 1536. The people offered longer and more stubborn resistance to the innovation than in Denmark, but Lutheranism

finally prevailed. Iceland!, also subject to Denmark, was lost to the Catholic Church when Jorn Arason, Bishop of Holar, tried to defend the old Farth by armed combat. He was captured and beheaded for high treason in 1550.

2. In Sweden? the brothers Olaf and Lars (Lawrence) Peterson, who

had studied at Wittenberg, began to work for the Reformation as early

as 1520. The infiltration into the country was greatly facilitated by the political situation and the democratic organization of parishes in which the people frequently elected their pastors. Sweden, like Norway,

had

foist it upon

and

been under Danish rule since the Union of Kalmar (1397); but for some time the Swedes had striven to shake off the foreign yoke and to restore the old kingdom. Christian II endeavored to save the Union by the terrible bloodbath of Stockholm in November 1520; but the Swedes eventually gained their independence and the leader of the revolt, Gustavus I, of the House of Vasa, became king (1523—1560). He personally favored Lutheranism and with the help of his chancellor Lars Andersson, formerly archdeacon of Strengnis, was able by deceit and force to the people

within

a few years. The

obsequiousness

worldliness of the clergy speeded the realization of the king’s schemes. A popular uprising at Dalecarlia in 1527 was put down and two prelates were executed. At the Diet of Westzras in 1527 it was decided to break

off communion of the Swedish Church with Rome, to permit the free preaching of the “pure word of God” and to confiscate in favor of the crown all church property and institutions. The government of the new

national church of Sweden was placed entirely in the hands of the king. In 1531 Lars Peterson was named to the episcopal see of Uppsala. Although there were frequent uprisings, the people were gradually induced to accept the new religion. Many Catholic rites, ceremonies and feasts were retained and the Swedish Lutheran church still has bishops instead of superintendents. 1 J. HELGASON,

Islands

Kirke,

G. v. Hertling, 1913, 163/75. ? J. WORDSWORTH,

H. HOLMQUIST,

Sweden). 1929,

Festgabe

The

E.HALLENDORFF

119 ff.

L'Université

J.F. MARTIN,

cath.

58,

Copenh.

National

K. Miiller,

1908,

1922.

H.SAMBETH,

Festschr.

T. J. OLESON, Speculum 1953, 245/78 (Arason). and

Church

1922,

A.SCHUCK,

G. Vasa

354 ff.

et

la

of

209/27 59,

Lond.

(church

History

Réforme

506 ff.;

Sweden, en

and

of Sweden,

1908,

Sudde,

1904 ff.

IGII.

state

in

Stockh.

Paris

(John

1g06H;

and

Olaf Magnus 1533—438, the last archbishops of Uppsala); cfr. J. KOLBERG, Beilage z. Vorlesungsverz. v. Braunsberg 1914/15. G. BUSCHBELL, Briefe v. Joh. u. Ol. Magnus, Stockh. 1932. D. ALCOCK, G. Vasa, 1924. C. G. LAN-

GENFELDT, Olaf Peterson u. d. Ref. in Schweden, 1923. C. BERGENDORFF, Olavus Petri, N. York 1928. W. RAACK, Die Einfiihrung der Ref. in Schweden, Preuss. Kirchenzeitung 1927, 185 fi., G. CARLSSON, Festschrift O. Scheel,

1952.

386/426

36{48

(Prussian

influence).

L.M.DEWAILLY

74

RevSphTh

(Apostolic succession in Sweden's national church).

TON, An archbishop of the Reformation. 1958,

OP.,

1938,

E. E. VELVER-

Laurentius Petri Nericius, Lond,

§ 170, Reformation in Northern and Eastern Countries 3. Prussia,

Protestantized

the domain

by

the

of the

Grand

1525. The neighboring

Teutonic

Knights,

Master Albert of

Baltic provinces,

Kuvland,

was

secularized

Brandemburg

and

(§ 163, 1) in

Livonia and

Istonie,

also

governed by the Knights, were delivered over to the Reformation in the second decade of the sixteenth century, as were also the cities of Kiga, Revel and Tartu. The Grand Master Walter (Wolter) of Pleltenbery (1490 -1535)

himself

remained

a Catholic,

but

tolerated

the

innovation.

The

calhedral

chapters and episcopal sees were gradually occupied by Protestants, When

Margrave Willtam archbishop of Riga

of Brandenburg, in 1539, Catholic

brother of Duke Albert, hecame worship in Livonia ceased cntirely,

The last Grand Master Gotthard of Ketiler, in order to obtain support against the threat of llussia, ceded the land to Poland (1561); but by the terms of the treaty the Protestant religion was maintained. After the example of Albert of Prussia, Kettler made Kurland and East Kurland on the Dvina a secular, hereditary dukedom in 1562 and at the same time introduced the Augsburg Confession. Esfonia was annexed to Sweden and togoether with Finland,

long

was concerned,

subject

to

Sweden,

sharcd

the

same

fate as far as religion

L. Avbusow, W. v, Plettenberg, 1919; Dic Einlithrung d. Ref, in Livland, Estland u, Kurland, 1921. O. Pohr{, Reformationsgesch. Liviands, 1gz8.

0. Kleeberg, Die Polnische Gegenref. in Liviand,

Agricola, der Roformator Finnlands, Helsinki

187/2x2

(Protestant

R. Wittvam,

Baltische

and

Orthodox

Churches

Kirchengeschichte,

1931. J. Grummerus,

1941, (7. v. Rauch, ARG

rgs6.

mect

in the

Baltic

Mich.

1952,

region),

4. Protestant congregations were established at an early date in the kingdom of Poland-Lithuania, especially among the German residents of the cities

of Dansig,

Elblag

and

Torus,;

and

this despite the

fact

that

King

Sigiamund I (1506—1548) forbade the circulation and reading of Luther’s works under severe penalties. But the anarchical condition of the Polish

state favored the innovation; even some of the independent nobles countenanced and encouraged it.

E, Zivier, Neuere Gesch.

Polens.

Polens I (1506/72),

1915, E. Hanisch,

Gesch.

1923. E. Koniecki, Gesch. d. Reformation in Polen, *1904. . Krause,

Reformation u. Gegenref, im ehemaligen Koénigreich Polen, *1905.

K. Vilker,

KG. Polens, 1930; ZKG 1934, 542/70; 1937, 89/87. Th, Wotschke, Gesch, d. IRe-

formation

in Polen,

1911;

Die

Ref. im

Lande

Posen,

1913.

[. Stammler,

Der Protestantismus in Polen, 1925. G. Dawid, Le protestantisme en Pologne

jusqu’en

1570, Thése

1927, G. Smend,

Dis Synoden der Kirche Augsburger

Kon{. in Grosspolen im 16., 17. und 18, Jh,, 1930, E. Schubert, Polens Kampf

gegen Luther, 1940. S. Ko?, Mél, H. Grégoire IV, 1952, 201/61 (Reformation in Lithuania). B, Stastswski, Reformation u. Gegenreformation in Polen, 1960.

Hungary which had suffered intensely from the attacks of the Turks was not spared the further tribulation of religious disturbances. Under King Louts II (1516~1526) and his successor, Fardinand of Austria, Lutheranism epread among the German residents of the cities as well as among Magyar nobles, although the government had taken severe measures to exclude it. The contest over the throne (see below) and the lamentable condition of the Church aided the progress of the new gospel. After 1543 the ‘‘Helvetic

75

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517—1648)

Coniession” of the Reformed Church of Switzerland met with even greater

success and almost displaced Lutheranism.

G. Loesche, Luther, Melanchthon und Calvin in Osterreich-Ungarn, 1goqg.

E. Doumergue, La Hongrie calviniste, Toulouse 1912, J.S. Szabp, Der Protestantismus in Ungarn, German by B. v. Horvath, 1927. A. Hudak, Die

Kirche unserer Viter. Weg u. Ende des deutschen Luthertums in der Slowakei, 1953. W. Bucsay, Geschichte des Protestantismus in Ungarn, 1959.

Since the time of St. Stephen (997—1038; § 82, 6) Transylvania had been subject to Hungary. The Hungarian throne which had been unoccupied since the unfortunate defeat at Mohacs in 1526 (§ 163, 2) was contested by Ferdinand I and John Zdpolya, Count of Szepes. In 1538 Ferdinand I obtained

the crown of Hungary,

and Transylvania was given to Zdpolya as an in-

dependent principality with the title of kingdom. As early as 1519 the Germans (cluefly Saxons) residing in the land were made acquainted with the Reformation by travelling merchants who distributed Luther’s writings; and soon there were Lutheran congregaticms in Sibiu, Kronshtadt and other places. These first congregations wer2 organized by the humanist John Honter of Kronshtadt {f 1549). Due to his efforts there was a united Transylvanian-Saxon Church of the Augsburg Confession by 1545. Many of the Hungarians and Magyars of the territory also embraced the new religion. Later, however, the majority of them went over to Calvinism. The Diet of

1557 granted freedom of religion to everyone. Fr. Teutsch, Gesch. der evang. Kirche in Siebenb., 2 vols, Sibiu 1921/22. Honter: Monogr. by 0. Nefoliczka, Kronshtadt 1930; K. K. Klein, 1935.

E. Roth,

Die

Gesch.

des

Gottesdienstes

der

Siebenbiirger

Sachsen,

1954 ;

Die Reformation in Siebenbiirgen, 2 vols. 1662/63. G, Siockl, Die deutschslav.

Sildostgrenze des Reiches im 16. Jh., 1940.

§ 171.

Schism in England under Henry VIII and Edward VI, Beginnings of the Reformation in Scotland,

I. For a long time England’s relations with the Holy See had ceased to be as cordial as once they were; the tendency apparent 1 THE CAMBRIDGE

MODERN

HISTORY II—VI, Cambr. 1904/6. THE

CAMBRIDGE

MODERN

vols. ®1931.

H. BELLOC, A History of Engl. IV (1525—1612),

HISTORY,

Political Hist. of England, G. M. TREVELYAN,

NEW

11, Cambr. 1958. W. HUNT and others, The

12 vols. Lond.

History of England,

1905/7.

London

W.

and

DIBELIUS,

N. Y.,

England,

London

1926,

2

1931.

C. READ,

Bibliography of British Hist., Tudor period, Oxf. 21959; The Tudors, Lond.

1936. J. D. MACKIE, The Early Tudors, Lond. 1952. R. M. RAYNER, Engl. in Tudor and Stuart Times, 1485—1714, Lond. ®1952. P. MEISSNER, Engl. im Zeitalter v. Humanismus, Renaiss. 1. Reformation, 1952. G. R. ELTON,

Engl. under the Tudors, Lond. 1955.

llustrative

of English

Church

History,

H. GEE and W. J. HARDY, Lond.

1914.

Documents

R.W. DIXON,

Hist.

of

the Church of England (1500/70), 6 vols. Lond. 41884/1902. R.W.STEPHENS and W. HUNT, Hist. of the English Church IV—VTI, Lond. 1906/13. P, JANELLE, L'Angleterre catholique A la veille du schisme, Paris 1935. H. ARNEKE, KG. u. Rechtsgesch. in England von der Ref. bis zum friithen 18. Th.,

76

§ 178, Schism in England under Henry VIN and Edward VI

toward the end of the Middle Ages to vest Uhe control of the

Church in the king and make it a National Church

become firmly fixed.

radical humanism

inglish

(§ 140, 3) had

Wyclif and the Lollards, and, to some extent,

paved

the way

for the religious innovation of

the sixtcenth century. At first, however,

Lngland’s religious crisis

resulted in schism and not in complete apostasy

from

the faith,

The schism originated in an arbitrary action of a despolic sovereign who was, unfortunately, abetted by obsequious courtiers. The immediate

motives were of the lowest sort.

HHenry

VI

(1504

1547)", the younger son of Henry VI, was destined for the clerical

1937. 11948.

S.L. OLLARD ot al,, A dictionary of F. A, ([CARDINAL)Y GASQUET, Tho ive

J. GAIRDNUIR,

Lollardy

and

the

Rof,

English Church of Seformation,

in Koglnd,

4 vols,

Hidt,, Lood,

Lowd,

Loned. %1qgon,

1go8/g,

H. W. CLARK, Mist. of Iinglish Nonconformity, 2 vols, Loml, 191 FERMILRTE died in the Knglish Ref., Lond. rg12. 11 M, GWATKIN, Church and Stade in

Engl. (to 1714), Lond, 1917, R, 8 ARROWSMITIL The Prefude to (he 1. formation, Study of Iinglish Church Life, Lond. 1023, [ 5. FLIFCHIR, The Ref. in Northern England, Lond. 1925, 1. CLAYFYON S§., “I'he Flisdopie

Basis of Anglicanism,

Lond.

1925,

€. S, CARTER,

The

Kaglish Cliurch and

the Ref.,, Lond. rgzs. 17, )1, SMUTHEN, Continent Protestantisn and the English Ref. (to 1603), Lond. 1927, 0, A. MAKRTIL, [iconomic Causes of e

Rei. in England, New York 1929,

G, CONSTANT,

La Réforine on Angleierre,

2 vols. Paris 1930/39 (to 1553). 1. A, MORETON, L Réforme anglicine au 16° 5., Paris 1931; cfr. GG, CONSTANT, RIKE 1931, x70{80, 1. SCHOVELLR,

Die Anfdnge

The English

des

Puritanismus,

1932,

Bishops and the Rof.

C. 1L MORTIMER

1530 60,

Lond,

sund .,€. BARIVR

1946,

W, K, SORLIEY,

A Hist. of the English Ref,, Cambr, 1937. W. A. DUNHAM and 8, FARGELLIS Complaint and reform in Engl. 1436—1714, Lond. 1938, M. POWICKI, The

Reformation in Engl,, Oxf. 1941. P, HUGHES, The Ref i Engl., 1 voly, Lond. 19501954 (standard). IFLICHE-MARTIN XVI. L. V. PASTOR, 1%imtesch. IV—VI. D.D.KNOWLKES, The rcligious orders in ugland 111, ambr. 1959. J.SPILLMANN, Gusch. der atholikenverfoly, in Fngland

1535/1681), & vols, Iguu[f;: I—1I% 1910, artyrs under Henry VILI and Elizaboth

B.CAMM, Liven of the (1%535/83), 2 vols. Lond.

Koglish 1904/%;

Tyburn and the English Martyrs, Lond. %1924, 4. CAMM ot al., Thn gt artyrs, Lond. 1929, ST. G. K. HYLAND, A Century of Versecution under Tudors and Stuarts, Lond. 1926, C.A, NEWDIGATL, Our Martyrs . ., in

Engl. and Wales in the 16th and r7th Centuries, Lond. 1g28. 1. and ;. MA'F-

THEW,

The

Ref.

and

the Contemplative

Lifo,

Catholicism in Engl., Lond. %1940, 1 MONOGR,

ON

LARD, Lond. ®1652; F. CHAMBERLIN,

HENRY

VIII by H. HALL,

H. M. SMITH, Lond.

Lond.

1932;

C, PATTA,

Lond,

2 vols.,

1948;

1534,

D, MATTIEW,

Lond,

1904

Ilorence

193%;

TH. MAYNARD,

2 vols.

A

T.ont,

F, PIL-

on

10340}

ANNK

BOLEYN by PH.W.,SERGRANT, New York 91924; K. BARRINGION, Lond, 1032; on TH, WOLSBEY by E.L., TAUNTON, Lond. 1901: R. FRANCIS, Tond. 1917; H.BELLOC, Lond. %1950; on TH.CROMWELL by R, |. MERKIMAN,

2 vola. Lond. 1902; P.WILDING, Paris 1935; TH, MAYNARD, T.and. 1956; G. R. ELTON, Cambr. Historical Journal 19«1, 1 3::/85; on TH, CRANMIEER b

A.F. POLLARD, Lond. 1926; A.C. DEANE, Lond. 1927; H. BULLOC, T.ond. '19%0; F. E. HUTCHINSON, 1981; G.W. BROMILRY, Tond. 1986; J. RIDLEY,

Lond.

1962,

PRES. SMITH,

W, WALTHER, English

115, 1915, 263/77.

H. M. SMITH,

Hist,

Heinrich VIII

Rev.

E. DOERNBERG,

1910,

v. Engl. u. Luther,

168 ff., 646 1f.:

1g08; cfr.

K. BUNRATH,

Henry VIII and Luther, Lond,

Henry VIII and the Reformation, N, York

1g62,

HZ

1963,

ST, EHSES,

77

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517—1648)

state and pursued theological studies at Oxford. The death of his older brother brought him to the throne; and in the first years of

his reign he manifested zeal for the Catholic faith. When Luther’s

pamphlet De caplivitate Babylonica appeared, Henry refuted it in his Assertio seplem sacramentorum, for which Pope Leo X conferred

on him the title Defensor fider — a title still used by the rulers of

England. But his sensuality and an invalid divorce and remarriage involved him in a break with Rome.

In 1500 he married Catherine of Avagon, the widow of his brother Arthur. Catherine was the daughter of Ferdinand the Catholic and an aunt of Charles V. Of the children born of this marriage only one survived — Princess Mary, later Queen Mary the Catholic. Henry became enamored of Anne Boleyn, a lady-in-waiting, and from the spring of 1527 sought to have his marriage with Catherine dissolved. The plan for a divorce found strong

support at court. The chancellor and papal legate, Cardinal Thomas Wolsey, a gifted but unprincipled statesman,

of nullity, for he was

aware

zealously undertook to attain a decree

of his master’s determination.

The principal

reason alleged in favor of a dissolution was that the king's marriage to Catherine had been invalid from the beginning because of the impediment

of affinity in the first degree. Some of the theologians of the day considered that the prohibition contained in Leviticus 18 : 16 admitted of no exception.

The majority, however, held a different opinion based on Deuteronomy 25 : 5. Moreover, the marriage of Arthur and Catherine had never been consummated,

“private

affair’’

Julius IT in

Under

1503

these

circumstances,

questioned and

the

validity

alleged that

the

of the

the reasons

defenders

of

dispensation

advanced

were

the

king's

granted

by

fraudulent

and that it had been requested by Henry's father without the knowledge of the person most concerned.

But these objections carried no weight since

Henry had, until 1527, raised no argument against the validity of the dispensation. Henry’s persistence prompted Pope Clement VII to declare in a brief of December 1527 that in case the marriage with Catherine was proved invalid, he thereby granted a dispensation from the impediment of affinitas

illegitima; since Anne's sister, Mary Boleyn, had previously been Henry's

mistress. Although the Pope’s response to Henry's pleading was by no means a decision, it did encourage the king to continue his efforts. In the hope that Henry's passion would cool with time, the pope remained patient. Rom. Dokumente zur Gesch, der Ehescheidung Heinrichs VIII v. Engl., 1893;

R

Mél.

1893 1801f.; 1900, 256ff. PASTORIV, 2, 483ff.;

A. Dufourcq,

P. CRABITES,

Henry VIII

Paris

Clement

and

VII

1932, and

the English

145/61

Henry

V, 678ff.

{Clement VII

VIII,

monasteries,

Lond.

Lond.

and

19356.

1906;

G.CONSTANT,

the

divorce),

F.A. GASQUET,

cir. S. BAUMER,

ZkTh 1889, 461/505; G. CONSTANT, RQH 105, 1926, 257/314. VILLE, Engl. monks and the suppression of the monasteries,

G. BASKERLond. 1940.

CH. C. BUTTERWORTH, The English primers 1529—45, Lond. 1953. A.LANG, Bekenntnis u. Katechismus in d. engl. Kirche unter Heinrich VIII., 1917, FR. PRUSER, England u, die Schinalkaldener 1535/40, 1929. STEPH. GAR-

DINER [sthup of Winchester, ’[1 5 55}, obedience in Church and Three Political Tracts (1529/41), P. JANELLE, Cambr. 1930.

78

State,

§ 171. Schism in England under Henyy VHI and Edward VI

In 1528 he sent his legate, Cardinal Camppegio a secret brief to be read before the king and

Campeggio

and Wolsey

were

commissioned

(§ 162, 3), to England with Wolsey and then DLurned.

by the

pope

to

examine

and

pronounce upon the sufficiency of the reasons for which the dispensation of Julius IT had been granted. Queen Catherine now decided to defend her rights and appealed to the pope in 1529. Her nephew Charles V, who had defeated the League

of Cognac

and was then the master of Ltaly, came

o

her defense, The pope suspended the jurisdiction of the two cardinals and transferred the investigation to Rome (July 1520). Frustrated in his plans,

Henry vented his anger on Wolsey, who was dismissed and accused of high

treason. He died November

He

was

succeeded

29, 1530 on his way to prison {or the sealfold).

as lord chancellor

by

the

renowned

humunist

Thomas

Move. Efforts were now made to obtain a professional theological opinton in Henry's favor from the faculties of the English and continental universitios, and Parliament threatened the Curin; but to no avail. The pope Torhade Henry (January 1531) under ecclesiastical penalties to contract another marriage while the investigation was pending,

2. When all legitimate means failed to secure the dissolution of

his marriage, Henry determined to attain his goal without, and in spite of, the pope. Thomas Cromwell, a pettifopping lawyer, who had gained the king's favor, advised him to imitate the example of the German princes and separate from Rome. At the Convocation of the Clergy in February 1531 Henry was declured supreme head of the Church of England. Archbishop Warham of Canterbury suggested that the clause be added “so far as the law of Christ permits”; but even this clause was later deleted. When More resigned the Chancellorship (1532), Cromwell, a true Machiavellian,

was appointed to that important post; and when Warham, the Archbishop of Canterbury and Primate of England, dicd (1532), Thomas Cranmer was named to the highest office in the Church of England. He had been house chaplain to the Boleyn family and

while on a trip to Germany

(1532) had come in contact with

Lu-

therans and had secretly married the niece of Osiander (§ 169, 2). With the help of these two worthies, the king was now in a position to carry out his plans, On January 25, 1533 he went through a form of marriage with Anne Boleyn, Cranmer was consecrated on April 15, and a month later pronounced the marriage with Catherine invalid and declared the marriage with Anne valid. On September 7, X533 Anne gave birth to a daughter,

the future Queen Elizabeth.

Henry had now incurred the threatened excommunication which

was

formally pronounced

answered

by

the

in a Bull dated

Act of Supremacy,

July

passed

by

11,

1533.

Henry

Parliament

on 79

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517 —1648)

November 3, 1534 which declared Henry to be the “supreme and only head of the Church of England,” endowed with the same spiritual powers and authority which had formerly been exercised by the pope. Refusal to take the Oath of Supremacy or to deny the validity of the second marriage or the right of Anne’s children to succeed to the throne were construed as acts of high treason punishable by death. The impediment of affinity was abolished by law in England in 1907; cfr. Bellesheim, AkKR 1908, 649 ff.

3. The English schism was now an accomplished fact. Unfortunately, the great majority of the clergy, long accustomed to an enthralled church, readily submitted to this new form of Caesaropapism. Very few had the courage to refuse to take the Oath

of Supremacy.

The most renowned

victims of the despotic king

were the learned and pious fohn Fisher, Bishop of Rochester, who was created cardinal after being sent to prison, and the noble-

minded humanist, Thomas More. Both were beheaded 1n 1535 and both were canonized in 1935 Also in 1535 a number of Carthusians

and some secular priests were executed. The king named Cromwell

his

“Vicar

General

in

Ecclesiastical

Affairs,”

and

by

1540

all

monasteries and religious houses — nine hundred and fifty of them

— had been suppressed and their goods and property confiscated

for the crown. Many pious foundations were secularized, relics and statues were destroyed and pilgrimages were prohibited. In 1538 Paul IIT published the Bull, which had been written three years previously, by which Henry was declared excommunicated and deposed and his subjects released from obedience to him. The Bull, however, had little effect and could not be published even i France or Germany. Despite the fact that Henry had some corre1 j. FISHER,

Lond. 1921;

Alte Vita in AB

1891,

121 ff.;

1893,

g7 if.;

ed.

R. BAYNE

PH. HUGHES, Lond. 1935. — Corp. Cath. g (]J. Fisher, 5. Sacer-

dotii defensio ¢, Lutherum, J. GRISAR, 5tZ 129, 1935, REYNOLDS, Lond. 1955. Princeten 1947. Selected

ACTA THOMAE

1525), 1929. Monogr, by V. McCNABB, London 1635; 217/30; A.ERBEB, 1935; H, KAPFINGER, 1935; E.E, TH. MORE, Correspondence, ed. by E. F. ROGERS, letters, ed. by E.F. ROGERS, New Haven 1961I.

MORI ed. H. DE VOCHT,

Louv. 1947.

TH. ROPER,

The Life

of Sir Th. Moore, ed. by E. V.HITCHCCCK, Lond. 1935. THE ENGLISH WORKS,

ed. by W, E. CAMPBELL, etc., Lond. 1931 ff. Monogr. by 1905; G.R.POITER, Lond. 1925; Milwaukee, 1950; R. W, Chambers,

Theol.

Gesch.

Z.

1951,

1949,

103/14;

160/80);

1947; L. Paul, Lond.

1953.

E.B.G.RONTH, Ox{. 1934; C. Hollis, Westminster, Md., 1940 {cir. R. STAMM.

H.V.GREYERZ,

R.AMAS,

S. GWYNN, Lond.

Princeton

P. HOGREE,

Schweizer 1949;

Beitrige

z.

TH. MAYNARD,

The Sir Thomas

allgem. Lond.

More ¢ircle, Ur-

bana (I11.} 1959. PH. J. BELL, The Mouth 1960, 325/39 (The trial of Th.More).

80

§ 171, Schism in England under Hernry VIII and Edward VI

spondence with the Lutherans and for a time (1535—1536) considered joining the Schmalkaldic League, he persecuted and executed not only those who remained loyal to the papacy, but also those who professed belief in the new religion that was being preached on the continent. By the king’s orders, Parliament in 1539, enacted

the so-called Bloody Statute or six articles of faith which had to be accepted by all under penalty of death: 1} Transubstantiation; 2) Communion under one kind; 3) Clerical celibacy; 4) The binding force of religious vows; 5) The necessity of auricular confession;

6) The efficacy of private Masses. However, the instructions published in 1540 under the title “Necessary Doctrine” were less outspokenly Catholic than the Six Articles. Heresy was shortly to follow schism. 4. Under Edward VI (1547—1553)", Henry’'s son by Jane Seymour, the Protestant Reformation was introduced into England. Since

Edward was but ten years of age, the regency was held first by his uncle the Duke of Somerset and later by the Duke of Northumberland, both of whom were in full harmony with Cranmer in his scheme to protestantize the country. Uprisings in many places were suppressed, often with loss of many lives. Protestant theologians were invited from the continent to organize the English Church. Thus Bernardino Ochino (§ 172, 2b), Martin Bucer (§ 164, 1) and Jan Laski

{§ 184, 3) appeared in person, while Calvin gave advice

by letter. Pictures and images were removed from the churches, private Masses forbidden, clerical celibacy was abolished and with the “Book of Common Prayer’ (1549, revised 1552) a new liturgy in English was introduced. It rejected the sacrificial character of the Mass and ordination and prescribed Communion under both 1 A.F.POLLARD,

MAN, The last Reconstruction

Die

Kirche

(Corp.

Edward

Tudor of the

King Edward Engl. Church,

v. Engl.,

ihr

Cambr.

1926.

Confessionum VI,

History of Engl. 1547/1603, Lond. 1910.

VI, Lond. 1958. R. G.USHER, The 2 vols.,, Lond. 1910. C. FABRICIUS,

Gebetbuch,

17, 1).

Bekenntnis

C.H.SMYTH,

W. PAUCK,

u.

Cranmer

Kanon.

Untersuchung

and

De regno Christi u. z. engl. Staatskirche d. 16. Jh.s, 1928, and

the English

England).

tums,

1953.

Ref.,,

Oxf.

H. KRESSNER,

G. CONSTANT,

1946.

C. HOPE,

Schweizer

H. W.CHAP-

ZKG

Urspriinge

1960,

des

zu

the

Recht,

Ref. under

Butzers

82/109

anglik.

{Bucer

Lond.

1926,

and

Staatskirchen-

GASQUET-E, BISHOP, Edward VI and the Book of Commmon Prayer, 31928 cfr. A. Bellesheim, Kath. 18gr I, 1 ff. J. E. FIELD, The Engl. Book,

Schrift

€, HOPF, M. Bucer

La réforme en Angelterre II, Paris 1949.

gies of 1549 and 1661, Lond. 1920.

1937

F. A.

Lond. Litur-

D. HAGUE, The Story of the Engl. Prayer

G. F. POLLARD,

Ecclesia

Anglicana,

Lond.

103I.

W. K.L.CLARKE and C. HARRIS, Liturgy and Worship, Lond. 71943. H. E. SYMONDS, The Council of Trent and the Anglican Ordinal, Lond. 1934. E. C. RATCLIFF,

1949.

7

The

Book

of Common

Prayer of the Church

of Engl., Lond.

¥.CLARK, The Eucharistic Sacrifice and the Reformation, Lond.

Biblmeyer-Tiichle, Chnurch History III

1960, 81

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517 —1648)

species, but retained many parts of the Catholic missal, breviary and ritual. A Protestant Creed of forty-two articles was adopted it 1553 1In which Calvin’s doctrines of predestination and the ISucharist were accepted with very little modification. As in cult, so also in organization, the English Church held to tradition much more closely than did the Protestant churches on the Continent. The episcopal office and dignity were rctained, wherefore the Anghcan Church, or “Church by law established” is generally known as the “Episcopal” Church. Since the beginning of the

eighteenth century three partics with different doctrinal tendencies have been recognized in the Anglican or Episcopalian Church and accordingly as a party attaches a high, low or indeterminate degrec

of importance to the visible church and its ordinances, is said to belong to the High, Low or Broad Church. Most Anglicans hold

that their belief represents one of the three principal

forms of

Protestantism; yet many, especially of the High Church, lay claim to Catholicity and assert that there is unbroken apostolic succession in their hierarchy, 5. At the time of the Reformation,

Scotland®

wis an indepondent king-

dom under the Stuarts and remained so until the beginning of the seventeenth

century. The new doctrine found its way into the country at a very early date,

The Scottish Metropolitan, James

his

nephew

(I513—1542)

Cardinal

David

Beaton of St. Andrews

Beaton

(1530—1 540)

(I522—1539)

induced

King

and

[ames

V

to enact severe measures to prevent the spread of the heresy,

Patrick Hamillon,

a relative of the king, was

burned

at the stake

in t 528

for professing Lutheran doctrine, and several religious of the same tendency suffered a similar fate. But after James' death Protestantism made rapid headway under the regency for his infant daughter, Mary Stuart (born 1542}, especially under the all-powerfull nobles who coveted the property of the Church, The execution of the preacher George Wishart was avenged by the

murder of Cardinal Beaton in 1546. In order to remedy the abuses in the

Catholic Church several synods (1549, 1 551) ecreed stringent reforms of the clergy; but they came too late. In 1554 the Queen-mother Mary of Guisea

assumed the regency int place of the earl of Arran:

but

she was

unable

to

repair the damage that had been done or to check the advance of the movement. Within a few years the fate of the Scottish Church was sealed (§ 183, 6. ! ANDR. LANG, History of Scotland, 3 vols. Lond.

1900/5.

P.H. BROWN,

Hist. of Scotland, 3 vols. Cambr, 1900/, M. B, MACGREGOR, The sources and literature of Scottish church hist., Glasgow 1934, W. STIPHEN, Hist. of the Scottish Church, 2 vols. Edinb, 18g4/06. A. F. MITCHRELL, The Scottish

Ref.,

Edinb.

1900.

D, H,FLEMING,

The

Ref.

in

Scotland,

Lond.

rg1o.

A. R. MACEWEN, Hist. of the Church in Scotland (to 1560}, 2 vols. Lond. 1913/18. A, ZIMMERMANN, RQ 1911, 27 ff., 110 ff, (Reformation in Scot-

land).

A. M. MACKENZIE,

1513/1638, Lond, *1957,

82

The Scotl. of Queen Mary and the religions wars

§ 172. Revival of Religious Life

CHAPTER THE

11

COUNTER-REFORMATION! § 172. Revival of Religious Life?.

1. Perhaps

no sphere

of ecclesiastical life was

so disastrously

affected by the decadence and disorder which marked the end of the Middle Ages and the beginning of Modern Times as was monastic or religions life. This became amply evident in Germany where,

with

the

outbreak

of

the

Reformation,

a

multitude

of

religious of both sexes contemned their vows and embraced the new doctrine. In the Latin countries, too, especially in [taly, the decline of religious discipline was scarcely less lamentable than in the North and also resulted, somewhat later on, in numerous apostasies. A reform commission composed of cardinals and prelates, appointed by Paul I1I, suggested in 1537 that all the lax monasteries of men be allowed to die out and then re-established by zealous monks. Fortunately, it was not necessary to resort to such radical means. For quietly and from within the orders themselves there were beginning, even then, reform movements which eventually resulted in old communities being restored to strict discipline and religious fervor; and this before the papacy itself, apart from the short pontificate of Adrian VI, had seriously undertaken the reform of the Curia. The energy for monastic reform was provided by ! WOLF, QKdRG

reformation,

toward

Cath.

1946.

11, 2, 206 fi.

Reform

PASTOR

H. JEDIN,

IV—XV.

in the early

Kath. Reformation u. Gegen-

G.V. JOURDAN,

roth Century,

Lond.

The

Movement

1913.

B, J. KIDD,

The Counter-Ref. (1550—1600), ]flmcl. 1933. P. JANELLE, The Cath. Reformation, Milw, 1949. H.HAUSER, La Prépondérance espagnole (1559 1660),

Paris

Religidse

S, MERKLE

®1948.

Lrzicher and

der Barockzeit,

J. SCHEUBER

der

B. BESS,

kath.

1921.

et

Kirche

al.,

Kirche

u.

Reformation,

(St. Theresa— H. Newman),

G, SCHNURER,

1937. ~~ Untersuchungen

Kath.

z. Gesch.

Kirche

n.

1917.

ed.

Kultur

by

in

u. Kultur d. 16. und

17. Jh.s, ed. by P. M. BAUMGARTEN and G.BUSCHBELL, ¢ fasc. 1024/32. J. LORTZ, Die Ref. in Dceutschland II, 1940, 82 ff. P. TACCHI VENTURI,

Storia della Comp. di Gesh in Italia I, Rome $1950. G, PFEILSCHIFTER, Acta

reformationis Catholicae,

de la littérature

1959 ff.

j. DAGENS,

Bibliographie chronologique

de spiritualité et de ses sources

(t501—1610},

Paris

1952.

L. WILLAERT, Aprés le Concile de Trente. La restauration catholique 1563— I648,

Paris

1960.

P. BROUTIN,

La

reforme

Pastorale

en France

an

XVIIe

siécle, 2 vols. Paris 1956. i M. HEIMBUCHER, Die Orden u. Kongregationen der kath, Kirche, 2 vols. *1932/34. P. POURRAT, Christian Spirituality I1I—IV, Paris 192 5/29.

P. PISANI, Les com afinies des prétres du XVIe an XVIIIe s, Paris 1928, H. JEDIN, History o?t e Council of Trent, 5t. Louis, 1957; RQ 1936, 231/281.

83

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517 —1648)

the fire of genuine Catholic piety which sometimes burns fitfully but is never extinguished. The leaders of the movement were Godloving men and women who had first reformed themselves and only then endeavored to inspire others. The movement began mn Italy and Spain (§ 158, 6) and was copied in France, while Germany,

exhausted and spiritually impoverished.by the schism, lagged far behind. The new religious communities dating their origin from this time have two things in common: they were founded 1n Latin countries and they all show a decided preference for the active

rather than the contemplative life. They devoted themselves to

the practical tasks of training the clergy or of instructing and edifying the people by means of preaching, catechizing and giving missions; others, especially of the female congregations, occupied themselves with teaching children, nursing the sick and other social and charitable works. Most of these new communities were organized as “‘congregations” without strict enclosure, the members of which were bound by simple vows only. 2. The communities founded in the first decades of the sixteenth

century previous to the Council of Trent are the following:

a) The Oratory of Divine Love was a confraternity of clerics and laymen founded at Genoa and in 1517 at Rome for mutual edification, practices of charity and strengthening the faith and devotion of the people. The most renowned members of the Oratory were St. Cajetan of Thiene (1 1547)

and fokn was

Peter Caraffa, later Pope

further developed

by the

Clerks

Paul IV. The Regular

purpose

of the Oratory

or Theatines, which Caraffa,

Bishop of Chieti (Theate) since 1504 and St. Cajetan, founded at Rome 1524.

The

members,

obliged

to

strict

poverty,

devoted

themselves

Bewnrath,

Festschr.

G. Kawerau

to

in

the

care of souls, then much neglected, and especially to the training of worthy priests. Pastor 1V,

2, 568 {f.; V, 3560 {f.

K.

1917,

70 if. A. Bianconi, L’opera delle Compagnie del Divino amore nella riforma catt., Citta di Castello, 1914.

Brescia 1948.

A. Cistellini, Figure della riforma pretridentina,

S. Ritter, J. Sadoleto, Rome 1g12.

G. B. Pighi, G. M. Giberti,

Verona 1goo0. Biogr. of St. Cajefan by R. de Maulde la Claviére, Paris 21905;

P. Chiminelli, Vicenza 1048. P. Paschini, S. Gaetano di Tiene, G. P. Carafa

¢ le origini dei Chierici regolari Teatini,

Rome

1926.

P.

A.

Kunkel,

The

Theatines in the hist. of Cath. reform before the establishment of Lutheranism

Wash. 1941. Le lettere di San Gaetano da Thiene, ed. F. Andrex, Rome 1954. b) The Capuchins. In 1525 Matteo da Bascio undertook a reformn of

the Italian Franciscan Observants by means of a return to the strict observance of the primitive rnle. The members were to be distinguished by a long pointed hood or capuche (hence the name Capuchin) and a beard. Pope Clement VII approved this branch of the Franciscan Order in 1528, and permitted them to live in small houses or hermitages. The apostasy

84

§ 172. Revival of Religious Life of Louis of Fossombrone in 1536, the second vicar-general, and of Bernardino Ochino of Siena, the fourth vicar-general in 1542, proved serious blows

to the new (t 1565

reform.

Ochino

at Austerlitz

became

in Moravia},

a Protestant

But

and fled to Switzerland

in the second

half of the fifteenth

century it grew rapidly and in 1574 Gregory XII permitted the Capuchins to make foundations outside of Italy. In 1619 the Capuchin reform was declared an autonomous order. The zealous work of the Capuchins among the common people of Germany and Switzerland went far toward counteracting the Reformation, and their efforts in the Catholic Restoration as well as in the foreign missions gave the order before it was a century old an enviable reputation as a staunch support of the Church. Succeeding centuries

have added new merit and renown.

Z. Boverius, Annales ord. Minorum Capuc., 2 fol. Lyons 1632/39; Continuatio 1676/1737. M. a Tugio, Bullarium ord. Fratr, Min. Capuc., 7 fol. Rome 1740f52; Contin. a. P. Damiani t. VIII—X, Innsbruck 1883/84. Amnalecta Ord. Capucinorum, Rome 1884 ff. Liber memorialis ovdinis Fratrum

Minorum 5. Francisci Capucinorum (1528/1928), Rome 1928 (Anal. Ord. Capuc. vol. 44, Suppl.). Collectanea Franciscana (= CF), 1931 ff. Monu-

menta historica Ord. Min. Cap., Assisi/fRome 1937 #f. M. a Pobladura, Historia generalis Ord. Fratrum Min. Cap., 3t. Rome 1947/51; Origo et progressus O.¥. M. Cap., Rome 1955. Pasior IV, 2, 630 f.; V, 367 if. P. Cuthbert, The

Capuchins,

z. 4oojdhrigen

des CF

Jub.

London

418/27

Barvaud,

Paris

N.Y.

1913.

des Kapuzinerordens,

Kapuzinerordens,

1940,

and

and

1924;

1940

1960,

Chr.

1928.

{Bernardino da Asti 31/77).

Monogr.

R. H. Baintor,

Th. Graf,

the

on

Florence

Schuite

et al., Festschr.

True

Ochino 1940;

Zur Entstehung

by

Founder: D.

also

Berivand-

B. Nicolini,

Naples

1939. (. de Parts, Les Fréres Mineurs Capucins en France, 2. t. Paris 1937/50. A. Eberl, Gesch. der Bayr. Kapuziner-Provinz, 1912. A. Hohenegger, Gesch. d. Tiroler Kap.-Provinz, 2 vols 1913/15. M. Kiinzie, Die schweiz. Kap.-

Provinz,

1928.

C. v. Oberleutasch, CF 1950, 219334

A. Jacobs, Die Rhein. Kapuziner 1611—1725,

(Vienne Cap.-Provinz).

1933. R. Fischer, Die Griindung

d. Schweizer Kap.-Provinz, 1955. D. M. a Portagruavo, veneti, 2 vols. (to 1580), Venice 1941—57. ¢}

New

groups

of

Clerks

Regular

for the

care

of

Storia dei

souls,

Capp.

nursing

the

sick and educating the young: The Clerks Regulay of St. Paul were founded

by Si. Antonio Maria Zaccavia and two other priests at Milan in 1531 They are better known as Barnabites from the church of St. Barnabas in

Milan to which they were first assigned. The Order of Somascha from

the

town

of

Somascha

near

Bergamo

where

the

(so called

motherhouse

was

located) was founded by St. Jevome Emiliani (1 1537) in 1532 for the care and education of orphans. A congregation of women known as Angelicals (Sorores Angelicae), founded by the pious widow Countess Luigia Torelli

of Guastalla in 1535 for the protection and rescue of girls, was placed under

the direction of the Barnabites in 1549. The Ursulines, fonnded by St. Angela Merict of Desenzano in Brescia in 1535, began as a pious association similar

to Franciscan Third Order for the care of the sick and the education of girls.

The Rule of St. Augustine was adopted and the community was approved by Paul IIT in 1544; the final approval as an order was given by Paul V in

85

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517 —1648) 1618. Today

the Ursulines are found in almost every country of the world

and are known as thorough and progressive teachers. Pastor IV,

Rome

1913/25.

z, 624 tf.: V,

360 ff. 0. Premoli,

Storia dei Barnabiti,

4. Dubois, Les Barnabites, Paris 1924.

Barnabiti, 4 vol. Florence 1933/37.

3 vols,

G. Boffito, Scrittori

C. Bascap2, I Barnabiti e la controriforma,

in Lombardia, Mil. 1931.

Biogr. of St. A. M. Zaccaria by A. M. Teppa, Milan

1897;

1913;

L. Geniile,

Chierici

Turin

Regolari

Somaschi

G. Chasiel,

(1528/1928),

Paris

Rome

1930,

—

1928.

L'Ordine

dei

W.E. Huberi,

Der

hl. Hieronymus Amiliani, 1895. — Biogr. of St. Angela Merici by V. Neusee, 21912; J. van Santen, Utrecht 1915; . Bertolotti, Brescia 1923. Beitrige zur Darstellung u. Gesch. des Ursulinenordens,

lines,

Lyons

Paris

1935.

1540—1650,

d) The

1937.

L. Christiani,

M. Chalendard,

Paris 1g50.

La

Hist.

des

Berlin 1930.

premiéres

promotion

Brothers Hospitallers developed

de

la

from

M. Avon, Les Ursu-

Ursulines

femme

&

frangaises,

1'apostolat

a lay fraternity founded

by St. John of God {(+ 1550) in 1540 at the hospital he had opened in Granada.

They adopted the Rule of St. Augustine and were constituted an order by Pius V in 1572. The order rapidly spread to nearly all parts of Europe.

Biogr. of St. John of God by L. del Pozo, Madrid *1929;

Paris

1931;

L. Ruland,

Die Barmherzigen de Dien

Rome

God,

1947;

Briider,

193t.

Paris ?1950. G. Rusotio,

1950.

Dublin

—

M. Gdmez

N. McMahon,

Moreno,

J. Monval,

Madrid

I. M. Magnin,

1950.

F. Ldufer,

Les fréres hospit.

de S. Jean

L’ordine ospedaliero di 5. Gtovanni

di Dio,

The Story of the Hospitallers of St. John of

1958.

e) The Society of Jesus or Jesuits: see § 173.

3. The activity of the Council of Trent (§ 174.9) had a farreaching influence on renascent religious life. In the closing session (XXV}

in December

1563

regularibus et monialibus.

it enacted

a great reform

decree:

De

In the twenty-two chapters of the decree it is forbidden to religious to have private or personal property, provision is made for the visitation of monasteries, even of exempt religious, and their dependence on the bishop is stressed; the enclosure of convents of women is insisted upon, the bestowal of monasteries on laymen in commendam (§ 96, 1. 3; 140, 2) is prohibited and the old practice of receiving young children, from which

many abuses arose, is abolished and the age at which profession may be made is fixed at sixteen (under certain circumstances at twelve

The

salutary disciplinary regulations

of the Council

for girls),

brought

about the reform of most of the older orders, especially in Spain and Francel. Through the efforts of Abbot Jean de la Barriere of 1 G. SCHREIBER,

Das

Weltkonzil

v. Trient

Vie du vénérable Jean de la Barriére, Paris 1885.

II,

1951,

451 ff.

A. BAZY,

PH, SCHMITZ, Gesch. des

Benediktinerordens 1V, 1960, 14 ff. M. SOUPLET, Le Vénérable Dom {Didier de la Cour), Verdun 1953. LUD. BLOSII ABB, OSB,, Statuta monastica, ed.

U. Berliére, Badia di Praglia 1929.

86

H. HOLZAPFEL,

Handb.

der Gesch. des

§ 172. Revival of Religious Life

the Monastery

of Feuillans near Toulouse,

the French

Cistercians

established the Reformed Congregation of the Feuillants in 158. similarly the Bemedictines formed several congregations of stricter observance.

The most important

of these were the Congregations

of St. Vannes and St. Hidulph in Lorraine, organized about 1600 by the Prior Didier de la Cour of St. Vannes. These reforms became

the model for the Congregation of St. Maur or the Maurists in 1618,

the constitutions of which were the Benedictine monasteries of ments of the Maurists gave this {§ 188, 2). Various reforms were Observants

which

after

became

1517

eventually adopted by most of France. The intellectual achievecongregation world-wide renown introduced among the Franciscan

(§ 151, 1).

an autonomous

of the reforms remained subject

Besides

branch

the

Capuchin

reform

(cfr. n. 2b above),

to the Observant

General.

several Such

were the Reformatr, Recollects and Discalced or Alcantarines (founded in 1559

by

St Peler

of Alcaniara,

+ 1562). Together

with the

old Observantia regularis they constituted four families under the

general name of Fratres Minores strictioris observantiae until 18g7 when Leo XIII prescribed uniformity of garb and practices and united them into one family (§ 219, 6). 5t. Theresa of Awvila (f 1582), authorized by Pope Paul IV, began 1 1562 to work a stricter observance of the rule among the Carmelites! of Spain. St. John of the Cross (t 1591)2 gave St. Theresa Franziskanerordens,

12, 1793/1800,

DictThC

1 BENOIT

déserts

Paris

1909,

MARIE

DE

L.VAN

DEN

des Carmes

%1929,

208 ff. LA

A. TEETART,

SAINTE-CROIX

deschaussés,

Paris

BOSSCHE,

1927.

Les

S. Pierre

d'Alcantara,

(B. Zimmerman),

M. M. VAUSSARD,

Carmes,

Paris

DE §. TERESA, Historia del Carmen descalzo en Espafia.

Les

1930.

Le

saints

Carmel,

SILVERIO

.., II vols. Burgos

1935/43. OBRAS DE SANTA TERESA DE JESUS, por SILVERIO DE S. TERESA,

9 vols. Burgos 1915/24 {Eng. by E. A. PEERS, 5 vols. N. Y. 1951); por EFREN DE LA MADRE DE DIOS, Madr. 1952 ff. Monogr, on St. THERESA by H. J. COLERIDGE (Life and Letters), 3 vols. Lond. 1881/96; H. JOLY, Paris 81926;

BERTIN!, Spaniens

L. BERTRAND,

Turin

VII,

1g93o.

1938,

Paris

1927;

H. HATZFELD,

233/57;

M.LEGENDRE,

Marseille

1929;

G. M.

N. Y.

1960.

in Ges. Aufsitze z. Kulturgeschichte

K. O'BRIEN,

Teresa

of

Avila,

M. LEPEE, Paris 1947 and 1951; E. STEIN, *1952; H. WAACH, %*1955; L. CHRISTIANI, Paris 1956; E. HAMILTON, Lond. 1960; PASTOR IX, g4/107. J. MUMBAUER, in Religidse Erzicher d. kath. Kirche (above p. 84) 17/51.

R. HOORNAERT, §. Thérése écrivain, Paris ?1925. G. ETCHEGOYEN, Essai sur les sources de S. Thérése, Paris 1923; cfr. RevSPhTh 1924, 489 f.; 1925,

47 ff.

P.E.DEROS,

Un

Maitre

de

1937. M.LEPEE, Bafiez et S.Th., 433/52 (Development of the ecstatic myst. Erlebnis der Gottesnihe bei der mystique de 3. Th., Paris 1946. E,

S,

Th.,

le P. Francois

d’Osuna,

Paris

Paris 1947. W.VOLKER, ZKG 1926, experiences of St. Th.). A. BACK, Das hl. Th., 1930. L. OECHSLIN, L’intuition A, PEERS, A handbook of the life and

Note 2: see next page

87

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517 —1648)

in introducing

assistance

valuable

the

convents

called

“‘doctora

into

reform

the

of Carmelite nuns and many of the monasteries of Carmelite friars. In 1580 Pope Gregory XIII separated the discalced (reformed) St.

Carmelites.

calced

the

from

often

Theresa,

mistica”, and St. John of the Cross (declared doctor ecclesiac in 1926) are among the most important representatives of Catholic

asceticism and mysticism. Their example and their classical writings contributed greatly to a Detter understanding of the contemplative life and to the development of mystical speculation. a large

orders,

existing

of already

reforms

these

4. Besides

number of new congregations for the practical performance of the

works of mercy were established between the opening of the Council of Trent and the middle of the seventeenth century, This fact gives evidence of the revival of Catholic life which began with the Council. From the end of the sixteenth century, France, spirltually renewed, took the lead in fostering religious life and became a nursery of sanctity and a school of genuine mysticism?. while still a layman

a) In 1548 St. Philip Neri of Ilorence {1515—1595),

Holy

of the Most

founded the Confraternity

to care for

Trinity at Rome

and edify pilgrims to the Holy City. After he had been ordained a priest the confraternity developed into a society of secular priests (r564) known

as the Oralory, the members

preference the new community

of which were called Oratorians.

Uy

Philip's

was to be a society of secular priests living

together under obedience, but without vows; and his idea of ithe priestly apostolate was to give highly individualized direction to penitents. Gregory XIII approved the Oratorians in 1575. The renowned historian Caesay

Baronius

his continuator

and

Odoric

members

were

Raynaldus

of

St. Philip’s Oratory {§ 4, 1 and 178, 1¢). The musical program which Philip introduced to attract young peoplc to the sermons and devotions in the

times of St. Theresa

and

1955.

Louvain

La

1958.

A. VERMEYLEN,

TOMAS

reforma Teresiana,

* OBRAS

Criségono

de

DE

LA

Rome

DE 5. JUAN Jesus,

of the Cross,

CRUZ

1962.

St. Thérése and

DE LA CRUZ

Madrid

1946.

SIMEON

19s54;

Life of Teresa

MONOGR.

Paris 1929 and 1936;

en France DE

LA

au XVIIe® siécle,

SAGRADA

FAMILIA,

Silverio de 5. Teresa, Burgos

OF THE CROSS by J. BARUZI, Paris 21931; DE JIESUS-MARIE,

Lond.

H. HATZI'ELD, Estudios literarios sobre mistica cspafio-

of Avila, N. Y. 1960.

la, Madrid

§t. John

AND

BIOGRAPHIES

F. KRONSEDER, 1926;

B. FROST,

Lond.

OF

1932;

JOHN

P. BRUNO

1937; F. WESSELY,

1938; V.CAPANAGA, Madr. 1950; H.WAACH, 1g955. E. A, PLERS, (above). R. HOONAERT, L'dme ardente de S. Jean de la Croix, Paris 1928, Cir.

L. DE LA TRINITE, RevSPhTh 1927, 51 ff., 165 ff.; AL, MAGER, BenMS 1927, 34 ff., 130 ff., 200 ff.; K. RICHSTATTER, 5tZ 119, 1930, 189/209, ® H. BREMOND, Literary History of Religious Thought in France from the Wars of Religion to our own Times. French, II vols. PParis 1916/33) Eng. by K. Montgomery, vols. ]—II1, London 1928/36. L. PRUNIL, La Renaissance cath. en France au XVIIe 5., Paris La réforme des Carmes en France, Paris 1950.

88

1921.

5. M, BOUCHERAUX,

§ 172, Rewvival of Religious Life Oratory developed

inte a distinctive form of eomposition

cardinal.

greatly toward

since known

as

“oratorio.” St. Philip was known during his lifetime and after death as the ‘‘apostle of Rome.”” The French Oratory, modeled after the Congregation of 5t. Philip, was founded at Paris in 1611 by Pievre de édvudie, loter (1627) 4 toward

It helped

the

conversion

of

many

deepening

Calvinists.

religious

[3érulie

was

life i

remarkable men of his day, an ascetic and a mystic whom ‘““Apostolus

At

Verb:

his death

in

incarnati,”

1629

there

and

were

the

“inspirer

forty-three

and

houses

France

once

of

Urban VI

director

of

the

of

aond

most

called

siings,”

his congregation

in

France. Sometime later the number had increased to seventy-one, - - SL Charles Borromeo, Cardinal-archbishop of Milan (§ 174, 7 with hterature) founded a congregation of secular priests called Oblates of St Ambrose (1578) which helped greatly toward the revival of Catholie life 1in that diocese. A. George, L'Oratoire, Paris 1928, di S. Filippo Neri, Brescia 1948, Studi

on Philip Neri by A. Capecelatro, V. Magnt,

G.

de

Florence

Liberu,

1947,

Rome

A.

1961,

C. (fasbarri, Lo spitito dell” Oratorio Romani 1956, 283 [f,, 538 f{. Monogr.

2 vols, transl. by

Baudrillart,

Pastor IX,

’aris

1940;

117/42.

Pope,

London,

#1814

13, z2un Miinster,

*1954;

€. A, Kneller,

ZWTh

1417,

246 ff., 472 fi. (Philip and the musical Oratories). £ Galler, in Relig. Frzicher d. kath. Kirche (above) 53/83. — L. Pouelle et L. Bovdet, 5t Philippe et la société romaine de son temps, Paris ?1959. Mémoires domestiques pour servir a l'hist. de VOratoivre de L. Batterel {1 1744), publ. by Tngold et Bonnardet, 4 vols, Paris 1g902/5; alphab. and analyt. table, 1911, #ibliothdgue

Ovatorienne, publ. by A. M. P. Ingold, 12 vols. Paris 1880/1903. 1évulle, Correspondance, ed. by . Dagens, 3 vols. Paris 1937/39. Opuscules de picté éd. by G. Rotureau, Paris 1044. Monogr. by 1. Lcherpeur, Paris 1gq0.

A. Molien, de France,

2 vols. Parts 1947; J. Dagens, Paris 1952, 4. Molien, 1. Oratoire DictThC 11, 1104/38. H. Bremond, Literary Llistory (sece above)

ITI. Ch. de Condven Bérulle's successor, 1588—1041), Lettres, &1, p. L' Auvyay

et

A. Jouffrey,

Paris

1y43.

. Kiesler,

bei P. de Bérulle u. Ch. de Condren,

44/77 (B. and Malebranche).

e

Diss.

Struklur

1934,

P.

.

Theozentrisius

Blunchard,

KevAM

1953,

b} During the second half of the sixteenth century several congregations

of clerics regular were

founded:

The Fathers of a (rood Death, or Camillians

were founded in 1584 by 5S¢ Camillus de Lelits (T 1614) to assist the dying, especially those stricken

with the plague.,

The

Minor

Clerics Regular

were

founded by John Adorno of Genoa and 5. Francis Caracciolo, "I'he first house

was established

at Naples in 1584, The

the community

in 1621.

Piarists

(Patrces piarum

schalarum)

were instituted at Rome in 1597 by St foseph Calusanctius {f 1048), a priest of Aragon, for the religious instruction of poor boys. Gregory XV approved

The

Fathers

of Christian

Doctrine

(Péres

de la

doctrine chrétienne} or Doclrinarians were a congregation of secular pricsis who devoted themselves to the teaching of Christian Doectrine, They were

organized by Venevable Caesar de Bus at Avignon in rggz2. For a time (1616—1647) they were united with the Order of Somascha {see above no. 2¢). In 1598 St. Peter Fourier (1 1040) founded (with the Rule of 5t. Augustine) the School Sisters of Notre Dame to teach poor girls gratuitously.

89

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1317 -—~1648) Biogr.

P. Alain,

of St. Camillus

Paris 1946,

by M. J. Vanti,

C. C. Mavtindale,

Rome

l.ond.

1940,

1587,

M. Vischer,

1940;

Der hl, IKamillun de 1.,

u. sein Orden, ed. by German Camillians, 1914, — Eplatolarlo di a. Guisappe

Calasanzio, ed, by L. Picanyol, o vols. Rome 1050/56, Biogr. of §t. Joseph v. Calasanz by [. /2. Heidenrveich, 1907, L. Sharagl, Plorence 1948, Pastor X1, 431/33. — Th. Cézanne, Céanr de Bus. Avignon rgzB. Palrus Fouriar: Bogr.

by

E.

Kreusch,

189y;

P, Bonnard,

DBrugen

%1935,

c} During the firat half of the seventeenth cantury France produced an astonishing number of flourishing new congregatinng devoted to education,

catechetical

work,

nursing

and

misstonary

endenvor.

The

chiel

promotors

of the communities were St. I'rancis de Sales and St, Vincent de Paul, both

of

whom

rank

foremost

among

St. Francis de Sales (1567—1622),

the

clergy

a Sivvoyan

of

the

noblaman,

Restoration

Paeriod.

wiaa provost of the

cathedral and, after 1602, bishop of Annecy-Genava, whore he worked with apostolic zeal and great success in converting

the Calvinianty of the canton

of Chablais, south of the Lake of Ganeva. 3ut he was utill better known as a director uf souls and a spiritual writer. le is the inust bhrillinnt reproesontas tive of “pious Humanism” {(Humanisma dédvot) and saderstood wall how to make religion attractive to the French laity, edpocially the educnied, Hia works

“Introduction

& la vie dévote,'' or Philothea,

aipd “Traitéd de "'amour

de Dien” or Theotimus helped to form many genearations of pious Christians and earned for him the title Doctor Ecclesiae {1877), With his hualp his

spiritual daughter St. Jana Frances Frémiol, Buronws of Chanfal {t 1041), founded tho order of the Visilation of the Blassed Vivgin at Annocy in 1610, The name was chosen because the Sivters were to visit the poor wick in their

homes; but in 1618 the order was obliged to adopt the Kule of St. Augustine and the cloister was imposad. The members wore known asn Visitandines and also as Salesians,

Oeuvres de S. Frangois de Sales, éd. p. len Religicunes de la Visitation

d'Annccy,

26 vols. Paris-Lyon-Annecy

1892/1932.

Biogr. of S. Francis de

Sales by 4, [, M. Hamon, 2 vola, Paris 1917; M. Scott, Lond. 1913, E. K. Sanders, London 1928; Magr. Julien, Paria 1928, F, Trochu, Parin 1941; A, Hémel-

Stier, 1956;

1961.

J. Russmann,

R. Pernin,

1048.

DictThC VII,

H. Waach,

736/62.

1988 M. V., Woodgats, Dublin

Pastor X1, 3z0z/1%; XII, 362/74.

H, Bremond, Literary History (see above) I—II, O, Milisy, In Relig. Erzieher d. kath, Kirche {see above) 87/123. F. Vincen!, S, Frangols de S. Direc-

teur d’Ames, Paris 1923,

[. Leolsrcq, S, Frangois de 8., docteur de la per-

fection, Paris 1948, P, Avchambauii, 8, Frangols do 8., Paria 1930 (Moralistea chrétiens), L. Cognst, La Mére Angelique et 8. Frangols de S., Paria 1953,

J. Muartin, Die Theol, des hl, Franz v. S., 1934. M. Wieser (prot.), Deutache und roman. Religiositit, 1919, — Briefe des hi. Frans v. 5. an dis M. Joh, Frantisha v. Chanlal, German

Chantal by E. Bougaud,

by E, Heine,

a vols, Paris 41033;

1937, Blogr, of St. Frances de

E, K. Sanders, Lond.

1928,

V. Guiraud, Paris 1929; 4. Himael-SHer, 1936; G, Bavdi, Florence 1949; H. Waach, 1957, J. Laclsrcg, S, Francois de S. & la Visitation, Brus, 1910,

M. Miller, Die Freundschaft des hl. Franz v, 8. mit der hl, Franziske v, Ch.,, '1937. E. L. Cowturier, La Vistation, Paris 1938, M. Descargues, Nouv, Revue Theol. 1951, 483/513 (Origin of the Visitandines).

a0

§ 172, Revival of Religious Life

d) $t. Vincent d¢ Paul (1581-—1660)

also represents the most attractive

side of the “‘grand siécle.”” A. Ehrhard calls him “'the miracle man of charity."

After a worldly life (captivity and stavery in Tunis is a legend: Debongnie),

he was

converted

by

Bérulle

(sce no.

ga

above)

and

with

St.

Francis

de

Sales as spiritual adviser, from 1617 he entered upon a life of perfect sacrifice

in the service of the necdy, in preaching of parish missions, in ministering to galley slaves, in organizing the care of orphans and foundlings, the velicf of the poor and sick and the reclamation of fallen girls and women. In 1625

he founded the called Lazarists their corporate lifetime he sent

Congregation of the Mission, the mombers of which were from the College of St TLazare in Paris where they began life, and today are called Vincentians. Even during Vincent's his priests into foreign missions where many of the congrega-

tion still work. He organized the charitable women of Iaris into a Confrater-

nity of Charity from which devcloped in 1633 with the cooperation of young widow, Lowuise de Mavillac, Madame Ie Gras {ft 1660; canonized

1934), a religious commaunity known as the Daughtets of Charity. The community received papal approval in 1688. [t was a bold venture to send con-

secrated virgins into the midst of the world without the protection of the cloister; but the presence of the Daughters of Charity on battleficlds, in hospitals, orphanages and other charitable institutions in all parts of the world for three centuries proves it to have been not only a bold, but a blessed venture. A congregation of similar purpose was founded at Nancy in_1652. Known as Sisters of St. Charles or Borromeans, the congregation now exists in two independent branches with motherhouses at T'rebnitz in Silesia, and Trier.

S. Vincent de Paul, Correspondance, entretiens, documents éd. P. Coste, 14 vols, Paris 1920/26. Biogr. and monogr. on Si. Vincent by Abelly-JK.v. Prent-

ner, § vols 1859/60 (cfr. P. Debongnie, RHE 1950, 638/700); E. K. Sanders, Lond. 1913; P. Renaudin, Marseille 1927, 4. Redier, Paris #1947 I{. Lavedan, Paris 1928. P.Coste, 2 vols. Paris 1932; I?, Casini, Florence 1937; J. Calvet, Paris

1949;

*1950;

W. Leibbrand,

.

Kiihner,

1951;

L. Cristiani,

Paris

1960.

Pastor X1II, 562/84; Hochland XXV, 1927/28 I, 83 fi., tgg fl. Bremond, Literary History (see above) III. [, Wittig, in Relig. Erzieher d. kath. Kirche

1939,

(see above)

774/78.

A. Lovat,

—

127/52.

Biogr.

Paris 1916,

P. Debongnie,

RHE

1036, 313/3u;

de Marillac

of St Louise

(Madame

1938, 320/31;

Lo Gras)

P. Coste, Paris 1924, G. v. Frente-Gemmingen,

by

1920,

L. Lallemand, Hist. de la charité 111—IV, Paris 1912. 4. Foucault, La socidtd de S. Vincent de P., Paris 1933. P. Coste, 5. Vincent de P, ¢t les Dames de la Charité, Paris 1618. C. W. Emanuel,

The Charities of 8. Vincent de 17,

Disgs, Washington Cath. Univ. 1923. L. Celier, Les Filles de la Charité, Paris 1929, P. Coste et al., same title, Paris 1933. J. Balde, Les Dames d¢ la Miséricorde, Paris 193z. C. K. Murphy, The Spirit of the Society of St. Vincent de P., Cork 1940. E. Cl. Scherer, Die Kongregation . Bermherz. Schwestern v. Strassburg, 1930. — Hist. des Soeurs de S. Charles, 3 vols. Nancy 1898.

W. Hohn, Die Barmherz.

Schwestern vom hl. Karl Borr., 1900,

A. Schonfelder, Gesch. der Trebnitzer Kongregation,

e) The history of the congregation

uausual.

In 1609

Mary

Ward,

a noble

known

English

1898.

as English Ladies refugee

{} 1645),

is most

foundad

91

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517 —1648) a community at St. Omer known as the ‘‘Jesuitesses,’’ dedicated to the education of girls. After a propitious beginning the community met with much opposition from various sources and was suppressed by Urban VIII in 1631. of the bishop of Munich,

permission

With

of the former

some

members

who

had not joined other communities were allowed to reorganize under modified

constitutions which were approved by Clement XI in 1703. The community spread rapidly in Germany, Austria and Italy and eventually made foundaAustralia,

Ireland,

in Iingland,

tions

the

Africa,

India,

of

States

United

America and Canada. Although the Sisters are still called English Ladies in Germany and Italy, the official title of all the houses is the “‘Institute

of Mary.”

Mary Ward: Biogr. by 1922; M. Th. Winkler, Diss.

Ward

(M.

658/712;

1628/31);

Die

1959.

Rome

ersten

154/89

in Rom

zealous

das

gegen

Institut

Maria

Eudes

John

Wards,

1954.

1869.

Friaulein u. ihrer Institute,

priest

1957,

Gregorianum

(oldest lives);

des Amtes der Generaloberin,

Die Anfinge

der Engl.

the

1644

1951,

Anklagen

P. Wesemann,

J. Leitner, Gesch.

) In

HJG

Chambers-Coleridge, London 188g; H. Riesch, 1926, J. Grisar, StZ 113, 1927, 34 ff,, 131 if.

(t 1680,

a

19235),

canonized

former Oratorian and disciple of Bérulle founded the Congregation of Qur Lady of Charity of Refuge at Caen for the reclamation of fallen girls. In

1835 some of the Sisters desirous of a central government separated to form the Congregation of Our Lady of Chavity of the Good Shepherd. Eudes also established at Caen in 1643 the Congregation of Jesus and Mary, (= Eudists) to

promote parish missions and conduct seminaries. The priests and brothers of the society take no vows. Eudes was one of the zealous propagators of devotion to the Sacred Heart (§ 188, 4). Two other societies for the education and

sanctification of the secular clergy, one in France

and the other in Germany,

were instituted at this time: The Sulpicians, founded by Jean Jacques Olier {(t+ 1657), a friend of St. Vincent de Paul, take their name from the church and seminary of St. Sulpice in Paris. From the time of their foundation in 1642 they have exerted a profound influence on the French clergy and at the time of the French Revolution they began a similar work in the United States and

Canada.

The

nstifutum

clevicorum

saeculavitim

in commune

viventius,

also called Bartholomites, was founded (1640) by Bartholomew Holzhauser (t 1658) at Tittmoning in the archdiocese of Salzburg. It was approved by Innocent X1 in 1680 and made foundations in Poland, Sicily and Spain. The

institute became extinct toward the end of the eighteenth century.

Joh. Eudes:

Lebrun,

Biogr. by H. Georges,

Paris 31936;

H. Kilian,

S. Jean Eudes et la dévotion au Sacré Coeur, Paris 1929.

1931.

Ch.

Levesque,

I.'origine du culte du S. Coeur, Avignon 1930. E. Georges, La Congrégation de Jésus et Marie, dite des Eudites, Lyons 1933. — J. J. Olier: Lettres, éd. p. E. Levesque, 2 vols, Paris 1935. Biogr. by F. Monier 1, Paris 1914; P. Pourvat, Paris 1932; E, Levesque, DictThC 11, g63/83.

Bremond,

Literary

séminaires

francais

history (see above) III, 420 ff. G. Letourneau, La mission de J. J. Olier, Paris 1905. G. Bertrand, Bibliothéque Sulpicienne, 3 vols. Paris 1900. J. Mon-

val,

Les

Sulpiciens,

Paris

jusqu'ad la Révolution,

normands

92

du

XVI®

au

1934.

2 vols.

XVIII®

A. Degerf,

Paris

1912.

siécles,

Caen

Hist.

des

G. Bonnenfant, 1915.

Les

séminaires

C.G. Herberman,

The

§ 173. Society of Jesus or Jesuits

Sulpicians in the United States, New York 1916. — Barth. Holzhauser: Biogr. by

A. Werfer,

q03 ff., M.

31916;

634 if.;

Arneth,

H. Wildanger,

J. N. Kisslinger,

Cfr,

F. Busam,

StMBenQ

Korbinians-Festschr.,

1924,

108 ff., 276 {f., 352 ff.

1958,

Geist u. Leben

in

%1941.

1902,

429/56;

3 173 Society of Jesus or Jesuits®. I. By far the most important religious organization of Modern

Times and one which was to take a leading role in ecclesiastical referm of the sixteenth and subsequent centuries was the Sociely (=

1 MONUMENTA HISTORICA MHS]J). CONSTITUTIONES

SOCIETATIS IESU, Madrid/Rome i8g4 ff. SOC. IESU, ed. A. Cordina, 3 vols. Rome

1934/38 (MHS] 63/65). REGULAE SJ. 1540/56, ed. F. Zapico, Rome 1948 (MHS] 71). P. DE CHASTONAY, Die Satzungen des Jesuitenordens, 1938,

ARCHIVUM

HISTORICUM

SOCIETATIS IESU, Rome

lexikon, 1934. J. HANSEN, Rheinische Akten 1542/85, 1896. H.STOECKIUS, Forschungen Jesu

tm

16, Jh,

I. DE RECALDE

Paris

1924/27.

I—II,

§ 178.

der Ges.

pagnie

Jesu

de

(1534/1921),

Heidelberg

J.CRETINEAU-JOLY, de Jésus,

H. BOEHMER

1go8, 371 ff.;

Sb.

zur Gesch. des Jesuitenordens zur Lebensordnung der Ges. 191z,

2;

(hostile), Notes documentaires sur la Comp,

téraire de la Comp.

sec

1g910/11;

1932 tf. L. KOCH, Jesuiten-

Histoire

religieuse,

Jesuiten,

*1g21

6 vols. Paris 31851,

(prot.),

Die

1913,

6;

1914,

7.

de Jésus, 2 vols.

politique

et lit-

BACKER-SOMMERVOGEL,

(cfr. B, DUHR,

H]G

P. TACCHI VENTURI, CivC 1910 IV, 52 ff.}); Studien zur Gesch.

I, 1914,

Jesus

®1951.

(152r/1773),

Lond.

1935.

IGNATIUS

Paris

E. ROSA,

OF

1919.

LOYOLA:

J. BRUCKER,

TH. J. CAMPBELL,

The

La Com-

Jesuits

I Gesuiti dalle origini ai nostri giorni,

Rome %1g30. Pastor V, 374 ff.; VI, 134 ff., 497 ff., and often in other volames. F. VAN ORTROY, AB 1908, 393/418 {Manresa and the beginnings

of the Society). HERM. MULLER, Les origines de la Comp. de Jesus, Paris 13g8. J. BRODRICK, The origins of the Jesuits, Lond. 1940: The progress of the Jes. 1556—79, Lond. 1946. H. BERNARD-MAITRE, Nouv. Revue Théol.

1950,

811/33;

Rech

SR

1952,

209/33

{Paris

Humanism

and

beginnings of the Society). G.BERNOVILLE, Les Jésuites, Paris H. BECHER, Die Jesuniten, 195%x. J.STIERLI, Die Jesuiten, Iribourg Hetmbucher

II®,

1034,

Gesch.

der

Bohm.

Leben

des hl. Petrus

130ff.,,

666 {.

OFFICIAL

HISTORIES

OF

THE

the

1934. 19355. PRO-

VINCES: A. ASTRAIN, Historia de la Compaifiia de Jesis enr la Asistencia de Espaiia I-—-VII (x540/1758), Madrid 1goz/25, 12 1912. B. DUHR, Gesch. der Jesuiten in den Lindern deutscher Zunge, 4 vols. {to 1773) 1907/28. A, KR{OSS, Provinz

der

Ges.

Jesu

I—II

{1556/1657),

1010/38.

P. TACCHI VENTURI, Storia della Compagnia di Gesu in Italia, 2 vols. (to I556), Rome ®%1g930/51. H. FONQUERAY, Hist. de la Comp. de Jésus en France I—V (1528 to 1645), Paris 1910/25. A. PONCELET, Hist. de la Comp. de Jésus dans les anciens Pays-Bas, z vols. Brux. 1927/28, TH. HUGHES, History of the Society of Jesus in North America (to 1773), 2 vols. Lond. 1907/17; Documents, Lond. 1908/10. F. RODRIGUES, Histéria da Compania de Jesus na Assistencia de Portugal I, Oporto rg31. S. LEITE, Histéria de la Companhia de Iesus no Brasil I, Lisbon 1g38. R.CORNELY - N. SCHEID, Faber,

rgoo.

P. SUAU,

Hist.

de S. Frangois

de Borgia

(1510/72}, Paris 1910. O. KARRER, Der hl Franz v. Borja, 1921. 1. DE RECALDE, Les Jésuites sous Aquaviva, Paris 1927 (Notes documentaires 2). F. CERECEDA, Diego Liinez (1512—65) en la Europa religiosa de su tiempo, 2 vols, Madrid 1g945. M. NICOLAU, Jerénimo Nadal (1507—380), Madrid 1049. GENERAL LIT. PRO ET CONTRA: P.LIPPERT, Zur Psychologie des

93

Modern and Recent Times. First Period {1517—1648)

of Jesus or Jesuits. The Society was founded by the Basque noble-

man Don Ifligo (Enecho—or, as he later called himself, Ignatius) Lépez de Loyola! (Province of Guiptizcoa}. When the French were besieging the citadel of Pamplona in in

the

G. GUNDLACH,

Zur

officer

old

year

thirty

dashing,

a

then

Ignatius,

1521,

Spanish army, was wounded. French seldiers mercifully carried him to his ancestral castle where he spent many months recuperating. For want of romances of chivalry he was obliged to while away the long hours by reading works of piety (Vita Chmnsti by Ludolf of Saxony [§ 146, 3] and the Legenda aurea) which aroused t1go4.

Jesuiteniabeln,

B. DUHR,

#rg23.

Jesuitenordens,

Soziologie d. kath. Ideenwelt u. des Jesuitenordens 1923. P. M. BAUMGARTEN, u. Ordensstrafrecht,

Ordenszucht

de Jésus, Rome

la Comp.

PILATUS

AUTHORS:

TANT

W. OHR,

able).

BRUCKER,

I, 3791f.,

1905

Jesuitismus, StML

M. Reichmann,

(cfr.

(favor113,

5tZ

z vols.

(Ex-jesuit), Der Jesuitenorden,

P.V. HOENSBROECH

1927, 468/74).

1911

1926

Jesuiten,

Die

de

PROTES-

{also M. Reichmann,

1911

spinitualite

ROSA etc., see above.

Der

(V. Naumann),

Die Jesniten,

FR.WIEGAND,

488 f.).

1953.

La

GUIBERT,

J. DE

1932.

1926/28 (anfijesuitical). R. FULOP-MILLER, Secret and Power of the Jesuits, N.Y., 1g2g. LITERATURBERICHT v. H. RAHNER, StZ 138, 1940, 94/100;

MAN,

natio

1958.

Bibliographie ignatienne, Paris et de

L.

de

A. FEDER,

1943/60.

in Monum.

Religion

6).

ser.

Ignat.

FONTES

et P. DA-

J. GILMONT

de 5. Ig-

NARRATIVI et al.

F. ZAPICO

I/III,

Rome

cfr.

1922;

des hl. Ignatius v. L.,

Lebenserinnerungen

C. A, KNELLER, ZkTh 1925, 1/33. ed. P. J.IPARRAGUIRRE, Madrid

TIONES,

ed.

initiis,

Iesu

Societatis

238/88.

1950,

RevAM

DE LA BOULLAYE,

H. PINARD

OBRAS COMPLETAS DE S. IGNACIO DE L., 1952. S. Ignatii EPISTOLAE ET INSTRUC-

Madrid

1—12,

I t.

0. KARRER,

1903/14.

Des hl. Ignatins geistl. Briefe u. Unterweisungen, 1922; Aus d. geistl. Tagebuch des hl. Ignat. v. L., 1922. PH. FUNK, Ignat. v. L., 1913 (Klassiker d. P. DUDON, and 1956;

LATER

—

Paris 1934; P.LETURIA,

literature cited above,

(prot.),

H]JG

u. joh. v. Polanco, dei

sec.

¢

XVII

TACCHI VENTURI

esp., BOEHMER,

1899

P.TACCHI

1956.

I, 36 ff.).

1g929.

Rome

XVIII,

18¢5

die Gegenreformation,

Kath.

561 ff. and

1896,

R.HARVEY, Milwaukee 1936; H. RAHNER, 1947 Barcelona *1949. J. BRODRICK, Lond. 1956. Cir.

v. L. und

Ignatius

1925;

Lond.

{prot.},

H.D.SEDGWICK

BIOGR.:

VENTURI,

I,

(also

EB. GOTHEIN

CL. ENGLANDER,

N, PAULUS.

v. L,

Ign.

S. Ignazio di L. Nell’arte

P.LETURIA,

Misc.

P. Paschini

II,

Rome 1949, 223/490 {Roman Apostolate); Hispania sacra 1950, 251318 (a hermit’s life 7). K. TRUHLAR, RevAM 1948, 313/37 (last years of L.). H. RAHNER, StZ 1955/56, 241/53 (Death). Critical editions of the EXERCITIA SPIRITUALIA in Monum. Ignat. s. IT t. 1, Madrid 1919 {cir. O. BRAUNSBERGER, StZ 100, 1920, 139/46). J. IPARRAGUIRRE, Directoria Exercitio-

rum de

spiritualium de

S.Ignace

d’oraison,

Paris

1540/99,

L.,

histoire

1925.

Rome

et psychologie,

K.HOLL,

cfr. M. MESCHLER. StML 1908 die Mystik, Sb. Leipzig 73, I, (sources of the Exercises). G. des Exerzitienbiichleins 1925. Exerzitien,

in

ihren

1927.

Die

Paris

Les exercices 1922;

geisti. Ubungen

spirituels

S. Ignace

d. Ignatius,

Malitre

1905;

II, 269 if., 387 ff. H. BOEHMER, Loyola u. 1921. C. A. KNELLER, ZkTh 1925, 161/85 HARRASSER, Beitrige z. Gesch. u. Aszese E. BOMINGHAUS, Die Aszese der Ignatian.

LILLY ZARNCKE,

geistesgesch.

A.BROU,

1955.

Die Exercitia spiritualia des Ignat. v. L.

Zusammenhingen,

1931.

K. D.SCHMIDT,

Die

Ge-

horsamsidee des Ign. v. L., 1935. O. MARCHETTI, Il pensiero Ignaziano, Rome %1g45. J.LEWIS, Le gouvernement spiritual selon 5. Ignace de Loyola, Bruges 1961.

94

§ 173, Society of Jesus or Jesuits

in him the resolve to do penance for his past sinful life. With no definite plans for the future, he determined to make a pilgrimage to the Holy Land. He stopped first at the famous shrine of the

Blessed Virgin at Montserrat where he laid his sword and dagger on Our Lady's altar and spent the night in prayer. Clothing himselt in the garb of a pilgrim he went on the next day to nearby Manresa where he lived for almost a year (March 1522 — February 1523) in a cave above the town. This period of severe penance and deep contemplation completed his conversion. During this time, too, he committed to writing his meditations in the now widely known

work

Exercitia Spiritualia.

In YFebruary

1523

he carried out

his

earlier resolve to visit the Holy Land. The next ten years after his return (1524—1534) were spent at Alcald, Salamanca and Paris in the study of the humanities, philosophy and theology. During his student days, Ignatius sought by close contact with fellow-

students to inspire them pressed m the Exercitia. themselves permanently Petrus Faber, a priest of

Diego

Laynez,

Alfonso

with the same lofty ideals he had exSix students at Paris decided to place under Ignatius's direction. They were: Geneva, the Spaniards Francis Xavier,

Salmerén,

Nicholas

Bobadilla,

and

the

Portuguese Simon Rodriguez. On August 15, 1534 at Montmartre near Paris they took the vows of poverty and chastity to which they added a third vow to make a spiritual crusade to the Holy Land for the conversion of the Mchammedans. In case they should not be able to fulfill the third vow they were to go to Rome instead and place themselves at the disposal of the pope. As a matter of fact when they reached Venice, where they had agreed to meet,

they found that the Turkish war made a Palestine pilgrimage impossible. At Venice the five who were not yet priests were ordained (1537) and the little group of six which Ignatius called the Compadita de Jesis (in the sense of a military troop under the command of Jesus} went through various cities of Italy preaching and administering to the sick. It was in Rome that Ignatius conceived the plan of giving the “Compaiifa,”” as yet without rule or constitutions, a permanent organization. After OVEIComing many Seriois difficulties, Ignatius drew up the “Formula Instituti” which Paul III approved wiva voce on September 2, 1539. By the Bull “Regimini Militantis Ecclesiae” of September 27, 1540, the same pope formally approved the new institute as an order of Clerics Regular, and on April 22, 1541 Ignatius and his companions made

95

Modern and Recent Times. First Peviod (1517—1648)

their profession in St. Paul Outside the Walls. The special work of the Society is to promote the perfection and salvation of souls by preaching, conducting retreats, teaching in schools of every grade and administering the sacraments. A fourth vow obliges them to special obedience to the pope in the matter of missions. The

wear

members

no distinctive

priests of the country

to which

but

habit,

dress as the secular

they are assigned; nor do they

recite the breviary in choir as other religious. All the clerical members are required to receive thorough training in philosophy and

theology. They are strictly forbidden to seek ecclesiasticial offices

or dignities. The organization of the Society is monarchical and strongly centralized. At its head is a general, elected for life, with

almost unlimited authority in the administration of the Society’s affairs. He appoints the provincials and rectors of all Jesuit colleges

throughout the world. Obedience to the general and local superiors is the characteristic virtue of the order. In the Bull of approval

the membership was not to exceed sixty, but in 1544 this restriction was removed. Ignatins was elected the first general in 1541 and

remained in Rome whence

dinary

skill

until

his

he directed

death

on

July

the Soclety with extraor-

31,

15560,

and

infused

into

the Society his own strength of will, self-control and unflagging energy in promoting the glory of God. The constitutions which he himself composed (1546—1550) were adopted at the first

general assembly in 1558 as the guiding norm of the Society. Although including many elements from the rules of the older orders, they are essentially original and have exerted a strong influence

on religious congregations

founded

subsequently.

In 1614 there was published at Krakow a work purporting secret statutes of the Jesuits. The work entitled Monila privata Jesu, or, in a later edition, Monita secreta, is now proved to be of the Polish ex-]Jesuit Zahorowsky to revenge himseif for his from

the order, — J. Reiber,

fabeln,

84 ff. —

J. B. Mundwiler, (1931), 28 {i.

Pilatus

HpBl

Monita

secreta,

(V. Nawmann)

141,

1908,

Der

19o2. —

Cir. B. Duwhr, Jesuiten-

Jesuitismus,

1o57 ff. —

to be the Soctetatis a forgery expulsion

A. Broy,

1905,

437 tf. —

DictApol

Suppl.

2. Owing largely to its well-developed organization and capable direction, the Society of Jesus experienced and early an extraor-

dinary growth. At the death of the founder there were twelve provinces extending from Brazil to Japan, with over a hundred houses and almost a thousand members. Under the next two

generals (Laynez t 1565 and St. Francis Borgia f 1527) the Society 96

§ 173. Society of Jesus or Jesuits

continued to spread throughout the Latin countries, though not without serious opposition, as in France. Several foundations had been made in Germany, too, before St. Ignatius’s death. The first German Jesuit was Peter Canisius (Kanis, Kannees, Kanys) De Hondt! who labored zealously in German-speaking lands for over fifty years. He was born at Nijmegen in the Netherlands in 1521, died at Fribourg in Switzerland on December

21, 1597 and

was declared a saint and Doctor of the Church in 1925. Without attempting to exhaust the list of his achievements, attention should be called to the following : He preached missions, catechized, revived Catholic schools, acted as theological adviser at the Council of Trent {1547, 1562), taught theology at Ingolstadt and Vienna, was provincial of the German province of his order (1556—1564), was frequently appointed papal legate in important matters, was often consulted by Emperor Ferdinand I on affairs of state and wrote numerous works on apologetics and ascetics and composed

widely circulated catechisms and prayer books. He well deserves the title often given to him of “Second Apostle of Germany.” His extensive correspondence is an important source for the history of the Catholic Restoration in the sixteenth century. 3. Endowed with papal privileges, the Jesuits devoted them-

selves, wherever they were assigned, to parish work, to home and foreign missions (§ 177), to works of charity, to education and to

the pursuit of the theological sciences (§ 178 and 188). The Society, inspired by the militant, chivalrous spirit of its founder, strove with tenacity of purpose to conquer the world for Christ. During

the second half of the sixteenth century it proved to be a strong support of the Catholic reform movement and a driving force in the Counter-Reformation and Catholic Restoration. It impressed something of its own character on popular devotion as well as on coll.

! 8. PETRI

CANISII

OPERA

O. BRAUNSBERGER,

8

ed. F. Streicher,

vols.

18g6/1923.

1933 ff. Epistulae

J. METZLER,

Die

et Acta

Bekennt-

nisse des sel. P. Canisius u. s, Testament (German)., 3-#1g25. F. STREICHER, Arch. Hist. S] 1939, 257/314 (Vita des hl. P. Can. von |. KELLER, T 1631). Biogr. by 0. BRAUNSBERGER, %1921 (cfr. StZ 110, 1925, 13/28); L.CRISTIANI,

DictThC

Paris

1925;

II, 1507/37.

J. BRODRICK,

Jj.METZLER,

New York,

1935,

X.LE

BACHELET,

P. Canisius, ein Charakterbild,

1925;

P. Can. als Erneuerer des Schul- u. Erziehungswesens, 1925; Der hl. P. Can. u. die Neuerer seiner Zeit, 1927, 0. KARRER, Hochland XXII, 1924/25 11,

497/518.

O, BRAUNSBERGER,

Entstehung

u. erste Entwicklung

der Kate-

chismen des sel. P. Can., x893. W.FRIEDENSBURG, Die ersten Jesuiten in Deutschland, 1905, W.SCHAFER {prot.), P. Can., Kampf eines Jesuiten

um die Reform d. kath. Kirche in Deutschland, Hoffius

S]., Rome

1956.

8 Bihlmeyer-Tiichle, Church Histary 111

1931.

B. SCHNEIDER,

Paul

97

Modern and Recent Times, First Period (1517 —1648)

moral and dogmatic theology. While it is incorrect to assert that the Society was founded specially to combat Protestantism, the circumstances of the times forced the Jesuits to do valiant battle

with both Lutheranism and Calvinism; for which reason they incurred the lasting hatred of the entire Protestant camp. It was

due to the efficiency and sacrifice of the Jesuits more than anything else that Protestantism was checked in southern and western (;ermany and that regions which seemed lost to the Church were It was chiefly by means

regained.

of education

the Society

that

was able to exert a powerful influence and strengthen the Catholic began

Jesuits

the

1548

After

cause.!

to establish

and

maintain

high schools, colleges, seminaries and universities on a large and progressive plan. Gradually the higher education of young men in Catholic Europe was conducted almost exclusively by Jesuits. Their method (ratio et institutio studiorum), based on scholastichumanistic procedure, was given its final form in 1599 under the fifth general, Claudio Aquaviva {t 1615). The Collegium Romanum was cstablished by St. Ignatius himself in 1551 with faculties for the humanities, philosophy and theology; and in 1552 he opened the Collegium Germanicum for the training of highly talented German clerical students. This latter institution served as the model for the clerical seminaries which were established by order of Trent (§ 174, 8). At one time practically every Catholic court of Europe engaged Jesuits as confessors and tutors, positions which rave them great influence, but which at the same time were surrounded by many hazards. 1

RATIO

STUDIORUM

COLL. a G. M. PACHTLER-B. ordnung

der Ges. Jesu,

INSTITUTIONES

ET

18¢6.

SCHOLASTICAE

4 vols 1887/94.

DUHR,

FR. MEYER,

B. DUHR,

SOC.

JESU

Die Studien-

Der Ursprung des Jesuit. Schul-

wesens, Diss. 1904, A, SCHIMBERG, L’éducation morale dans les colléges de la Comp. de Jésus en France (XVIe—XVIIIe® 5.}, Paris 1913. J. B. HERMAN,

La

pédagogie

des

Jésuites

Gesch,

des

Untersuchungen

zur

E. CL. SCHERER,

Gesch. u. KG.

au

XVI®

Noviziates

s.,

Louv.

in der

1914.

H. STOECKIUS,

Gesellsch.

Jesu,

1918;

Ign. v. Loyolas Gedanken iiber die Aufnahme u. Bildung der Novizen, 1925. an den deutschen Universitdten,

1927, 84 ff.

275 ff. E. BOMINGHAUS, in: 75 Jahre Steila Matutina I, 1931, 24/42 (spirit and pedagogical work of the 5. J.}. J. SCHROTELER, Die Erziehung in den Jesutteninternaten des 16. Jh.s, 1940. F.CHARMOT, La pédagogie des Jesuites, Paris 1943. W.FLEMMING, Gesch. des Jesuitentheaters in den Landern deutscher Zunge, 1923. JOH.MULLER, Das Jesuitendrama in den Lindern dt. Zunge (1555/1665), 2 vols 1930. H. BECHER, DVSLGG 1941, E. RINALDI, La 269/310 (spiritual development of the Jesuit drama). fondazione del Collegio Romano, Arezzo 1914. A. KARDINAL STEINHUBER, Gesch. des Collegium: Germanicum in Rom, 2 vols. ?1go6. R, G. VILLOSLADA, Storia del Collegio Romano (1551—1773), Rome 1954.

o8

§ 174. Popes from Paul 111 to Pius I'V. Council of Trent

§ 174. Popes from Paul Il to Pius IV,

Council of Trent!.

Series of popes: Paul ITT

(1534—1549};

cellus IT (1555); Pawl IV {1555—1559);

Julius III {1550—1555);

Mar-

Pius I'V (1559—1565).

I. “The century from the election of Paul III to the death of

Urban

VIII

(1534—1644)

is one

of the most

important

and

re-

splendent periods in the history of the papacy, for it is marked by the Catholic Reformation and Restoration’ (L. Pastor). The ponti-

ficate of Paul III (1534—1549)2 witnessed the fransition from the

Renaissance to the Catholic Restorafion. Paul belonged to the ancient Farnese family and his life previous to his elevation had not been without serious faults. Even.as pope he loved pomp, the chase and lively pastimes and was guilty of nepotism. He named two

of his youthful grandsons to the College of Cardinals

(1534)

and to a third grandson — Ottavio Farnese, husband of Margaret of Austria, a natural daughter of Charles V — he gave Camerino

and Nepi as fiefs, while their father, Pope Paul's own son, Pier

1 C. MIRBT, QQuellen zur Gesch. des Papsttums u. des rém, Katholizismus 41924, 265 ff. Reports of the nuncios in Germany, see lit. § 159.7. L. V. PASTOR, History of the Popes V—VII; Allgemeine Dekrete der rém. Inquisition 1555/97, 1912. F. X.SEPPELT, Gesch. der Pidpste V, 21959. L. CRISTIANI,

L’église

4 1'époque

du

Concile

de Trente

(Fliche-Martin

17),

Parts

1948.

Concilium Tridentinum (see below) Il ed. S. MERKLE,

1911 (contains material

Origines

52 {f., 317 ff.; Origines

on papal elections, and lives of the popes from Julius III to Pius IV). History of the Popes, 3 vols., Lond. 1866. M. BROSCH, Gesch. des Kirchenstaates, z vols. 1880/82. P. HERRE, Papsttum u. Papstwahl im Zeitalter Philipps II (Pius 1V to Clement VIII), 1907. A.PIEPER, Zur Entstehungsgeschichte der stdndigen nunciaturen, 1894; Die pépstl. Legaten u. Nuntien in Deutschl., Frankreich u. Spanien 1 (1550/59), 1897. P. RICHARD, de

des nonciatures

la nonciature

de

permanentes,

France,

RQH

1906

RHE

244 /77 (Investigation of the nunciatures).

Protektorate der Kardinile des europ. Staatensystems

eurcp.

Staatensystems

della Controriforma

I,

1906,

112/80.

1559/1660,

1928.

Milan

A. VISCONTI,

1958.

C.CAPASS0,

18g ff.

(Card.

V with

(Mass.) Paul

Guidiccioni);

1959.

II1).

1go8,

RQ

ST. EHSES,

1904, 451/512 (Reform efforts under Paul III). p- 42, ARG 1936, 1/69 (Consilium de emendanda gorianum

MIOG

V.SCHWEITZER,

132/42.

1gs0.

R. M. DOUGLAS,

M. BROSCH,

La

Ré-

di vita religiosa in Italia

Paolo I11, 2 vols. Messina

cour du pape Paul III, z vols. Paris 1932. lict of Charles

L’Italia nell'epoca

E. RODOCANACHI,

umanistico di Al. Farnese, Florence

£I4?7—I54?}, Cambr.

1933,

an der 16m. Kurie, 1948 E.FUETER, Gesch. 1492/1559, 1919. W. PLATZHOFF, Gesch. des

(1516—1713),

2 PASTOR YV, 1909.

QF1tAB

]J. WODKA, Zur Gesch. der nation.

forme en Italie, 2 vols. Paris 1g20/21. PROBLEMI nel Cinguecento, Padua 1960. Cir. lit. § 172, 1. GONI, Carteggio

L. JUST,

1925. A. FRU-

L. DOREZ,

la

Jacopo Sadoleto

1902,

1906,

127/53

(Con-

27 if., 142 If.,

in Conc.

Trid.

IV,

W.FRIEDENSBURG, see eccl). P.LETURIA, Gre-

1945, 22/46 (Paul 11T promotes the Council).

99

Maodern and Revent Times. First Poriod (1517 —1648)

Luigi

Parm

Farness, o man

Pincenza,

and

nepotism

nol

only

of reprohensible morals, was made duke of Pior

proved

Luigh

was

detrimental

murdered to the

in

Papal

1847,

Paul’s

States,

but

cansed im many difficultios and much sorvow and greatly lessened his prostige. Yel in purely ecclesiastical affairs he met the demands of his office in o mueh different way than the Medici popes who

precedad him. 1t hus often been allegod that Paul 11T was waating in personal

zewl for veligion,

but he certainly was

not blind to the

deplorable condition of the Church and the need of reform; and it was al Jenst an enrnest dosive to impirove the situation that induced him to give his approval to the now religious congregations: the Theatines, Capuching, Barmbites, Somaschi, Ursulines (§ 172, 2u ¢), and with the approbation of the Jesuils in 1540 (§ 173, 1), he pave the Chureh the most important order of clerics regular of modern times, Moteover, he named to the highest senate of the

Choreh o number

of lonrped and eminently pious men such as

Contaring, Carafli, Sicloleto,

Pole, Corvini

and

Morone

and set up

a reform commission of nine members which, in 1337, delivered to

the pope an astonishingly eandid report o the evils in the Church

with suggestions for reform (Consilium de Kinendanda Ecclesia, § 172, 1), Since the religious innovation was infiltrating into Italy from the nortly, at the suggostion of Cardinal Caraffa and St. Ignatius Loyula, Paul by the Bull "*Licet ab initio,” of 1842, reorganized

the Tagudsition and named o contral committee of six cardinals, later called Sastetumn Offictum, to puard the purity of faith in the Church and to proceed agrinst apostates and suspects without regard fo person ot rank. Cardinal Caraffa (later Paul IV), one of the most uncompromising champions of reform, headed this committee,

The writingw of Luther, Zwinghi und Calvin were smuggled into Italy al an early date, and were quite widely read; but it was only in the cities (Venloe, Modona, Ferrnra, IFlorence, Lucea, Slena, Naplea) that small groups

of humaninte,

already hostile toward the Church,

and unfaithful monks

intorentod thowselven in the new ldoss. The grest moms of the people was loft untouched, Jusn de Valdids (1 1841}, & Spaniard and an enthusiustic

admirer of Erasmua, attracted & group of men and women of the higher soclal

class In Naplea to whom hoe wpoke learnedly of the regeneration of the inner man, while he was actunlly propagating a religion of smotion and e fanatical mysticlan, Saveral of this group became Protedtants aithough Valdes himself

naver broke openly with the Church. Duchess Rensla d'Esle of Forrara, the hrilllant daughter of Louls XII of Frange, favored the new doctrine

and protected Protentant refugeos, among them, Calvin, The postess Vitioria

100

§ 174. Popes from Paul IIl to Pius 1V. Council of Trent Colonna

(f 1547),

widow

of the Marchese

of Pescara,

like her great friend

T.

Boeselager-Stolberg,

Michelangelo, was fascinated for a time by the ideas of Valdés, but she always remained a convinced Catholic and a loyal daughter of the Church {cir. Rothes,

W.

170,

HpBIl

Inquisition

Festschr.

1922,

after

1922,

5. Merkle

265ff.

328 ff., 373 ff.,, 446 {{.). —

1542

served to break

—

up most

action

effective

The

of the Protestant

of the

conven-

ticles and groups in Italy. Some of the adherents were executed, others renounced their errors or fled to other countries. The most renowned of the fugitives

were

the

Augustinian

Canon,

Peler

(t 1562

Vermighi

Martyy

as

professor in Zurich), Bermardino Ochine, vicar-general of the Capuchins {§ 172, 2), both disciples of Valdés, and Bishop Peter Pawl Vergerio of Capodistria, who had been papal nuncio in Germany (1533——1535). He died in 1564 at Tiibingen where he was councillor to Duke Christopher of Wiirttem-

berg. A great sensation was created at Rome in 1567 when the Protonotary Apostolic Peter Carnesecchi, formerly secretary to Clement VII was beheaded and burned as a heretic (for the anti-Trinitarian Sociniant who originated 1

Italy see

§§ 169, 3 and

185, 4). The

Protestant

movement

was

also

felt

slightly in Spain, especially in Seville and Valladelid, but was checked by the Inquisition after 1557. P_ Chiminellt, Bibliografia della storia della Riforma religiosa in Italia, Rome mori

1921;

Scritti religiosi

and E. Feist,

Per

dei

Riformatori

la storia degli eretici

italiani, Turin

1925.

del s. XVI

italiani

D. Cantiin Europa,

Testi, Rome 1937. F. Lemwmi, La Riforma in Italia ¢ i Riformatori italiani ail’ estero . . ., documenti, Milan 1939. P. Tacchi Venturi, Storia della Com-

pagnia di Gesu in Italia I: La vita religiosa in Italia durante la prima et dell’ ordine, Rome ?1931. . Buschbell, Reformation u. Inquisition in Italien um die Mitte des 16. Jh.s., 1910.

G. K. Brown,

Italy and the Reformation to

1550, Oxf. 1933. D. Cantimori, Eretici italiani del Cinquecento, Florence, 1939;

Prospettiva di storia ereticale 1italiana del Cinquecento,

canachi,

see above.

Monogr.

on Valdés

by

J. Heep,

Bari

1960.

E. Rodo-

190g9; E. Cione,

Bari

1938. D. Riccard, Juan de Valdés y el pensamiento religioso europeo en los siglos XVI y XVII, Lawrence (Kans.) 1959. L. Smith, Epistolario di P. P Vergerio I, Rome 1934. P. Paschini, P. P. Vergerio, Rome 1925. — Ed.

E. Schéfer, BeiBoehmer, RE 18, 580/87 {Spanish Reform Movements). trige zur Gesch. des span. Protestantismus u. der Inquisition tm 16. Jh,,

3 vols 1902. J. C. Wichlelland, The visible word of God. logy of P. M. Vermigii, Lond. 1957.

Sacramental

theo-

2. From the beginning of the Reforrnation, Luther and his followers as well as many Catholics, and especially Emperor Charles

YV, had clamored for a general council. During the of his pontificate Clement VII

(1523—1534)

eleven years

could not be moved

to summon one. Hence it is to the credit of Paul III that he exerted

himself in favor of a council and succeeded in getting it under way. It was the mighty task of his council to safeguard the old Faith from the devastating attacks of the innovation, to endeavor to conciliate those who had separated from the Church and thus to 101

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517 —1648)

ten years were to elapse before

restore religious unity. However,

the sessions could actually begin. The first convocations, to Mantua

in 1536 and to Vicenza in 1537 were without result. The intrigues of France, which did not want to see religious reunion in Germany, the constant injection of the proposed council into the politics of the day by both pope and emperor, the threat of an irregular new

the

council,

national

Francis

V and

Charles

between

war

I

(1542—1544) and, to some extent, the unfortunate efforts of the emperor to achieve unity by means of disputations (1540—1540,

1544) was the way opened. ecumenical council to meet relations between pope and France made it necessary to convocation to Trent was

peace of Crépy (September 1542 Paul had convoked an in November; but strained and the war of Charles with another postponement. The

with the In May at Trent emperor call for

Only

obstacles to another attempt.

§ 165, 3. 6) were all so many

renewed by the Bull “Laetare Jerusalem” of November 19, 1544" I CANONES

AEM. L. RICUHTEK interpretum etc.,

ed.

Louvain

1781/87.

TH.

1886.

]. SUSTA,

Die

cum declarationibus et FR.SCHULTE J.LE PLAT, Monumentorum ad 1853.

7 tom.

collectio,

amplissima

spectantinm

Trident.

1564;

TRIDENTINI,

CONCILII

DECRETA

ET

Rome

Conc. Trident. historiam Conc.

SICKEL, Zur Gesch. des Konzils v, Tr. 1559/63, 1872; Rém. Berichte 1—-V, Sb. Wien 1895/1901. 1. V. DOLLINGER, Ungedruckte Berichte u. Tagebiicher zur Gesch. des Konzils v. Tr., 2 vols. 1876. A.V, DRUFFEL-K. BRANDI, Monumenta Trid., Beitrige zur Gesch. des Konzils v. Trient T—V, 1884/90. Disputationes

J. LAINEZ,

2 vols.

H. Griser,

ed.

Trid.,

rom. Kurie u. das Konzil v. Tr. unter Pius IV, Aktenstiicke, 4 vols. 1904/14. (:. CONSTANT, Etude et catalogune critiques de documents sur le concile de

Trente,

RANDIS

Paris,

de Trento,

(1530/61),

2 vols,

inéditos

Voten

J. HEENER,

El concilio

TORRES,

de Simancas, mentos

1910.

Tridentinos

Valladolid

sobre

Documentos

1928/34.

la justificacidn,

M, FER-

1612,

Trienter Konzil,

vom

del Archivo

J. OLAZARAN,

Madrid

1957.

t. [—IIl

=

general

—

DocuCom-

prehensive critical collection of acta and sources: CONCILIUM TRIDENTINUM, Diariorum, actorum, epistolarum, tractatunm nova collectio, ed. Societas

Goerresiana

p. 1—3, p. I—4,

ed.

have

So far there

1go1 .

appeared:

Diariorum

= Actorum 1g9or/3z; t.IV—VII, 1, VIII—IX ed. S. MERKLE, I, 5—6, ed. ST. EHSES et al., 1904/60; t. X—XI = Epist. p. 1—2,

1916/37;

G.BUSCHBELL,

=

t. XII—XI1l

Tractatuum

p. 1—2,

I, ed.

V. SCHWEITZER et al., 1930/38. Cir. S, Merkle, HJG 1910, 305/22 (study of sources); 1913, 538/56 (technique of the work); ZRGkan 1938, 154/79 (ornissions in the records). — Survey of the literature in K. SCHOTTENLOHER IV, 1938, 655/74; V, 1939, 498. — Estudios Eclesiasticos, 1946,

266/95.

H. JEDIN, Das Konzil v. Tr., Ein Uberblick iiber die Erforschung

s, Gesch., Rome

1948. PIETRO

SOAVE

Istoria del Concilio Tridentino, Lond. 1619.

(Anglicanism and the Istoria by Sarpi).

del Concilio di Trento, 2 fol. Rome

(= Paolo Sarpi, cfr. §176, 3),

POLANO

G. COZZI, RivSCIt 1956, 559/619

SFORZA

1656/57.

PALLAVICINO

ST. EHSES,

H]JG 1905, 209 if.;

1906, 66 ff.; RQ 1923/24, 151/67 (Sarpi’s Work as a source).

Quellenapparat der Konzilgesch. Pallavicinis, Rome passim. 1932.

A. GALANTE,

K. D. SCHMIDT

ST. EHSES,

162

H]G

1925,

Trento

ed

il Concilio

(prot.), Studien z. Gesch.

351/54.

1940.

ecumenpico

H. JEDIN, Der

PASTOR V—VII

tridentino,

des Konzils

HEFELE-LECLERCQ,

S]., Istoria

v. Trient,

Histoire

Rome

1925;

des Conciles

§ 174, Popes from Paal [II to Pius IV, Council of Trent

Since the Protestants had repeatedly declined an invitation to take part in a papal council (§ 165, 3. 6}, arrangements were made only for a strictly Catholic ecclesiastical assembly which had no

influence on the future development of the new religion. March 15,

1545 had been set for the opening, but by that date so few bishops had appeared in Trent that the opening session could not be held until the Third Sunday of Advent (December 13). From then until the closing session on December

4, 1563, counting two long inter-

ruptions, the Council of Trent had lasted almost eighteen years.

3. frst Pertod {first to tenth session, December 13, 1545 to March 11, 1547). The three cardinals: del Monie (later Pope Julius II1}, Cervins (later Pope Marcellus II) and the Englishman, Pole (§ 183, 1), were

appointed

the

was

legates and presided

over the sessions

of the first period conscientiously and skillfully. The cardinal legates proposed the matter to be treated and constantly supervised the deliberations; 1 the more important matters they received instructions directly from Rome. The first weeks during which attendance

still small

(34—42;

very

few

Germans)

the

time was spent in settling the order of business. It was agreed that questions of dogma and discipline be debated simultaneously. The I1X—X, 1, Paris 1930/38. 6 vols, Lisb. 1944/46. — ed. by L, RUSSO,

St. Louis

1957 ff.

Florence

J. DE CASTRO, Portugal no Concilio de Trento, Contributi alla storia del concilio di Trento ...

1948.

H. JUDIN,

G.SCHREIBER,

Das

History of the Council of Trent.,

Weltkonzil

v.

Tr.,

2z vols.

1951,

J. MUOLLER,

ZKG

I. ROGGER, Le nazioni al concilio di Trenteo 1545—52, Rome 1952. G. ALBERIGO, I vescovi italiani al concilio di Trento 1545—47, Florence 19s59. A. KORTE,

Die

Konzilspolitik

Karls

V

1538/43,

1905.

1925, 225 ff., 338 ff. (Policy of Charles V toward the C. 1545). R. UCHS and G. BUSCHBELL, AU 19335, 188/210 {imperial instruction for the cardinal of Trent 1546). G. Buschbell, QFitAB 1932, 218/41 (Instr. to the imperial plenipotentiaries in Rome 1547). H. JEDIN, H]G 1952, 184/96 (Imperial protest against the transfer to Bologna). Ch. Terlinden, Scrinium Lovaniense, Louvain

1961, 331/43

(Charles V and the Council}.

E. STAKEMEIER,

Glaabe

u. Rechtfertigung, 1937; ThQ 1935, 157 ff.; 1936, 180 ff., 322 ff., 466 {f.; Der Kampf um Augustin auf dem Tridentinum, 1937 (cfr. H. JEDIN, ThRev 1038, 425/30).

H. JEDIN, Cardinal Seripando,

St. Louis,

1941.

A. MAICHLE,

Das Dekret De editione et usu sacrorum librorum, 1914 (cfr. W. KOCH, Th) 1914/16); Der Kanon der bibl. Biicher u. das Konzil v. Tr., 1929. A. ALLGEIER, H]JG 1940, 142/58 (“authentic”). La Bibbia e il Concilio di Trento, Rome 1947. B. EMMI, Angelicum 1953, 228/72 (Decree on the Vulgate). W.KOCH, ThQ 1952, 46/61 {'‘traditions’’). G.H.TAVARD, Holy Writ or Holy

Church,

Lond.

1960.

A.STAKEMEIER,

Das

Konzil v. Tr. tiber

d. Heilsgewissheit, 1947. J. HEFNER, Die Entstehungsgesch. des Trienter Rechtfertigungsdekrets, 1909. H. RUCKERT (prot.), Dic Rechtfertigungslehre auf dem

A, WALZ,

Die

Tridentin.

Angelicum

Polemik

1951,

des Martin

Konzil,

97/138

1925

Chemnitz

(cfr. ST. EHSES,

(Giustificazione

gegen

das

H]G

1925,

tridentina).

Konzil

R. SEEBERG, Lehrbuch der DG. IV, 2, 1920, 753/833.

v. Trient

568/71.

R. MUMM,

I, 190j5.

103

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517—1648)

emperor,

out of consideration

for the

Protestants,

had

requested

that questions of reform be treated first, whereas the pope demanded that matters of faith be given first attention. Hence the decisions reached after thorough discussion by the special commissions or congregations appointed for the purpose were approved and proclaimed in the solemn sessions as Decreta de fide and Decreta de reformatione. As had been the constant practice previous to the Council of Constance, only bishops and the generals of religious orders were each entitled to one vote. A large number of theologians who were not bishops (theologi minores) were engaged in preparing the decrees and were given a consultive voice. Among these were men of deep theological learning such as the Jesuits Salmeron, Laynez and Peter Canisius (§ 173, 1. 2); the Dominicans Cano, Soto and Ambrosius Catharinus (Lancelot Politus, see § 178, 1b)

and the Franciscans Castro Zamora (t 1568), Michael (1 1578), Andrew Vega (t 1560), Francis Orantes (1 Jerome Seripando, general of the Augustimian Hermits Trent), and chief representative of the School of St.

of Medina 1584), etc. (1 1563 at Augustine,

distinguished himself by his broad learning. The dogmatic task of the Council consisted in stating and explaining the deposit of faith of the Catholic Church as opposed to the denial of fundamental Catholic dogmas by Protestants, their new material and formal principles, their spiritualistic concept of the Church, and their rejection of most of the sacraments. Hence in the fourth session (April 8, 1546) it was declared that Scripture together with apostolic tradition is the rule of faith; the canon of inspired Scripture was established; the Vulgale was declared to be the authentic text for preaching, teaching and disputations; and in the interpretation of Scripture the unanmimous opinion of the Fathers must be the guide, subject to the judgment of the Church. In the fifth public session (June 17, 1546) the decree on the dogma of original sin was promulgated. The decree on the doctrine of justification, a masterpiece of theological analysis, declares that justification comes not by faith alone, yet faith is the “beginning, foundation and root of all human salvation.” It was published in the sixth session on January 13, 1547. This decree, setting forth the Catholic doctrine in most precise terms in opposition to the

vague

notions

of the

innovators,

makes

the

sixth

session one of the most important and decisive of the entire Council. Although the opinions of the Thomistic and Scotistic Schools were 104

§ 174. Popes from Paul 111 to Pius IV. Council of Trent

debated through no less than sixty-one meetings of the special congregation, no evidence of the heated discussions which took

place appears in the wording of the decree which was finally adopted. The legates then proposed that the doctrine of the Church regarding the sacramenis be discussed next and in the seventh

session (March 3, 1547) the dogmatic decree on the sacraments in

general, and on baptrsm and confirmation in particular, was promulgated. From the fifth to the seventh session a number of reform decrees were published dealing with the appointment of lectors of Sacred Sripture, the duties of preachers, the obligation of residence

for those holding benefices, the qualifications of bishops, etc. The eighth session was followed by an fntermission of more than four years. 4. Rome had never been pleased with the place where the Council met. It was only under pressure that the Curia had agreed to an 1mperial city. Hence when the typhus broke out in Trent in the spring of 1547,

the papal legates took the occasion with the

consent of a two-thirds majority to transfer the Council to Bologna (eighth session, March 11, 1547). The pope approved the rather

precipitous transfer; but fourteen bishops of the emperor’s party remained at Trent and refused to recognize the transfer. Charles himself was indignant because the Protestants whom he then had at his mercy (the Schmalkaldic War and his victory at Miihlberg on April 24, 1547; § 166, 1) would refuse to attend a council assembled mn a city of the Papal States. He, therefore, demanded that the synod return to Trent and the tension between the emperor and the pope increased to such an extent that the decrees prepared in the ninth and tenth sessions at Bologna were not published, although the commissions diligently continued their work on the various subjects proposed to them. An especially vigorous protest from the emperor (January 1548) and his independent action in the Augsburg Interim (June 1548, § 166, 2) caused Paul III to suspend the Council on September 13, 1549. Two months later the pope died (November 10, 1549). The conclave lasted more than two months and resulted in the election of the council’s president Cardinal Jokn Mary del Monte as Julius IIT (1550—1555)%. Like Paul III, Julius was worldly! PASTOR

(Reopening

of

VI,

1913,

the C. by

1/314.

Julius

K. ERDMANN, III).

H. JEDIN,

QFitAB

87/156; HJG 1934, 401/33 (Church reform 1550/59). 1932/35.

1938

(Decree on Penance and Extr.

U.}).

RQ

1928/29,

1934,

238/317

305/32;

1035,

F. CAVALLERA, BullLE

N. M. HALMER,

Die Mess-

105

Modcrn und Recent Times. First Peviod (1517-—1648)

minded

and gave scandal by his nepotism;

nevertheless he con-

(imied the work of reform which had been undertaken, fostered the

socioty of Jesus, and, in spite of France’s opposition and intrigues,

willingly aceeded {o the emperor’s demand to resume the Council at Trent. The new Bull of convocation was issued on November 14, 1550.

(eleventh to sixteenth Session, May 1, Period 5. Secomd 1551 to April 28, 1552). A few days after his accession, Julius restored Pavima Lo Ottavio Farnese {see no. 1 above), but when

the latter asked France himself with Charles V Irance. As a result no during this period and

for aid against the emperor, Julius allied and thus became involved in war with French prelates took part in the Council for a time a schism of the French church

the archbishop-electors of Mainz, Trier and Trent; andd in general the attendance was

(hrealenad, However, Cologne appeared at

sreater that daring the first period, The discussions on the sacra-

ments contitted. The decree on the Blessed Eucharist was promulwated in the thirteenth session (October

11, 1551) and the decree

on Penance and Extreme Unction was published in the fourteenth (November 25, 1551). These dogmatic decrees were acsession companied by reform decrees respecting the administration of the bishop's office, the discipline of the clergy and the granting of benefices, In response to the emperor’s constant urging, ambassa-~ dors of several Protestant princes and cities provided with letters of safe-conduct by the Council appeared in Trent from October 1351 to March 1552, They represented Elector Joachim II of Duke

Rrandenburg,

Christopher

of Wiirttemberg, Elector Maurice

of Saxony and six imperial cities of southern Germany. Although the Iathers of the Council received them kindly and showed them every consideration, it was soon evident that these ambassadors would be satisfied with nothing less than the right to control the

council and dictate its decrees. They demanded that all decisions thus far made be revoked; that the decrees of Constance and Basel

on the superiority of a council over the pope (§ 142, 2; 143, 1) be renewed:

that

all the members

of the council

be released

from

their oath of obedience to the pope. They also proposed other

conditions which could not be accepted. The treacherous attack of Maurice of Saxony on the emperor and the invasion of southern opierlehre der vortridentinischen Theologen (1520—62), 1944. F.J, MONTALBA)N,

#aj101.

106

Razdn

y ¥Fe 1945,

11/32

(Protestants

at Tr.);

E. BIZER,

ARG

1956,

§ 174. Popes from Paul III to Pius 1V. Council of Trent

Germany by Maurice’s

allies placed the city of Trent

Hence in the sixteenth session {April 28, 1552)

in danger.

a decree was pro-

mulgated suspending the council for two years. As a matter of fact it was almost ten years before the sessions could be resumed. 6. Julius III was succeeded by the learned and pious Cardinal

Cervins (see no. 3 above),

known as Pope Marcellus II. Unfortu-

nately, he reigned for only twenty-two days (April to May 1555) and was followed by Cardinal John Peter Caraffa as Paul IV (1555— 1559)'. He had long been known as a sincere advocate of strict reform and had held several offices in which he evinced reforming zeal (§ 172, 2a; 174, 1). Although he was seventy-nine years old when elected,

he was possessed of a fiery energy and an 1ron will. He determined not to reconvene the Council, but to reform the Church by his own efforts. He began a relentless war on abuses in the Curia, especially on “‘the heresy of simony,” enacted stern laws for the discipline of the secular and regular clergy, and for the eradication of heresy. The

Inguisition,

which

he himself

reorganized,

was

fully utilized

in enforcing the reforms. Even innocent and worthy men such as Cardinals Morone, Contarini and Pole were brought before it as suspects, and Morone was imprisoned for two years. Although Paul IV was one of the most learned men of his day, he remained thoroughly medieval in thought and spirit. In 1559 he published the Bull “Cum ex Apostolatus officio” in which “‘by the plenitude of power over peoples and kingdoms” he renewed all the penalties that had ever been pronounced on apostates from the faith whether clerics or laics, princes or subjects and declared such princes deprived of all rights, dignities and possessions; their domains and property were seized them.

to be retained

by the

Catholic

princes

who

first

Unfortunately Paul’s work for reform was seriously compromised by his ¢/l-starred politics and his reprehensible nepotism. As a patriotic Italian and Neopolitan he disliked the House of Hapsburg and secretly leagued with Henry II of France, threatened to depose Charles V and became involved in a war with Philip IT of Spain ! PASTOR VI, 1913, 315/56 (Marcellus 11}, 357/626 (Paul IV).

Nonciatures

de France,

Paul IV, t. I, 1—=2, Paris

procés des Carafa, Maredsous

1g9og.

1909/11;

R. ANCEL,

La disgrice

et le

L. RIESS, Die Politik Pauls IV u. seine

Nepoten, 1909. F, STEGMULLER, Z. f. schweiz. KG. 1012, 161 {f., 241 ff. war between Paul IV and Naples). G. MONTI, Ricerche su P. Paolo 1V arafa,

H.

Benevento

JEDIN see above.

rgz5.

J. BIRKNER,

J.LYNCH,

RQ

1933,

79/99

Transactions of the Royal

XI, 1961, 23/42 (Philip 11 and the Papacy).

(Carafa's

trial).

Historical Society

107

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517 —1648)

(as king of Naples) which proved unfortunate for him and exposed Rome to grave danger (1556—1557). He refused to recognize Ferdinand 1 of Austria as emperor, partly because of the Peace of Augsburg and partly because IFerdinand had accepted the imperial dignity without the pope’s consent. Paul entrusted most of the political affairs of the Curia to his nephews, especially to Cardinal Carlo Carafa, an utterly unworthy and unprincipled man, whom he made secretary of state, and who used the office for shameless

extortion. When

Paul’s eyes were opened

nephews he deposed and banished repatr the harm they had done.

them

to the conduct of his

(1559)

but he could not

7. The conclave following the death of Paul IV was prolonged for four months owing to the disagreement of the French and Spanish factions. It ended with the election of Cardinal Grovann:

Angelo de’ Médict of Milan as Pope Pius IV (1550—1565)% In con-

trast to his predecessors he was

a peace-loving

man

and

a good

diplomat, yet somewhat worldly 1n his private life. He was on good

terms with Emperor Ferdinand I whose policies he approved, and with Philip 11 of Spain, who considered himself the protector of Church and Papacy,

domains, two

but who promoted

a state-church in his own

He brought the guilty nephews of Paul IV to trial and

of them,

Cardinal Carafa and his brother Giovanni,

duke of

Paliano, were sentenced to death and executed (1561). This tragedy made a tremendous impression, but at least it ended political

nepotism

on

a

large

scale.

However,

Pius

Borromeo

cardinal-secretary of state and

IV

also

favored

his

relatives and in 1560 made his twenty-one-year-old nephew Charles ! PASTOR VII, 1920.

Papsttum

u.

Papstwahl,

archbishop

of Milan?,

]. SUSTA, Die rdm. Kurie, etc., p. 103.

etc.,

see

p. 100.

ST. EHSES,

Festschr.

P. HERRE,

G. v. Hert-

ling 1913, 139/62 (Re-opening of the C. 1560); H]G 1916, 49/71 (Conciliar letters under Pius IV). J. BIRKNER, HJG 1932, 340/55 (Reform of the

College

of Cardinals).

H. JEDIN,

Krise

u. Wendepunkt

des Tr.

Konzils

1502/63, 1941; Ephemerides lit. 1945, 5/38 (the C. and the reform of liturg. books). H. A, P, SCHMIDT, Liturgie et langue vulgaire, Rome 1950. G. B, DA FARNESE, Il sacramento dell’ ordine nel periodo precedente la s. 23 del conc. di Trento, Rome 1947. For lit, on Philip II see § 184. 2 A. SALA, Documenti circa la vita e le gesta di San Carlo Borromeo, 3 vols. Milan 1857/62. — Acta Ecclesiae Mediolanensis ed. A. RATTI II—I11, Milan 1892/96. — DBiogr. of St. Charles by CH. SYLVAIN. 3 vols. Bruges 1884,

C. ORSENIGO,

Milan

1938;

G.S50RANZO,

passim

and

Terzo Centenario CHINI,

also AB

108

®"1929;

2 vols. Milan

1915/16,

1944.

della Canonizzazione,

in Charakterbilder

1] primo

L.CELIER,

kath.

Paris

1912;

TFestschrift;:

ibid.

A. RIVOLTA,

1908/10.

Reformatoren,

San

Carol

PASTOR

1924,

105/35.

Milan

Borr.

nel

VII—IX

P. PAS-

soggiorno di §. Carlo Borr. a Roma, Turin 1935. -—— See 338 ff.; on the relations of St. Charles with Switzerland,

§ 174. Popes from Paul IT1 to Pins IV. Council of Treut

This appointment proved to be the classical example of a pope’s nephew who fully deserved the honor, for in the discharge of his duties in the Curia, Charles Borromeo not only exhibited administrative ability but was also an example of blameless life and sincere plety. He was his uncle's most reliable councillor in ecclesiatical and political affairs and the “"good genius” of his pontificate. It was due in no small measure to Borromeo's influence

that the worldly-minded pope was induced to continue the work of reform, especially to reconvoke the Council of Trent and bring it to a successful close. From 1565 until his death {November 3,

1584) Borromeo resided at Milan from which place he promoted and led the Counter-Reformation and Catholic Restoration for upper Italy in the spirit of Trent. He defended the rights of the Church against the Spanish governor of Milan, was a father to the

poor and orphans and was an angel of consolation to the afflicted during the pestilence which visited the city in 1576. Charles Borro-

meo was canonized by Pope Paul V in 1610, 8. Third and Final Period (seventeenth to twenty-fifth session, January 18, 1502 to December 4, 1563). Again there were and serious difficulties to be overcome. Emperor Ferdinand

many I and

France objected to a continuation of the carlier assembly; thev desired that all the decrees and canons which had alreadyv been

published be revoked and that an entirely new council be convoked

in some city other than Trent. Out of fear of the Protestants, German bishops absented themselves so that Germany was poarly represented in the last and most important sessions. The Protestant princes again discourteously declined the pope's invitation extended to them at the National assembly at Naumburg in January 1561.

The chief task during the third period was to complete

the

Communion

the

decrees on the sacraments. From July 16, 1562 to November 11, 1563 (twenty-first to twenty-fourth sessions) decrees were promulgated on

under

Sacrifice of the Mass,

both

species,

Communion

the Sacraments

of children,

of Orders and Matrimony:.

The discussions preceding the formulation of these decrees were

long and anirated, and more than once there was danger that the counci would have to be dissolved before completing the work. During this period a great number of reform decrees were published

affecting practically every phase of the life of the Church.

see § 180,4.

Milan 1957.

STORIA di Milano X: L'eta della Riforma cattolica 1559—1630,

109

Maodern and Recent Times, First Peviod (1517 —1648) In June 1562, Emperor Ferdinand I presented a plan (in 15 articles) for the “‘reformm of the Church in head and members” and demanded that it be discussed hefore considering dogmatic questions, While some of the pointa of this plin contained valuable suggestions, others, such as the demand ot the chalice for the laity and a married clergy, could not be granted at all or only with reservations. Duke Albert V of Bavaria supported Ferdinand's plan and France approved some of the articles, especially Communion under bolh spocies. In the twenty-second session it was decided to leave the question of the chalice to the judgment of the pope. In 1564 Pius IV permitted o number of German dioceses to administer Communion under hoth Bpecies; but the reruest to abolish the often broken law of celibacy wid rosodutely demied. When the enthusiasm of German Catholics for the lay chalico flagged, espacially when the hope that it would mean the return to the Church of countless Protestanls was waning, the permission was revoked in Bavaria in 1571, and in 1584 in all of Austria except Bohemia. Clr, Th. B. RKassowitz, Die Reformvorschlige K. Ferds I auf dem Konzil v. Trient,

1906,

Terzog

V,

I,

v, Trient

1, 1911,

Albrecht

&, Eder, Die Reformvorschlige

A, Kudpfier,

1891;

cfr.

St

Die

Ehses,

K. Ferd.s I auf dem

Kelchbewegung HJG

1915,

in Bayern

105~—9.

unter

. Constani,

Comcossion A I"Allentagne de la communion sous les deux espéces par Pie IV, 2 vols. Paris 1922/20, H, Lulz, QINtAT 34, 1954, 203/35 {Bavaria and the chalice Jor the laity). A. Franzen, vh, Jahrhundert, 1955,

Die

Kelchbewegung

am

Niederrhein

im

Tho guestion regarding the obligation of residence and the jurisdiction of bishops led to lengthy and heated debate. To prevent the cumulation ol benefices with tho care of souls, the Spaniards and the French requested the council to declare that the obligation of residence is fure divine and

both of these national groups supported the thesis that episcopal jurisdiction

comes directly from God and not from the pope. The Italians vigorously

apposed this opinion. Thus the old controversy regarding episcopal jurisdiction and papal primacy was revived. Finally, in the twenty-third session (July 15, 1563) 1t was agreed to dismiss this question without a decision. From April until May 1563 Cardinal Morone, the prudent president-legate, conferred

with Emperor Ferdinand in Innsbruck and reached an understanding regarding the emperor's plan of reform. H. Grisar, LiTh 1884, 453 ff., 727 ff. (The question of primacy and episcopal jurisdiction at Trent). Ph. Helle, Die Konferenzen mit d. Kaiser Ferd. I {(1653), Disa. 1911. G. Constan!, La légation du Card. Morone prés I'Emperour et le Concile de Trente (1563), Paris 1922, H. O. Evennetf, The Cardinal

of Lorraine

and

the

Council

of Trent,

Cambr.

1930.

H. Jedin,

Krise, sea above, P. Browtin (H. Jedin), 1.’évéque dans la tradition pastorale du 16% 4., Paris 1933

In the twenty-fourth session the dogmatic decree on Maivimony was published. This not only defined matvimony as @ sacrament and explained

indissolubility but also contained a special decree de refoymatione matrimonii in ten chapters. The first of these called “"Tametsi"” declared clandestine

marriages null and void and recognized as valid only those marriages entered

into before the proper pastor and two or three witnesses. Among the other

110

§ 174. Popes from Paul 111 to Pius IV. Council of Trent

reform decrees the following should be mentioned Prescriptions regarding

the conferral of sacred orders, of the quasstores eleemosynarum

adequate provision of parishes, abolition (and the proclamation of indulgences only

by bishops), the obligation of residence for rectors of churches, and the obligation of bishops to receive consecration with in three months after appointment. Of great importance was the decree on the erection of diocesan seminaries for the education and training of clerics from carly youth. However, it was declared that this decree was not to be interpreted to the

detriment or discontinuance of theological studies in the universities. The twenty-fourth session issued a number of regulati ons regarding provincial

and diocesan synods (the former to be held every three vears, the latter, annually), diocesan visitations, the duly of preaching and instructing the faithful, public penances, competitive examinations to provide pastors for vacant parishes, prohtbition of pluval benefices (although exceptions were not wholly

excluded), expectancies, provisions, veservalions, etc. 3. Merkle,

Theol.

Das

Fakultiten

Konzil

und

von

tridentin.

Tr.

u.

die

Universititen,

dSeminarien,

1¢goo;

1905,

nochmals

F. Heiner,

Theol.

Fak.

und trid. Sem., 1g01; cfr. E. Reckers, ZThS 1928, 119/29. J. O. Donohoe, Tridentine Seminary Legislation, Louvain 1957. J. E. Rainer, ZkTh I9I5,

256 If., 465 ff. (decree on the reform of preaching).

9. In the twenty-fifth and final session which occupled two days (December 3 and 4, 1563) dogmatic decrees were publishe d on purgalory, the veneration and invocation of the saints, on the relics and tmages of the same, and on sndulgences (in which it was decl ared that they are beneficial to Christian people, and that the Chur ch received from Christ the power to grant indulgences), Besides these, a specral reform decree on religious orders of men and women (§172,3)

was adopted, as well as a general reform decree on a variety of points

(dueling

forbidden

under

pain

of excommunication).

A

number of proposed reforms not yet discussed in detail, such as a

new edition of the Index of forbidden books to replace the edit ion of Paul 1V, a catechism for general use, a revised brev iary and missal, etc., were committed to the care of the pope. The decrees were signed by 255 fathers, the council consisting of 6 card inals,

3 patriarchs, 193 archbishops and bishops, 7 abbots, 7 generals of

religious orders and 39 proxies for absent prelates. Pius IV confirmed the decrees by the Bull * Benedicius Deus” of January 26, 1564 and established the Congregatio S. Concilii composed of eight

cardinals to interpret and supervise the execution of the decr ees,

* Bull of confirmation in Conc. Trid. IX, 1152/56; cfr. St. Ehses, 3. Vereins-schr. d. Gorresgesellschaft f. Y914, 43/53. F. FRAN SEN, Schol. 1950, 1951 (Anathema). V. MARTIN, Essai historique sur I'introd ucti on en France des décrets du Concile de Trente (1563/1615), Paris 1919. ¥, WILLCOCX, L'introduction des décrets du Concile de Tr. dans les anciens Pays-Bas,

111

Modern and Recent Times. First Period {1517 —1648)

In the same year he published an I'ndex librorum prohibitorum and a Professio fider

Tridentina,

the latter consisting of a profession of

faith and an oath of obedience to the Roman See. His successors carried out the other proposals of the council (§ 175). Emperor FFerdinand, Poland, Portugal, Savoy and the Italian states accepted the decrees of Trent without question. Philip II of Spamn accepted thermn, but 1n his acceptance added the clause ‘““without prejudice to the nights of the king.”” France accepted the dogmatic decrees,

but refused to acknowledge the reform decrees. However, these latter were gradually promulgated by bishops i the provincial synods. The Catholic princes of Germany led by Emperor Maximilian I1 accepted the decrees concerning dogma and cult at the

Diet of Augsburg in 1566. The Ecumenical Council of Trent lasted longer and met with greater external and internal difficulties than any other council in the history of the Church. But no other council ever had such a farreaching and endurning effect on Catholic faith and ecclesiastical discipline as Trent. Unfortunately, however, it was not able to restore the unity of faith of western Europe. It came in good time to save the Church in the Latin countries, but it came too late to

remedy the ills of the north or to heal the schism they had caused. Trent did clearly define and proclaim the Catholic faith in opposition to the false teachings of the day and by its reform decrees provided a program for the religious and moral renewal of clergy and people. In spite of vicious attacks, the Church valiantly defended her hierarchical constitution and successfully repelled the religious subjectivism of the Reformation. The fears which had been enter-

tained that conciliarism and Gallican ideas would prevail in the council were, fortunately, never realized. Thus the Reformation which threatened to destroy the Catholic Church gave the impetus for her revival and restoration. Although the decrees were not everywhere put into effect at once nor with equal vigor, yet the Diss. Louv.

of Trent 1953,

1929.

G. SCHREIBER,

and Anglican

225/50;

1954,

see § 174,3.

Formularies,

23/48

Lond.

(Visitations

in

H. E. SYMONDS,

The Council

1933. A. MONTICONE, Rome

1564/72).

RivSCIt

SILVINO

DA

NADRO, S5inodi diocesani italiani. Catalogo bibliografico, Rome 1960, P. BROUTIN, La réforme pastorale en France au XVI1I¢s., 2 vols. Paris 1956, S. TROMP, Gregorianum 1957, 481 ff. 1958, g2 ff. (De manuscriptis acta et declarationes antiquas S. Congr. Conc. Trid. continentibus). F. H. REUSCH, Der

Index

der verbotenen

prohib. des 16. Jahrh.s, 1886.

Biicher,

2 vols.

]J. HILGERS,

1883/8s;

Die Indices

librorum

Der Index der verb. Biicher, 1904.

ST. EHSES, 1. Vereinsschr, d. Girresgesellschaft f. 1921, 68/83 (Genesis of the Index).

112

A.SLEUMER,

Index Romanus,

1934.

§ 175,

The Great Reform Popes: Pius V, Gregory X1 and Sixtus V

general beneficent result of the council was to unite Catholics and inspire them with great confidence and courage. Trent also marked the beginning of a new era in the domain of the ecclesiastical sciences and Catholic piety (§ 178).

§ 175. Three Great Reform Popes after Trent:

Pius V, Gregory XIII and Sixtus V (1566—1590)2. Series of popes: St. Pius V (1566—1572); 1585); Sixtus V (1585—1590).

Gregory XIIT

(1572—

1. The Council of Trent laid the firm foundation of a Catholic Restoration and provided the norms to be followed. The completion of the work rested chiefly with the Curia. By the kindly disposition of divine Providence the Church was now given three truly worthy reform popes, each of whom was remarkable in his own way. After the death of Pius IV, Charles Borromeo promoted the candidacy of Cardinal Michael Ghislieri, a Dominican and former

general

Inquisitor

of the

Pius V2 (1566—1572;

Roman

canonized

Church,

in 1712).

who

was

As pontiff,

elected

Pius

as

V re-

presented the Catholic Restoration in its most perfect form. He continued the strict life and practices of virtue and piety to which he had been trained as a mendicant friar. His zeal for religion and the Catholic cause was as great as his energy in enforcing the Tridentine decrees in Catholic countries. In conformity with the resolutions of Trent, the Catechismus Romanus for the use of pastors

was 1ssued in 1566, the revised Breviary in 1568, and the Missal in 1570. In 1568 Pius published a more trenchant form of the Bull

“In Coena Domini”

which was a compilation of all the censures

1 See Lit. pp. 1 ., 84 and 100.

1559/1660,

Paris

I6. Jh.s, 1927, * PASTOR

1933.

VIII,

1920.

H. HAUSER, La prépondérance espagnole

P.M.BAUMGARTEN, G. GRENTE,

Saint

Von

Pie V,

den

Paris

Kardinilen 1956.

des

T. VAN

ORTROY, AB 1914, 187/215 (Roman sources on Pius V). 0. BRAUNSBERGER,

Pius V u. die deutschen Katholiken, 1912. CH. HIRSCHAUER, La Politique de 5. Pie en France, Paris 1922. M. PETROCCHI, La controriforma in Lt., Rome 1947. ST.L. V. SKIBNIEWSKI, Gesch. des Rém. Katechismus, 1503.

P. PASCHINI, Il Catechismo Romano del Concilio di Trento, Rome 1G23. S. BAUMER, Geschichte des Breviers, 1895, 364 ff. P. M. BAUMGARTEN,

Hispanica II—III,

1927 (reform of the breviary and the Gregorian Calendar

in Spain). K. PFAFF, RQ 1930, 23/76 (Bull “In Coena Domini™). Don Juan d'Austria monogr. by F.HARTLAUB, 1040, P.GOURLEZ, Paris 1936; H. CAMBON, Paris 1952.

9 Bibimeyer-Tichle, Church History III

113

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517 —1648)

reserved to the pope originally i1ssued in the thirteenth century (§ 110, 2D). As revised by Pius V the Bull was aimed especially at

Spain

and Venice where

efforts were being made

to bring the

Church under state control. Like Paunl IV, Pius V also proceeded vigorously against the heresies which were secretly infiltrating into Italy (§ 174, 1); and, basing himself on medieval canon law, pronounced sentences of excommunication and deposition on Queen Elizabeth of England in 1570. This was the last time that a pope declared a reigning monarch deposed. In this case, however, the sentence

served

only to increase

bulwark

in the Levant

the persecution

and

oppression

of English Catholics {§ 183, 3). Pius V worked incessantly to unite the Christian princes against the hereditary enemy, the Moslems. In the same year that the Turks took Cyprus, the last Christian {August

1571),

he succeeded

in inducing

of Austria,

half-brother

of Philip 1I,

Spain and Venice to combine their fleets in a joint attack. Under

the

command

of Don

John

the Christians gained a brilliant naval victory over the Crescent near Lepanto (Nadvpaktos) in the Gulf of Corinth on October 7, 1571. While the victory brought great joy to the West, discord among the Christian powers unfortunately prevented their pursuing the advantage they had gained. 2, The pontificate of Gregory XIII (r572—1585)%, formerly Cardinal Hugo Buoncompagni of Bologna, was also of great importance for reform, although as a religious character Gregory was by no means the equal of his predecessor. He was, however, a learned jurist and highly gifted with initiative and the ability to organize. He is perhaps best known for his reform of the Julian calendar (1582; § 3, 7), which was not adopted in Protestant coun-

tries until 1700. No less than twenty-three institutions of higher learning owe their existence or survival to his munificence. He founded the Hungarian college at Rome in 1574 and in 1580 united it with the German college. In 1579 he established a special college at Rome for the training of priests for England and about the same ! PASTOR

IX,

1923.

J.SCHMID,

CivC

1924

IV,

319 ff.; 1925

I, 219 {f.

(Gregorian University). G.CATALANO, Controversie giurisdizionale tra Chiesa e Stato nell’'etd di Gregorio XIII e Filippo LI, Palermo 1955. ON NUNTIATURES see Pieper and Richard in § 174. H. BIAUDET, Les nonciatures apostoliques permanentes jusqu’en 1648, Paris 1910. A, WYNEN, Die pipstl. Diplomatie, geschichtl. u. rechtl. dargestellt, 1922.

L. JUST, QFitAB 1933, 285/307;

1939, 249/96 (esp. the Nunciature of Cologne). G.LEVI DELLA VIDA, Documenti intorno alle relazione delle Chiese orientali con la S. Sede durante il pontificato di Greg. XIII, Rome 1948.

114

§175.

tune

The Great Reform Popes: Pius V, Gregory XIII and Sixtus V

opened

colleges

for Greeks,

Armenians

and

Maronites,

the

and richly endowed

the

students of which he endeavored to inspire with his own zeal for the union of the Eastern Churches. As special patron of the Jesuits, he assured the permanent existence of their Collegium Germanicumn (§ 173, 3) by assigning it a fixed income

Collegium

Romanum,

still called the Gregorian

papal nunciatures which did much

University,

The

to check heresy and enforce

the decrees of Trent were completely reorganized under Gregory. The diplomatic representatives of the Curia at the courts of Vienna, Pans, Madrid and Lisbon usually served no more than a year in

each

place.

Gregory

made

these

appointments

permanent

and

established nunciatures at Lucerne for Switzerland (1579), at Graz

for the interior of Austria (1580) and at Cologne for lower Germany (1584). Pius V had established a special congregation of cardinals

(1568) to handle German affairs; Gregory reorganized it {1573) and

assigned to it men fully qualified to meet the exacting demands.

These measures show how much effort the pope expended in strengthening and utilizing the positive forces of the CounterReformation. It became possible to check to some extent the apos-

tasy in the German north and even to win back some of those who

had apostatized (§ 180, 4). At this time France was being rent by

the Huguenot

Wars,

and the Catholic Church

in England

was

suffering intensely from the persecution under Elizabeth. Gregory’s intervention in the French and English disturbances was not particularly fortunate, but it was wholly justified by traditions stilt quite generally recognized in the West (§ 18z, 3). 3. During the pontificate of Sixtus V (15851590} the Roman See achieved a degree of ecclesiastical authority and political prestige such as it had not enjoyed for a long time. The new pope (formerly Cardinal Felice Peretti) was born of poor parents and had been a Franciscan since 1533. From the beginning of his pontificate he displayed remarkable energy and a natural ability to govern. He established order in the Papal States, exterminated the brigandage which had reached immense proportions and was terrorizing 2ll Italy, and replenished the state treasury. To expedite the work of the Curia, Sixtus established or reorganized fifteen ' PASTOR X, 1926, 1/499 (cfr. P. M. BAUMGARTEN,

AL.V.HUBNER,

Sixtus

V,

2

vols.

1871;

new

ed.

ZKG

1932.

1927, 232/44).

FR,V.OPPELN-

BRONIKOWSKI, Schliissel u. Schwert (Sixtus V), 1929 (popular). V, MARTIN, Les Congrégations romaines, Paris 1930. J. GRISAR, Papstl. Finanzen, Nepotisinus u. Kirchenrecht, Rome 1943.

115

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517 —1648)

congregations of cardinals, some to deal with spiritual, others with temporal affairs, This system persisted until 1908 when Pius X modified it somewhat

to meet the demands

of the times.

In 1586

Sixtus fixed the number of cardinals at seventy (six bishops, fifty priests and fourteen deacons), although the recommendation of Trent to internationalize the college of cardinals was not followed., Pope Pius XII was the first pope to do so somewhat 1mperfectly (1946). Sixtus insisted strongly on another important reform measure: the ad limina wvisit of bishops at which they were obliged to give a full account of their administration (§ 110, 2€). Much of Sixtus’'s fame rests on his intensive building program in which he greatly changed the appearance of Rome. Among other things he completed the cupola of St. Peter's according to the plans of Michelangelo, and moved the mighty obelisk from the Circus of Nero to its present position in the plaza of St. Peter. Sixtus published a revised edition of St. Jerome’s translation of the Bible, and

by the Bull “Aeternus ille” of March 1, 1590 declared it the only official text. But the work had been done in haste and was so faulty that shortly after Sixtus’s death (} August 27, 1590) it was withdrawn from circulation by Clement VIII 1n 1592 and replaced by a corrected edition known as the Vulgata Clementina. This edition is still in use, although Pius X in 1907 ordered a revision with the help of modern textual criticism and Pius XII in 1945 authorized a new translation of the psalms from the original text. It is often

asserted

that,

according

to S5i. Roberi

Bellavmine’'s

preface

to the Vulgata Clementina, Sixtus V himself determined to withdraw his edition and subject it to correction. And early in the seventeenth century

there were rumors that the Bull ““Aeternus ille’” was not issued in a proper or valid manner. But no convincing proofs have ever been adduced in support of either assertion. X, M. Le Bachelet, Bellarmin et la Bible Sixto-Clémentine, Paris 19171 P. M. Baumgarlen, Die Vulg. Sixtina u. ihre Einfithrungsbulle, 1g11; Neue Kunde v. alten Bibeln I—II, 1, rg22/27. F. Amawnn, Die Vulg. Sixtina v. 1590, 1912.

1913, 10935.

H. Hipfl, Beitrige z. Geschichte der Sixto-Klementin, Vulgata

— J. B, Nisius, ZkTh 1912, 1914; €. A. Kneller, ibid. 1919, 1928, Pastor I1X, 154 1f,, s60 ff.; X1, 473 ff. Cir. lit. on Bellarmine § 178, 1h.

Besides

his

multiple

occupations

with

purely

ecclesiastical

affairs, many polsiical concerns demanded his attention and in this

field Sixtus showed extraordinary ability. In the relations between Church and State he, like his predecessor, held the medieval notion of a papal hierarchy (§ 111)}; and he caused the first volume of 116

§ 176. Popes of End of Sixteenth to Middle of Scventeenth Century

Bellarmine’s “Disputationes de controversiis” (§ 178, 1b) to be put on the Index because it taught that the pope has only indirect power in secular affairs. But in practical politics Sixtus was prudent and conciliatory and managed to steer a middle course in the wars

then convulsing the western world. Everything

depended on the

position of the Curia toward the Huguenots and the royal suceession in France (§ 182, 4). Philip II, who, like the Hohenstaufen, ruled upper and lower Italy (Milan, Sicily-Naples), tried to force the

papacy

to participate

in the war of the Catholic

League

against

the Calvinist Henry (IV) of Navarre-Bourbon, the successor of the murdered Henry III. But Sixtus patiently withstood Spanish pressure and never abandoned his position of neutrality. Subsequent events proved how farsighted Sixtus's policy was; for by preserving France as an independent power the political balance in western Europe was maintained and with it the freedom and independence of the Holy Sce. § 176. Popes from End of Sixteenth Sertes of popes: cent IX

(1591);

Urban VII

Clement

VIII

to Middle (1590);

(1644—1655).

Gregory X1V

{1592—1605);

to 1621); Gregory XV (1621-—1623);

of Seventeenth Leo XI

Century.

{1500—15091); {1605):

Paul

InnoV

(1605

Urban VIII (1623—1644); Innocent X

I. From the end of the sixteenth century the history of the papacy no longer presents the same march of progress: the heroic age of the Catholic Restoration was at an end. The work of reform

never wholly ceased; but political affairs, the social and economic

problems of the Papal States and the embellishment of Rome occupled the attention of the popes. During some of the pontificates abuses in the Curia and nepotism again caused trouble; and in endeavoring to check a growing tendency toward state control of the Church in varicus places the popes were not always entirely successful,

The powerful Sixtus V was succeeded by three popes whose pontificates totaled fifteen months: Urban VII (September 1590) lived only tweive days after his election; the pious, sickly Cardinal Sfondrato, elected as Gregory X1V, reigned from December 1590 to October 1591; Innocent IX, who was seventy-two years old when elected on October 29, 1591, died 1 PASTOR X—X1V, 1 {cfr. P. M. Baumgarten, ZKG 1929, 416 ff) — For further literature see the introduction to the present volume and §§ 172,

174, 175.

117

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517—1648)

on

December

of

30

same

the

Both

year.

Gregory X1V

and

lonocent IX

abandoned the policy of Sixtus V and supported Spain and the Leagne with troops and moncy against Henry of Navarre (§ 182, 5) -— Pastor X, 501 ff, M. Facini, 11 Pontificato di Gregory X1V, Rome 1911, It was probably during the two-month conclave {October 6i to Do-

cember 5, 1590) before the clection of Gregory XTV that the {famous prophesies concerning the popes had their vrigin, They have always heon ascribed to Si. Malachy, archbishop of Armagh (f 11q8) and were first

published in a collection of legends called “Tignum vifae' of the Denedictine Arnold of Wyon (Venice 15095). The prophecios consist of one hundrod wnd eleven short mottoes characterizing the popes from Celestino I {1143 -1144)

to the end uf the world. Thug in numerical order the devices of the popoes

of more recent times are as [ollows: Pius IX “Crux de cruce’; Leo XTH, “Lumen in Coclo’'; Pius X, "Ignis ardens’; Denedict XV, ""Religio depopuJohn lata”; Pius XTI, “Fides intrepida'’; DPius XT1, “Pastor angelicua™; XI1I, “Pastor ¢t Nauta’'; Paul VI, "Flos Florum.” Then {ollow [eur other

mottoes

before

‘‘Petrus

Romanus,”

who

accerding

to tho list is to bo the

—

The genvineness of the

last pope. Although there is somao coincidence in the these popes so many hundred years before their time, today regard the prophecy as a [forgery. Cir. [, H. Finke, 1904, p. 1 ff. — E. Vacandard, Ctudos de relig. IV? serie, Paris 19z23.

—

Pastor

[X, 5201

designiition given to all serious historians Schmidlin, Dostgabo critique ot d"hisinire

prophecy is defended by J. Maitre, La prophétio des Papes atiribude & S. Malachie, Paris, 1001, and in part by f{. Troll, [ho Papsiweissagungen des hl. Malachias,

1461,

2. The pontificate of Clement VIII {1592—16035), of the Florentine house of Aldobrandini, was longer and more important. He was a man of genuine piety, prudent and circumspect in dealing with the grave problems demanding solution. Delicate health forced him to commit many of the Drirdens of government to

others, yet he personally supervised the details. He created his nephew Pietro a cardinal, but the remarkable qualities of the youny man absolve the pope of the charge of nepotism. Clement VIII determined to continue the program of Catholic reform and sncceeded in carrying it out in several countries. After some hesitation he decided in the interest of peace and religion to adopt a different policy toward France than the one followed by his immediate predecessors, Two years after Hemnry of Navarre had abjured Protestantism, Clement recognized him as king of I'rance (§ 182, 5). From both a political and ecclesiastical point of view this reconciliation proved advantageous. The Curia became more independent of Philip 11, and France experienced a notable revival of Christian life. 1 PASTOR

XI,

Bibeln II, 1, 1927,

118

1927.

28 if.

Cir.

P. M, Baumgarten,

Neus

Kunde

v. Alten

§ 176. Popes of End of Sixteenth to Middle of Seventeenth Centnry

In 1598 Clement acted as arbiter between

France

and

Spain

i

effected the Peace of Vervins. After the death of the childless Alfonso

d@'Este, Henry supported the papal claim to suzerainty over Ferroa, As was mentioned above (§ 175, 3), Clement

publishcd @ correctid

edition of the Vulgata Sixtina (r592). He enlisted the aid of sucl, eminent and learned men as Toledo (§ 198, 14), Bellarmine (§ 198,

1b), Baronius (§ 4, 4 and 178, 1¢), Du Perron, cte., and clevated them to the cardinalatial dignity. He establishod the Congregatio de

Auxiliis to settle the Molinist controversy regarding grace (§ 198, 21) and was present at all the sessions up to the time of his death,

[n

1600 Clement proclaimed a jubilee which drew three inillion pilgnms to Rome. In this same year Giordano Bruno, the *“philosopher of Nola,”

an apostate

Dominican,

was

burned

at the stike

as an obstinate heretic (§ 178, 3). 3. Leo XI of the Florentine house of Medici died April 27, t6os, just twenty-six days after his clection, and was succcedid by Cardinal Camillo Borghese as Paul V. (1605 1621)h Ile was learned, capable, a generous patron of the arts and deeply religions;

but he must be blamed for the way in which he enriched his nephews and

otherwise

favored

his relatives.

In

an

effort

to aphold

ihe

absolute power of the papacy over princes and people he heciune involved in a serious conflict with Venice, The proud republic of San Marco

refused

to revoke laws which

forbade the sale of prop-

erty to clerics and the erection of new churches, monusteries and hospitals without permission of the state: it further refased fo surrender to the ecclesiastical court two clerics who had been imprisoned. In April 1606 Paul V pronounced sentence of excommunication on the doge and the senate und placed Venelian territory under inderdict. But the penalties were disregarded, The senate was encouraged

in its disobedicnce

hy the learned

Servite

Paul Sarps (+ 1623), who later became famous for Lis very binsed history of the Council of Trent (§ 174, 2 literature) and who was 1 PASTOR

XII,

1927

{L.eo XI

Venezia del 1606 e i Gesuiti,

Rome

nelli et al., 7 vols. Bari 1931/51. Epistelarium).

K. BENRATH,

Vereins f. Ref.-Gesch. I911;

P. Sarpi

dottrina

C. MANFRONI u.

1959.

etc.,

Neue

P. Sarpi,

Venice Diss.

Bologna

1952, 52/88 (account of research).

Panl

FRA

VY,

v, PIRKI,

I, SAKD],

P. SAVIO, Avvum Dricfs

100, 1910, 305/34.

d. Protestanten,

di Fra

and

1924;

1904.

1932,

v.

Opere,

1936/47.

P, Darpl,

Vinterdetio el

1)

tgoy;

B, SO1LIANT,

G.CoOZzl,

G. SALVATORELLI,

Pisn

Hus-

193G/40 (Sarpi's Schriften

DBlogr, by A. ROBERTSON, G, GFETTO,

di

jgq41.

Lond,

G, RIIN,

Hl Gallicancsimo

1l Diritto

dew

e lu

ccelesiastico

Atti delln Acad. nog,

dei Lincei, Cl. di sc. mor. VIII, 5, 1953, 311/60 {Sarpi's religious ideas). Cfr,

also lit. on the C. of Trent (§ 174, 2).

119

Maodern and Recent Times. First Peviod (1517—1648)

even then in intimate correspondence with the Calvinists of Switzerland and France. Sarpi was appointed “'theologian to the most Serene Republic’” and in his advice to the senate as well as in bitter pamphlets defended the idea of a strictly national Church and declared that the privilegivm fori and the immunities of the Church woere based on purely human, not diving, law. Accepting Sarpi's interpretadion that the pope’s censures were invalid, the senate forbade their publication and the observance of the interdict; and clerics who rtefused to hold divine services (Jesuits, Capuchins, Theatines) were banished, Numerous theologians engaged in the comtroversy; Cardinals Bellarmine and Baronius calmly but convincingly defended the rights of the Curia. When war seemed inevitable and there was danger that Venice might go over to Protestantism, peace was restored in 1607 through the good offices of Henry IV of France,; but under conditions which did not malke the peace a victory for the pope. Some of the pope’s demands were granted such as the repeal of the laws in question and the surrender of the two

clerics;

but

the censures

had

to be lifted without

a

petition from the senate, and the Jesuits were not permitted to

return. This and several other incidents about the same time made it evident that medieval canon law could no longer be enforcedin all points. Lven in Catholic countries, national interests and greed for political power took precedence over the demands of religion. This was the last time that the Curia interdicted an entire state. During the Thirty Years’ War which devastated Germany, Paul V and his successors supported the emperor and the League by liberal grants of money. During the sixteenth century the Catholic powers endeavored to exer-

cise direct influence on papal elections. In the conclaves which elected Leo XI and Paul V (both in 1605) Spain instructed the Spanish cardinal to express that country’s vefo to the election of candidates

not approved

by the Spanish monarch. By the middle of the seventeenth century the fus Exclusivae seu exclusionis of the emperor and of the kings of France and Spain was being exercised in almost every conclave, Although the Curia always opposed the right of exclusion as an abuse, it continued to be used down to relatively recent times. When Austria, through the cardinalarchbishop of Krakdw, used the veto against the election of Cardinal Rampolla, the newly elected Pius X by the Constitution “Commissum Nobis” of January 20, 1904, forbade the veto under pain of excommunication. J. B, Sdgmiiller, Lehrb. des kath. KR. I* 497 {f. Various authors, as

L, Wahrmund wahl,

(Das Ausschliessungsrecht der kath, Staaten bei der Papst-

1888), L. Lector (Le conclave, Paris 1894, 1937) and A. Eisler (Das

P

120

§ 176. Popes of End of Sixteenth to Middle of Seventeenth Century Veto

der

kath.

Staaten

originated later.

bei

der

Papstwahl,

rgoy),

thmmk

that

the

veto

4. Gregory XV (1621—1623)! of the house of Ludovisi and arch-

bishop

of Bologna,

succeeded

Paul

V

for

a brief

but

important

pontificate of about two years and a half. He was frail in health and

obliged

to

rely

for

help

on

his

distinguished

and

capable

nephew Cardinal Ludovico Ludovisi. Shortly after his election (see above} he made new regulations for papal elections and prescribed that the secret ballot be used until a two-thirds majority was reached (1621). He was a great admirer of the Jesuits and canonized Ignatius of Loyola and Francis Xavier, as well as Isidore the ploughman, Theresa of Avila and Philip Neri (1622). An important advance in ecclesiastical organization was marked by the establishment of the Congregation of Propaganda for the control of Catholic

Missions

throughout

the world

(§ 177, 1). It was due

to Gregory’s influence that the electoral dignity attached to the Palatinate

Bavarnia.

was

Hence

transferred

when

1622 he presented to (Bibliotheca Palatina) {§ 181, 1).

to

Maximilian

Maximilian

the

conquered

Gregory the famous consisting of about

Catholic,

the

Duke

Palatinate

of

in

Heidelberg library 3500 manuscripts

Urban VIII (1623—1644)% was a member of the famed Barberini

family.

His

pontificate

extended

over

a critical

pericd

of the

Thirty Years’ War then being prolonged by the intervention of France and of Gustavus Adolphus of Sweden, and Urban personally

favored France rather than the emperor and Spain. He had been shamefully deceived by Cardinal Richelieu into believing that the war would in no wise jeopardize Catholicity in Germany. But it is not historically true to assert {as Ranke and Gregorovius do} that Urban approved the Franco-Swedish alliance and that he rejoiced at the Swedish victory in Germany, He endeavored rather to be ! PASTOR XIII, 1, 1928, 1/224. G.GABRIELI, ArchSRom 1924, 5§23 (election of Gregory XV). P. TACCHI VENTURI, La cancnizzazione dei Santi Ignazio di L. e Francesco Saverio, Rome 1922. D. ALBRECHT, Die deutsche

Politik Papst Gregors XV., 1956.

* PASTOR XIII, 1—2, 1928/29, 225/980. structions générales aux Nonces ordinaires de

A.LEMAN, Recueil des inFrance 1624/34, Lille 1919;

Urbain VIII et la rivalité de France et de la maison d’Autriche 1631/35, Lille 19z0; RHE 1923, 370/83: 1938, 542/55 (election of the €mperor in 1636).

K. REPGEN,

R() 1961,

62/74

(Memorial of 1632).

tatigkeit unter Urban VIII, 1927. G.HOFMANN, Jerus., u. P, Urban VIII, Rome 1933.

0. POLLAK,

Theophanes

Die

Kunst-

III, Patr. v.

121

Maodern and Recent Times. First Period (1517 —1648)

the “eommon father of Christianity’” and sincerely strove to make

peace among the warring powers, The Papal States were consiclernbly enlarged during Urban’s pontificate when, with the extinction of the Rovere family (1631), the dukedom of Urbino apain became part of them. Unfortunately, Urban showered excessive favors on his nephews, the Barberini, which they repaid by making encmics for the pope by their insolence and rapacity; they involved Urban in a lengthy war with his vassal, the duke of Parma; the campaign worked great hardship on the Papal States and ended in a disgraceful peace in 1644. Urban was a generous putron of the arts and classical literature and was himself a poet of no mean ability ; many of the finest examples of barogue architeeture still found in Rome are Urban's contributions. The end of Galileo’s unfortunate trial {§ 178, 3} and the beginning of the Junsenist controversy (§ 1go, 1) fall within Urban’s pontificate. 5. Innocent X (1644.--1655)1, of the Pamfili family, began his pontificate by endeavoring to restore peace and order in Rome. He took legal action against the nephews of Urban VIII for mis-

appropriation of public funds. They fled to France and found a protector in Cardinal Mazarin, who even threatened to invade the Papal States. The process was finally dropped and the Barberini were reliabilitated (1646). During this pontificate the Thirty Years’

War was brought to an against which Innocent the rights of the Church clergy he condemned five

end by the Peace of Westphalia (1648), protested because the terms prejudiced (§ 181, 4). At the request of the French propositions from Jansen’s “Augustinus”

in 1683 (§ 190, 1), War with the duke

of Parma broke out again

in the course of which the city of Castro was destroyed and the territory was incotporated into the Papal States. In spite of his sevetity

toward

the

nephews

of Urban

VIII,

Innocent

himself

became guilty of nepotism. Donna Olimpia Matdalchini, the widow of his doceased brother, took unfair advantage of the aged pope’s affection for his relatives to enrich her family. When Innocent died on Janhuary 7, 1685, Donna Olimpia refused to meet the expenses of hig burial. I PASTOR

pchien Gesch,

X1V,

1, 1920, 1/299.

mus d. Zeit Innozetiz’

W, FRIEDENSBURG, X,

Rome

1go4

Regesten z. deut-

(from Q%i‘l:AB 1Q0T /fl.

H. COVILLE, Btude pur Mazarin et ses démélés avec le pape Innocent X, Yarls 1914, V. Tornetta, Arch. Storico ital. 1941, 86 ff.; 1942, 95 fi. (Mazarin

and the pope 1644/46).

122

§ 177. Missions among Pagans in America, Africa and Eastern Asia

§ 177

Missions among Pagans in America, Africa and Eastern Asial, 1. During the sixteenth century Catholic mission activity entered upon a new and flourishing period. The losses which the Church had sustained by defections in Europe were more than compensated, at least as far as numbers were concerned, by the conversion of pagans in lands beyond the seas. The preaching of the Gospel to pagans, which had almost reached a standstill in the fifteenth century, was given a powerful impetus by important new discovertes i both West and East., The Christopher Columbus, discovered the islands

Genoese off the

admiral, coast of

Central America in 1492 ; the Portuguese Cabral reached Brazil in 1500; following the routes along the west coast of Africa already taken by his countrymen, Vasco da Gama discovered the ocean route to India and Ferdinand Magellan (Magalhfes) led the first fleet to circumnavigate the earth (1519—1522). A fundamental change had taken place in what, until now, had been the medieval world. New and unknown lands and peoples appeared on the European horizon. The Catholic rulers of Spain and Portugal took seriously their Christian obligation of having the Gospel preached 1 J.SCHMIDLIN,

J. DINDINGER,

Einfiihrung in die Missionswissensch.,

Bibliotheca

Missionum

MERSKIRCHEN-G. DINDINGER, R. STREIT,

Die

PERICDICALS: f.

kath.

deutsche

NZMW

Bibliographia

M.-Literatur

Die kath. Missionen,

Missionswissenschaft

(ab

(Bibliography),

1938:

1g17.

1916 ff.;

Missionaria, 18o00/1g925,

1873 ff. (popular); ZMW und

2

R. STREIT-

Rome

G. ROM-

1936 ff,

parts

1925.

= Zeitschrift

Religionswissenschaft),

1g11 ff.;

= Neue Zeitschr. f. Missionswissensch., 1945 ff, J. THAUREN,

Atlas

der kath. Missionsgesch. 1932; Atlas der kath, Weltmission, ed. by J. NEUHAUSLER, 1932. J.DESPONT, Nouvel Atlas des Missions, Paris 1g51. J. SCHMIDLIN, gesch., 1960.

Kath. Missionsgesch., 1924, 195 ff. A. MULDERS, MissionsH.-W. GENSICHEN, Missionsgesch. der neueren Zeit, 1961,

L. HANKE, Colonization and Christian conscience. PASTOR V—XVTI passim. G. GOYAU, L'Eglise en marche, Etudes d’histoire missionnaire, 8 vols. Paris 1928/38; La France Missionaire dans les cinqg parties du monde, 2 wvols., Paris 1948.

(cfr. ZMW

B. DESCAMPS,

1932,

364/68).

Hist. générale comparée

K.S.LATOURETTE,

des missions,

History

of the

Paris 1932

Expansion

of Christianity 111 (1500—i1800), Lond. 1939. A.HUONDER, Der einheim. Klerus in d. Heidenlindern, 19og; Der hl. Ignatius u. der Missionsberuf der

Gesellsch, Jesu, 1922. T. J. M. BURKE, Beyond all horizons. Jesuits and the missions, N. ¥. 1957. L, LEMMENS, Gesch. d. Franziskanermissionen, 192g. J.A. OTTQ, Kirche im Wachsen, 1940. A. VATH, Die Franenorden in den Missionen v. 16. Jh. bis z. Gegenwart, 1920. THOMAS A JESU O, CARM., De

procuranda salute ommnium gentium 1940. 1913.

BOUR,

G. ROLOFF, Gesch. der europ. V,.VALENTIN, Kolonialgesch.

[Antw. 1613], ed. Th. Pammoli, Kolonisation der Neuzeit,

El conquistador espafiol del siglo XVI,

Rome

seit d. Entd. Amerikas, 1915. R.BLANCO-FOM-

Madr.

1935.

CH. A. JULIEN,

Voyages de découverte, Paris 1948. Cfr. relevant articles in The Catholic Encyclopedia, 15 vols. with Index, New York 1907/14; Suppl. I, 1922,

123

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517—1648)

colonies;

in their recently acquired

(Franciscans,

orders

old

zeal of the

mission

and the reawakened

first

the

and

Dominicans}

fervor of the new (Jesuits and Capuchins) supplied the personnel necessary for the work. With a spirit of sacrifice and an undaunted courage, the missionaries took up their task and were stimulated rather than deterred by the thought of the martyrdom which probably awaited them. The principal theatres of their labors were North and South America and eastern Asia. In 1622 Gregory XV

established the Congregatio de Propaganda Fide' (or, as it became familiarly known, Propaganda) to be the central bureau of ad-

ministration of all Catholic missions. The terrae missionis subject

to Propaganda included not only the newly discovered pagan lands,

but also the territories recently lost to the Church in northemn Europe. And in 1627 Urban VIII opened a special seminary in Rome, the Collegivm Urbanum de Propaganda Fide, in which young men of every nation were to be trained as missionaries. After the was established at Paris in day doing excellent work in 2. The Church made her America?, According to a

wmisszons

for foreign

a seminary

seminary,

Roman

of this

model

1663 and has continued to the present the mission field. greatest conquests in the New World— treaty between Spain and Portugal,

1 (0, MEJER, Dic Propaganda, ihre Provinzen u. ihr Recht, 2 vols. 1852/53. J. SCHMIDLIN et al.,, ZMW 1922, 1/64. K. HOFFMANN, Ursprung u. Anfangstiitigkeit des ersten piapstl. Missionsinstituts, 1923, PASTOR XIII, 1oo ff., 740 ff. R.CORRIGAN, Die Congreg. de propag. fide u. ihre Tatigkeit in Nordamerika im 17. Jh., Diss. 1928. ACTA 8. C. de Prop. Fide Germaniam ed.

1622—49,

spectantia

générale

Hist.

A, LAUNAY,

1962.

H. TUCHLE,

by

de la Société des Missions Etrangéres, 3 vols. Paris 1894; Mémorial de la

Soc. des Miss. Etr.,, 2 vols. Paris 1915/16; Les Bienheureux martyrs des

Miss.

FEtr.,

Paris

1930.

F. CAVALLERA,

BullLE

1933

(beginnings

II—III,

1g25/27

of the

Soc. d. Miss. Etr.). L. BAUDIMONT, Fr. Pallu (1626—84), fondateur de la Soc., Paris 1934. G. DE VAUMAS, L'éveil missionaire de la France (to 1663), Lyons 1942.

% BIBLIOTEHECA

literature

on

America

MISSIONUM

1493/1gog).

(see

above)

P. G. MODE,

Source

graphical Guide for American Church Hist., Menasha,

Documents

COLUMBUS: StZ

120,

DERICI,

of American

Biogr.

1930,

Der

by

195/207.

Charakter

Cath.

History, Milwaukee,

E.MORISON,

Boston

Studi Colombiani,

der

Entdeckung

Book

Wisc.

%rgss;

21962,

u. Eroberung

Biblio-

1921. J.T.ELLIS,

S.DE

3 vols., Genoa

and

{Mission

CHRISTOPHER

MADARIAGA,

1952.

G. FRIE-

Amerikas

durch

die

Europier, 3 vols. 1925/36. J. T. BERTRAND, Hist. de I'Amérique espagnole, 2 vols. Paris 1929, E. SAMHABER, Siidamerika, 1939. H. Herring, History

of Latin

America,

New

York

Santa Sede e Hispanoamérica,

Missionspolitik

im

1955.

P. DE

3 vols. Rome

Entdeckungszeitalter,

LETURIA,

1959/60.

ZMW

Relaciones

1913,

entre

A.FREITAG, 11ff.;

HpBl

la

Span.

153,

1914 I, 260 ff., 346 ff. J. SCHMIDLIN, ZMW 19235, 182/96 (material in Propaganda on the American mission 1622/57). J. SPECKER, Die Missionsmethode in Span.-Amerika im 16, Jh., 1953.

124

P. BORGES,

Métodos misiona-

§ 177. Missions among Pagans in America, Africa and Eastern Asia

suggested and ratified by the Curia in 1493—1494 (§ 157, 3), a line of demarcation was drawn west of the Azores. All newly discovered lands to the west of the line were allotted to Spain; all to the east, to Portugal, and both countries were sertously reminded of their duty to promote the faith among the natives. Twelve missionaries accompanied Columbus on his second voyage in 1493. Christianity

was first planted in the Antilles of the West Indies (Hispaniola,

Cuba, etc.) where bishoprics were established by 1511. Shortly thereafter it was introduced into New Spain or Mexico which was

conquered

by

Hernando

Cortez

from

1519

to

152I1.

Franciscans

began to work in Mexico in 1523 ; also in 1523 idolatry was forbidden. Missions were soon established in South America, especially in Venezuela, New Granada (Colombia), in the Empire of the Incas (Peru, Ecuador, Chile), which Pizarro conquered in 1532, and in les

en

la

cristianizacidén

E. DAENELL,

and

TH.

AD. REIN, 1925.

Die

Spanier

M. MARSHALL,

THE

Der

de

Kampf

America,

in Nordamerika

The

Westeuropas AND

1960.

1513/1824,

Colonization

RELATIONS

JESUIT

Madrid of

um

North

$.LEITE,

1911.

America,

Nordamerika

DOCUMENTS

ALLIED

im

sce

P. 95.

Lond.

rgzz.

H. E. BOLTON

I5.

(North

u.

6.

Jh.,

America)

1610/1791, ed. by E. KENTON, New York 1925. TH. MAYNARD, The Story of American Catholicism, 2 vols. N. York 196:t. TH. ROEMER, The Cath. Church in the US,, St. Louis 1950. J. SCHMIDLIN, ZMW 1924 82/88 {Missions

in North America, survey of lit.). J. G. SHEA, Hist. of the Cath. Church in the United States (1521/1866}, 4 vols. New York 1886/g2. C. DE ROCHEMONTEIX,

Les

Jésuites

et

la

Nouvelle-France,

5

vols.

Paris

1895/1906.

TH. HUGHES, Hist. of the Society of Jesus in North America (to 1773), J.CAMPBELL, Pioneer Priests of North America vols. Lond. 1go7/17. ‘("1642,’1710), z vols. New York 1gogf1o. R.CORRIGAN, see above. J.SCHMID-

LIN, ZMW 1924, 145/60 (Christianization of Mexico). M.CUEVAS S]., Historia de la Iglesia en Mexico, 5 vols, Tlalpam 1921/28. CH. S. BRADON, Religious Aspects of the Conquest of Mexico, Cambr. 1931. G. DECORME, La Obra de los Jesuitas Mexicanos (1572—1767), 2 vols. Mex. 1949. R. RICARD, La “conquéte spirituelle” du Mexique (1523/7z), Paris 1933. G. W, JAMES, The old Franciscan Missions of California, Boston 21925. Z, ENGELHARDT

OF¥M.,

The

Missions

and

Misstonaries

of

Cal.,

2 vols.

S. Barbara

21929/30. J. M. KEYS, Las Misiones espafiolas de Cal., Madr. 1950. M. J. GEIGER, The life and times of fray Junipero Serra OFM, 2 vols. Washington

1959. O.MAAS, Misiones de Nuevo Mejico, Madr. 1g29. W.HANNS, Die Verdienste der Jesuitenmissiondre um d. Erforsch. Kanadas 1611/1759, Diss. 1916. F.B. STECK, The Jolliet-Marquette Expedition 1673, Quincy, [11. 1928. G. GOYAU, Les origenes religieuses du Canada, Paris 1924. A. F. MO-

RICE,

Hist. of the Cath.

lation

of Can.,

Canada

in Western

Church

(1659/1895),

2z vols.

Toronto 1910, F. X. GARNEAU, Hist. du Canada 1% {1534/1744), Paris 1913. L. LEMMONIER, Hist. du Can. francgais, Paris 1949. J. C. McCOY, Jesuit ReParis

1937.

A. A. JOHNSTON,

Eastern Nova Scotia. I, Antigonish 1960.

de la Nouvelle-France, Paris 1925. Isaac 1635.

of the Cath.

Church

in

G. RIGAULT et G. GOYAU, Martyrs

J. WYNNE,

The Jesuit Martyrs of North Canada,

Paris

Jogues, New York 1927. F.TALBOT, The Life of Is. Jogues, J.A. O'BRIEN, The American Martyrs, New York 1953.

N. Y.

America,

1930.

Hist.

N. York

A.HEINEN,

1925.

Unter

H. FOUQUERAY,

den

Rothiuten

Les

Martyrs

Kanadas,

du

1930.

M. J., SCOTT,

125

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517 —1648)

the La Plata countries of Paraguay (see below), Uruguay, Argentina and Portuguese Brawii (principal missioner, Fr. Jose de Anchieta, S. J., 1553—1597).

In spite of some initial errors

{forced conver-

sions and mass baptisms with little or no previous instruction, levying of tithes, etc.) there gradually developed 1n these countries

g flourishing Church with millions of native converts and a well-

organized hierarchy. By 1610 there were in South America five archdioceses, twenty-seven dioceses and about four hundred monasteries. Only a relatively small portion of the natives remained pagan. In North America, religious of various orders working out from their centers in Mexico evangelized New Mexico, Florida and California,; while French missionaries from Canada, or New France,

travelling the Great Lakes and rivers, penetrated the interior. After 1615 the Franciscan Recollects and after 1625 the Jesuits worked with zeal and heroism among the Hurons and other Indian tribes of Canada. Eight Jesuits, among them Fathers John de Brébeuf and Isaac Jogues, suffered martyrdom at the hands of the Iroquois from

1646

to

1649

and

were

canonized

om

June

29,

1930.

The

Apostolic Vicariate of Canada which was erected in 1658 became the diocese of Quebec in 1674. The

Spanish

and

Portuguese

governments

supported

the missions

in

their colonies with money and military protection, in recognition of which Rome granted them the right of patronage for all new mission bishoprics. Spain was given this right in 1508; Portugal in exercise of this right by the Spanish ‘‘Council of the Indies” crown obtained an almost absolute control of the Church in On the other hand the work of conversion was greatly impeded

stations and 1514. In the the Spanish the colonies. not only by

reason of the low degree of culture of some of the natives among whom the mis-

sionaries worked, but also, and especially, by the conduct of greedy conguistadores, brutal colonists and avaricious traders, who often mercilessly exploited the Indians, treated them inhumanly and reduced them to slavery. Such unchristian conduct on the part of the Spaniards made the “‘spiritual conquest’’ of the Indians doubly hard. At the request of the missionaries, Paul IIT issued a Bull in 1537 in which he forbade slavery in the New World under pain of excommunication and emphasized that the Indians had jmmortal souls the same as the whites and were, therefore, privileged to become Christians and receive the sacraments. But the scandals continued. One of the most ardent champions of the oppressed for almost half a century

was the Dominican Bariolomé de Las Casas of Seville (f 1566),

bishop

of

Chiapas in Mexico {1543-—1551). With indefatigable zeal, and some exaggera-

tion, he pleaded and wrote in defense of his charges and went to Spain seven

times in an effort to induce the crown to take action against the injustices being perpetrated, When it became evident that the Indians were not capable of doing heavy work, large numbers of Negro slaves were imported

126

§ 177, Missions among Pagans in America, Africa and Eastern Asia from Africa. These also received the care and protection ef the missionaries.

One

of the best known

heroes of Christian charity is Peler Claver,

S. J.,

a Catalan, who worked among the slaves brought into the port of Cartagena

(Colombia)

for almost forty years (1615—1654)

and baptized an estimated

300,000. He is rightly called the "“Apostle of the Negro”; but he called him-

self the “‘slave of the Negro.”” He was canonized in 1888. P, Leturia,

1930,

H}JG

133/77; Misc.

patronage

1926,

1/71;

Ges.

G. Mercati V,

in America).

Aufsitze

1946,

E. Schdfer,

Der

z. Kulturgesch.

Spaniens

II,

s02 {f. (the Holy See and Spanish

Kgl.

Span.

Oberste

Indienrat I,

1936. L. Hanke, HarvThR 1937, 65/102 (Paul III and the Indians}. Biog. on Las Casas, see . 4. MacNutl, Lond. 190g; 4. Freitag, 1015; L. Hanke,

Philad.

1953; M. Jiménez Ferndndez,

Seville 1953.

R. Schneider, Las Casas

vor Karl V, 1938. B. Biermann, ArchFP 1957, 337/58 {Documents on Las Casas). [J. Hoffner, Christentumn u. Menschenwiirde, Das Anliegen d. span. Kolonialethik im Goldenen Zeitalter, 1947. Biog. on P. Claver by . Ledos, Paris 1923; 4. Lunn, Lond. 1035; J. Schenk, 1954; A. Valtierra, London 1960.

A special type of mission developed in Paraguay and neighboring countries. After 1609 the Christian Indians, with the consent of the Spanish government,

were

gathered

into

settlements

(veductions,

doectrinas)

which all whites except the missionaries were strictly excluded.

to protect the Indians from

exploitation

and from

from

This was

the evil example

of the

colonists. There were more than thirty such reductions with a total population of about 150,000. A nominal poll tax was paid to the colonial government but beyond this the reductions were entirely exempt from colonial authority

and subject directly to the king. All civil and ecclesiastical affairs within the reductions were administered by Jesuit missionaries of whom sixty to eighty were assigned to this work. The more tractable and intelligent

natives,

chiefly

the arts, and

Guarani,

many

were

were

trained

converted.

in

The

agriculture,

land,

the

the produce

trades

or

of the fields

even and

the yield of the arts and crafts were all held in common, althcugh the legitimate acquisition of private property was not discouraged. The daily program: work, rest, recreation, was dominated by religion. The ‘'Jesnit states’’ of

Paraguay

patriarchal

(1516}

were

a practical attempt to realize the ideal of the theocratic-

commonwealth

and by Thomas

At any rate the system

described

Campanella,

by

Thomas

O. P.,

More

in

in his “Civitas

his

““Utopia”

Solis”

(1611).

served fo train the npatives to live in a Christian

civilization. Later on, in the eighteenth century, the Franciscan, Junipero Serra, introduced a similar system in the missions of California and achieved a success which

constifutes

of the missions. For a proved to be the most Indians; yet they were ments whose strongest For anterior Schmidlin, Kath.

Compaiiia

one of the most glorious

pages

in the history

period of a hundred and fifty years the reductions effective means of civilizing and Christianizing the ruthlessly suppressed and destroyed by the governsupport they were (§ 194, 2).

and hostile bliography (Gothein, Pfotenhauer) see Missionsgesch., 315 ff. P. Pastells SJ., Historia de la

de Jesis en la Provincia

del Paraguay,

8 vols., Madrid

1912/49

(standard). P. Herndndez S J., Organizacién social de las doctrinas Guaranies,

127

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517 —1648)

2.vols, Barcelona 1913. Documentos para la Historia Argentina t. XIX-—XXI:

Iglesia, Prov. del Par. etc. I—III {1609/37) ed. C. Leonhardt S J., Buen, Aires

P. Fl,

A. Bringmann,

1927/29.

deutscher

ein

Bauacke,

in Par.

Missionir

(1749/68), 1908. A. Huonder, The Cath. Encyclop. XII, 688/700. 4. Astrain, Historia de la Compafiia de Jesds (§ 173 bibliog.) IV—VII. Fr. Schmzdi,

Der christl.-soziale Staat der Jesuiten in Paraguay, 1913, Maria Fassbinder, Der ‘Jesunitenstaat’ in Par., 1926. J. S. Geer, same title, 1928. Pastor XV], Y, 293 ff. O. Quelle, Ibero-Americ. Arch. 1934, 260/82. M. Mdrner, The

political and economic activities of the Jesuits in the La Plata region, Stockh. 1953. C. Lugon, La république communiste chrétienne des Guaranis 16101768,

Paris

1949.

3. As far as missions were concerned, Africa’ remained the “dark continent”” until the nineteenth century. Some few attempts at

evangelizing the pagan tribes were indeed made; thus after 1491 (first native bishop in 1521) and again after 1547 Portuguese missionaries from Congo worked in Angola and Mozambigue, and from the beginning of the seventeenth century also in Upper Guinea and in the island of Madagascar. In the Mohammedan north the missions remained without results. On the other hand the Franciscans and Jesuits in Abyssinia or Ethiopia, since the beginning of the seventeenth century, had good reason to hope for the future. The Negus Seltan-Sagad (Segned — Emperor Socinius or Susengos) embraced the Catholic faith in 1624. But the native clergy and most of the people objected to union with Rome, and all mission endeavor had to cease. The Alexandnian religion (Monophysitism) was again rigorously imposed ; all foreign missionaries were banished and several of them were put to death. 4. The Christian faith was preached with great zeal and exceptional

owing

results in

to pagan

eastern

opposition

Asia:

and

India,

internal

Japan

and

China®;

but

difficulties the results

1 BIBLIOTHECA MISSIONUM (vide supra) 15—=20, 1951/54 (bibliog. on Adrican missions from 1053). C. P. GROVES, The Planting of Christiantty in Africa

II,

London

1954.

L. KILGER,

Die

erste

Mission

unter

im

Konigr.

Kongo

den

Bantu-

stimmen Ostafrikas (1560/62), 1917; ZMW 1917, 1919 (East Africa) 1921, 1930 {Congo and Angola); 1930, 297/311 {Upper Guinea and East Africa). EUG. WEBER,

1924.

Dne

portugies.

Reichsmission

J.CUVELIER, L’ancien royaume de Congo, Bruges 1946.

1491/1548,

J. CUVELIER

and L. JADIN, I’ancien Congo d’aprés les archives romaines (1518—1640) Brussels 1954. S. R. WELCH, South Africa, 6 vols. Capetown 1935/51 (several different titles). J. SCHMIDLIN, ZMW 922, 193/205 (Madagascar). BIBLIOTECA

BIQ-BIBLIOGRAFICA

DELLA

TERRA

SANTA

E

DELL’

ORIENTE

FRANCESCANO, III. serie, Quaracchi 1928 (Franciscan missions in Ethiopia). 2 BIBLIOTHECA

MISSIONUM

Asia from 1245). E. ZECHLIN, HZ guese to India, China and ]apan). me ¢t de 1'"Occident, Paris 1952.

128

4—11,

1928/39

(bibliog. of the missions in

157, 1937, 491/526 (coming of the PortuH. DE LUBAC, La rencontre du Bouddhis-

§ 177. Missions among Pagans in America, Africa and Eastern Asia

were not everywhere permanent. Much of the success was due to the comprehensive plan of mission work devised by the Society of Jesus. From the foundation of the Society, its members bound themselves by a special vow to go to the Turkish or pagan missions at the request of the Holy See. By the year of the founder’s death (15560) there were about one hundred and {fifty Jesuits in the missions of eastern Asia. a} The

Philippine

Islands,

inhabited

by

Malays,

were

discovered

the Portuguese Magellan in 1521 and were claimed for the crown

by

of Spain

in 1569. Immediately Augustinian Hermits from Spain began to preach the Gospel there and were followed by Franciscans, Dominicans and Jesuits. From the beginning the missions received the liberal support of the Spanish government and the missionaries were able to baptize and civilize large numbers of the natives. In 1595 an archdiocese was erected at Mawnila with

three suffragan sees; and by 1600 two million Filipinos — one-half of the population — were Catholic. Unfortunately, however, many of these were Catholic in name only, since the instructions they received were often super-

ficial. —

F. J. Montalban,

Philippinen, 1565—1%700,

1931.

Madison

f.

L.

1959.

S. J., Das span, Patronat und die Eroberung

Phelan,

The

Hispanization

of the

der

Philippines

b) From very early times there were Christians on the Malabar Coast in southwestern India or Hindustan. Although these people were called Thomas Christians, they were actually Nestorians (cfr. § 12, 11 and 354, 5). After the Portuguese had established a colony here, Goa was made the seat of a diocese (1534) which extended from the Cape of Good Hope to Japan. In 1541 a seminary was opened for the training of a native clergy. Even before the written approbation of the Society of Jesus had been given by the Holy See, King John IIT of Portugal asked for their services in India. In May

natins

1542 Francis Xavier, who was one of the first companions

(§ 173, 1), landed in Goa

In spite of tremendous

of St. Ig-

as missionary and papal legate to India.

difficulties, he socon achieved brlliant success.

His

first efforts were spent among the careless western Christians of Goa whom he recalled to a more exact fulfillment of their religious duties. Then he directed his attention to the Paravians around Cape Comorin, of whom about twenty thousand had already been baptized, and he baptized many more; and between 1544 and 1547 he converted several thousand pagans along the coast of Travancore. He then visited the island of Ceyilon, the

peninsula of Malacca, and the Moluccas or Spice Islands (east of the Celebes)

and in 1548 was again in India {Cochin). Both Christians and pagans considered lum a prophet and a worker of miracles. The ‘““Apostle of India” looked upon himself as the precursor and pioneer of the mission

that was

to be, and left to his companious and the other missicnaries of the future the task of building up and deepening the faith of which he had planted the seed. He was especially solicitous about the training of native clergy and catechists, who could understand and make allowances for local customs and morals and who would exercise their office as a strictly religious, and }¢

Bihlmeyer-Tichis, Church History TIT

129

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517—1648) not a political function. When Francis went on to Japan in 1549 (see below)

his fellow religious continued the work he had begun in India. As children of their times they often placed too much reliance on the anthority of the home government. In 1558 Goa became an archdiocese with suffragans in Cochin and Malacca; later Meliapor (Mylapur) and Cranganove were also made suffragans of Goa. The Thomas Christians were reunited with the

Cathalic Church in 1599; but most of them separated again in 1653. Unfortunately, the Portuguese government, presuming on the right of patronage granted by Rome, seriously impeded the natural development of the hierarchy in India, so that

was

after 1637 Propaganda

the

to remedy

obliged

situation by the appointment of vicars apostolic (titular bishops); but even this measure provoked constant disputes with Portugal until well into the nineteenth century., et

F. Roz

hac

in

Nestorianorum . ..

erroribus

De

I. Hausherr,

India

orientali, QOrientalia Christ. XI, 1, Rome 1928. Placidus a S. foseph, De fontibus iuris ecclesiastici Syro-Malankarensium, Rome 1937. G. Schurhammer, The Malabar Church and Rome, Trichinopoly 1939. — [J. Wicks, Documenta indica {1540 to 57), 3 vols. Rome 1948/54 (MHS] 70. 72. 74).

A da Silva Rego, Documentagio para a historia das missdes do padroado portugues do Oriente. India, 12 vols. Lisb. 1947/58. J. Védik, Die Inder, 1934, M. D'Sa,

1936.

Lond.

of India,

A history

G. Dunbar,

of the

Hist.

Cath.

Church in India I, Bombay 1g10. A. Jann, Die kath. Missionen in Indien, China u. Japan, ihre Organisation u. das portugiesische Patronat vom 15./18. JTh., 1915

u. Buddhismus

(cfr. StZ o1,

um

im Ringen

1916,

Matthieu

Th. Gasquiére,

1922.

Fernasien,

Christentum

J. B. Aufhauser,

264 #1.).

Castro, premier vicaire apostolique aux Indes, Louv.

1937

(cfr. ZMW

de

1937,

S. G. Prakasar, Hist. of the Cath. Mission in Ceylon I (1505/1602},

243 ff.).

G. Schurhammey and E. A. Vorelzsch, Ceylon z. Z. des 1924. Colombo Konigs Bhuwaneka Bahu u. Fr. Xavers 1539/52, 2 vols. 1928. C. Wessels,

d’Amboine

la mission

de

Hist.

Monumenta

2 vols.

Xaveriana,

Fr. Xaver,

1932. Idem

(MHS]

1944/45

Madrid

Portug.-Asiens

genoss. Quellen z. Gesch.

1576—1605,

[Moluccas]

1go0/12.

Louv.

G. Schurhammer,

1934.

Die

—

zeit-

z. Z. des hl

u. s. Nachbarlinder

2 vols. Rome

et J. Wicki, Epistolae s. Francisci Xav.,

67/68). Commentarii s. Fr. Xaverii sacri 15521952

Hist. SJ. 1g953). Biogr. of Si. Francis Xavier by J.Cros, z vols. Pans

(Arch.

19oo;

A. Brou, 2 vols, Paris 21922 (cfr. J. Schmidlin, ZMW 1914, 60/64); A. Bellesort, Paris 1917. 1936; M. T. Kelly, Lond. 1918; G. Schurhammer, 1955 if.

(standard), Th. Maynard,

Lond. 1937; J. Brodrick, London 1952.

Dufour, Paris 1953. Cfr. G. Schurhammer,

ZME

1922, 129/65;

X. Léon-

Ibero-Americ.

Arch, 1930, 234/56; Arch. Hist. 8]. 1935, 201/33,; Studia missionalia 1953, 33/75. A. Brou, S. Frangois Xavier, Conditions et methodes de son apostolat, Bruges 1925. C. M. de Melo, The recruitment and formation of the native clergy in India, Lisbon

After

1579

the

1955.

Jesuits

achieved

some

temporary

success

in northern

India in the realm of the talented and tolerant Mogul Akbar the Great (1556 to 1605), This was especially the case when Jerome Xavier, a relative of Francis

was

130

Xavier,

went to Akbar’'s court at Lahore in 1595.

a religious eclectic and syncretist was

not

converted

But Akbar who

and his second

§ 177. Missions among Pagans in America, Africa and Eastern Asia successor, been

Shah Jahan

built.

V. 4. Smith,

Miss. 1920—1921

(1628), destroyed the Christian churches Akbar

p. 201 ff. —

the

Great

Mogul,

Oxford

which had

1917;

cfr.

Kath.

P. du Jarric, Akbar and the Jesuits, transl.

by C. H. Payne, London 1926, — C. Wessels, Early Jesuit Travellers in Central Asia 1607—1721, The Hague 1924. — E. E. M acLagan, The Jesuits and the Great Mogul, London 1932. The Christian mission in Madura in southern India began under the

most favorable auspices. The Jesuit Robert de Nobili, a Tuscan nobleman, introduced (1606) a new experiment later known as the accommodation method.

He

began

by recognizing

the

Indian

caste

social institution and adopted the dress and manner {penttent) and a guru (religious teacher), and to the Brahmins or highest caste. He studied

system

as a political-

of life of a Sannyasi

devoted himself exclusively the language and literature

of the caste and composed religious treatises in Sanskrit and Tamil. In administering baptism he omitted those ceremonies which proved repugnant

to the

Hindus.

In this way

Nobili was

able to make

many

converts,

as did

also his fellow religious john de Britto, a noble Portuguese, who was martyred

in 1693 (canonized 1947). The first opposition to the Nobili method came from members of the Society; but in 1623 Gregory XV decided in Nobili’s

favor. After 1640 Nobili {} 1656) organized a number of Jesuits in the Indian mission to adopt the dress and manners of the pariahs, the members of the lower caste. By 1670 the Christian converts in Madura numbered over 40,000 and by 1700 they exceeded 150,000. But by the latter date the

opposition to the accommodation method had become so strong, especially on the part of the Franciscans and Capuchins (see below under China), that

the Curia was

obliged

to institute

an investigation.

Charles

Thomas

Mazliard de Towrnom, patriarch of Antioch (titular) was appointed papal legate and visitator to the missions of the East. In 1704 he condemned sixteen of the so-called Malabar custorus and in spite of the defense presented by the Jesuits, the Holy See supported Maillard’s decision. Finally in September 1744 Benedict X1V by the Constitution “Omunium sollicitudinum” sustained the sixteen points with some modifications. The controversy, with some of its unpleasant concomitants, created great confusion in the

Indian power, hardest Eastern

mission. This was followed by the collapse of Portugal’s colonial the incursion of English and Dutch Protestants and finally, by the blow of all, the suppression of the Society in 1773. As a result, these missions declined rapidly toward the close of the eighteenth century.

L. Besse, La mission du Maduré, Trichinopoly

Nobili, 1924. men,

1943;

Paris

1914.

P. Dakhmen,

R. de Nobili, Premiére apologie (1610), ed. et trad. p. P. Dah-

1931.

A. Bessidves,

Monogr.

on

Toulouse

Jokn

de

Britio:

1946.

A.

Véth,

C.

Die

A. Moveschini,

im kath. Heidenapostolat,

1927.

E. Amann,

Florence

Akkommodation

Mission d. Neuzeit, Kath. Miss. 1926, 225 ff. et passim. J. Thauren, komm.

R. de

Malabares

in

d.

Die Ak-

Rites,

Dict-

ThC IX, 1704/45. V. Cromin, A pearl to India (Robert de Nobili), London 1959. For further lit. on the rites controversy, see under China infra. ¢) During the seventeenth century Christianity gained a footing in Indochina after individual missionaries of various orders had prepared the way. Greater and more permanent results were achieved in Cockin China

131

Modern and Recent Times. First Peviod (1517 —1648)

(after 1615) by the Jesuit Buzomi and in Tonkin (after 1627) by his companion Alexander de Rhodes (f 1660), often called the “‘Apostle of Annam.” The latter aroused lively interest in the foreign missions in his native France and became instrumental in the foundation of the Paris Foreign Mission Seminary {see no. 1 above). About the same time Christianity was introduced into Siam and Cambodia. By about 1660 the Christians in Indochina

300,000.

numbered

in 1663

But

a bitter

broke

persecution

out

which, with a few interruptions, lasted into the nineteenth century. J. A.Otto, Al. v. Rhodes, Kath. Miss. 1928, 6 fi. et passim. F. Schwager, ZMW 1913, 146/56. A. Launay, Hist. de la mission du Tonkin I (1658f1717), Paris 1927. Ch. Maybon, Hist. moderne du pays d’Annam (1592/1920), Paris 1919.

H. Chappoulie,

Aux

origines

d'une

Eglise.

Rome

et

les

missions

d'Indochine, 2z vols. Paris 1943/48. d) The Catholic mission in Japan was founded by Si. Francis Xavier,

who

at first in the port of Ka-

(1549—1I551,

preached there for two years

goshima) and in spite of the opposition of Buddhist bonzes, converted large numbers of the natives. He greatly admired the Japanese people because of

their efficiency

and

their relatively high standard

the point of entering China when Hongkong,

December

3, 1552.

His

of culture.

He

was

he died on the island of Sancian, body was

brought

to Goa,

where

on

near it is

still honored. Pope Gregory XV canonized him in 1622, After Xavier's death the work of the Jesuits in Japan continued to bear fruit. By 1580 there

were

two

hundred

churches

with

about

160,000

Christians

1in the

shogun

Hideyoshi

{(called

“Land of the Rising Sun."”” Many of the converts were of the nobility, even some of the daimyos, or feudal barons. In 1585 Japanese pilgrims, led by two Christian princes, came to Rome and were granted audience by Gregory XIII. A Japanese bishopric, subject to Goa, was erected at Fumnay

in the kingdom

of

Bungo

in 1588.

In

1587

the

Taikosama, by the Christians) began a bloody persecution against Christianity. It was during the persecution that the well-known martyrs of Nagasaki

—six foreigners and twenty natives — were crucified in 1597. But the number of Chrstians continued to grow; by 1600 there were about 750,000 and fifteen years later, more than a million. A still more frightful persecution began in 1614 under the shogun Iyeyasu (Taifusama) and lasted for several decades,

during which the Christian population was reduced by more than half, The causes of this attack were various: jealousy of the native bonzes; fear of the political influence of Spain and Portugal; intrigues of the Dutch Calvinists; the imprudent entry of Spanish friars {(Franciscans and Dominicans} from the Philippines into mission territory reserved to the Jesuits up to 1600 (1608 ?), and finally a lack of a sufficient number of native priests.

After

1638 no more missionaries

were allowed

in the country

and in 1640

a sort of special court of inquisition was instituted to deal with Christians. The missionaries who remained in the country were expelled or executed and the native Christians were drowned or otherwise kiiled with refinement

of torture.

Up until 1857 anyone

suspected

of belonging to the Christian

religion was called upon to trample under foot the crucifix or a picture of the Blessed Virgin (Efumi). It has been asserted that the Dutch Calvinists actually submitted to this blasphemous ceremony for the sake of commercial

132

§ 177, Missions among Pagans in America, Africa and Eastern Asia

interests, but the assertion is incapable of proct. Recently there have discovered at Nagasaki the trial records of fifty-seven Christians who executed between 1660 and 1674, and of fifty-nine Christians of the period who died in prison (cfr. M. Anesaki, in Misc. Ehrle III, Rome

PP. 343 ff.;

J. Dahlmann,

Kath.

Miss.

1922—1923,

pp. 57 ff.;

been were same 1924,

H. Heuvers,

StZ 109. 1925, Pp. 315—318). The last accounts of this persecution date from 1691. In 1865 French missionaries discovered in the neighborhood

of Nagasaki about 20,000 more than two centuries.

the Church.

In 1924

Christians who had kept the faith in secret for They, for the most part, were again united to

another

a village near Osaka. Cir. Kath, Miss. 1924/235,

Japans

(£549/78),

Yoretzsch,

1926;

libers.

v.

group

265;

of such Christians was

1927,

348 f. —

kommentiert

v.

discovered

in

L. Frois S[., Die Gesch.

G.

Schurhammer

Relacion del martirio . . . el 5 Febr.

1597,

ed.

u.

E.

A

R. Galdos,

Rome 1935. Kirishito-Ki u. Sayo-Yoroku, Japan. Dokumente z. Missionsgesch. des 17. Jhs, deutsch 1940. L. Magnino, Pontificia Nipponica 1T, Rome 1947. L. Pedot, La S. C. de propaganda fide e le missioni del Giappone (1622—1838), Vicenza 1946. K. S. Latourette, The hist, of Japan, New York 1947. J. Witte, Japan, 1928 (pp. 371/500 on the Christian mission). L. Del-

place, Le catholicisme au Japon (1540/1660), 2 vols. Brussels 1908/10 (cir. StML 1910 II, 566 {f.). O. Cary, A Hist. of Christianity in Japan (r549/1909), 2 vols. Lond. 1909. Chk. R. Boyer, The Christian century in Jap. (1549—1650),

London 1951. A. jannand J. B. Aufhauser, vide supra under India. J. Dakl-

mann,

Japans

dlteste Bezichungen

z. Westen

(1 542{1614),

1923.

G. Schur-

hammer, StZ 100, 1921, 440/55 (Francis Xavier in the capital of Japan); Das kirchl. Sprachproblem in der japan. Jesuitenmission des 16. und 17. Jh.s, Tokyo 1928; Die Disputation des P. Cosme de Torres 3]J. mit d. Buddhisten

in Yamaguchi

(1551), Tokyo 1929.

D, Schilling, Das Schulwesen der Jesuiten

in Jap. 1551/1614, Diss. 1931. J. F. Schiitte, Valignanos Missionsgrundsitze f. Japan I, (1573/82), Rome 1951/58. J. Laures, Die Anfinge der Miss, von Miyako, 1952; Takayama Ukon u. die Anfinge d. Kirche in Jap., 1954; Kirishitan Bunko, a manual of books and documents on the early Christian missions in Japan, Tokyo, ¥1957; The Catholic Church in Japan, Tokyo 1954. e} The spiritual conquest of China, with its rich and ancient culture, was carefully planned by Jesuit missionaries and carried out especially by means of a knowledge of the language and by cultivating mathematics and astronomy,

so highly

esteemed

in the

point of the undertaking was the Hongkong, where a bishopric for 1576. Three Jesuits in particular of Macerata (1 1610) who began his von Bell of Cologne (f 1666), who

nand

Verbiest

(f 1688), who

went

“Middle

Kingdom.”

The

starting-

Portugnese colony of Macao, opposite China and J apan had been erected in achieved glowing success: Matteo Ricci mission career in 1583; John Adam Schall began in 1622z, and the Fleming, Ferdito China in 1659.

By

adopting

Chinese

customs and manners of life, but especially by their learning and proficiency

in the sciences,

they

were

accepted

in the highest

circles

and

even

gained

the confidence of the court. Schall and Verbiest were appolnted directors of the Bureau of Mathematics and Astronomy in Peking, and retained their high position even after the native Ming dynasty had been overthrown by ths

133

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517 —1648)

Manchu dynasty in 1644. During the seventeenth century Spanish Dominicans and

Franciscans,

who

had previously worked

in China,

returned.

But

the differences in mission methods gave rise to unpleasant friction. Nevertheless, Christianity

continued

to prosper;

by

1664

there were

about

250,000

Christians and by 1700 it is estimated that they numbered about one million. In 1674

the first native was

appointed vicar apostolic.

From time to time

there were local persecutions and many martyrs, In 1690 Peking {the ancient Cambaluc

Goa.

§ 127, 4) and

Nanking

were

made

A high point of success was reached

emperor K’ang-hst m his empire. Bibliotheca

granted

Missionum

bishoprics

and

suffragans

temporarily in 1692

when

of

the

full freedom

for the preaching

of Christianity

(vide

13—14,

Fonr!i

supra)

1959/61.

Ricciane

ev. P, d’Elia, 3 vols. Rome 1g941/50. Ad. Schall, Relatio de ortu et progressu fidei in regno Chinensi (1581 /1669), Regensburg 1672. Lettres et mémoires, ed. H. Bernard, Tientsin 1942. La corréspondance de Ferd. Verbiest, ed. R. Josson et L. Willaevt, Brussels 1938. A. van den Wyngaert, Sinica Franciscana II—V, Quaracchi/Rome 1933/54. Ricci: Biog. by A. Ricci-Riccards, Florence

1910:

cfr.

Tacchi

1947, IF. Bortone, Rome 1953.

Abh,

fabeln

Berlin 1938, 5.

*1go4,

H. Bosmans, Giants,

Notre

H. Cordier, étrangers,

1925.

Verbiest,

Dame

Hist.

CivC

II—III;

E. Salviont,

Turin

O. Franke, L1 Tschi (Chinese sage) u. M, Ricci,

ZkTh

1gor,

Louvain

(Ind.)

1962.

330 ff.

1912.

—

Paris 1920/21.

1933.

B. Duhr,

{Schall’s

—

alleged

G. H. Dwme,

H. Hermann,

générale de la Chine

4 vols.

1910

4. Véth, J. A. Schall v, Bell,

240 ff. and

F.

Venturt,

Jesuiten-

marriage).

Generation

Chines.

Gesch.

et de ses relations avec

F. E. A. Krause,

Gesch.

Ostasiens,

of

1912.

les pays

3 vols.

O. Franke, Gesch. des chines. Reiches, 3 vols, 1g30/37. —G. NHosenhranz,

Der Nomos

de la Chine, India.

Chinas u, d. Christentums,

3 vols. Vannes

A. Thomas,

Hist,

1936.

A. Launay,

Hist.

des missions

19o7/8. Jann and Aufhauser, vide supra under

de

la

mission

{prot.), China u. die christl. Mission, 1925.

de

Pékin,

Paris

1923.

W. Oehler

Jul. Richier (prot.), Das Werden

der christl. Kirche in China, 1927. K. S. Latourette {prot.), Hist. of Christian Missions in China, Lond. 1929. 0. Maas, Die Wiedererdffnung der Franziskanermiss. in China, in der Neuzeit, 1926, 5. Alcobendas, Las misiones

franciscanas en China

1650/90,

Madr.

1933.

B. Biermann,

Dic Anfinge

d.

neueren Dominikanermiss. in China, 1927 (cfr. 4. Vdtk, ZkTh 1928, 420/26). J. M. Gonzdlez, Misiones dominicanas en China I, 1700f50, Madr. 1952, P. d’'Elia, The Cath. native episcopacy in China, Shanghai 1927; The Catholic missions in China, Lond. 1935. H. Bernard, Aux portes de la Chine (16. Jh.}, Paris 1937. S. Schiiller, Die Gesch. der christl. Kunst in China, 1940. G. Mensaeri, ArchFH 1953, 369/416 (Hierarchy in Ch. 1684—1v21). — J. Bettray,

Die

Christiang

in China

Rome

1955.

Akkommodationsmethode

E. R, Hughes,

before

des

Religion in China, the Year

1550,

P.

Matteo

London

London

Ricci

1950.

1930.

in

China,

4. C. Moule,

C. Cary-Elwes,

China and the Cross. A survey of missionary history, New York 1957, In the meantime

dark clouds were gathering over the Chinese mission.

Even earlier than in India, the Jesuit missionaries in China had considered it permissable and necessary to adapt their methods to the special conditions of the

134

country.

Ricci,

the

founder

of the

mission,

set

the

example,

He

§ 177. Missions among Pagans in America, Africa and Eastern Asia allowed the new converts to pay honor to the scholar and statesman,

fucius,

and

to venerate

their ancestors by

prostrations

and

sacrifices,

Consince

he viewed these ceremonies as having only civil and political significance; he translated the name of God by the Chinese characters T ien (heaven)

and Shang-#i (emperor or highest lord); and in administering Baptism and Extreme Unction omitted certain ceremonies that appeared obnoxious to

the learned classes. He also allowed some mitigations in the commandments

of the Church, especially with regard to fasting and the observance of Sunday. In 1615 Paul V approved the use of the Chinese language in the celebration

of Mass; but in 1698 Propaganda withdrew this approbation. Early in the seventeenth century the accommodation method met with opposition within

the Society of Jesus itself and after 1633, when Spanish friars arrived in China, the dispute became more heated. The friars considered accommodation

an illicit approval of paganism.

In 1645

Innocent

X condemned

the “Chinese Rites’’: but after further examination in Rome,

most of

Alexander VII,

in 1656, declared that the ceremonies in honor of Confucius and ancestors appeared to be ‘‘a purely civil and political cult.” The controversy continued

with

issued

increased

a decree

vehemence. forbidding

In

1704

sacrifices

the

Congregation

in honor

of the

of Confucius

and

Inquisition ancestors.

In 1702 Clement XTI had sent the apostolic legate Tournon (see no. 4b above} to investigate and regulate matters pertaining to the missions in the Far East. On January 25, 1707 Tournon forbade the Chinese Rites nnder pain

of excommunication. When the Emperor K'ang-hsi heard of the legate's decree, he ordered that Tournon be arrested and delivered to the Portu guese authorities at Macao. Tournon died there in 1710 after having been named a cardinal in 1707. In 1711 and again in 1715 Clement XI confirmed the

decisions of his legate. Most of the Jesuits in China as well as in India refused to abandon their accommodation method — a line of conduct difficult to reconcile with the constitutions of the Society and the special vow of obedience to the pope. Finally the definitive declaration of Benedict XIV in the Bull “Ex quo singulari” of July 11, 1742 terminated the controversy.

However,

the consequences

for the missions

were

devastating;

the Chinese

emperor became suspicious, progress in the spread of the faith was paralyzed, Catholics were subjected to social ostracism and many apostatized; persecutions were renewed and many missionaries were expelled. The only safe

refuge left to the Jesuits was their residence in Peking where they continued

to

serve

the

court

as

mathematicians,

astronomers

and

artists.

In

1759

they were expelled from Portugal and its colonies and in 1773 the Society

was suppressed. This proved a serious blow to the missions since the other orders and the Paris Seminary were unable to fill the gaps left by the depart-

ing Jesuits.

By the nineteenth century

only ahout

200,000

Catholics

were

leit in China. G. Pray S]., Hist. controversiarum de ritibus Sinicis, 178¢. J. Brukker S]., Rites Chinois, DictThC II, 2364/91. A. Huonder 5]., Der chines. Ritenstreit, 1921. K. Pieper, ZMW rg24, I/I1 (beginning of controversy

on

rites).

P. A. Kirsch,

ThQ

Chinese and Malabar rites). 1931,

162/68);

XVI,

1, 306 ff.

1901,

374 ff.

Pastor XV, St Chen,

(Bull

of Benedict XIV

284 ff., 440 ff. (also Neufer,

Hist.

tentaminum

on

the

ZMW

missionariorum

135

Modern and Recent Times, First Period (1517 —1648) s ] P,

proliturga Boutinch,

sinica,

Lo

Rome

lutte avtour

1951

{also

P, d'Elia,

de 1a liturgie Chinotse

CivC an

1953

XVII®

111, 55/70). ot XVIII®

5.,

avis 102, A8, Rosso, Apostolic Legations to China (18th cent.), South Pasadena 1947, A, v, d. Wyngaert, Autonianum 1947, 65f/91 (Tournon

and the bishop ol Peking). Launay,

way

Thomas,

Maus,

Clr. Libliog. under India, and the works of Janx,

Riermann,

cited

above,

Alter 1603 Tnlrepid Jesuit missionaries from Goa and China found their

into

followed

the alimost

them

inaceessible

in 1707 and

mountains

got as far as Lkasa,

of

Tibet.

Italian

Capuchins

the capital; but these daring

attempts Lo establish a mission in tlis country never met with great success,

The

Capuching

woere expelled

in 1760,

A vicariate in charge of the Paris

Forcign Mission bociety was established in eastern Tibet in 1847, A, Launay, Hist, de la mission du Thibet, 2 vols, TParis 1903. 4. Jann, Die Kath, Missionen (vide supra) 380 {f,; Festgabe G. Schniirer 1930, 128 ff,

G. Castellant, Nel Tibet (B, Desideri 8, ], 1648/1733), Rome 1934. L. Pelech, I missionari italiani nel T, ¢ nel Nepal, Rome

1952 ff,

§ 178.

Revival of Ecclesiastical Learning!. Theological Controversies. Piety and Morals. 1. One of the most gratifying facts in the life of the Church at the beginning of modern times is the revival of the theological sctences as a result of the religious schism. The exasperating attacks L

ITURTER, Nomenclator literarius theologicae cath. 112 {(1109/1563),

1906; LEL {1564/10603), 1907. M, ZIEGLELBAUIER, Hist. rei literariae QSB,, 4 tom. Augsburg 1754, B. DORHOLT, Der Predigerorden u. seine Theo-

logie, 1917, A, DIl BACKER-CH. SOMMERVOGEL, Bibliothéque des écrivains de la Comp. dv Jésus, new ed., 11 vols. Paris 189o/1932; Corrections and additions by L. M. RIVIERT and 1. CAVALLERA, Toulouse 1911/30. X. M. LeBACHELET et al., jésuites (Théologie), Niet’ThC VIII, 1012/1108. G.SCHNURiIiR, Kath. IKirche u. Kultur in d. Barockzeit, 1936, M. GRABMANN, Gesch, der Kath, Theologie, 1933, P FERET, La Faculté de Théol. de Paris et ses

docteurs les plus célébres, Epogue moderne, 7 vols. Paris 190af10. H. BREmond, Hist, litt, du sentiment relig. en France (see § 172, 4); Autour de I'humanisme,

Paris 1936.

L. PRUNLL,

sce § 172, 4.

J. CALVET,

La littérature

rol. de Y. de Sales a I'énelon, P’aris 1938. Dictionnaire des lettres francaises 11, 1954 (17" cent.), K, WERNER, Franz Suarez u. die Scholastik der letzten hh,, 2 vols, 1861, Gesch. der kath. Theologie (in Deutschland) seit dem rienter Konzil, 2188g; Gesch, der apologet. u. polem. Lit. der christl. Theol.

IV—V, 1865/67. FR.LAUCHERT, IMe italien. literar. Gegner Luthers, 1912. P, POLMAN, L’élément historique dans la controverse ecclés, du 16¢ s,

Gembloux 1932, F. KHRLE, Die Scholastilk u. ithre Aufgaben in unserer Zeit, '1933. K. ESCHWEILER, Die zwei Wege der neueren Theol., 1g26; Die

Philosophie der span, Sphtscholastik 17. Jh.,

in:

Spanische

Forsch.

der

auf den deutschen

Gdrresgesellsch.

I,

Universititen des

1,

1928,

251/325.

M. SULANO, Los grandes cscoldsticos espafioles de los siglos XVI y XVII, Madr. 1928, G, KOKSA, Dic Lehre der Scholastiker des 16. u. 17. Jh., 1955, E. LEWALTLR, Die Metaphysik der span.-portug. Jesuitenkollegien u. die Vorgesch. d. deutschen Idealismus auf d. luther. Universititen, 1933 J. TURMEL, Histoire de la théol, positive du concile de Trente au conc. du

Vatican, Paris 1go6.

136

§ 178. Theological Controversies. Piety and Morals

of the innovators forced Catholic scholars to re-examine the principles of the faith and to offer proof of its most tmportant teachings. The ecumenical Council of Trent did most valuable

work in 1ts discussions and decisions and stimulated further study. Even Humanism which had once endeavored, for the most part,

to ridicule and destroy, now placed itself at the service of theclogy

and offered its own improved methods of research to advance it. In Spain and Italy and to a lesser degree in France and Belprum,

a new and fruitful scholarship began to flower. In this revival which was led chiefly by the Dominicans and Jesuits, Germany was represented only by a few Jesuits. As may easily be understood, controversial theology — apologetics and polemics — attracted chief interest in the beginning; but in the sixteenth century there developed in Spain (Salamanca) a new interest in philosophy and

dogma.

This

movement,

known

as

Neo-Scholasticism,

was

based

on the best achievements of the thirteenth century, especially on St. Thomas, and proceeded to develop further. The other theological disciplines were also cultivated: Church History, Patrology, History of Dogma, Christian Archeology and Hagiography were tevised and much original work was done, a) The new Protestant teaching regarding the Scriptures and the necessity of appealing to Scripture for dogmatic proof of the Church’s teaching, greatly stimulated Scriptural studies. The Council of Trent had

paved the way (§ 174, 3) and the best editions of the Seriptures (the Compl utensia and other polyglotta, Erasmus's New Testament, § 145, 5; the Vulgate Sixto-Clementina, § 175, 3) were available. The best known exegeles were: The Spanish Jesuits John Maldonado (1 1583, commentary on the

Gospels) and Francis Toledo or Toletus (f 1596, a textual criticy;, William van st {Estius) in Douai (f 1613, commentary on the Epistles); Cornelius van den Steen (a Lapide), S. J. in Louvain and Rome {t 1637). Excellent introductions to biblical studies were written by the Dominican Sixius of Stena (a converted Jew, t 1569) and the Jesuit Anthony Possevino (T 1611;

cfr. 184, 5; 186, 2).

b) In the field of apologetics and polemics the following are eminent: The Italian Dominican, dmbrosius Cathavinus Politus (f 1553; monogr. by J. Schweizer, 1910); Cardinal Hosius of Ermland {t 1579; cir. 184, 3};

William van der Lindt (Lindanus), Bishop of Roermond and later of Ghent (f 1588;

Panoplia

Evangelica,

1559,

monogr.

by

W.

Schmetz

I,

1926);

Peter Camisius (t 1597; § 173, 2) and his fellow-religious James Gretser of Marhdorf, professor in Ingolstadt (f 1625); the Italian Jesuit Possevino, mentioned above; the Capuchin St. Lawvence of Brindisi (t 1619; Opera omnia, 13 vols. Padua 1928—1944; monogr. by Ilarioc da Teano, Theanum 1953; Hieronymus a Fellette, Venice 1937. S. Lorenzo da Pr. Studi, Padua

137

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517—1648) 1951,

pPp.- 97—139),

author

of a valunable apologetics

“Lutheranismi

hypo-

typosis” {(1607—1610). Perhaps the greatest apologist of the age was Robert

Bellarmine {1542—1621), of an ancient noble Italian family. He became a Jesuit in 1560 and taught theoclogy at Louvain and Rome from 1570 1o 1588, In 1509 he was ¢reated cardinal and was canonized and declared Doctor

Ecclesiae in 1930. Bellarmine’s “Disputationes de controversiis Christianae

fidei” (3 vols. Ingolstadt 1586—1593) has long been the best work of its kind; it set many Protestant pens in motion. (Cfr. § 175, 3 for the attitude

of Sixtus V toward Bellarmine). Bellarmine and Suarez are the classical representatives of Catholic political science, and developed the AristotelianThomistic concept of the State, R. Bellarmini Opera, 12 vols. Paris 1870/76. Explanatio in Psalmos, ed. R. Galdos,

1925

Rome

2 vols. Rome

(cfr. ZAM

1930,

1931/32.

215/33).

De

B. 1 Opuscula

R,

1935. Opera oratoria ed. S. Tromp,

Barkelet,

Bellarmin

documents,

Paris

avant 1911;

Hist. 5] 1935, 234/52).

son

Pontifice 8 vols.

Cardinalat

Auctarium

ascetica,

fragmenta

Rome

ed. §.

1942/50.

(1542/98),

Bellarminianum,

Bellarmine’s aulobiog.

3 vols, Freiburg

Tromp,

X. M.

Le

Correspondance

et

Paris

1913

(Arch..

(Latin) in Le Bachelel, Bellar-

min 438/66. Biogr. of Bellavmine: E. Raitz v. Frentz, B1930; P. Tacchi Venturt, Rome

1923;

1961,

X.

M.

E. A. Ryan,

A. M.

Fiocchi,

Le

Bachelet,

Louv.

1938

logie de Bell, Paris

Rome

DictThC II,

(cfr. ZK(

1908.

1930;

[J. Brodrick,

s60fgg.

19306, 661/70).

E. Timpe,

2

vols.

Lond.

Pastor X—XII

1950;

passim,

[J. de la Serviére, La théo-

Die kirchenpolit.

Ansichten u. Be-

strebungen des Kard. Bell., in Kirchengesch. Abhandl. ed. by M. Sdvalek 111, 1905, 3/133. J. Gemmel, Scholastik 1929, 161/88; 1930, 357/79 (Bellarmine’s doctrine on Church and State). F. X. Arnold, Die Staatslehre Kard. Bellar-

mins, 1934. G. Thils, Les notes de 1'Eglise dans 1'apologétique cath. depuis la Réforme, Gembloux 1937. G. Buschbell, Aus B.s Jugend, H]JG 1902, 52 {f., 307 ff.; Zur Charakteristik des Kard. B., Vereinsschrift d. Gorresgesellschait 1921, 1f15; B. in Briefen an s, Verwandten, Festschr, 5. Merkle, 1922, 59/92.

—

C. A. Kuneller,

Um

Bell.,,

ZkTh

1923,

141/54.

G. Buschbell,

Selbst-

bezeugungen des Kard. B., 1924. S. Merkle, Grundsitzl. u. methodolog, Erdrterungen zur Bellarmin-Forschung, ZKG 1926, 26{/73. Cir. bibliog. under Vulgata Sixto-Clementina § 175, 3.

¢} In the revival of the Augustimian Hermits tinian school, played an grace. But the leaders in Cajetan

(1 1534;

cfr.

dogmatic theology, Jerome Servipando, General of (f 1563; § 173, 4) and precursor of the new Augusimportant part by reason of his opinions concerning the movement were Spanish theologians, who like

§ 145, 4b

and

160, 1)

closely

followed

5t.

Thomas.

Most of these were Dominicans: Francis of Vitoria (I 1540) taught at Salamanca; his equally famous disciple at the university, Melckior Cano or Canus

(f 1560)

wrote

"Loct

Theologici”

(4. Lang,

Die

Loci

Theologici

des M. Cano, 1910; M. facquin, RevSPhTh 1920, p. 121 ff.}, in which he developed the principles of a new theological methodology and fundamental

theology; Dominic de Sofo (t 1560; monogr. by V. Carye, Salamanca 1931 cfr. Jb. d. Hist, Vereins Dillingen 1952, p. 145 {f.) became co-founder of

the University of Dillingen; Dominic Be#iez, also of Salamanca, led the Dominicans in the Molinist controversy (see below), In 1531 Vitoria began

138

§ 178. Theological Controversies. Piety and Morals to use the Summa of St. Thomas as a textbook and wrote extensively on political science and international law. Besides the Dominicans, a numbe r of Spanish Jesuits did outstanding work in the field of dogmatic theol ogy: Francis Toledo {t 1506), Gregory of Valencia, professor at Ingolstadt {1 16013;

W. Hentrich,

(t 1604),

Diego

Greg.

Ruiz

v.

Val.

und

der

de Montoya

Molinismus,

(f 1632)

1028),

and Jokn

Gabriel

de Lugo

Vdsquez

(t 1660).

The

best known of the Jesuits, however, was Francis Sudrez (1548—1617), who for the last nineteen years of his life taught theology at the University of Coimbra. His philosephical and theological writings are characterized by depth, penetration and clarity of expression. His work in metaphysic s exerted a powerful influence in the universities of Germany and Holland during the seventeenth century, and his opinions in political science and international

law

are still held

in high regard.

The

Reformed

Carmelites

also developed Thomistic theoclogy in the great Cursus Salmanticensis (15 volumes). K. Eschweiler, see above p. 138. A. Dempf, Christliche Staatsphilosophie

in Span,, 1937. — Vitoria: De Indis recenter inventis, ed. W, Schdtzel, 1952, Monogr. by L. G. 4. Getino, Madrid 81930, R. H. Villoslada, La Universida d

de

Paris

durante

los estudios

de

Fr.

de

Vitoria

(1507/22),

Rome

1938,

A. Neszalgyi, Doctrina Francisci de V. de Statu, Rome 1937. F. Stegmiiller, Fr. de V. y la doctrina de la gracia en la escuela Salmantina, Barcelona 1934.

P. Tischieder, Festschr. J. Mausbach, 1931, 9o/106

(jus gentium). 4. Truyol-

Serra, Die Grundsitze Suarez: Opera omnia,

des Staats- u. Volkerrechtes bei Fr. de V., 147, — 30 vols. Paris 1856/61. Monogr. by R. de Scoraille,

Paris r92r. E. Conze, meier, Die Gotteslehre

Der Begriff d. Metaphysik bei S., 1928, J. Letwesbei Fr. Suarez, 1938. K. Deuringer, Die Lehre vom

2 vols. Paris 1911; K. Six et al. 1917. L. Makieu, Fr. Suarez, sa philosophie

Glauben beim jungen S., 1941. B. Jansen, Gregorianum 1940, 452/8¢y (conservatism of Suarez). H. Rommen, Die Staatslehre des Fr. Suarez, 1927, J. Giers, Die Gerechtigkeitslehre des jungen Suarez, 1958. G. Ambroseiti, Il diritto naturale della Riforma cattolica, Milan

1951. — Q. Mexl, Theologia

salmaticensis, 1947. Envigue del S. Corazon, Los Salmanticenses, Madrid 1955.

The French Jesuit Denys Petau or Pelavius (f 1652) edited the works of the Fathers and wrote on scientific chronology; afterward he published the very important De Theologicis Dogmatibus (5 vols. Paris 1644—1650) in which he established the principles for the science of the

history of dogma. Monogr. by J. Martin, Paris 1970.

d) Moval theology continued to be taught in conjunction with dogma, as in the Middle Ages. But after the end of the sixteenth century it was treated

as a separate as well

discipline.

as Leonard

Vdsquez,

Lessius,

S. J.,

Bd#iez

and

at Louvain

Sudrez,

(t 1632;

already see

mentioned,

below),

Adam

Tanner, S. J., at Ingolstadt and Vienna (4 163z and John Martinez de Ripalda, S. J. at Salamanca (f 1648) did notable work in this field. The caswistic method in moral theology was used, especially by the Jesuits, as a preparation for hearing confessions. During the controversy between the Rigorists and Laxists, even sound casuistry was erroneously identified with Laxism. The system of Probabilissm which gave rise to the controversy is traced to the Spanish Dominican Bartkolomew de Meding (t 1 580); but

139

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517 —1648)

it was later adopted and furthor devoloped by the Joesuity, espocially John

Azor (Y 1003), Thomas Srnches (1 1010), Paul Laymann {+ 1635) and others, J. Dallinger nnd F, H, Reusch, Gosch. dor Moralstreitigheiten in der kath, Kirche goit . 16, Jh., 2 vols. 188q. 4. Schmilt, Zur Gosch. . Probabilismus, 1904, F. Deininger, Joh, Sinnich {t 16660), dor Kampf der Liwener Univ. pegen den Laxismus, 1928, [, Teraus, Zur Vorgosch., . Moralsystome von

Vitorin

DictApol

bis Medina,

11T,

goef62,

1030,

[ de

Dlic ot A.

PP Deman

.

0.,

Vermeersch,

DProbabilisme,

Probabilisme,

ThictThC XIIT,

417{619. FE. Amann, Queralle du Taxismae an France, DictThC TX, 34/86, e) HHistoriography, which hiud become stagnant during the Middle Ages, aine experienced a rovival, IMumanism had led to a knowlodge and use of historical criticiam and the atiacks of tho Reformers forced Catholic scholars

to defond the Church in the [iold of history. The pious Oratorian Cardinal Caesar Davowius

(1 1007), at the urging of Philip Neri, wrote his Annales

Feclesinstici (12 folio vols, Rome thesis to thoe vonemous of source

malorial,

Magdoburg

Baronius

1588

-1007), a curofully compilul anti-

Conturies

presonts

the

{§ 4, 4). By

history

of the

using

a wealth

Church

down

to

the year 1198 (for continuntions of the Annales from the sevonteenth to the ninceteenth contury sce § 4, 4). Tho works of the Tfathers wero ably edited by the Jesuits Fronton du Duc (Y 1024), James Sirmond ( 11651) and Denys Petaw (¥ 16052), Valuablo collections of lves of the sainls woro

published by Aloysius Lippomano (+ 1550) anil the Carthusian Lawrencs Surits of Cologno (f 1578}, The Belgian Josuit Jokn Bollandus (1 10065} and his collaborators Godfrey Henschen

(t 1081) and Dandel Papebroch

(1 1714)

began the gigantic dcta Sanctoruss (Antworp 1043 £L; § 2, B) and laid the foundation for sciontific haglography. Cir. 1. Delehays, L'Oouvre des Bollandistes

1615—1915,

Brussels Y1961

Brussels

1920,

AB

1037,

---

V—XLIV;

(samo title); F, Pelster, StZ 99, 1920, 517 {f,

The fitst important scholars in the field of the Auvgustinian Hermit Onuphrius Panvind (+ portraity of the popes cfr., O. Hartig, H]G 1917, priest Anthony Bosio (1 1629) who oxplored the sotteranca, Rome 10632).

P. Pselors,

Christian archeology were 1368; on his collection of pp. 284 {f.) and the secular Roman catacombs (Roma

2. The teaching of Luther, Calvin and their followers regarding grace and justification caused Catholic scholars to direct special attention to the original state of man in Paradise, the fall of man and the relationship between grace and free will, This was all the

more necessary since the innovatoers appealed to the opinions of St. Augustine on sin, grace and predestination. Trent had deliberately left the central problem of the cooperation of grace and free will undecided. But as in Christian antiquity, so now, a controversy arose regarding predestination which perturbed theologians for a long time. The two great rival schools of theology — Thomism and Scottsm — in new form played an important part in the controversy. The Dominicans championed the stricter view, while the 140

§ 178. Theological Controversies. Piety and Morals

Jesuits defended a more liberal one. The first stages of the controversy fall within the period we are now considering and developed

in Spain and the Netherlands,

a) Michael de Bay or Balus {+ 158g), who had boen professor of oxogusis

at Louvain

since

1552

endeavored

Holy Seripture and the Fathers

to

advance

theology

(especially Augustinoe)

by

which

roverting

to

he claimed

had been neglected by the Scholastics, He believed that in «o doing it woulkl be easier to refute Protestantism or reconcile it with Catholicisn. But in interpreting the anti-Pelagian works of tho great Doctor of 1lippo, Baiug

developed

opinions on original sin, the fall, froo will wnd justification which

differed but slightly from the ideas of Luthor and Calvin, Fapecially, denied the supernatural character of man’s original endowments

ho

in Paradise.

He held, therefore, that original sin totall y corruptod man, deprived him of liberty and the capacity to perform morally good acts, and that officacious grace is irresistible. These views were roadily accoptod by many of [3uius's students, but also met with vechement opposition, The Bolgian Franciscuns caused eighteen of Baius's propositions to be condemncd by the Sorbonne in 1560, and in the Bull “Ex omnibus afflictionibus’ of October I, 1567, Pius V without mentioning Baius or his followers by nane, condomned seventy-nins sentences, some as herctical, some as erroneois, suHpect or

scandalous.

After

hesitating

for a long

time

and

after Gregory X1

had

confirmed the preceding papal act, Baius aubmitted in 1580: but his errors continued and bore bitter fruit in Janscnism {(§ 190), which is a dircct

offshoot of Baianism,

F. X. Jansen, Baiug et le Baianisme, Louv. 1930. X. M. Ls Buchelel, DictThC IL, 38/111. Pastor VILI, 267 1f,: IX, 228 {f.: X, 139 [f, H. de Lubac, Surnaturel, Paris 1946. E. van Eijl, RHE 1953, 710{76; 1055, 408/542. J. Qrcibal, RevSR 1962, 115/39 (The “Comma Pianum"}),

A postlude to the Baian controversy involved the doctrine of graco as taught by Leonard Lessius (t 1623), the Jesuit professor of thaology at

Louvain, He and other members of the Society had been bitter opponuonts of

Baius. While Lessius endeavored to uphold both the froodom of the will

and

the efficacy of grace,

he seemed

to stress the importance

activity over the divine in the process of salvation.

of man's

Baius and his frionds

caused the faculties of Louvain (1587) and Douai {1§88) to censure thirt y-four sentences on grace and the inspiration of Scripture found in tho worka of Lessius. Lessius sent an apology of his theses to Rome, Sixtus V submitted the matter to investigation, but abstaining from a dofinitive decigion,

forbade either side to censure the other (1588). — C. Van Sull, L. Luossius, Louvain

1927. —

X, M. Le

controversy in 1610~-1613

Bachelet,

Prédestination

on Lessius's work

ot grice officace

'‘De gratia afficaci’),

(the

2 vols,

Louvain 1931; cir. Scholastik 1953, pp. 400 ff. b} Toward the end of tho sixteenth century Dominican and Josuit theologians clashed in their opinions regarding the cooperation of graco and free will. The dispute is usually referred to as the Molinist Controveray.

The Dominicans

under the leadership of Dominic

Baficz of Salamanca

{t 1604) postulated a praemotio and prasdeterminatio Physica of the will.

141

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517—1648) The Portuguese Jesuit Pefer Fonseca (T 1599) proposed the theory of the scientia media or the scientia condictonale futurovum of God as a means of

upholding the infallible efficacy of grace as well as the unrestrained freedom of the will. The Spamish Jesuit Louis Molina (t 1600), professor at the University

of Evora,

in Portugal,

gave

the

in his work

‘‘Concordia liberi arbitrii cum

Jesuit theory

wider

publicity

gratiae donis, divina praescientia,

providentia, praedestinatione et reprobatione”

{Lisbon 1588). Unlike Bafiez,

Molina does not admit a causal predetermindtion of the will of God, but only a concursus simultaneous with the free will of man in virtue of the

divine foreknowledge of even conditioned acts. According to him gratia sufficiens is not of itself efficacicus (ex sese et ab intrinseco) but becomes

so by man’s cooperation (gratia ab extrinseco, ex humano consensu efficax). This doctrine found wide approval, especially among the Jesuits. Even Suarez, who at first opposed it, eventually embraced it. But the Dominicans accused the Molinists of Pelagianism, or Semi-Pelagianism and of contemning

the authority of 5t. Augustine and 5t. Thomas.

Soon the whole of Spain

rang with the clamor of the controversy and Molina was denounced

to the

Spanish Inquisition. The Molinists in turn charged Bafiez with Lutheranism,

When the dispute had grown exceedingly bitter, Rome intervened (1594) Clement VIII appointed a special commission, the Congregatio de Auxiliis

grattae,

to investigate

and report on the matter.

The Congregation spent

nine years studying and discussing the problem. Five times the Congregation

was on the verge of condemning Molinism, intercession

of

Aquaviva,

the

Jesuit

but each time refrained at the

General,

and

Cardinal

Bellarmine.

Paul V caused the Dominican theory of praemotio physica to be examined in [ike manner and in 1607 decreed that both theories might be taught and that neither side should accuse the other of heresy. In order to obviate a recurrence of such a bitter dispute, the Congregation of the Inquisition in 1611 decreed that, for the fnture, special permission was to be obtained for the publication of any work treating of grace. L. Molina, 5.]., Liberi arbitrii cum gratiae donis ... concordia,ed. by J. Rabeneck, Madrid 1953. W. Hentrich SJ., Gregor v. Valencia u. der Molinismus,

1928.

H. Lange

SJ.,

De

gratia,

1929.

Pasfor XI,

513 ff.;

XII, 163 i, (cfr. P. M. Baumgarien, ZKG 1929, 419/28). Le Bachelet 5] ., vide supra za. — N. del Prado OP., De gratia et libero arbitrio, 3 vols. Fribourg 1g907. R.Garrigou-Lagrange OP,, Prédestination (after Trent), DictThC XI1, 2963/3022.

C.(G. Van Riel, Beitrag zur Gesch. der Congregatio

de auxiliis, Diss. Bern 1921 (also W. Hentrich, Scholastik 1926, 263/67). E. Vansteenberghe, Molinisme, DictThC X, 2zog4/2187. F. Stegmiiller, Zur (Gnadenlehre des jungen Suarez, 1933; Gesch. des Molinismus, 1935. F. Lif}, La guestion des rapports entre la nature et la grice de Bajus au Synode de Pistoie, Fontaine-'Evéque 1934. W.ZLurz, Ad. Tanner SJ. (f 1632) u. die Gnadenstreitigkeiten des 17. Jh.s, 1932.

3. Even in the greatly changed circumstances of the times, theology maintained its primacy in the intellectual world. But when natural science and wnatural philosophy broke with AristotelianScholastic principles, theology’s primacy was contested. Two 142

§ 178. Theological Controversies. Piety and Morals mncidents

which never abated,

occurred

as this time

aroused

interest

which

has

The ex-Dominican Giordano Bruno of Nola (1548—1600) maintained that philosophy was entirely independent of ecclesiastical authority. He

denied the Incarnation of Christ and other dogmas and taught a sort of naturalistic pantheism. His obscene poems and blasphemous attacks on the

hierarchy and the After seven years his errors, he was Biographies by M. 459 1.

—

Church scandalized all but the most hopelessly abandoned. in prison during which he obstinately refused to retract burned as a heretic at Rome on February 17, 1600, — Bergfeld, 1929; L. Cicuttini, Milan 1950 — Cir. Pastor X1,

L. Oischki,

rtaliana 1948,

1949

DVSLGG

1924,

p. 1—79.

(the trial}). Bibliografia,

—

L. Firpo,

Riv.

Florence 1957. —

storica

A. Mercari,

11

sommario del processo di G. B., Rome. 1042. N. Badaloni, La filosofia dj G. Bruno, Florence 1955. The case of the noted Physicist and astronomer Galileo Galilei of Pisa (1564—1642) is perhaps even more generally known, Canon Nicholas Copernicus of Frauenburg {t 1 543) had written a treatise on the solar system in which he tanght that the earth moves around the sun. To the majority of theologians the, as yet, unproved Copernican hypothesis appeared dangercus; and when Galileo began to lecture publicly on it he was denounced to Rome. His interrogation before the Inquisition in 1616 resuited in his teaching being censured as “philosophically foolish and preposterous and, because contrary to Scripture, theologically heretical.” At the same time the work of Copernicus “De revolutionibus orbium coelestium"’ (1543) was prohibited ‘‘donec corrigatur.” Galileo promised that he would

no longer teach it. But when

he published his “"Dialogo sopra i due

massimi sistemi’” in 1632, he was again summoned before the Inquisition and condemned as ‘vehemently suspected of heresy.”” The famous expression “E pur si muove” and the use of the rack to force Galileo to retract are now acknowledged to be pure fiction.

E. Vacandard, Etudes de critique et d'hist. relig., Paris 1905, 295/387-

A. Favavo,

das

ThQ

G.e I'Inquisizione,

kopernik. 1010,

2 vols.

Weltsystem,

1qog:

565 ff}). E. Woklwill,

1909/26.

urteilung,

Documenti,

C. Willems,

Z. f. syst. Theol.

G.

Der

Florence

.-Prozess,

P. Aubanel, Urbain VIII et Galilée,

1909

u. sein Kampf

Die G.-Frage,

1927,

1g07.

102 if.

1919.

(also

Al

fiir die kopernik.

L. Qlschki,

Paris 1929.

Ad. Miiller,

K. Stange,

Miiller, Lehre,

Galileis Ver-

G. u. seine Zeit,

Monogr.

G. u.

by G. Loria,

1927,

Milan

1938; C. Bricarelli, Rome 1931; L. M. Torcoleiti, Monza 1955; L. Gevmonal, Turin 1957. R. Lémmel, G. Galilei im Lichte des 2o0. Jh.s, 1929. F. Dessauer,

Der

Fall G. u. wir,

DictApol 11, 147/g2.

1943.

Pastor X1I,

203 ff.; XIII,

616 ff.

P. de

Vryegile,

4. In comparison with the preceding period, the faith and piety! of Catholic people, especially in the Latin countries, grew more fer' E. BOHMINGHAUS, StZ 134, 1938, 234/45 (the Church in baroque). H. BUSSON, La pensée rel. frang. de Charron (f 1603) & Pascal, Paris 1933. P. Pourrat, see above o 83. J. GREVEN,

Die Kolner

d. kath. Reformation in Deutschland, 1935.

Kartause u. die Anfinge

A. SCHROTT, ZkTh 1937, 211/57

143

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517 —1648)

vent after the middle of the sixteenth century. This chiefly to the reform movements introduced by the new orders, the Council of Trent, zealous popes, bishops and The number of eminent leaders and sainis in the cloister world

1s relatively

large.

In the

field of ascetics

was due religious pastors. and the

Si. Ignatius

of

Loyola and his order exerted a most powerful influence by preaching and practicing the 1deals of the Imiiatio Chriséi, In order to sanctify themselves and to carry out their apostolate most efficiently they adopted a sort of military organization. By means of the Ignatian

“Exercises’ and popular or parish missions they were able to bring their asceticism to the common people. Large crowds received the

sacraments of penance and the Holy Eucharist, a practice that had been much neglected toward the end of the Middle Ages (§ 152, I). Another indication of religious fervor at this time was a revival of mysticism. Its chief representatives were: The Franciscan Observant, Francis of Osuna (1 1541), St Teresa of Avila and S¢. John of the Cross (§ 172, 3) in Spain; and St Francis de Sales (§ 172, 4¢),

the Oratorian Cardinal Peler de Bérulle (§ 172, 4a) and the Dominican Louts Chardon (1 1651) in France. But over against this wonder-

ful upsurge in the life of the Church and in the religious life of the people, the growing absolutism of the state boded ill for the liberty

of the Church. And this tendency constitutes the dark side of the baroque period.

The spirit of mysticistn breathes through the immense amount of ascetical and devotional literature which appeared at this time. Among the authors were: the Carthusians of Colognre, the Benedictine Abbot Louis di Blois or Blosius (t 1566), the Dominican Louis of Granada (t 1588; Obra selecta, ed. A. Trancho, Madrid 1947; — M. Hagedorn, Reformation und Span. Andachtsliteratur,

1934);

the

Jesuits

Peafer

Canisius,

Alfonso

Rodriguez

((t 1616), Jacobo Alvarez de Paz (t 1620), Louis de Ponte (} 1624) Louis Lallemant (1 1635; cir. A, Pottier, L. Lallemant, 2 vols, Paris 1927; La Doctrine spirit. du L. Lallemant, Paris 1936) and Eusebius Niervemberg {t 1658); the ‘Theatine Lorenzo Scupoli (1 1610), James Merlo-Horstius, a pastor of Cologne {1644) and Jeam de Bernidves-Louvigny (t 16359; Le chrétien interieutr), a

layman and clerk of the French treasury.

Confralernities arose in great number both in the cities and country places; even the practice of self-scourgimg in private and public was revived in monasteries and confraternities and was encouraged by St. Charles Borromeo. (devotional bibliography of 16 and 17 cent.).

denbild in den &sterr. Gnadenstitten,

u.

Volkstum

L. A, VEIT

and

des Barocks,

144

in

Gesch.

u.

L.LENHART,

1956 (standard).

Leben,

Kirche

1951.

1934;

und

G. GUGITZ,

G, SCHREIBER

Deutsche

Das kleine Gnaet al., Wallfahrt

Mirakelblicher,

Volksfrobmmigkeit

im

1938.

Zeitalter

§ 178. Theological Controversies. Piety and Morals But during this period great emphasis was placed on exter nals und whatever appealed to the emotions, the fantasy and the sense s. Pilyvimages and

splendid processions

were

organized,

and constituted

lmportant

lactors in

popular devotion. The older devotions to the Blessed Trinity, the Blessed Virgin and the saints were developed and extended.

Christ aund During the

sixteenth century the 4ve Maria and the Rosary were given their present

form (§ 119, 3; 133, 7). There is definite evidence that the Litany of the Blessed

Virgin was used at Loreto since 1531, but it is of much earlier origin,

Peter

Canisius helped to spread the devotion in Germany (1558), 13y erccting Marian Congregations or sodalities, the Jesuits exerted a beneficent influence

on the young.

originated

continuous

the

day

To pay special honor to the Blessed

in Milan

in

1527

of exposing

hours during which

and

might.

In

1592

Hours” Devotion™ at Rome,

the

Blessed

the faithful, in relays,

Pope

Clement

VIII

Eucharist,

Sacrament

prayed

418 1f;

Schleussner,

"1924. and

N. Paulus,

ThQ

E. Villaret,

introduced

the

K. Dendal,

mariales, Roms

ZikTh

1950.

1902,

Ph.

Congrégations

Le P, Jean

“Forty

whence it spread to the other dioceses of Ltaly

1026, 254 If. —

Les

for forty

throughout

and eventually to all the dioceses of the world. A. de Sanii, Le litanie lauretane, Rome 1887. Cir. [. Brau n, 1900,

a practice

Leunis

574 fI.;

Liffler,

SJ.

CivC

Die Marian,

mariales

(1532—8y),

W. Kratz, Die Marian.

r1qg00

|.

Paris

IV,

StMI. 58,

3oz ff.;

M7

Kongregationen,

1947,

fondateur

J. Wick:

des Congrég.

Kongregationen in den Tindern

deutscher Zunge, 1917. — A .de Santi, L’orazione delle quara nt’ ore, Rome 1914, 5. During the late Middle Ages the number of holydays of obligation was so great as to cause great inconvenience. Long before the Refo rmation,

complaints were frequently heard as well as requests that the numb er be reduced. In the parts of Europe that became Protestant, almost all of the holydays were abolished and even in the Catholic parts the number was considerably lessened. At the Reichstag of Regensburg in 1524 the papal

legate, Cardinal Campeggio, agreed that in Germany and the lands to the east the feast days of strict obligation be reduced to thirty-five {excl usive of

Sundays) and that on other feasts (on which Mass was prescribed), servi le work could be done after hearing Mass. In France the provincial Syno d of Bordeaux in 1583 also reduced the number of feasts, At the repea ted requests

of bishops, Urban VIII regulated the matter by a Bull of September 24, 1642, The Bull enumerates thirty-one feasts of obligation, among them the feast of St. Joseph (March 19) which had been widely celebrated for a long time and which had been made a day of obligation by Gregory XV in 1621. But besides the thirty-one feasts enumerated in the Bull, a!l Sundays of the year as well as the feasts of the patronal saints of the parish, the diocese and the

nation were days of strict obligation. Bishops were forbidden to intro duce new feasts. — Cir. E. Eisentraut, Die Feier der Sonn- und Festtage scit dem letzten Jh. des Mittelalters,

1914,

6. Witch-baiting, a deplorable legacy of the late Middle Ages

(§ 158, 2),

was carried on even more energetically in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. The Reformers, led by Luther and Calvin, difiered in no wisc from Catholics in their opinions regarding witcheraft, and appealed to texts

of the Old Testament, 11

especially Exodus

Biblmeyer-Tiichle, Churck History 111

22: 18, to Justify their conduct.

145

Modern and Recent Times. First Peviod (1517—1648) Since about

1520 #vials of witches in Germany

in the secular courts;

witcheraft

be

the criminal code

punished

as a capital

were

held almost

exclusively

of Charles V of 1532 prescribes that

crime

and

permitted

the

judges

to

use the rack. The guidebook used for the judicial investigation continued to be the “Malleus Maleficarim’ written in 1487 and published frequently thereafter. The rules of procedurc issued for the courts of the Electorate

of Saxony in 1572 increased the penalties and prescribed that anyone found

to be in league with the devil was to be burned. During the latter part of the sixteenth century and during the Thirty Years’ War the number of victims

in

both

Catholic

and

Protestant

sections

of

Germany

increased

frightfully. At the same time witch-baiting increased in both France and England. On the other hand there were far fewer executions of witches in Tialy {(Rome) and Spain owing to the greater leniency of the ecclesiastical tribunals. In 1635 a decree of the Holy Office greatly restricted the use of the rack. But gradually there appeared, even in Germany, individuals daring

encugh to oppose the popular mania.

The first to do so was Doctor Join

Weyer the Calvinist physician to the duke of Jiilich-Cleve. In 1563 he wrote De Praestigiis daemonum,. The Catholic theologian, Cornelins Loos of Trier, also wrote in opposttion to the trials, but was obliged to retract (1592). The

learned Jesuit Adam Tanner (see no. 1 d above), in his Theologia schelastica (16206),

also

courageously

disapproved

the

trials

of

witches

while

other

members of his order were zealous advocates of witch-baiting. But perhaps the

most

effective

protest

on

the

side

of humanity

was

offered

by

the

in administering to those who

had

Jesuit Fredevick von Spee in his ““Cantio criminalis”™ (published anonymeously

in 1631).

He had had much

experience

been condemned to death and he critizes the horrible abuses in the prevailing proceedings and pleads for basic reforms in the courts. It was not, however, until the eighteenth century when medical science had made some progress

and people had a better understanding of natural phenomena and, especially,

when the rack had been abolished as a regular step in court procedure, that witch-baiting as a popular mania gradually ceased. Janssem VIIIW, 494 1f. N. Paulus, Hexenwahn u. Hexenprozess, vornehmlich im 16. Jh., 1910. B. Duky, Die Stellung der Jesuiten in den deuntschenn Hexenprozessen, 1goo. F. Mevzbacher, Die Hexenprozesse in Franken, 1957. J. B. Diel-B. Duhy,

328{52;

u. die 1958,

Friedrich v. Spee,

®1g901;

cfr. B. Duhv,

HJG

1900,

1905, 327/33. J. Riltlenauer, Fr, v. Spee, 1950. H. Zwetsloot, Fr. Spee

Hexenprozesse, Other bibliogr.

1954.

E. Rosenfeld,

Friedrich

Spee v. Langenfeld,

§ 158, 2.

3 179 Literature and Art (Renaissance and Baroque) in the Service of the Church!,

Ecclesiastical Music.

1. While Germany and the other countries of the north, divided and paralyzed by the Reformation, retrogressed for a time in ! G.SCHNURER,

(standard).

146

Kath.

J. SCHEUBER

et

Kirche

al.,

u.

Kultur

Kirche

u.

in

der

Barockzeit,

Reformation,

1937

aufbliihendes

§ 173. Literature and Art in the Service of the Church. Ecclesiastical Music

their

cultural

attainments,

the

peoples

of the

Latin

countries

fortunately retained, for the most part, unity of religion and culture.

The Catholic Restoration beginning in Italy and Spain, purified and ennobled literature and the graphic arts, and gladly made use of them. This purification of the fine arts, usually referred to as baroque culture (c. 1550—1700), set an example for all Europe. In spite of some excesses and aberrations, the baroque represents the last great common culture of the West, based on Christian philosophy. The Church had again proved its everlasting creative vitality; but in her solicitude to protect herself from the distress of further innovations, she did not sufficiently arm herself against

the attacks of the pseudoscientific

and materialistic

culture to be

made on her in the eighteenth century. Italy

led

the

way

in the

production

of religious

(f 1564; § 154, 2—3) and his noble-minded friend,

poetry.

Michelangelo

Vitforia Colonna (t 1547;

kath. Leben im 16. u. 17. Jh,, 1917, K. JOEL, Wandlungen der Weltanscha uung, z vols. 1928/29. L. PFANDL, Spanische Kultur u. Sitte im 16, u, 17. Jh.,

1924, Gesch. der span. Nationalliteratur in ihrer Blitezeit, 1928; Philipp 11 v. Span., 1938. ]. GREGOR, Das span. Welttheater, 1937. K. VOSSLER, Poesie der Einsamkeit in Span., 1940; Aus der toman. Welt, 2 vols. 1G40.

J. CALVET,

LER,

La littératuzre rel. de Fr. de Sales A Fénelon, Paris 1938. G. MUL-

Deutsche

1027/29.

Dichtung

P. HANKAMER,

v. der Renaissance

Deutsche

H. DE BOOR and R. NEWALD, 21g60.

Gesch.

der christl. Kunst,

1908.

K. WORMANN,

la fin

du

(. DEHIO,

Gesch.

16%,

du

der

u. deutsches

Deutsche

Kultur des Barock continued

des

Barock,

Lit. V, 11963.

(1610/60), New York 1952.

W. FLEMMING,

TH. SCHLUSSEL,

Gegenref.

Gesch. d. deutschen

RICH, The age of the Baroque

Gesch. 1V, 1950.

bis z. Ausgang

17¢

et

du

J.BUHLER,

18¢

5.,

Deutsche

Kultur im Zeitalter des Barocks, in Osterreich,

by J. SAUER

Kunst

21947.

C. J. FRILED-

1g60.

F.X.KRAUS,

II, 2 (Italian Renaissance),

Gesch. der Kunst aller Zeiten u. Vélker IV deutschen

Barock,

II1%,

Ig31.

Paris *1951.

V12, 1922,

K. MALE,

PASTOR

Iart

IV—XYV

rel.

de

passim.

E. KIRSCHBAUM, Deutsche Nachgotik 1550/1800, 1930. H.WOLFTLIN, Renaissance u. Barock in Italien, *1926. P. SCHUBRING, Die Kunst der

Hochren.,

1926.

M. DVORAK,

Ren., 2 vols. 1927/28.

Niederlanden,

Gesch.

der

italien.

Kunst

im

Zeitalter

der

G. GLUCK, Die Kunst der Ren. in Deutschland, den

Frankreich usw., 1928.

W. WEISBACH,

Der Barock als Kunst

der Gegenreformation, 1921 (cfr. Repert. f. Kunstw.

1928, 16/28); Die Kunst

des B., 1924. W.HAUSENSTEIN, Vom Geist des Barock, 31924. B. CROCE, Storia dell’ et barocca, Bari 1928. J. WEINGARTNE R, Der Geist des Barock,

¥9z5;

1930.

Das

453/66.

Kunstgewerbe

J. KREITMAIER,

AL. RIEGL,

K. ESCHER,

1912

kirchl.

€tc.

.Die

Die

der Neuzeit,

religitsen

Entstehung

B. u. Klassizismus

A. E. BRINCKMANN,

Krifte

der

(in Rome),

Die

Kunst

1927;

des

Rém.

Barock,

Barockkunst

1910.

des

Barockkirchen.

in

W. PINDER,

Barocks

StZ

110,

Rom,

1926,

%1923.,

Deutscher

u. Rokokos,

B.,

1924.

G. WEISE and G, OTTO, Die rel. Agsdrucksgebidrden des Barock, 1938. L. FREYBERGER, Rel. Deutung des Barocks, 1049. G.SCHREIBER, Das

Weltkonzil

v. Trient I, 1951,

381/425

(baroque

and Trent).

E. HEDERER,

Deutsche Dichtung des Barock, 1955. B. WARDROPPER, Introduccién al teatro religioso del siglo de oro 15001648, Madrid 1953. L. MONTALTO, Un mecenate in Roma barocca, il card. Benedetto Pamphili 1653/1730, Florence 1955. M. PETROCCHI, Pagine sulla letteratura religiosa lombarda

del 's00, Naples 1956.

147

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517 —1648)

§ 174, 1) wrote verse evidently inspired by the spirit of the Catholic Restora-~ tion. Torguato Tasso (f 1595), highly honored by Pope Clement VIII, in

a spirit of deep faith extols the heroes of the first Crusade in the epic ""Geruliberata’

salemme

(1575).

written in classical Spanish

St. Theresa’s

ascetical

and

also the mystical

as were

mystical

poems

works

were

of St John

of the Cross (§ 172, 3 and literature) and of the Augustinian Luis de Léon (both *+ 1501; monogr. by K. Vossler, 1946). The two Spanish poets, Lope de Vega (1 1635; monogr. by M. V. Depta, 1927; K. Vossler, 1932) and Caldevon de la Barvca (+ 1681, monogr. by E. Fruios, Saragossa 1952),

occupy a high place in world literature as dramatists. In their dutos sacvamentales they honor the Blessed Eucharist by means of beautiful allegories. After checkered careers in the world, both of them became priests. The great, Dutch poet, Jost van den Vondel (} 1679; monogr. by G. Broom, Amsterdam, an

and

1935), famed as a composer of tragedies, was in turn a Mennonite

Arminian

St. Francis

devotional

de Sales

works;

and

entered

and

Blaise

(f 1622;

Catholic

the

Church

in

1641.

wrote

4¢), a pious humanist,

§ 172,

Pascal

(1 1662;

In

France,

beautiful

a learned

§ 190, 2} wrote

apology. The Golden Age of French literature was reached in Pierre Corneille, a pupil of the Jesuits (1 1684} and Jean Baptiste Racine, a friend

of Port Royal. Both of them were playwrights of a high order, whose productions were inspired by classical antiquity and Catholicism. Germany was represented by the Jesuit Frederick von Spe (t 1635, § 178, 6), who wrote lyrics of tender Christian sentiment for the people (Trutznachtigall), and his Alsatian fellow-religious James Balde (} 1668; biogr. by J. Bach, 1904), called the “German Horace” {Latin odes and hymns). The Breslau physician, John Scheffler, known as Angelus Silesius, (converted from Protestantism 1653; ordained priest 1661; f 1677) wrote two poetical works on which his fame rests: “Heilige Seelenlust’ (The Soul’s Spiritmnal Delight) a collection of over two hundred religious hymns of great beauty, and *‘Cherubmischer

Wandersmann'’ (The Cherubic Pilgrim) a hundred rhymed couplets in epigrammatic to savor of pantheism, but are capable of Toward the end of his life Silesius began to works

against Protestantism.

The

collection of more than sixteen form. Some of his couplets seem a quite orthodox interpretation. publish controversial and polemic

Latin drama

(§ 173, 3) cultivated in the

Jesuit schools helped to encourage the literary movement. Angelus Silesius’ poetic works ed. by H. L. Held, 3 vols. *1925. Monogr.

by

G. Ellinger,

1927;

K. Richstitier, StZ 111,

I, 297/314.

M.Godecker,

1926, 361/81;

Diss.

Wash.

Cath.

Univ.

1938.

0. Kayrey, Hochland XXVIII,

Cir.

1930/31

R.v. Kralik, Joh. Scheffler als kath. Apologet u. Polemilker, 1913,

M. H. Gies, Eine latein. Quelle zum '‘Cherubin. Wandersmann'’ des Ang. Sil., 1929.

E. Eilert, Ang. Sil. als Streittheologe s. Zeit, Diss. 1937.

R. Neuwinger,

Die deutsche Mystik unter bes, Beriicksichtigung des “'Cherub. mann’’ Joh. Schefflers,

Wanders-

1937.

2. In the field of architecture! the classical renaissance predominated in Ttaly from the beginning of the sixteenth century until 1 1, BURCKHARDT, Gesch. der Renaissance in Italien, #1g12. W. LUBKE, Gesch. der Ren. in Deutschland, z vols. 31914. G. V. BEZOLD, Die Baukunst

148

§ 179. Literature and Art in the Service of the Church. Ecclesiastical Music

about 1540.

It is characterized by the adaptation of the Roman

classical orders and design, and achieved monumental

effect by

spaciousness and proportion of the various parts. Renaissance architecture spread to the other countries of Europe but in these places re-

tamed, until the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, many Gothic elements. As a result of the Reformation there were few churches built in the north for a long time. In Italy, on the other hand, this style developed to its greatest perfection under the encouragement of popes like Julius II and Leo X and of prelates who were also patrons of the arts. The foremost architect of the age was Bramante of Urbmo

(1444—1514). However, all the great artists of the times

lent their skill in the building of the new St. Pefer's in Rome, the largest church in the world, the erection of which occupied one hundred and twenty years (1506—1626). The original plans for St. Peter’s (which called for a building in the form of a Greek cross with arms of equal length, a central cupola and four

smaller cupolas over the four arms) were drawn by Bramante,

greatly altered.

Michelangelo

Lovenzo

(see below)

designed

the gigantic

dome,

but were later

which

was

not

begun until twenty-four years after his death. Cario Maderna (} 1629) provided the designs for the triple nave and the vestibule (1605 ff.); and

St. Peter

Bernini and

built the

piazza (1656—1665},

3. About

designed the huge

magnificent

1530—1540

double

canopy over the tomb

colonnade

which

the classical Renaissance

of

encloses

the

style began

to

decline and was superseded to a great extent by the late Renaissance or baroque style. The movement was somewhat capricious; but gradually the baroque became the prevailing style. It is essentially a style which strove to express a desire for greater freedom, more

powerful

effect

and

the relation

between

the

natural

and

the

supernatural. It gave the forms of the classical Renaissance a new charm and warmth, It is, therefore, not correct to consider the der

Die

Ren.

in Deutschland,

Baukunst

der

Holland,

Ren.

in Italien,

Gesch,

der kirchl.

Belgien

21914.

u. Dinemark,

A. HAUPT,

1900,

Baukunst

J. DURM,

der

Ren.

Schwaben

und

in Frankreich u. Ttalien, 1916/23; Gesch. der Ren. in Spanien u. Portugal, 1927. A.VENTURI, Storia dell’arte italiana XI: Architettura del Cinquecento, 2 vols. Milan r938/39. P. KLOPFER, Von Palladio bis Schinkel, 1911.

M. HAUTTMANN,

Baukunst

in Bayern,

Franken 1550/1780, 1921. M, WACKERNAGEL, Die Baukunst des 17. U. I83. Jh. in den germ. Lindern, %41932. ©O. POLLAK, Die Kunsttitigkeit unter Urban VIII, 2 vols. 1927/31. SCHULLER-PIROLI, 2000 Jahre St. Peter, 1950. P. KELEMEN,

Baroque and Rococo in Latin America,

N. York 1951. J.BRAUN

Die belg. Jesuitenkirchen, 1907; Die Kirchenbauten der deutschen Jesuiten, 2 vols. 1908/g; Spaniens alte Jesuitenkirchen, 1913; StML 87, 1914, 545/51.

P, PIRRI, Giovanni Tristano e i primordi della architettura gesuitica, Rome

1955.

149

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517-—1648)

haroque a decadent style, as 1t was in the Romantic period and continued to be almost down to the present. It possessed excellencies of its own and definite meaning as an artistic expression of a revived Catholic self-consciousness and the greatly intensified religi-

ous spirit of the Counter-Reformation

and Restoration period. It

was favored by the popes and the new religious orders, especially the Jesuits. Baroque 1s sometimes erroneously called the *‘ Jesuit style’’; for the architects of Jesuit churches actually built in the style that prevailed in the place at the time they were building.

The characleristic elemenis of the baroque style in ecclesiastical architec-

twre are the manner in which the nave meets the transept under a majestic

cupola, the emphasis on unity of space (the side naves end in chapels), the great facades and the rich interior decorations. The Jesuit church of the Gesw in Rome (1568—1575) by Giacomo Vignela (t 1573) is an example that has often been imitated. Aundrea Palladio (1 1580) adhered more strictly to the

classical

antique

in

the

churches

he

built

in Venice.

The

leading

masters of the baroque style in the seventeenth century are the gifted and versatile Lovenzo Bernini of Naples

{1 1680; see above no. 2) and Francesco

fHorromini (t 1667), The latter preferred the curve to straight lines or rounded forms. Others like the Theatine Guarind (1 1683} and the Jesuit Andrea Pozzo (1 1709) strove rather for grotesque effects (hence the name ‘‘baroque’’) and prepared the way for the rococo style (§ 188, 5). Yet it cannot he denied that gome of their creations have picturesque charm and awaken deep emotion. — H. Sedelmayr, Die Architektur kower, G. .. Bernini, London 19535,

Sculpturing was widely

Borrominis,

1929.

R. Wiil-

used in Renaissance and baroque churches

to

enliven otherwise flat surfaces or to decorate the interior. Here, too, Michsalangelo was a leader (Medici tombs in Florence, 1521— 1534; upper part of

the monument of Julius IT in Rome 1542-—1545). Not far behind him were Andrea Sansovine (t 1529) and his pupil Jacopo Saunsovino (t 1570). The undisputed master of Italian baroque sculpture was Bermini (see no, 2 above). Very often, however, the creations of this period lack sericusness and become merely theatrical and grotesque {'‘paintings in stone”). Allegory was used excessively, — P. Schubring, Italienische Plastik der Renaissance, 1923,

—

W. v, Bode,

Die

Italien.

Bildwerke

der Ren.

und

des Barock

II,

‘1930. — A. G. Brinckmann, Barockskulptur, ®1927. — G. Sobotka, Die Bildhauerei der Barockzeit,

1927. —

4 vols,,

G. Pillement

1927—1939.

espagnole, Paris 1945.

—

G, Weise,

Spanische

et N. Daniloff,

Plastik aus 7 Jahrh,,

La

sculpture

baroque

4. During the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries there was a great deal of activity displayed in the field of painting®. The creative 1 E.V.DER

BERCKEN,

Die

Malerei

der

Frith-

u.

Hochrenaissance

in

Italien, x9r7/27. K. ESCHER, Die Malerei der Ren. in Mittel- u. Unteritalien, 1922. H, V0SS, Die Malerei der Spdtren. in Rom u. Florenz, 2 vols. 1920; Die Malerei des Barock in Rom, 1924.

150

A, VENTURI, Storia dell’arte italiana

§ 179. Literature and Art in the Service of the Church. Ecclesiastical Music

period of several of the great Italian painters of the late Renaissance falls in the time of the Reformation and Counter-Reformation. This was the case especially of Michelangelo

(1 1564), Correggio (1 1534)

who had already begun to use baroque forms, and Titian (+ 1570);

for all these see § 154, 3b and literature. Closely allied to Titian were two other great masters of the Venetian school: Paole Veronese (T 1588), whose favorite subjects were banquet scenes from the Bible; and Tinforetio (Jacopo Robusti, 1 1594), who painted

religious scenes with dramatic force. The Fleming Rubens (+ 1682), El

Greco

(Kyriakos,

t 1625°7)

and

baroque painters of the first order.

Murillo

in

Spaln

were

also

Since about 1530, a tendency known as mannerism prevailed throughout

{ialy, except Venice. This tendency consisted in the production of works of art

which imitated and exaggerated the style of the great masters, especially Michelangelo and Correggio. Among the Mannerists were: Giorgio Vasari {t 1574}, who also wrote a valuable biography of Italian artists; 4Angelo Bronrino (t 1572) and Frederico Bavoccio (t 1612). 1talian barogue painting of the

seventeenth century was, in a sense, a reform.

It showed two trends: a) an

eciectic, begun by the Caraceis in Bologna {Lodovico,

t 1619, and his cousins

Agostino, t 1602, and Annibale Caracci, 1 1609); and continued by Domenichino

(1 1641),

Guido

Reni

{t 1642)

and

Carlo

Dolci

(f 1686;

monogr.

by

M. von Boehn, 1925); b) a nafuralistic trend begun by Caravaggio (+ 1609). The school of Naples, founded by the Spaniard Jusepe de Ribera {1+ 1656) called lo Spagnoletio (cfr. trend.

4. L. Mayer, Ribera, ®1923), followed the naturalistic

In Germany after the death of the great masters Aibrecht Diiver (1 1528), Maitthias Griinewald (t ca. 1530) and Hans Holbein the Younger (¥ 1543) (for

all of these efr, § 154, 3¢}, there was a decided decline in the field of painting.

This was due partly to the iconoclasm of the Reformation and partly to a loss of interest in the art. The Saxon court painter Lukas Cranach (T 1553)

displayed an amount of energy and, even after becoming a Protestant, continued to paint pictures of the Madonna. Some few others continued to paint, but withount affecting the general situation. Only after the Thirty

Years’”

War

was

there

some

interest shown

in the decoration

of churches

in southern Germany and Austria, and in the rew baroque style of painting. Fr. Burger, H. Schmilz and I. Beth, Die deutsche Malerei vom ausgehen-

den MA. bis z. Ende der Renaissance, den des H.

germ. Lindern, Barock, 1930.

Tinlelnot,

1913/22.

W. Drost, Barockmalerei in

1925 ff. H. Ginter, Stidwesstdeutsche Kirchenmalerei W, R. Deusch, Deutsche Malerei des 16. Jh., 1935.

Die barocke

I.. Cranach d. Altere, 1953.

Freskomalerei

in Deutschland,

1951,

F. Liidecke,

IX: La pittura del Cinquecento, Milan 1934. K. A. STRAUB, Die relig. Grund-

strimungen

1941,

der barocken

Tkonographie,

1g47.

R. PALLUCCHINI,

Veronese,

151

Maderrz and Recent Times. First Period (1517 —1648)

On the other hand the Spanish Netherlands produced in Peter Paul Rubens {(t577—1640) an artist of exceptional ability who placed his talents at the service of the Catholic Restoration. He was the court artist of the Hapsburgs and after 1608 lived at Antwerp. Besides being the court artist, Rubens was

sometimes

employed

on diplomatic

missions.

His inexhaustible fantasy, his

charming temperament and his skillful technique make him the heir and continuator of the Italian Renaissance and the chief representative of biarogue in the north. His religious paintings, especially the *Crucifixion” and

the

his

‘Taking

numerous

Dlown

from

conceptions

the

Cross,’”

in the

Pietd

breathe

of the

cathedral

at Antwerp,

and

idealism

and

of religious

devotion. His most famous disciple Anton van Dyck (t 1641; Crucifixion scenes, ietas and genre pieces) was even more tender and lyrically sentimental than Rubens. — W, Bode, Die grossen Meister der holland. und flim. Malerer, *1920. — E. Gradmann, Niederiind. Meister, 1946, — E. Lottké, LLa

pensée

z vols.

1904, mann,

chrét.

Lille

dans

1947,

—

la

Monogr.

A. Rosenberg, 1905: 1954, C, Verschaeve,

Leben,

NF.

peinture on

Rubens

et

by

hollandaise

M.

Rooses,

1432—16609,

1906;

R.

Vischer,

K. A. M. Stevenson, London 1gog; F. R. Leh1938. — Cfr. P. V. Keppler, Aus Kunst und

*19006, pp. 35—61.

19oo; E. Schaeffer,

flamande

—

1909; L. van

Monogr.

on A. Van

Puyvalde,

Dyck

by M. Rooses,

Brussels 21950,

National and religious painting enjoyed an astonishing revival in Catho-

lic Spain

during

the

seventeenth

century.

Here

fidelity

to

nature

and

periect technique were united to devotion and earnest dignity. The great masters were: Veldsquez (1 1660), who as court artist to Philip 1V worked

chiefly with secular subjects and excelled as a portrait painter, and Murillo (1617—1682) the chief representative of the school of Seville and one of the most renowned religious painters of all times, His favorite subject was the Immaculate Conception which he painted thirty times without repeating himself. Francisco Zurbaran

(t 1662) was noted for his vigorous manner and

[idelity of expression. His canvases, mostly in honor of the saints or depicting scenes of monastic life, are among the most beautiful and noble productions of the Spanish schoel. The Greek,

(¢. 1547—1614),

subjects sixty

who

passed

representing

through

religious

representations

of St.

Kyriakos

Theotokopoulos,

Italy on his way to Toledo, preferred

enthusiasm,

Francis

called El Greco

ecstasy

of Assisl).

and

In spite

mysticism

{over

of his mannerism,

El Greco is much esteemed at the present time for the ardor of his feeling

and imagination, A. L. Mayer,

Gesch.

der

span.

Kunst von Greco bis Goya, 1926.

7 vols. Cambr.

‘t923; by

(Mass.)

H. Knackfuss,

C. Justi,

by H. Kehrer,

1904;

1918;

Monogr.

]. Lépez

H. Knackfuss,

on el Greco

J. Camdn Aznar, 2 vols. Madr. Paris 1954; K. Ipser, 1g60.

z vols.

21922.

H. Kehrer,

Spamn.

Ck. R. Post, A History of Spanish Painting,

1930/38.

®1940;

Malerei,

on

Veldsquez by C. Justi,

Jiménez,

"1913;

A. L. Mayer,

by H. Kehver,

1950;

Madrid

*1920;

L. Goldschneider,

1955:

1913;

on Murillo

on Zurbaran

A. L. Mayer,

®1954;

2 vols,

1931;

A. Vallentin,

5. During the Middle Ages chant and church music in general gradually became so worldly that Pope John X X IT endeavored to reform it {1322), but without success. The Council of Trent (Session XXII, 1562) prescribed that

152

§ 179. Luterature and Art in the Service of the Chureh. Ecclesiastical Music whatever was "lascivious or unbecoming’

must

and

But

be strictly avoided

in the

chant and organ music doring divine service. Some of the more zealons demanded the total abandonment of figurate or polyphonic music in church

the return

to pure

Gregorian

chant.

a commission

of cardinuls

{1564—1565) appointed by Pius IV to carry out the preseriptions of Trent were not of this extreme view and demanded only a clear rendering of the

text, a simplification of the musical phrasing and the avoidance of seculur

music in church, Just at this time the talented musician, Giovanni Previirt da Palestrina (f 1594}, by his Missa Papae Marcelli (+ 1555 ?), his Improperia (1556) and other compositions proved that the defects which were being censured were in no wise due to the art of music. For many years (1551 to 1555; 1571—1594) Palestrina was choir master of the papal chapel of St. Peter's in which, since the Avignon exile, singers from the Netherlands

were chiefly employed. His epitaph calls him “‘princeps musicae.” He did not create an essentially new style of church music but rather improved and perfected what had been done by the best masters who preceded hin.

His works are characterized by a solemn earnestness, a clarity of composition on the basis of plain chant, a rich harmony and an angelic devotion. Palestrina's contemporary, Orlando di Lasso of Mons in Belgium ({1 1504), who was made court musician to Duke Albert V of Bavaria in 1556, was not the

equal of the Roman

master in depth of composition,

but he surpassed him

in versatility and wealth of fantasy. He composed 516 motets. More in the style of Palestrina were the Spaniard Thomas da Vittovia (1 c. 1613) ani

the Italian Gregorio Allegvi (f 1652; famed for his nine-voiced Miserere). Amntonio Lotti of Venice (1 1740) was somewhat freer. During the seventeenth

and eighteenth centuries, Munich, Vienna and Salzburg became the centers of church music for Germany. But the influence of the oratorio (§ 172, 4d) and the opera again introduced secular elements into church music. Baroque all too gladly made music a gorgeous setting for the Mass, but lost sight ol any intimate connection between the music and the liturgicul action. Even the great masters of music, Mozart (T 1791), Havdn {4 180qg) and Beethoven (f 1827) in their most beautiful compositions generally departed too far

from the liturgical basis of church music¢, so that in the nineteenth century a reaction and reform set in .

H. Riemann, Handb. der Musikgesch., 2 vols. 1904/12. U. Kornmiiller, Lexikon der kirchl. Tonkunst, 2 vols. 1891/92. O. Ursprung, Die kath. Kirchenmusik, 1933. K. G. Fellerer, Gesch. der kath, Kirchenmusik, %1940,

Das Weltkonzil v. Trient I, 1951, 447/62 (Trent and church music).

for, Die nachtridentin. Choralreform

Das

Konzil

zu Rom,

v. Trient u. die Kirchenmusik,

2 vols.

1919;

1gor [z.

cir.

Pasfor

K.

W. Bdumbker, Das kath. deutsche Kirchenlied, 4 vols. 1883/1911.

R. Moli-

Weinmann,

VII,

314/25.

A. Schering,

Gesch. des Oratoriums, 1911. R. Haas, Die Musik des Barock, 19z28. A, Rerner, 5. Robert Bellarmin et la musique relig,, Paris 1939. . Morel, (rir,

Frescobaldi

E. Schmitz,

(Organist in St. Peter,

1914;

R. Casimiri,

t 1643),

Rome

1918;

1945.

Palestrina:

K. G. Fellerer,

Monogr.

1930

by

(efr.

W.

Kurthen, ZThS 1926, 201/17); 4. J. M. Kat, Haarlem 1951. Orlando di Lasso . monogr. by E. Schmitz, 1915; Ch. van den Borren, Brussels 1943. W. Boetti-

cher, 1958 ff.

A. J. Mayer,

JbLW

15, 1941, 67/154 (liturgy and baroque).

153

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517 —1648)

CHAPTER

III

REFORMATION VERSUS COUNTER-REFORMATION, FROM RELIGIOUS PEACE OF AUGSBURG TO PEACE OF WESTPHALIA (1555—1648)'. DEVELOPMENT OF PROTESTANTISM. GRECO-RUSSIAN CHURCH § 180,

Progress of Reformation in Germany and Catholic CounterReformation to Beginning of Seventeenth Century?.

1. The agreement reached in the religious Peace of Augsburg in 1555 between the Cathohe and Protestant princes of Germany

satisfiecd neither party; Vsee

literature

on

it was a temporary

poroand,

at

the

truce rather than a

bheginning

of chapters

[ and

[I.

PASTOR VI —XT1V. JANSSEN IV —VIHL J. SCHMIDLIN, Die kirchl, Zustinde i Prentschland vor dem 3ojidhr, WKricge nach den bischofl, Ditdzesanberichten an den I Stull, 3 parts 1go8/1o; Kirchl. Zustinde u. Schicksale des dt.

ILatholizismus withrend des 30§, IKrieges nach den bischofl. Romberichten, 1g4v. 1. TOCHLE, Acta 8. C. de Prop. Fide Germaniam spectantia [(‘:22{49, Gesch. der Kirche im Zeitalter des konfessionellen K. EDER, e 1gh2. Absolutismus, 149, Die Reichskirche vom Trienter Konzil bis z. Auflésung

des Reiches,

Deutsche

18830/1go8.

Darsteliungen

Gesele 1B,

K. BRANDI,

im

Zettalter

GOTHEIN,

Staat

Gegenref.

und

vormaligen

u.

1959, tm

PProtestantismus

Oberdsterreichs

11,

in

Osterreichs

Osterrcich, K. EDER,

1525/1602,

im Zeitalter der Ref.

sources).

E. BLRNHARD,

B. BRETHOLZ, Die

Krieges,

3 vols. 1908,

H. GILLE, Das Zeitalter

rechtl.

1959, 18¢/242

(The Counter-

concept).

G. LOESCHIE,

Osterreich,

1927.

Osterreich ob der Enns {new

KG.

195{240.

neuen

30j.

M. RITTER,

der CGegenreform.,

1930,

Rome

its historic

L. TOMEK,

in Osterreich,

des

1931 .

), PAUL, Reformation w. Gegenreform,, I193I, 1956, 321/368 (review of studies). R. G. VILLOS-

and

its name

¥ Austria:

Steiermark

w.

Gesellschaft

Saggl storici intorno al Papato,

Reformation:

des

der

Gegenteform. u. Religionskriege,

der Gegenreform., 1930, WO ZLEDEN, Daeculum

LADA,

u. Quellen, ed. by M. SPAHN,

11,

21930,

1950,

1949.

G. MECENSLEFFY,

M.VANCSA,

P, DEDIC,

und Gegenref.,

Neuere

Gesch.,

Organisation

Kirche

Gesch. des Protestantismus im

Glacbensspaltung

1936.

J. WODKA,

der

Gesch.

u.

Geschichte

Nieder-

Landstinde

und

in

Der Protestantismus in

1930;

Bohmens

ARG

1942,

1 (1526/76),

Evangelischen

in

220/44 1920.

Béhmen,

1939,

J. TH. MULLER, Gesch. der Bshm,

1603.

M. DORRERL, Entwicklungsgesch. Bayerns 1—I112, 191628, M. SIMON,

lit. below, Lvang.

mus

HAVARIA:

KG.

in der Oberpfalz

{(1570—1620), Gegenref. im

154

Baycrns,

8. RIEZLER,

Gesch.

%1952. J. B, GOTZ,

{1556/76),

1937, Southwest Bistum Konstanz

1933;

Briider 1T (1528/76), 1931. Further Bayerns

IV—VI

{to 1651),

1898/

Die erste Einfiilhrung des Calvinis-

Die relig. Wirren

and Central im Pontifikat

Germany: Gregors

in der Oberpfalz

K. SCHELLHASS, XTII (1572—85),

§ 180. Progress of Reformation in Germany and Cosunter-Reformation

permanent peace treaty. Emperor Ferdinand I (1556—1564)!, a convinced Catholic and a ruler with a lively sense of duty, continued his efforts toward the restoration of religious unity. He permitted the religious colloguies which had

been

agreed upon

at Augsburg

to take place at Worms from September to October 1557 under the presidency of Bishop Julius von Pflug of Naumburg., Me-

lanchthon was one of the Protestant debaters

and

Peter Canistis,

one of the Catholic disputants. But the colloquy was utterly fruit-

less except to reveal that the Protestants were beginning to disagree

among themselves (§ 169, 2). This was the last time that a religious discussion was held by order of the emperor. The Hessian George Witzel

(Via regia, 1564)

and the Fleming, George Cassander {Con-

sulatio de articulis religionis,

1564),

at the emperor’s

invitation

drafted suggestions as to how a reconciliation of the two religious groups might be effected; but the theology of both these tracts

was so vague and even faulty that many Catholic theologians felt obliged to oppose them. (On the demand for, and the granting of the chalice to the laity in part of Germany, see § 174, 8). 1925;

Der

Dominikaner

Felix

Ninguarda

u. die

Gegenref.

m

Siiddeuatschl,

u. Osterreich (1560/83), 2 vols. 1930/39. K.I. REINKING, e Vormundschaft der Herzdge v. Bayern in der Markgrafsch. B3.-Baden im 710, jh., 1935. O.FEHR, Das Verhidltnis v. Staat u. Kirche in Baden-Durlach 1556/ 1807, 193I. K.HAHN, ZGORh 1911, 204 ff., 501 ff., 3573 if. (reports of

parochial

visitations

anf

Eichsfelde,

in diocese

of Strashourg);

Die kirchi.

Reformbestre-

bungen des Strassh, Bischofs Joh. v. Manderscheid (1569—g2), 1913; Die kath. Kirche in Strassb. unter dem B. Erasmus v, Limburg (1541 to 15631, 1940. D.CUNZ, Die Regentschaft des Pfalzgrafen Joh. Casimir in der Isurpialz 1583/92, Diss. 1934. L. A. VEIT, Kirche u. Kirchenreform in der Erzditzese Mainz 1517/1618, 1920. PH., KNIEB, Gesch. der TRef. u. Gegoenred. dem

Protestanten

Northern

Preussens,

die

in der

Germany:

1924.

Vorherrschaft

21909.

Pfalz,

PH.

Schlesien,

J. HECKEL,

H.LEUBEL, im

HILTEBRANDT,

protest.

Die

Polen

Calvinismus

u.

evangel.

Die

rém.

Dom-

u.

Salzburg,

u. Luthertum

Deutschland,

1928.

Kurie

Rome

1910.

die

—

Kollegiatstifter

I: Der

G.WOLF,

u.

Kampl

Aus

um

Kurkéln

im 16. fh., 1905. P. WEILER, Die kirchl. Reform im Erzbistum Koéln 1583/ 1615, 1931. K. H.GRAFF, Der Kbslner Kurfiirst Salentin v. Isenburg

{1567—77}),

1937.

J.SOLZBACHER,

Kasp.

Ulenberg,

1949.

A. FRANZEN,

Der Wiederaufbau des kirchl. Lebens im Erzbistum K&ln unter Ferdinand v. Bayern 1612/50, 1942; Die Visitationsprotokelle . . . im Erzstift Kalu . . . im Jahre 1569. L. E. L. SCHUCKING, Christoph Bernh. v. Galen, Fiirsthbisch.

v. Miinster 1606/78, 1940.

A, JACOBS, Die rheinischen Kapuziner 1611/1725,

1933. J. JUNGNITZ, Die Visitationsberichte der Ditz, Breslau I—IV, 1902/8. G. ZIMMERMANN, Das Breslauer Domkapitel 1500/1600, 1938. V. Conzemius,

Jakob III v. Eltz, Erzb. v. Trier 1567/1581, 1956,

! ¥. B. v. BUCHOLTZ, Gesch. Ferdinands 1, g vols. 1831/38. GR. RICHTER, Die Schriften G. Witzels, 1913. P. BRODER, Cassanders Vermittlungsversuch zw. Kathol. u. Protest., Diss. 1931. Monogr. by M. E. NOLTE, Nijmegen 1951T. W. TRUSEN, Um die Reform und Einheit der Kirche {(H,Witzel},

1957.

155

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517 —1648)

z. In the meantime,

Profestantism strongly supported by the

Jus reformands approved at Augsburg, continued to make headway. It was introduced into the Palatinate by the new Elector O#Heinrich (1556— 1550; § 165, 5) and into the Margraviate of Baden

by Bernard 111 (1556) after his predecessor Philip I had tolerated it for some time.

In Baden-Durlach,

Protestantism became

firmly

cntrenched; while in Baden-Baden Philip IT (1566—1588) restored the old faith (1571). After the death of Duke Henry the Younger

of Brunswick-Wolfenbiitiel (1568), his son and successor, Julius (1568--1589), made Protestantism the sole religion of his realm. In

spite

of

the

reservatum

ecclesiasticum,

the

Catholic

Church

suffered severe losses from Lutheran conquests in the principalities of central and northern Germany. Those which were not immediately subject to the empire were simply confiscated by secular princes (Brandenburg,

Saxony,

Mechlenburg,

Pomerania)

or

‘“‘adminis-

trators” were elected from among Protestant princes, who then made full use of their jus reformandi. Thus the two archdioceses of Magdeburg and Bremen and more than a dozen dioceses {Libeck, Verden,

stadt,

Merseburg,

Kammin,

Church.

Minden,

Naumburg,

Brandenburg,

By about

Osnabriick

[for at least ten years|, Halber-

Meissen,

Havelberg

and

Ratzeburg,

Lebus)

1570 almost seven-tenths

Schwerin,

were lost to the

of the population

of

Germany had become Protestant. Only in the south and west did the people remain loyal to the old faith, and even here it was seriously threatened. The worldly archbishop of Cologne, Gebhard T'ruchsess of Waldburg,

had been

elected in 1577 after a warmly

contested election and was confirmed by the pope three years later. In 1582 he publicly declared himself a Protestant, married his mistress,

the canoness

Countess

Agnes

of Mansfeld,

and

endeav-

ored to transform the archdiocese into a secular principality. But the cathedral chapter and the city council opposed him. Gregory XTIT deposed and excommunicated Gebhard and the chapter elected in his stead the young duke Enest of Bavaria (1583), who already held the dioceses of Freising, Hildesheim and Liége. The “Cologne War"" which ensued was decided against Gebhard with the help of Bavarian and Spanish arms (1584). Thus the danger of a Protestant majority in the college of electors was obviated and Catholicism was sustained not only in Cologne but also in the neighboring dioceses of Paderborn and Miinster. In Strasbourg the Protestant party in the cathedral chapter elected the fifteen year old margrave 156

§ 180. Progress of Reformation in Germany and Counter-Reformation

John George of Brandenburg as prince-bishop, but he was not able to establish his claim against the Catholic candidate, Cardinal

Charles

of Lorraine,

Bishop of Metz.

Here,

too, a “Bishops’

War”

resulted and lasted from 1592 to 1604. And here, as in Cologne, the victory of the Catholics was facilitated by the doctrinal dif-

ferences which had developed among Protestants themselves and which increased as Protestantism spread. In the Palatinate the

prince-clector

Frederick

11l

(1559—1576)

introduced

Calvinism

(1563) with the Heidelberg catechism: but his son, Lowss V7 (1576—1583), forcibly suppressed it and restored Lutheranism. John Casimir, while regent (1583—1592) for his nephew Frederick

IV,

re-established

Nassau

(1578),

Calvinism.

Calvinism

Bremen (1584), Zweibriicken

was

also

(1588),

adopted

Anhalt

Dby

(1590},

Hesse-Cassel (1605} ; and John Sigismund, prince-elector of Brandenburg, personally embraced it (see no. 5 below). Among orthodox

Lutherans the antagonism toward Calvinism was almost as great, sometimes greater than toward Catholicism. Toward the beginning

of the seventeenth century the Lutherans in Saxony used to say, "Rather papists than Calvinists.” 3. Protestantism also gained ground in the realms of secular Catholic princes, especially in the domains of the Hapsburgs, with the exception of Tirol. It made its way into Silesia during the reign

of Ferdinand

I. His son, Emperor

Maximilian

II

(1564—1576)1,

as crown prince, was secretly attached to it and used to assert that he was “‘neither Lutheran nor papist, but a Christian.” As emperor,

he professed to be a Catholic for dynastic reasons, but prudently

concealed his inner convictions. He certainly favored Protestantism wherever he could and on his deathbed refused the Last Sacraments. He expressly permitted the knights and lesser nobles of Lower and Upper Ausiria to observe the Augsburg Confession in

their castles and on their estates

(1568—1571);

but the terms of

the concession were greatly exceeded. The new religion rapidly spread to cities and villages so that the old religion seemed doomed.

Between

1572

and

1578 his brother,

religious liberty to the provinces ! Nuntiaturberichte

£1939/52.

W.E,

SCHWARZ,

aus

of Styria,

Deutschland,

Briefe

u.

Archduke

Akten

Abt.2, zur

Charles,

granted

Carinthia,

Carniola,

VI—VII

(r566—7r),

Gesch.

Maximilians

11,

2 vols. 188¢/g1. V. BIBL, Die Korrespondenz Max.s II, 2 vols. 1916/2T. R. HOLTZMANN, K. Max. II bis zu s. Thronbesteigung, 1go3. PH. J. SCHERG,

Uber die relig. Entwicklung Max.s II {1527—62),

1903.

V. BIBL, Archiv f.

tsterr. Gesch. 1918, 208/426 (his religious attitude); Max. TI, der ritselhafte Kaiser,

1929,

157

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517 —1648)

and Gorizia. The Protestant cause was also greatly advanced by the dispute between the morbid and incompetent Emperor Rudolf I'T

(1576—1612)

and

his

brother

Archduke

Matthias.

Rudolf

was

obliged (1608) to renounce his rights to Hungary, Upper and Lower Austria and Moravia, By a “capitulation” of 1609 Matthias granted to the powerful nobility and the sovereign cities freedom to follow the Augsburg Confession, so that the Catholic reform of Rudolf (sec no. 4 below) was nullified. Maximilian IT had already given to the non-Catholics of Bohemia {Bohemian Brethren and Lutherans) a verbal assurance of toleration; but Rudolf, by

royal charter of July 9, 1609 granted liberty of conscience

to all

subjects, and to Protestant princes, lords, knights and sovereign

cities the right to build churches and schools and to hold services according to the Confessio Bohemica of 1575 (§ 148, 6). In a special

“agreement’ recognized by the emperor, Protestants on the royal estates were permitted to build churches and hold services. In Stlesia the Protestant princes were given a royal charter (160g) assurtng them of still greater protection in their religious liberty. 4. While

human

weakness

and

political

entanglements

were

resulting in more concessions to the new religions, and while the

condition of the Catholic Church in Germany was becoming more

doubtful, a lively reaction set in in several localities after the middle of the sixteenth century, which von Ranke called the CounterReformation'. However, the term does not mean renewed hostility ' A, ELKAN, Entst. u. Entwickiung d. Begriffs (12, 1914, 473/93. H. JEDIN, Kath. Reformation

Gegenreformation, HZ oder Gegenref., 1946.

K. HARTMANN,

Der Prozess gegen die protest. Landstidnde in Bayern unter

J. SCHWEIZER,

RO

Herzog Albrecht V (1564), 1904. W.GOETZ and L. THEOBALD, Beitrige zur Gesch. Albrechts V u. der sog. Adelsverschworung v. 1563, I9I3. 1914,

194 {f.;

Duke William V of Bavaria).

1915,

22 ff.

B. SCHWARZ,

(Roman

correspondence

of

Kard. Otto Truchsess v. Wald-

burg bis z. Wahl als Fiirstb. v. Augsburg (1543), 1923. ST. EHSES, Festg. A. de Waal, 1913, 123/43 (Card. Truchsess in Rome 1559/63). F.SIEBERT,

Zwischen Katser u. Papst. Kard, Truchsess v. Waldb., 1943. TH. SPECHT, Gesch. der ehemal. Univ. Dillingen, 1902, Dillingen u. Schwaben, 1949. H.v. EGLOFFSTEIN, Fiirstabt Balth. Dernbach u. die kath. Restaur. im Erzstift Fulda,

18go.

W. E. SCHWAR?Z,

Die Akten der Visitation des Bistums

Miinster aus der Zeit Johanmns v. Hoya (1571/73), 1913: Z. f. vaterlind. Gesch. Westialens 1922, 95/135. P.LOER, Moritz v. Biiren $]J. (1604/61),

1939. A. BRECHER, Die kirchliche Reform in Stadt u. Reich, Aachen, 19 5%. PR. HEFELE, Der Wiirzburger Fiirsthisch. Julins Echter u. die Liga, rorz.

J. ECHTER-FESTSCHRIFT, ed. by CL.V.HESSDORFER, 1917. Monogr. on J. Echter by 5. Merkle, 1917; TH. HENNER, 1918; G.FRH.V. POLNITZ, 1959. J. SCHMIDLIN, Die kath. Restauration im ElsaB am Vorabend des 30]. Krieges,

1934;

Neues

Arch.

{, elsiss.

KG.

1943,

135/204;

Archives

de

I'égl. d’Alsace 1949/50, 12¢/81. ]J. LOSERTH, Akten u. Korrespond. z. Gesch, der Gegenref. in Innerésterreich vnter Erzherz. Karl II {1578—¢g0) und

158

§ 180. Progress of Reformation in Germany and Counter-Reformation

toward or conflict with Protestantism, nor a violent attempt to re-catholicize the territories that had embraced the new religion. It refers rather to the reform movement within the Church which has

already been described and which was planned especially by the Council of Trent and carried into effect by capable popes and by the zealons efforts of the Jesuits and the other new religious orders. It was not confined to Germany, but began at almost the same time

in other

countries

of Europe:

France,

England,

lands, Poland, Hungary and elsewhere (§ 182—184).

the

Nether-

With the reawakening of self confidence among Catholics, the Catholic princes began to follow the example of Protestant rulers and to assert their jus reformandi in favor of the Church. Among the secular princes, Duke Albert V of Bavaria (1350—1579) was the first to take up the work energetically (1564). He broke the resistance of the Protestant nobles, ordered that parochial visitations be made and that parish missions be preached, introduced a strict censorship of books, demanded that all officials and professors make the Tridentine profession of faith and did everything possible to further the schools recently established by the Jesuits. His son and successor, William V, the Pious (1579—1597), worked with even greater zeal to preserve the Catholic religion in Bavaria. Among the spiritual princes, the excellent Cardinal Ofto Truchsess of Waldburg, Bishop of Augsburg (1543—1573) strove to reawaken Catholic life in his diocese by pastoral letters, diocesan and parochial visitations, synods and missions; he founded the University of Dillingen (1563) which he committed to the Jesuits. A similar

zeal was displayed by Prince-abbot Balthassar von Dernback of Fulda (1570), Prince-bishop John of Hoya in the diocese of Miinster (1571}, Archbishop Daniel Brendel of Mainz in the Eichsfeld (1574), Prince-bishop Julius Echter of Mespelbrunn in the diocese of Wiirzburg (1573; with Card. Otto, the latter was then the foremost

champion of the Catholic cause in Germany and founded the UniFerdinand II (1590—1637), 1898, 1906/7 (Fontes rer. Austr. 50, 58, 60); Salzburg u. Steiermark im letzten Viertel des 16. Jb., 1905; Das Kirchengut

in Stetermark

Gegenref.

16.

u.

in Niederdsterr.

Reformation

373/446.

im

K. Rudolfs

17. Jh., II

durch in

1912.

V. BIBL,

K. Rudolf

Oberdsterr.,

Die

Einfithrung

II (1576/80),

Archiv

f.

1901;

&sterr.

Die Gegenref.

Festschrift

above

Die relig.

Gesch.

1927,

A.KROSS, ZkTh 1907, 474 ff.; 1908, 55 ff. {royal charter of 1609).

G.L.OESCHE, Gesch. der Gegenref. in Schlesien, z parts 1915/16.

Ferdinand

der kath.

in d. Fiirstentiimern Liegnitz-Brieg-Wohlau,

F. Schiitz,

II.

§ 166, 4.

und

das

1954,

315 ff.

Problem

des

(Ferd. II).

1931.

D), VELSEN,

H.STURMBERGER,

Absolutismus,

1958.

K. EDER,

Kaiser

M. HECKEL,

see

159

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517 —1648)

versity of Wiirzburg 1n 1582 and the great Julius Hospital), Bishop

Dietrich

(Theodore}

of Fiirstenberg

in the diocese

of Paderborn

(1585} and Bishop Leopold of Austria, a brother of Emperor Ferdi-

nand II, in the diocese of Strasbourg (1607--1625), A CounterReformation program was also gradually carried out in Austria. Emperor Rudolf II forbade Protestant services in Upper and Lower Austria, at least in the citied, and especially in Vienna (1578),

and restricted the religious liberty of the nobles to limits

originally prescribed by Maximilian II in 1571. After an uprising of the peasants which lasted for several years, he ordered (1597) a '‘general reformation” in Upper Austria to be carried out with the support of the army. Even sterner methods were adopted in the interior of Austria, where Archduke Charles (1 1590) had begun to suppress Protestantism in 1582. His son, Archduke Ferdinand (later Emperor Ferdinand II), continued the work after 1598. Ferdinand, who had been cducated by the Jesuits at Ingolstadt, and always retamned members of the Society as his counsellors, set the example to the other German princes of a vigorous effort to restore the Church in his domains. He succeeded in almost entirely suppressing

Protestantism

in Styria,

Carinthia

and

Car-

niela, A reform commission travelled through the land under mlitary protection, reintroducing Catholic worship. Those who resisted were exiled; only the nobles, by appealing to the royal charter of 1609, were able to retain a Hmited religious freedom. The Counter-Reformation movement also spread to Switzerland?, part of which was in the ecclesiastical province governed by St. Charles Borromeo, archbishop of Milan (§ 174, 7). The bishop of Basel, James Christopher Blarer of Wartensee (1575 to 1608), and fohn Francis Bowhomini, papal nuncio to Switzerland (1579—1581), gave St. Charles their fullest support. In 1579

Gregory

XITII

established

the

Swiss

College

capable and virtuous clergy for the country.

at Milan

to train

a

The Jesuits settled

1 K. FRY, G. A. Volpe, seine erste Nuntiatur in der Schweiz 1560764, 1931; Dokumente 1560/88, 2 vols. 1935/46. FR. STEFFENS and H, REINHARDT, Die Nuntiatur von G. Fr, Bonhomini (1579/8r and 87), 3 vols. 1g06/29.

J. G. MAYER,

Das Konzil v. Trient u. die Gegenref. in der Schweiz,

2 vols, 1gorf3. C. CAMENISCH, Karl Borromeo u. die Gegenref. im Veltlin, Igol. E. WYMANN, Der hl. Karl Borromeo u. die schweiz, Eidgenossenschaft, 1903, Geschichtsfreund

1910, 217/88;

1911,

1/170.

H. REINHARDT,

zur Gesch. der kath., Schweiz tm Zeitalter Karl Borromeos,

Studien

1911. H.METZGER,

Vorstudien zu einer Gesch. der trident. Seelsorge-Reform im eidgentss. Gebiet des Bistums Konstangz, Diss. 1951. A. FRIGG, Die Mission der Kapuziner in den rdtoroman. u. italien. Talschaften Ritiens im 17. Jh., 1953.

160

§ 180. Progress of Reformation in Germany and Counter-Reformation

in Lucerne in 1574 and later in Fribourg and other places. After 1581 the Capuchins made a number of foundations which became centers of Catholic activity. Sz Fidelis of Sigmaringen, who was

murdered

by

Calvinists

at

Graubiinden

in

martyr of the Capuchin Order. 5. The effects of the Counter-Reformation

1622,

was

the

first

were by no means

Insignificant. It served to check the advance of the innovation and

to regain much that had been lost. In view of the rights which the Protestants had been asserting for their territorial churches, no valid objection could be made to the methods employed by the Catholic princes. And if the Protestants could appeal to the declaration of Ferdinand I (1555; § 166, 4) against the action of the

spiritual princes

(the bishops),

the Catholics

on their part

could

point to the far greater violations of the right of reservation by the Protestants. Still, the Counter-Reformation naturally served to

rouse the Profestants, to which the Catholics in turn reacted.! Bitter

feuds and controversies were carried on by pen and word of mouth. The antagonism between the two religions continued to increase

until 1t assumed a dangerous character. When a Catholic procession

m Donauwdrth

was disturbed by Protestants,

that imperial city

was deprived of its rights and annexed to Bavaria (1607); and at the Diet of Regensburg in April 1608 the Protestant princes seceded ;

the Diet ended without agreement. Under the leadership of the Elector Frederick 1V, (1583—1610) of the Calvinistic Palatinate, the Profestant Union was formed in May 1608 at Ahausen in Ansbach. It was composed of several princes of southern and western Germany (the Palatinate, Wiirttemberg, Baden, Ansbach, Kulm-

bach and Neuburg)

and later others joined it. France and Holland

supported the Union. As was to be expected, in June of the following year, the Catholic princes formed the Catholic League to counteract the Protestant Union. The League was headed by the energetic Duke Maximilian of Bavaria (1598—1651), a loyal Catholic, and consisted of the bishops who were prince-electors, five bishops of southern Germany, the prince-abbot of Kempten ! K. LORENZ, Die kirchl.-polit. Parteibildung in Deutschland vor Beginn

des 30j. Krieges im Spiegel der konfess. Polemik, 1go3. W, HERBST, Das Regensburger Religionsgesprach v. 1601, 1928. PH. HILTEBRAN DT, OFitAB

14/16,

1911/14

U. STUTZ, Sb. Berlin

229/86.

(papal policy in the Prussian

H. KUHNSTEINHAUSEN,

Die

Neuburg it der rom. Kurie, 1937.

12

and Jiilich-Cleve

Kurf. Joh. Sigismund v. Brandenb. u. das 1922, 2; cfr. O, HINTZE, Sb. Berlin 1930, 26

Bihlmeyer-Tilchle, Church History IIT

Korresp.

Wolfg.

questions).

Reformationsrecht, and HZ 144, 1931,

Wilhelms

v. Pialz161

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517 —1648)

and the prince-provost of Ellwangen.

The dispute over succession

promise

both

mn Jélch-Cleve (1609) threatened to bring the Union and the League mto armed conflict. However, the dispute was settled by a combetween

the two

claimants,

of whom

had,

in the

meantime, changed their veligion. The Lutheran Wolfgang Wiilliam,

count palatine of Neuburg,

became a Catholic and married a sister

of the duke of Bavaria to obtain the help of the League. His domains returned with him to the Church (1614—1615). The Lutheran Elector fohn Sigismund of Brandenburg, on the other hand, became

a Calvinist (1613), but made no attempt to impose Calvinism on his Lutheran subjects. However, the bitter feeling between Protestants and Catholics continued to grow and soon broke out in

armed conflict,

§ 181.

Thirty Years’ War and Peace of Westphalial, 1. The frightful war, which made Germany a plaything of foreign powers, turned the country into a battlefield for many years and forced it to the verge of utter ruin,

began

in Bohemia.

! See lif. notes p. 156 (especially A. Huber and S. Riezler).

HOFF, XIV.

Gesch.

des europ.

D.ALBRECHT,

Staatensystems

Zeitschrift

fiir

1559/1660,

bayerische

534 ff. (subsidies of the Curia 1618/1635).

see § 176,4. —

Briefe u. Akten

1928.

W. PLATZ-

PASTOR

Landesgeschichte,

F. GREGOROVIUS

XII—

1956,

and A. LEMAN,

z. Gesch. des 30j. Krieges, ed. by the Bayr.

Akad. d. Wissensch.,, 11 vols. (1590/1613), 1870/1908; NF.: Die Politik Maximilians 1 u. s. Verbiindeten (1618/51) II, 1—4, 1908/48. H. SCHUZ,

Der

30f. Krieg,

2z fasc.

J. SCHMIDLIN,

Kirchl.

1917

(Hauptquellen

Zustinde

zur neuveren Geschichte

u. Schicksale

des deutschen

2223},

Katholizismus

wihrend des 30j. Krieges nach den bischofl. Romberichten, 1940. H.TUCHLE, Acta S. C. de Prop. Fide Germaniam spectantia (1622-—1649), 1662. F. HUR-

TER,

Gesch.

d. Deutschen

Ferdinands

Reiches

IT {1619—37),

unter

11 vols.

Ferdinand III

1850/64.

{1637—1657},

M. KOCH,

Gesch.

2 vols, 1865/66.

A.LLMAN, RHE 1938, 542/55 (Curia and imperial election of Ferdinand, 1636). O. KLOPP, Der 30j. Krieg bis 1632, 3 vols. 1891/96; Deutschland und die Habsburger, ed. by L. KONIG,

IV, Camb.

SCHOLTE,

1906.

ZidA

H.BAKER,

1g50,

267/90

1908.

THE CAMBRIDGE

The wars of truth

(relig.

r603/49,

background

MODERN

of the

Lond.

HISTORY

1952.

J. H.

Simplicissimus).

B. BRETHOLZ, Gesch. Bohmens und Mihrens III—1V, 1924/25. L, WINTERA, Braunau u. der 30j. Krieg, 1903. A. MULLER, Arch. f. schles. KG. 1951, 50/73 (K]crstergrab%. E. BERNHARD, see p.156. M. RITTER, Die pfilz, Politik und die béhm. Konigswahl 1619, HZ 79, 1897, 239/83. H. STURMBERGER, Aufstand in Béhmen, 1959. A. GINDELY, Gesch. d. Gegenref,

Béhmen, 1894. G.LOESCHE, sce § 180,4. Acta S. Congregationis de Propag. Fide res gestas Bohemicas illustrantia, 2 vols. (1622/24), Prague 1923/54.

AL. KRGSS, HJG 1913, 1 ff,, 275 ff.; Gesch. d. béhm,. Provinz d. Gesellschaft Jesu I, 1—2 (to 1657) 1927/38. K. PFISTER, Kurfiirst Maximilian v. Bayern u. sein Jh., 1949. H.SCHOSSER, Die Entwickl. des relig.-kirchl. Lebens in

der Oberpfalz nach d. Rekatholisierung, 1938.

162

H. GUNTER,

Die Habsburger

§ 181.

Thirty Years’ War and Peace of Westphalia

Emperor Matthias {(1612—1619) endeavored to restrict gradually the concessions which his brother Rudolf had granted to Prot-

estants in Bohemia

(§ 180, 3} with the idea of eventually suppress-

ing them entirely. There had been plenty of precedent for such action; wherever rulers were in a position to do so they had taken measures

to suppress the religion with which they did not agree,

Matthias, therefore, ordered that the churches built by Protestants

at Braunau and Klostergrab on monastic property, be closed. The “agreement”

of

160¢g

had

mentioned

only

royal,

not

monastic

domains. But the Protestants of Bohemia were infuriated. When their demands were rejected and the church at Klostergrab was torn down (1617) they rose in rebellion at Prague (May 1618) under

the leadership of the Protestant Count Maithias of Thurn. The imperial governors Martinitz and Slawata and the secretary

Fabrictus were thrown from the high windows of the castle and a provisional government of thirty directors was instituted. Matthias

died on March zo, 1619. The Bohemian rebels refused to recognize the new emperor, Ferdinand IT (1619—1637), and elected the

Calvinist prince Frederick V of the Palatinate (1610—1632) as their

king. The revolt spread to the neighboring countries of Moravia, Silesia, Lusatia and even to the archduchy of Austria and the kingdom of Hungary (first period of the Thirty Years’ War, the Bohemian-Palatine War 161g—1623) . It seemed as if the Hapsburg

rule and the Catholic Church were at an end in these countries when Ferdinand secured the powerful help of Spain, the League and the Protestant elector of Saxony. The latter lemt his aid Liga

1625/35

{archive

im 17. Jh., 1955. MONOGR.

1910;

ON

of Simancas),

J. B. ELLERBACH,

WALLENSTEIN:

J. PEKAR,

2

vols.

1908.

L. v. RANKE,

1937;

G. MECENSEFFY,

Habsburger

Der 30j. Kxieg im ElsaB, 3 vols. 1912/29. f1gro;

G.WAGNER,

H, HALLWICH,

1958;

G. HOEHNE,

3

vols.

ZKG

1950/5%, 268/go. M. RITTER, Der Ursprung des R.-ediktes, HZ. 76, 1893, 62/102. H.GUNTER, Das R.-edikt v. 1629 u. die kath. Restanration Alt

wirtembergs,

Igor.

R. RUSSQ,

Archivo

storico

ital,

1926,

25 ff.,

233 {f.

(policy of Curia at Diet of 1630). B. BAUSTAEDT, Richeliey 1. Deutschland, 1936. MONOGR. ON GUSTAVUS ADOLPHUS: J. PAUL, 3 vols. 1927/32;

G. WITTROCK, 1930; O.WESTPHAL, 1932; M. HEIN, Hist. VS 1937, 73/106 ; O. NORMANN, ARG 1938, 102/18; M. ROBERTS, 2 vols. Lond. 1953/58, G. EGELHAAF, G. Adolf in Deutschl. 1630/32, 1gox. F. BOTHE, G. Adolfs u. seines Kanzlers wirtschaftspolit. Absichten auf Deutschland, I1Q10.

J. GRISAR,

VS

1930,

StZ 124, 1932, 93/102

415/29.

H. TEITGE,

(G. A.’s aim in Germany).

Die Frage nach

dem

J. PAUL,

Hist

Urheber der Zerstérung

Magdeburgs 1631, 1904. H. HALLWICH, Briefe u. Akten z. Gesch. Wallen. steins 1630/34, 4 vols. 1911/r2. H.v.SRBIK, Wallensteins Ende, 21952.

H. SCHWARZ,

W,

v. Hessen-Kassel

u. Gustav Ad., Diss.

im Kampf

gegen

1937.

Kaiser

R.ALTMANN,

u. Katholizismus

Landgr.

Wilh. V

1633/37,

1938.

163

Modern and Recent Times. First Peviod (1517—1648)

because I.eague

of his strong and

the

dislike

imperial

troops

of Calvinism. at

White

The

victory

Mountain,

near

of the Prague

on November 8, 1020 served to secure the threatened Hapshurg rule. Frederick V, called “the Winter King,” fled and was deposed. Stern justice was meted out to the rebels of Bohemia. The emperor

annuled the royal charter of 1609 and; appealing to his jus reformandr, suppressed Protestantism in Bohemia, Moravia, Upper and

Lower Austria and

Upper Silesia, He did the same in the Upper

Palatinate (Amberg), which was given to Bavaria to compensate for the damages inflicted by the war, and in the Palatinate of the Rhine which was occupied by the League and Spanish troops. The

renowned Biblioteca Palatina at Heidelbery was sent to Rome (§ 176, 4). The Union was dissolved in 1621. The electoral dignity, taken away from Frederick V, was conferred on Duke Maximilian of Bavaria (1623).

Unfortunately, however, the war was not at an end. Count fruest of Muansfeld, the Mavgrave Geovge of Radewn-Durlach and the “‘mad” Duke Christian of Brunswich-Wolfenbittlel espoused Frederick's cause. The latter two

were

defeated

by

Tilly,

the commander-in-chief

of the League,

in three

engagements at Wimpfen, Hochst and Stadtiohn in 1622 and 1623 But now Chrisiian IV, king of Denmark and duke of Holstein, supported by England and Heolland, took up arms in behalf of Frederick (second peviod of the Thirly Years' War: Saxon-Danish War 1625—162q9), Ernest of Mansfeld

was defeated by Albert of Wallenstein, general of the imperial army, near Dessau {(April 1626}, and Christian met a like fate at the hands of Tilly near Lutter am Darenberge, northwest of Goslar (August 1626). Christian was obliged to surrender the dioceses of Lower Saxony and promise not to interfere further in the affairs of the empire (Peace of Liibeck, 1629).

2. After this fortunate turn of events the emperor felt himself justified and obliged in conscience to restrict Protestantism to the boundaries assigned to it in the Treaty of Passau and the Religious Peace of Augsburg. Urged by the League, by Carlo Carafa, the papal nuncio, and by his confessor, the Jesuit Lamormaini, Ferdinand issued the Edict of Restitution' on March 6, 1629 in the

form of an authentic interpretation of the Peace of Augsburg. By

the terms of the edict the Protestants were ordered to restore all church property which they had seized since 1522. Immediately imperial commissaries accompanied by soldiers were dispatched throughout the country to enforce the decree. By autumn of 1631 the following properties had been restored: two archdioceses

(Magdeburg 164

and

Bremen),

five

dioceses

(Halberstadt,

Minden,

§ 181, Thirty Years’ War and Peace of Westphalia

Hildesheim, Verden and Osnabriick), two abbeys immediately subject to the empire (Herford and Hersfeld), one hundred and fifty churches and monasteries and about two hundred parishes in

cities and

villages

these properties Wolfenbiittel, This

strength

action

of

which

were

of the

German

had

located

hitherto

been

Protestant.

in Wiirttemberg

emperor,

which

Protestantism,

and

threatened

was

legally

Most

of

Brunswick-

to

break

justified:

the

but

politically and in the manner in which he proceeded, it was a mistake, for it offered to foreign powers an excuse for intervening

and thus brought about a complete and unfortunate reversal of affairs. As the result of a treaty between France and. Bavaria,

cleverly negotiated by Cardinal Richelien, the emperor was induced

at the Diet of Regensburg in the summer of 1630 to dispense with

the services of Wallenstein and his army just at the time that Gustavus Adolphus of Sweden, a new and most dangerous foe, was preparing to attack Germany. The Swedish king landed on the island of Usedom on June 24, 1630 with 12,000 picked men and in the Treaty of Barwalde (January 1631) received an annual subsidy from France to carry on war against the emperor. He protested that he was acting only as the protector of the sorely

oppressed

Evangelical

faith,

but

it socon

became

evident

that

political and economic motives were not entirely absent. He hoped by a victory over the emperor to secure and extend Sweden’s ascendancy around the Baltic Sea, to obtain commercial advantages for his country and, with the help of France, to take over the leadership of the Protestants against the House of Hapshurg. At first, several of the Protestant princes of Germany, especially the electors of Saxony and Brandenburg, comprehending Gustavus Adolphus’s motives, cautiously withheld their support. (For the attitude of Pope Urban VIII toward the contending powers, cir.

3 176, 4).

3. War broke out again and rapidly took a new turn (third perviod.: The Swedish War 1630-—1635). Tilly, it is true, captured Magde-

burg, which, contrary to his wishes, was completely destroyed

by

fire (May 1631), but in the battle at Breitenfeld-Leipzig the hitherto undefeated general of the League was vanquished by Gustavus Adolphus. Almost all of the Protestant princes now joined forces with the Swedish king, who swept triumphantly through Thuringia and Franconia to Mainz, Augsburg (Tilly defeated and fatally

165

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517 —1648)

wounded tn the battle on the Lech, April 1632) and Munich until he was halted by Wallenstetn, whom the emperor was forced to summon in haste. Gustavus Adolphus was killed in the indecisive battle

of

Lidzen

(November

1632),

but

the

war

went

on:

the

chancellor Oxenstjerna administered political affairs in Sweden whtle Duke Bernhard of Saxe-Weimar took command of the Swedish

army. Wallenstein, who was suspected ‘of duplicity, was murdered

by imperial officers at Vger (February 25, 1634) and the imperial

forces defeated the Swedish army at Nirdlingen in September 1634.

This brought southern Germany again under the emperor’s control,

but only after the country had been frightfully devastated. Elector

Johm George I of Saxony concluded a separate treaty of peace with Emperor Ferdinand

IT at Prague on May 30, 1635 and most of the

other Protestant princes of Germany later accepted the terms of the treaty. The Lidict of Restitution was abandoned as a condition of the treaty and church property which had been seized by Prot-

estants before November 12, 1627 was to remain in their possession.

The war, however, dragged on, and France now openly took part (fourth period : The Swedish-French War 1635--1648 ). I'rom this time on 1t became a purely political war and was marked by pillage and destruction, murder and rapine. Hunger and pestilence added their share to depopulate and despoil a large part of the empire. (zermany was completely crippled ; her ccclesiastical and moral life were seriously impaired and the country was for a tong time dependent politically [‘rance.

and

culturally on

foreign

countries,

especially on

4. After long and difficult negotiations, peace was finally conchided in the Westphalian cities of Miinster and Osnabriick. The

interests of the Church were affected chiefly by the Instrumentum Pacts Osnabrugense of October 24, 16841, The principal conditions ' J. G V. MEIERN,

1734/36.

K. REPGEN,

DELLA

Acta

K. MULLER, Acta

ROCCHETTA,

pacis

pacis

Instrumenta

Westphalicae

pacis

Westphalicae,

Westph.

1962 ff.”

La nunziatura di F, Chigi

F. KOPP and 1. SCHULTE,

Der Westf. Frieden,

publica,

6 parts

1049.

V. KYBAL

1640/51,

?1943.

Hann.

M. BRAUBACHand

I, Romc

6. INCISA

1943/46.

M. BRAUBACH,

Der

West{, Friede, 1g948. E. HOVEL, Pax optima rerum, 1948. F. DICKMANN, Der Westf, I'riede, 1959, HINSCHIUS-SEHLING, R 21, 100/76. PASTOR X1V,

1, 73/101.

L.STEINBERGER,

1900,

B. v. BONIN,

home

devotions

MOLLER,

ThQ

Die

Jesuiten

u.

die

Friedensfrage

Die prakt. Bedeutung des ius reformandi,

1908, 255/79 (Exercitinum religionis publicum, in

the

peace

of

Westphalia).

M. RITTER,

1635/50,

19oz. 1.3, HZ

SAG-

privatum and ro1,

1908,

253/82 (canon law and the peace of Westph.). §. KELLER, Festg. P. Kriiger 1911, 473/510 {Reformed church in civil law). H. FISCHER, Beitrige zur

166

§ 181. Thirty Years’ War and Peace of Westphalia

were as follows: A general amnesty was proclaimed and property

was to be returned to those who were in possession in 1618. Bavaria retamned the Upper Palatinate and the electoral dignity; and an

eighth electorship was created for the Palatinate of the Rhine. Sweden took western Pomerania, Riigen, the diocese of Bremen (exclusive of the city) and Verden. To compensate for these losses the princes of Brandenburg and Mecklenburg were permitted to take territorics formerly ruled by bishops, but now “secularized.” The Lorraine dioceses of Metz, Toul and Verdun went to France. The Religious Peace of Augsburg was confirmed, and at the urging of Prince-Elector Irederick William of Brandenburg, Calvinism

was given the same legal rights as the other two religions. To settle

questions of church property and to determine the right of religious practice in the imperial cities, January 1, 1624 (midway between 1618 and 1630) was designated as the terminus a quo. Both spiritual

and secular princes were to enjoy the jus reformandi in the same way; but only in the case of those who were not practicing their

present faith before January 1, 1624. All other dissidents whether Catholic or Protestant were to be permitted to practice their

religion at home or to attend churches in territories where churches

of their faith were allowed. In case of banishment for religious reasons, the persons thus penalized retained the right to dispose of their property. Emperor Ferdinand I'Il (1637—1657) did not accept January 1, 1624 as the basis for settlement in Cisleithan

Austria.

Furthermore

it was

decided

that if, in the future,

a Lu-

theran prince became a Calvinist or vice versa, the religious status of his domains was not to be altered. The same ruling was also held to govern the case of a Lutheran prince becoming a Catholic, or

conversely, Thus in 1697 when the Prince-Elector Frederick August

of Saxony (1694—1733) became a Catholic, and in 1733 when the duchy of Wiirttemberg came under the rule of the recently converted Charles Alexander (1733—1737) (§ 187, 4), the religious Kenntnis

Diss.

1913.

d.

pipstl.

Politik

K. REPGEN,

RQ

wihrend 1953,

d. Westfil.

79/116

Friedensverhandiungen,

(Chigi's instructions);

Die

R&-

mische Kurie u. der Westfial, Friede, 1962. C.C. ECKHARDT, The Papacy and the world-affairs, Chicago 1937. P.VOLK, 500 Jahre Bursf. Kongregation, 1950, 67/125 (question of monasteries). G.SCHMID, ARG 1953, 203/23. H. E. FEINE, Die Besetzung der Reichsbistiimer vom Westfil. Frieden bis

zur

Sikularisation,

19zr:

Deutsche

Verfassungsgesch.

d.

Neuzeit,

ro4o0.

C. BORNHAEK, Deutsche Verfassungsgesch. vom Westf. Frieden an, 1g94o0. H. ZWINGMANN, Der Kaiser in Reich u. Christenheit zwei Jhh. nach dem Westi. Frieden I, 1914. K.HOLL, Die Bedeut. der groBen Kriege fiir das

relig. u. kirchl. Leben

innerhalb des dtsch.

Protestantismus,

1916.

167

Modern and Recent Trmes. First Perviod (1517—1648)

status

of

these

territories

remained

unchanged.

The

Peace

of

Westphalia maintained the reservatum ecclestasticum and made it obligatory on Catholics and Protestants alike; but henceforth it had httle practical significance. Finally it was decided that, for the future, whenever religious matters came up for discussion in the

Diets, they were to be settled, not by a majority vote, but by a friendly agreement between the Corpus Catholicorum and the

Corpus Evangelicorum. trom a political point of view the Peace of Westphalia meant

a shocking abasement and the almost utter ruination of (Germany,

a permanent loosening of the bonds of empire and a lessening of imperial authority. From the point of view of the Church it meant that the horrors of war had exhausted both parties to the point

where they were forced to mutual toleration and to an admission of

the political equality of the two ownership of church property property which was taken from the Edict of Restitution would

lost.

By

the

Brief Zelus

domus

confessions. For a long time the was disputed: but most of the the Catholic Church, and which have restored, was irretrievably

Dei

of November

20,

1648,

Pope

Innocent X protested and declared the terms of the peace invalid, although he foresaw that his remonstrance would be futile. The protest was, naturally, not against the peace, but against the serious harm which the terms inflicted on the Church. Under the circurnstances he could not have kept silence without failing in his duty. The powers involved understood this and awaited the protest, which they prepared to reject even before it reached them. § 182,

Religious Conflicts in France to Middle of Seventeenth Century’. 1. France bordered immediately on the countries that gave birth to the new and revolutionary religious ideas (Germany and Switzer! H. HAUSER,

Les sources de 1'hist. de France au XVIe siécle {1504

/1610), 4 vols. Paris 1911/16. E.BOURGEOIS et L. ANDRE, Les sources ... au XVIIe 5. (1610/1715), 8 vols. Paris 1913/36. ACTA Nuntiaturae Gallicae,

Paris 1961 ff. A. L, HERMINJARD, sous la direction de E, LAVISSE

see § 168. HISTOIRE DE FRANCE PUBL. V—IX, 1 (1492/1789), Paris 1903/10.

W. PLATZHOFF, see § 181. P.IMBART DE LA TOUR. Les origines de la Réforme, 4 vols. Paris 1905/35. G. GOYAU, Hist. religieuse de la Natio n frangaise, Paris 1922. PASTOR 1V, 2-—XIV

C. POULET, Hist. de I'église de France 11, Paris 1946. passim. F, ROCQUAIN, La France et Rome pendant

les guerres de religion (1559/98), Paris 1924. A.CLERVAL, Registre des proces-verbaux de la Faculté de théol. de Paris I (1505/23), Paris 1918.

168

§ 182, Religious Conflicts in France

land). At a very early date, therefore, these ideas — first Lutheranism and later, to an even greater extent, Calvinism — gained entrance mto France. Access was made all the easier because in France,

as elsewhere,

satisfactory

and

generally been

conditions in the Church

both

the

higher

neglecting their duty.

and

were by no means

lower

clergy

had

Still the movement

quite

did not

touch the great mass of the French people. 1t affected chiefly the nobility, the educated classes and the bourgeoisie especially in the south and west where liberal humanists like Faber Stapulensis

(Jacques Lefévre d’Etaples,

t1563), vicar-general of the bishop

of Meaux, had prepared the way. King Francis I (1515—1547), a L.CRISTIANI,

RevHE

Etudes

et relig.

LEFEVRE

réforme

Paris Paris

France

D'ETAPLES:

théol.

frang.,

1947. 1920.

Paris

1946,

53/83

H. DORRIES,

1936,

1934.

ZKG

3 ff.

M. MANN,

au

16¢

and

1925,

LEVIS-MIREPOIX,

the

Paris

544/5%1;

Frasme

La France

faculty).

J. BARNAUD,

et les débuts

de

ia

de Ja Iienaissance,

. DE LAGARDE, Recherches sur l'esprit polit. de la Réforme, H. HAUSER et A, RENAUDET, Les débuts de 1'Age moderne,

La Renaiss. et la Réforme, Paris 1929.

ance

(Luther

5.,

Paris

1g42.

L. FEBVRE, Le probléme de incroy-

J. CHAMBON,

Der

franz.

Protestantismus.

Sein

Weg bis z. franz. Revolution, %1948, E. . LEONARD, Historic générale du Protestantisme, Paris 1961 ff.; Le protestant francais, Paris 1953. I.. PERRIRAZ, Hist. de la théologie réformée frangaise i1V, Neuchétel 1961, I.. AGUESSE Hist. de I"établissement du protestantisme en France, 4 vols. Paris 1882/85, KERVYN DE LETTENHOVE, Les Huguenots et les Gueux (1560/85), 6 vols.

Bruges 1883/85. J. W. THOMPSON, The Wars of Religion in France 1559/76, Lond. 1909. L. ROMIER, Les origines polit. des guerres de religion (1547/59), 2 vols. de

Paris

Catherine

Paris

1922;

H, NAEF,

La

1913/14;

de

La

conjuration

Médicis,

L.a

Paris

France

a la veille

des

d’Amboise

et Genéve,

Paris

Catholiques et Huguenots conjuration

d’Amboise,

1923;

guerres

de

& la cour de Charles

IX,

1g22.

Le

royaume

rel.,

2z vols.

Paris 1g24.

1. V. MURALT,

ZKG 1933, 263/85 (cause of religious wars), A. GRANT, The Huguenots, Lond. 1934. L. R.LEFEVRE, Les Francais pendant les guerres de rel., Paris 1949 ff, LEVIS-MIREPOIX, Les guerres de rel., Paris 1950. K. NI RNBERGER, Die Politisierung des franzos. Protestantismus, 1948. H. FOUQUIRAY,

Hist. de la Compagnie de Jésus en France I—V,

Paris 1910/25.

E. SAULNIER,

Le r0le polit. du Card. de Bourbon {Charles X} (1523/90), Paris 1912.A. AUTIN L’'échec

de la Reforme

Gallicanisme

en

et la réforme

France

cath.

au

XVIe

s., Paris

(1563/1615),

Paris

1918.

V. MARTIN,

1919.

J. FAUREY,

monarchie frang. et le protestantisme francais, Paris 1923.

]. VIENOT,

France,

Les

de

la Réforme

frang.,

les débuts

Paris

(1514/73),

1926.

R.LEBEGUE,

Paris

1929.

I'’Eglise de France an XVIe 5., Paris 1936.

La

tragédie

V.CARRIERE,

Le

La

Hist.

religieuse

épreuves

MONOGR. ON FRANCIS I:

¢n

e

(. F.

MUNZER, Diss. 1935; C.TERRASSE, Paris 1048. A. BAILLY, Paris 1954. CATHARINE DE MEDICI: J. H. MARIEJOL, Paris 21g20; P. VAN DYKE, 2z vols. New York 1922; J.E.NEALE, The age of Catherine de Medici, New York

1959.

Lond.

1560},

MARGARET OF VALOIS: P. JOURDA, z vols. Paris 1930; 1936;

1892;

K. KUPISCH,

Méd.

et

L.FEBVRE,

1944.

A.W.WHITEHEAD,

21951.

Coligny,

TH. SCHOTT,

Paris

Valois, reine de Navarre

30, 1900, 447/98 Paris 1936.

Paris

1913.

—

Lond.

RE

4,

G. DE COLIGNY: 1906;

219/28.

J.H.MARIEJOL,

et de France

A.BOULE,

(t 1615), Paris

{marriage of Marg. of Valois}.

E. MARCKS

CH.MERKI,

La

vie

S. PUTMAN,

de

1928.

Paris

I (to

1904

Catherine

Marguerite

TAUZIN,

P. ERLANGER,

de

de

RQH

Henri I11, 169

Modern and Recent Times. Fivst Peviod (1517 — 1648)

frivolous and religiously indifferent ruler, and his son and successor, flenvy T1 {1547 1550}, both supported the German Protestants against 1he Hapsburgs, But after 1525 the Sorbonne and the

parliament of Paris cocrced

estantisim.

The

courts,

the king

especially

the

to take action against

so-called

Chambre

Prot-

ardente

(from 1547 1549), pronounced a great many death sentences for heresy, The government could not tolerate a weakening of the country by w religious schism; here there was no inducement, as th Germany, to favor secularization of church property, since by the concordat of 1510 (§ 157, 6) (he crown had almost complete contvol of the rench church, appointed the prelates and drew

rich revenue from church property. However,

stster of Iraneis Navarre (f 1540),

opunly

with

embraced

been

Among

I, Margaret of Valois (Angouléme), queen of began to favor Protestantism without breaking

the Church.

Calvendsie,

actively these

the highly cducated

Several

which,

propagated

families

were

families

since

the

in France the

of the higher nobility

middle

of tlhe century

by Calvin and

Bowrbons,

had

his disciples.

a collateral

branch

of

the royal family. Two brothers of the Bourbon family figured prominently in the religious conflict: Anthony of Bourbon, titular

king of Navarre, and Lowss, Prince de Condé,

The Coligny brothers

of the house of Chitillon also embraced Calvinism and three members of this family vigorously supported the new religion: Gaspard,

a bolliant military leader and

statesman,

Francis of Andelot and

Cardinal Odet, archbishop of Toulouse (deposed and excommunica-

ted 1563}, Under Calvin’s directions, his followers in France formed

congregations supplied with preachers from Geneva. In May 1559 about 400,000 of them assembled at Paris for a national synod in which they drew up a confession of faith (Confessio Grallicana) and a program of church organization based on Calvin’s writings. Thus the Calvinistic church of IFrance came into existence, the members of which were known as Huguenots, The name is probably derived from the word “‘Eidgnoss” (French, ‘‘Eigunots” — confederates) by which the members of the Genevan party of

independence

were

known:

or

the

name

may

come

from

their

leader Besangon Hugues. During the reign of the young king Francis I1 (1559 1560) the Huguenots sought to obtain the civil recognition of their religion. By the conspiracy of Amboise in the spring of 1560 they planned to capture the leaders of the Catholic party, Duke Francis of Guise and his brother Charles, archbishop 170

§ 182,

Religious Conflicts in France

of Reims and “‘cardinal of Lorraine,” who had almost unlimited influence at court, and to place the power in the hands of one of their own leaders, Louts de Condé. However, the Guises were

warned in time and the plot failed. z. Irancis Il was succeeded by his ten-year-old brother, Charles IX (1560—1574), during whose minority the queen-mother, Catherine de Medict, niece of Pope

Clement

VII,

held the regency

(until 1563 when Charles reached his majority; although Catherine continued to rule until 1570). Her policy was to prevent either party from becoming too strong; hence she summoned Anthony, the Huguenot king of Navarre, to take part in the government and ordered the courts to cease prosecutions of the Huguenots (January 1561).

Meanwhile

Calvinism

continued

to

make

progress.

Even

the powerful opposition of the “Triumvirate,”’ consisting of Duke Francis of Guise, Constable Montmorency and the Marshall of St.

André, was unable

to check it. Catherine

insisted that the conces-

sions granted to the Huguenots be ratified, and invited both parties

to a colloquy to be held at Posssy?, near Paris,

in the fall of 1561,

Theodore de Béze (Beza) of Geneva (§ 168, 3) represented the Calvinists, while Cardinal Charles of Lorraine and the Jesuit general Layne: championed the Catholic cause. Neither side was satisfied with the results. An edict issned at St. Germain-en-Laye in January 1562 granted freedom of conscience to Protestants throughout the king dom and freedom of worship under police protection outside the cities. These concessions emboldened the Huguenots to seek still greater favors. While the leaders were immediately concerned

with enforcing the edict,

the preachers sent from Geneva, inflamed

with Calvin’s spirit, called for the total destruction of Catholic “idolatry’ and taught that it was right to resist “‘tyrannical” and "‘godless” authority for the sake of religion. Under such instruction the Huguenots began to attack churches and monasteries and to assault priests and monks. On March 1, 1562, the Duke of Gutise, on his way to Paris with an escort of two hundred horsemen,

endeavored to stop a Huguenot service being held in the city of Vassy, contrary to the Edict of St. Germain. His action provoked

an encounter in which a number of Huguenots were slain or wound-

1 H, 0. EVENNETT, The Cardinal of Lorraine and the Council of Trent, Cambr. 1930. M, FRANGOIS, Le cardinal F. de Tournon, Paris 1951, G. CA-

STELLANI,

CivC 1950 ITI, 261 ff., 516 ff. (Politics and Religion in Poissy).

171

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517—1648)

ed. This was the signal for the first of the eight Huguenot Wars, which with some interruptions, lasted for thirty years (1562—1598). Both sides resorted to reprehensible means: lies, treachery, cruelty

and unjustifiable slaughter. The popes, Spain and Savoy, supported the Catholics with money and troops; England and some of the Protestant princes of Germany aided the Huguenots in the same

way; everyone realized that the outcome of the war would deter-

mine to a great extent the political and religious future of western Europe.

3. The frrst three of the Huguenot wars were waged with varying degrees of success on either side (1562—1563, 1567, 1568—1570). Anthony of Navarre and Marshall St. André both fell in battle and

Francis of Guise was assassinated (1563). The Peace of St. Germain in August 1570 proved to be only temporary. The terms were very favorable for the Huguenots. They were granted a general amnesty, freedom

of

conscience,

the

right

to

freedom

of worship

on

the

estates of the nobility and in a number of cities (except Paris and the toyal court), the right to hold public office and the right of

asylum i four strongholds for two years. In order to consolidate

the peace, Charles

1X gave his sister, Margaret of Valots, in marriage

to the Huguenot, Henry of Bourbon, son of Anthony of Navarre. But this wedding (August 18, 1572) became the occasion for an unprecedented carnage and for the resumption of hostilities. Since 1571 Admaral Coligny, the leader of the Huguenot party,

had gained great influence over the incompetent

young

king and

tried to force France to support the rebellious Netherlands and to league with England in a war against Spain. The queen-mother Catherine, as ambitious as she was frivolous, feared that she would

be superseded at court and relegated to the background. Without

a scruple, she plotted with her third son, Henry of Anjou, and the young duke Henry of Guise, who was eager to avenge his father’s death, to assassinate Coligny, their most dangerous rival. The plot

miscarried (August 22, 1572), and Coligny was only wounded. since there was now danger that Coligny’s friends would retaliate, it was coldbloodedly decided to slaughter all the Huguenots, then in Payis in large numbers for the wedding. After some hesitation, the irresolute king gave his consent. The horrible plot was carried out on St. Bartholomew’s eve— Sunday, August 24, 1 572 — and the following

day. Coligny was the first victim, Between four and five thousand Protestants were killed in Paris and in several cities of the provin172

§ 182. Religious Conflicts in France

ces (Orleans, Bourges, Lyons, later in Rouen, Toulouse, etc.). The

royal troops and city militia who were under orders to carry out the

plot, were joined by wild mobs to whom murder was the prelude

to plunder; and a rumor had been purposely spread that the Huguenots were being punished deservedly for a dastardly plot against

the king

and

the

court.

These

circumstances

explain

the

large

number of victims. Henry of Navarre and other prominent Hugue-

nots escaped death only by renouncing their religion.

The Massacre of St. Bartholomew’s Eve deserves to be condemmned in the strongest terms. It was a political crime committed under the cloak

of religion. But it was not, as is often asserted even to this present day,

the result of long premeditation; it was rather the result of a hasty decision

made

to repair the blunder in the plot against Coligny.

The responsibility

for the crime lies entirely with the French court which had long been accustomed to appeal to the principles of Machiavelli. The Holy See had

nothing whatsoever to do with the massacre. Pius V' had expressly demanded that resistance to the heretics be aperte ot libere and had condemned any

resort to illegitimate means, And Gregory XIII {pope since May 13, 1572} certainly knew nothing of the plot. It is true, there was rejoicing in Rorme (Te Deum, procession, a Bull of Jubilee and a memorial medal) at the message

from the French court that the rebels and heretics had received their just

deserts. The message said nothing of the atrocities which had been committed,

but spoke only of the victory which the Catholics had gained. And to rejoice at such news was quite in harmony with the spirit of the age. During the

period of the Reformation and Counter-Reformation intolerance was the order of the day. The bitter religious feuds had deadened moral sensibilities

and the majority of the people were ruled by a '‘collective mentality”’ which justified anything done to the enemies of one’s religion. Even conspiracy and political murder were not considered serious crimes and had

increased alarmingly. The followers of Calvin especially were swayed by a wild spirit of revenge, as 1s seen in Scotland {under John Knox, § 183, 6), in England (under Cromwell), in the Netherlands and in France. Coligny publicly applauded the assassination of the Duke of Guise (see no. 3 above) as the greatest good fortune that had befallen France, and although he

knew

of the plot,

did

nothing

to prevent

the

murder.

Calvin's

successor,

Beza, who held that liberty of conscience was a diabolicum dogma, called Guise’s assassination the work of an avenging God and praised the murderer.

Elizabeth I of England planned the murder of Gregory XIII, Philip II and Don Juan of Austria, or at least appoved such plans {cfr. W. Platzhoff,

Die

Theorie

von

der Mordbefugnis

der Obrigkeit

im

16. Jh.

1906,

81 ff.;

Pastor IX 327). On the other hand, Catholics plotted against the life of the

“wicked Jezabel of the north,”

i. e. the excommunicated

queen of England;

and the cardinal secretary of state to Gregory X1II expressly approved such

a plot in 1580 and called it a “laudable undertaking” (cfr. 4. 0. Mevyer, England und die Kath. Kirche unter Elisabeth und den Stuarts I, rgr1,

2z7 {f.,

426 ff.;

HZ 129,

1924,

511 f

—

Pastor IX,

321 ff.

—

B. Duhr,

173

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517—1648) StZ 116, 1929, 419 f.). Plots of a similar character resulted in the murder of Willlam of Orange 1584 (§ 184, 2), Henry III 1589 (see no. 4 below)

and

Henry IV

The

Spanish

of France

1610,

and

in the Gunpowder

Plot

in England

1605 (§ 183, 4). Besides the actual deeds, there was at this time, too, much theoretical discussion of the right to resist authority and of tyrannicide.

Jesuit Juan

Mariana

(t 1624), in the work De Rege ef Regis

tnstitutione, dedicated to Philip I1I, gave

as. a personal opinion that under

certain conditions, tyrannicide is permissable and quoted the murder of Henry III of France as a case in point. After the murder of Henry IV the

parliament

Clandius

of Paris ordered the book to be burned and the Jesuit general,

Aquaviva,

forbade his subjects,

such a doctrine.

under severe penalties,

to teach

Sources and bibliog. on Massacre of St. Bartholomew’s Eve, in H. Hauser,

Les sources de l'hist. de France (see above) StML 29, 1885, r161if., 263 ff. F.X. Funk,

Die

Publizistik

der

Barth,,

1905.

III, 1912, 230/69. ThQ 1893, 527f

E. Vacandard,

Les

papes

B. Duhs, A. Elkan,

et la Saint-

Barthélemy, Etudes de critique et d'hist. relig., Paris 1905, 217/92. ler, Christl. Welt 1911, 746 ff., 770 {f.; also in ““Aus der akadem.

K. MiilArbeit,”

1930, 213/35. W. Platzhoff, Preuss. Jbb. 150, 1912 IV, 52/67; Frankreich u. die deutschen Protestanten 1570/73, 1912. Pastor IX, 1923, 352/79 (cir.

B. Duhr, StZ 116, 1929, 419 f.). S. L. England, The massacre of S. Bartholomew, Lond. 1938. Ph. Evlanger, Le massacre de la St. Barthélemy, Paris

1960.

Y. de la Briére, DictApol 1, 420/26. — On the question of the vight of

vesistance and tyrannicide: L. Cardauns, Die Lehre vom Widerstandsrecht des Volkes gegen die rechtmiss. Obrigkeit im Luthertum u. Calvinismus, 1903. W. Platzhof{, Die Theorie von der Mordbefugnis, see above, K. Woizendorff, Staatsrecht u. Naturrecht in der Lehre vom Widerstandsrecht

des

Volkes,

1916.

K.

Miller,

KG.

11,

2,

Tyrannenmord im SpatMA., Diss. 1938. — zur Gesch. des Papsttums, %1924, 364/66.

des M.,

J.

1908.

de Mariana,

B. Fava,

Reggio

1019,

346/52.

1953.

0. Jasz

and

tyrant. The tradition and theory of tyrannicide,

e il pensiero politico di

J. D. Lewis,

Glencoe,

Against

1957.

Jesuitenfabeln, *1go4, 694 ff. S. Hirt, Staatslex, ITI5, 1150/52.

4.

The

Massacre

Der

On Mariana: K. Mirbt, Quellen B. Anloniadzs, Die Staatslehre

Le teorie dei monarcomachi

Em.

J. Schonstedt,

of S8. Bartholomew's

Eve

in Paris

the

B. Duhy,

did

not

result in the extinction of the Huguenots. They were considerably

weakened; but now they began in real earnest to assemble their

forces and press their demands.

War broke out again

(fourth and

fofth Huguenot wars 1572—1573, 1575—1576). In 1576 King Henry 111 (1574—1589), an immoral weakling, was forced to grant them almost complete religious freedom. The Edict of Poitiers in September 1577, at the end of the sixth war (1577), restricted their

rights to liberty of conscience throughout the kingdom, and the free exercise of religion for the nobility (and some subjects) and in one city of each of the seventy-five departments. The 174

§ 182. Religious Conflicts in France

seventh war (1580) effected no change in this arrangement.

But in

the meantime an inner political change had taken place. To protect the Catholic

faith, which

was

threatened,

a Catholic

alliance was

formed in 1576, known as the Holy League, and was powerfully supported by the great mass of the people whose religions zeal had

recently been aroused by the preaching of the Jesuits and Capuchins,

Henry III had no heir, and his younger brother died in 1584. Hence France and all other countries of Europe were much concerned whether the next king would be a Catholic or a Huguenot, since the rightful claimant to the throne was Henry of Navarre, who had reverted to Calvinism (1576). Faced with this possibility, the

League

reorganized

in

1584

as

a military

force

under

the

leadership of Duke Henry of Guise and joined with Philip II of Spain to protect Catholic interests and to exclude Navarre from

succession to the throne. In July 1585, the League forced Henry II1

to revoke all concessions made to the Huguenots and to forbid Protestant services under penalty of death. At the insistance of the League and of Spain, Sixtus V declared in a Bull of September g, 1585,

that Henry

of Navarre was a relapsed heretic and as such

was excominunicated and could not succeed to the French throne. But m spite of the pressure brought to bear by the Spanish king,

the pope could not be induced to take further measures against Navarre and his adherents (§ 175, 3). In 1585, the eighth and most critical of the Huguenot wars broke out — the War of the Three Henrys. The league broke with the irresolute king and Paris openly rebelled. When Henry III ordered the murder of his staunchest supporters, Henry oi Guise and his brother Louis, cardinal-archbishop of Reims,

in 1585, he sealed his own fate. The pope

sum-

moned him to appear before the papal tribunal; and the majority of his subjects deserted him as an insufferable tyrant. He fled to the

camp of the Huguenots outside of Paris where on August 1, 1589, he was mortally wounded by the dagger of a fanatical partisan of

the League, the Dominican Jacques Clément.

5. The French crown now belonged by right of inheritance to Henry of Navarre-Bourbon as King Henry IV (1589—1610). But

the religious conflict continued. Henry was not able to overcome

! See lit. above. M. PHILIPPSON, Heinrich IV u. Philipp 1II, 3 vols. 1870/76. MONOGR. ON HENRY IV: P. VAISSIERE, Paris 1928: G. SLOCOMEE,

Paris Paris

1933; 1954;

S.R.TAILLANDIER, M.ANDRIEUX, Paris

1938: 1955.

P. ESTAILLEUR-CHANTERAINE, G.DE ALBERTIS, Maria Medici

175

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517 —1648)

the League, which was now supported by troops and money from

spain and the Holy See. However, the situation was altered when

Henry took the step that his Catholic advisors had urged since 158q,

and renounced heresy in the chapel of St. Denis on July 25, 1593. His motives in taking this step were evidently political (“Paris vaut bien une Messe™). Opposition to him gradually subsided. Paris opened 1ts gates to him, and after some hesitation, Clement VIII

absolved

calm

the furious

him

on September 17, 1595.

The League

was dis-

solved and Henry's reign was troubled by no further disorders. France held 1ts ground as a great Catholic power and began to ncrease in importance while Spain’s star began to decline. It was a difficuilt task to adjust the religious situation in a country that had been convulsed by the long wars. In order to Huguenots,

who

constituted

about

one twelfth

of the population, Henry IV saw himself obliged to grant them far-reaching concessions. This he did by the Edict of Nantes on

April 30, 1598. The edict declared that the Catholic religion must

be recognized as the state religion, demanded that Catholic worship

be restored in all places where it had been suppressed, and ordered that all property taken from the Church be restored. But the adherents of the “so-called reformed religion” were granted liberty of conscience throughout the kingdom and the free exercise of their religion in many places; especially in all places where Protestant

services had

two towns of specified cities) 3500 places in offices, allowed jwife of Henry

sous

Henri

DictApol

la

Ligue

59{140

II,

IIT

been held several times in 1596 and 1597; in

cvery department (except Paris and some other and in the castles and homes of the nobility {(about all). They were further to be admitted to all public to settle their disputes in mixed tribunals and, as

IV, et

{ 1643],

[V,

Paris

1830/98.

1587/96,

V. DE CHALEMBERT,

18g8.

P. RICHARD,

H. DROUOT,

2 vols.

(Sixtus V,

1941.

Henry

Paris

IV and

Ligue

Hist.

cathol.

Mayenne

et la Bourgogne,

the League).

J. FAUREY,

1038.

M. DE BROUARD,

de la Ligue

ROQH

(1576/95),

Etude sur

116,

Henry

1932,

IV et

l'Edit de Nantes, Bordeaux 1903: L'Edit de N. et la question de la tolérance, Paris

1905.

1929.

Y. DE LA

G. DASDEVISES

1301),

Paris

1907.

BRIERE,

DU DEZERT,

G. BONET-MAURY,

1598/1905, Paris 21909.

IV, Paris

1932.

tion,

1911;

J. PANNIER,

de Henri

and

Paris

the

1g34.

Curia,

V. MARTIN,

1595).

IV, Paris

L’Eglise et I'Etaf en France I (1598/ La

liberté

de conscience

en France,

L'église réformée de Paris sous Henri

L'église réf. de Paris sous Louis

au X VII® siécle, Paris 1955. sur Henri 1V, Paris 1955.

176

de Henry

XITI

162129,

2 vols. Paris

1921,

338/84;

1922,

J. VIENOT, Hist. de la Réforme franc. de ’Edit de Nantes

2 vols,

(France

La conversion

RevSR

L. PRUNEL,

L. BERARD,

Renaissance

cathol.

sa révocaen

233/70

France

Lettres du Cardinal de Florence

§ 182. Religious Conflicts in France

a pledge of the peace, were granted more than two hundred fortified

places (places de siireté) for an eight year period. At the time, this latter concession seemed necessary to secure peace. But it constituted an evident peril to the national unity of France, since the Huguenots were thus enabled to organize

politically and militarily, to form a state within the state and to

negotiate with foreign Protestant powers which were hostile to France (England and Holland). King Louis XIIT {(1610—1643)1, therefore, seriously entertained the idea of putting an end to the

political power of the Huguenots. Neither did their anomalous position conform to Cardinal Richeliew's idea of state absolutism

and unity. Armand Jean du Plessis, Duke de Richelieu (} 1642), who became president of the Council of Ministers in 1624 and prime minister in 1629, was a realistic politician of insatiable ambition and indefatigable energy. Statesman and Frenchman that he was, he did not hesitate to league with Gustavus Adolphus and the German Protestants in the Thirty Years” War (§ 181, 2. 3) to crush the Catholic house of Hapsburg. With the pious Capuchin, Pére Joseph Le Clerqg du Tremblay (Eminence Grise, ¥ 1638) as his constant adviser, Richelieu sought to weaken both Protestants and Hapsburgs by using the Protestants to weaken the Hapsburgs and the

Hapsburgs to weaken the Protestants. When the Huguenots, under

the leadership of Duke Henri de Rohan, and with the support of England, took to arms to prevent a restriction of their liberties (162 5),

Richelieu laid siege to their principal fortress at La Rochelle and took it in October 1628. Their political privileges were revoked, their

fortresses

were

1 MONOGR.

Paris

*1961;

L. DOLLOT, Mémoires

taken

ON

from

LOUIS

P. ERLANGER,

them,

XIII:

Paris

Paris 1908/31.

Card.

Richelieu,

W. HAGEMANN,

the

C. ROMAINS,

Les cardinaux-ministres

du

and

1946;

Huguenot

Paris

by

L.VAUNOIS,

B. CHAMPIGNEUILLE,

sous la monarchie

&d.

1934;

H.DE

frang.,

BEAUCAIRE

et

garITiSons

Paris

Paris

autres

Paris

1932;

1952.

[—X,

R.s polit. Test., 1934. Monogr. on Richelieu:

G. HANOTAUX et LE DUC DE LA FORCE, 6 vols. Paris 1893/1947; Lond. 1912; K.FEDERN, 1927; H. BELLOC, Lond. 1929; COMTE

AULAIRE,

1950.

A. BAILLY,

Paris

1934;

E.C. PRICE, DE SAINT-

C.J. BURCKHARDT,

%1g950;

W. ANDREAS, 1958; K.MUTH, Hochland 1935/36 I, 11 1f., 104 ff. W. MOMMSEN, HZ 127, 1923, 210 ff. (R. as statesman). PASTOR XIII, 502/47. E. ROCA,

Le

Paris

1911.

NYOL

DU

Régne

J.CANU,

de

Louis XI1II, Paris 1934. CLOS,

R.,

same

Paris

title,

1906.

E. GRISELLE,

Paris

A.LEHMAN,

1944.

Louis

L. BATIFFOL,

XIII

R.

R. et Olivares, Paris 1938.

R. et le clergéd de France

I, Paris

et RR.,

et le roi

J. TOUR-

1g12.

L. DESDOQUVRES,

France

et la monarchie

Le P. Joseph de Paris capucin, l'eminence grise, 2 vols. Paris 1932. P.LAFUE,

Le P. Joseph, Paris 1946. {1615—1666), Rome 19509.

13

P.BLET,

Bihlmeyer-Thchle, Church History I

Le

clergé

de

177

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517—1648)

withdrawn; but the Pacification of Nimes their religious and civil privileges,

in July 1629 restored

§ 183.

Catholic Church in England (to 1689), Scotland and Ireland:.

I. The Church system established in England under Edward VI did not last long. When Mary Tudor, called the Catholic {1553 to 1558)%, daughter of Henry VIII and Catherine of Aragon, came to the throne, it was abolished. Mary was a devout Catholic and earnestly endeavored with the help of her cousin, Cardinal Reginald Pole (1 1558) to bring the Church in England again into communion with the Holy See. To accomplish this, the old penal laws against heretics, enacted under Henry VIII, were invoked. Two hundred and seventy three Protestants, including five bishops, met death on the scaffold. Among the bishops was the hypocrite Thomas Cranmer, whose see was given to Pole. Many other Edwardian Protestants went into exile where they came under the influence

of Swiss and southern German reformers. These severe measures were for the most part fully justified since they were taken to check political conspiracies and revolts and to punish outrages that had been committed against the Catholic religion. But even many Catholics disapproved of them and they served to make Mary unpopular with her subjects (“Bloody” Mary). Especially unpopular was her marriage (1554) to Philip, son of Charles V, who was soon to ascend the Spanish throne as Philip II. The end of Mary’s brief reign (} 1558) also put an end to the Catholic Restoration in

England.

1 See bibliogr.

® PH. HUGHES,

§ 171. Rome

and the Counter-Reformation

in England,

Lond.

1944; The Reformation in Engl. II/III, Lond. 1953/4. C. G. MORTIMER and S. C. BARBER, The English Bishops and the Ref. 1 550/60, Lond. 1936. R.TYLER, Calendar of Letters, Despatches and State Papers [—X1II: Philip and Mary 1554-—1558, Lond. 1954. MONOGR. ON MARY THE CATHOLIC: J. M. STONE I, Lond. 1go1 (also A.Zimmermann, H]G 190z, 832/40); M. CR. BROWN, Lond. 1g911; K.WOODWARD, Lond. 1927; B.WHITE, Lond. 1935; H. F. M. PRESCOTT, Lond. 1952. G.CONSTANT, Rev. d’hist. diplomat. 26,

1912, 23 ff,, 224 {f. {mariage of Mary and Philip II}; Rev. hist. 112, 1913, If27 {Cath. restoration in Engl. 1553). — MONOGR.ON CARD. POLE:

C. M. ANTHONY, Lond. 1g90g; M.HAILE, Lond. 1910 (also G, CONSTANT, ROH 9o, 1911 11, 498/514); W. SCHENK, Lond. 1950. F. A. CARD, GASQUET,

Card. Pole and his early friends, Lond. 1927. R. ANCEL, RHE 744 tf. {Pole’s legation to Engl.). PASTOR VI, 181 ff., 579 1f.

178

1909, 521 fi.,

§ 183. Catholic Churds in England, Scotland and Ireland

2. Mary was succeeded by Elizabeth I (1558—1603)!, daughter of Henry VIII and Anne Boleyn. Elizabeth proved to be a capable ruler who raised England to a position of power on a par with France and Spain. In religions matters she was totally indifferent,

but was able to see and take political advantage of any situation.

During the reign of her half sister Mary, she embraced Catholicism and in her coronation oath she swore to preserve the Catholic religion. But from the beginning she made no effort to conccal her aversion to the Catholic faith. Her resentment toward Catholics was naturally heightened by the fact that they considered her illegiti-

mate

and,

therefore,

incapable

of succeeding

to the

throne,

and

looked upon Mary Stuart, queen of Scotland, as the legitimate heir, But even before Pope Paul IV refused to acknowledge Elizabeth’s rights to the throne, she reverted to Protestantism. In 1559 Parlia-

ment declared her to be “the supreme governor of the kingdom

in

all spiritual and temporal matters.” The Mass was abolished, and

by the Act of Uniformity of June 1559 the Edwardian ordinal was

restored and all officials of the state and Church were obliged to

take the Oath of Supremacy. Fifteen of the sixteen Catholic bishops

refused and were deposed; eleven of them died in prison. Unfortu-

nately only a small number of the lower clergy had the courage to

refuse, Malthew

Parkey,

the former chaplain

of Anne

Boleyn,

was

named archbishop of Canterbury and the head of the reformed hierarchy. He was consecrated by the rite introduced under Edward VI, which had been declared invalid by Paul IV in 1555,

and he, in turn, by the same invalid rite, consecrated most of the

new bishops.

1 MONOGR.,

Lond.

*1go1;

J.CHASTENET,

death).

ON

ELIZABETH

J.E.NEALE,

Lond.

I.

E. MARCKS,

21959;

A.L. ROWSE,

of Eliz., Oxf. Lond. 1910.

RHE

Paris 1953,

1948, 148/78 (sickness and 1914. J.B.BLACK

1936. A, F. POLLARD, Political Hist. of England A. BROWNING, The age of Eliz., Lond. 1935.

The

England

PH.

HUGHES,

of Eliz.,

Lond.

Walsingham u. 5. Zeit (1530/90) I, 1908. 1919.

M.CREIGHTON;

M. HUMBER-ZELLIR,

Paris 1953. L. ANTHEUNIS,

C.E.WESTON, The Reign of Queen Elizabeth, Lond.

The Reign I547/1603,

Lond.

*1927;

The

1950.

K. STAHLIN,

Sir Francis

E. R. HULL, The Spanish Armada,

Reformation

in

Engl.

111,

Lond.

1954.,

E. J. BICKNILL,

Theo-

W. H. FRERE, The English Church 1558/1625, Lond. r19ri. H, N. BIRT The Elizabethan religious settlement, Lond. 1907. A.ZIMMERMANN, RQ 1908, 81/101

(Established Church under Elizabeth).

logical introduction to the 39 Articles of the Church of Englangd, Lond. *1955. J. E. NEALE, English hist. rev. 1950, 304/32 (Uniformity Act); 1952, 510/21 (thirty-ninth article, 1571). W.P.M.KENNEDY, Elizabethan Episcopal

Administration,

3

vols.

Lond.

1924.

G.F.POLLARD,

Ecclesia

Anglicana,

Lond. 1931. K. Wahl, Staatskirche u. Staat in Engl., 1935. MONOGR. ON HOOKER (f 1600, theologian of Anglicanism): ¥. J. SHIRLEY, Lond. 1049; P. SCHUTZ, 1952. E. H, EMERSON, 1955,

179

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517 —1648) In

spito

of such

consecration

during

Elizabeth’s

roign,

the

Anglican

Church still claims an unhroken apostolic succession for its hierarchy., After

the question had boeen thoroughly investigated by a special commission of scholars, Pops Leo XI1T issued the Bull “Apostolicae Curae’” in 1896

in which he declared: Pronuntiamus ot declaramus ordinationes ritu angli-

canc actas irritas prorsud fuisso ot csse omninoque nullas.

A, Boudinhon, Do la validité des ordinations anglicanes, Paris 1896. S. Brandi, La condanna dolle ordinazioni anglicano, Romo Y1908, Viscount

Halifax,

Leo

X1

and

Anglican

Barlow and Angl. Orders, Lond.

DictApol IT1,

1162/1228.

Qrders,

1922,

L. Marchal,

Lond.

1912.

A4, St

Barnes,

Bishop

S, F. Smith, Ordinations anglicanes,

Ordinations anglicanes,

DictThC

XI,

1154/93. A. Stephenson, Anglican Orders, Lond, 1956, F, Clark, Anglican Orders and defect of intention, Lond. 1986, Anglican: G. Dix, The question

of Anglican Orders, London

1944,

3. But Elizabeth did not stop here; her aim was to effect the

complete suppression of the Catholic religion’. The forty-two articles of Edward VI were reduced to thirty-cight (after 1571 one

more was added) and in 1563 became the profession of faith of the

Enyglish state-church, Members of the House of Commons, teachers

and public officials as well as all persons suspected of loyalty to the old religion were obliged to take the oath of supremacy; and any who refused a second time to take the ocath were threatened with death. At first the penalties were restricted to confiscation of property and imprisonment; but even these penalties were inflicted with undue cruelty, Later, especially when Psus V in 1570 ! C. J. DUSTOMBUES,

La persécution relig. en Angleterre sous Elisaheth

ct les premiera Stuarts, 3 vols, Lille 1883,

the Ancient Hierarchy,

Lond,

Igc}g,

G. I, PHILLIPS, The Extinction of

J. H. POLLEN,

Unpublished documents

relat. to the English Martyrs I (1584/1603), Lond. 19o8; The Engl. Catholics in the Reign of Queen Eliz. 1558/80, Lond. 1920; Sources for the Hist. of

Roman Catholics in Engl., Irelund and Scotland, Lond. 1921.

and

J.H.POLLEN,

Lond. 1914. u, die kath.

Lives

of the

Engl.

Martyrs

under

E. H. BURTON

Eliz, I (1}583 88),

J. SPILLMANN, B3, CAMM, etc., sou 1} 78. A. O, MEYER, England K. unter Elisabeth u. den Stuarts'I, Rome 1911, C. G. BAYNE,

Anglo-Roman Rolations r5s8/156s, Lond, 1913. R,LECHAT, Les réfugiés angiais dans les Pays-Bas espagnols (1 558/:%3;: Louv. 1914. P. GUILDAY, The Engl. Catholic Refugees on the Continent (1558/1798) I, Lond, 1914,

A.H. ATTERIDGE, The Ilizabethan persecution, Lond. 1928. PASTOR VI1-—XI passim. B. MACEL, The Recusants of Engl., Lond. 1940. A. G.SOUTHERN, Elizabethan Recusant Pross, Lond, 1950, CARD, GASQUET, A Hist,

of the venerable Engl. Colloge at Rome, Lond. 1920,

biog.: B. CAMM, Lond, 1908,

I1, 399/607. Lond. 1929.

M, HAILE, Lond, 1914.

CARDINAL W. ALLEN

G. CONSTANT, DictHE

R.P, PAUL, The British Church from the days of Card, Allen, W. ALLEN, The martyrdom of E. Camplon and his companions

(1382), ed. J. H. Pollen, Lond, 1908. B, WAUGH, E. Campion, new ed. Lond.,

1961. PH. CARAMAN, J.Gerard, The recusant, London 1951, PASTOR IX,

goofog(Lugislation

114 ff. 1962, 205 #f. 180

againat Catholics).

autoblography of an Elizabethan 284 #f. L. ANTHRUNIS, RHE 1988,

T, CLANCY,

Recusant

histo

(English Catholics and the papal deposing power),

1961,

§ 183. Catholic Church in England, Scotland and Iveland

declared Elizabeth excommunicated and deposed, and her subjects

released from obedience, new and more severe penidties were decreed and the scaffold was put to work. It was a time of terrible suffering for the faithful of England who were decricd and persecuted as traitors and enemies of the state. They were accused of sympathizing with Spain in that country’s political difficultics with England, and were made to suffer for the conspiracics against Elizabeth (§ 182, 3) and the plot to free Mary Stuart from prison (no. 6 below). Little wonder that their numbers rapidly declined. Priests especially were imperiled and the death penalty was imposed on anyone found guilty of lodging or sheltering them. To provide priests for the sorely oppressed English Catholics, it became necessary to establish seminaries abroad. In 1568 William Allen, canon of York and “Cardinal of England” (r587), founded the English College at Douai and in 1579 Pope Gregory XII[ founded a similar institution at Rome. Many sons of the best English families made their theological studies in these stitutions and returned secretly to England as missionaries, almost certain of meeting a martyr’s death. One of the most renowned victims of the persccution was the learned Jesuit, Edmund Campion, an alumnus of Douai, who was put to death with two companions in 1581. When Philip IT of Spain sent his Invincible Armada against England in 1588 in a vain attempt to avenge the death of Mary

Stuart,

the

persecution

of Catholics

became

more

violent,

wnd

more than one hundred were executed. In all one hundred and twenty-four priests and sixty-one laymen gave their lives for their faith during Elizabeth’s reign. Many men and women languished

for years in vile prisons, and “recusants,” i. e., those who refused

to attend

the Anglican

services, were obliged

to pay enormous

fines. This latter penalty was also imposed on Puritans and Pres-

byterians (§ 185, 3), who opposed the Act of Uniformity

(Noncon-

formists, Dissenters) and were made to suffer almost as much as Catholics. 4. With Elizabeth's death the House of Tudor came to an end

and the English throne passed to the Stwarts, a family of capable, but impulsive and autocratic rulers®. James VI of Scotland, son of 1 G. DAVIES, Bibliography of British Hist., Stuart Period (1603/1714),

Oxf. 1928; The early Stuarts

1603/60,

Ox{. 1959.

K, SCOTT,

Die Stuarts,

1036. J. P. KENYON, The Stuarts, Lond. 1958.” S. R. GARDINER, Histo of England from the Accession of James I (1603) to 1642, 10 vols. Lond.

181

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517—1648)

the unfortunate

Mary

Stuart,

ascended

the throne

as James I of

England (1603—1625). He had been educated as a Calvinist, but he humself gave English Catholics reason to hope that his accession would

mean

the

end

of their oppression.

Their

hopes,

however,

were disappointed. The penal laws against Catholics not only remained in force, but were made more rigorous and were inflicted with greater severity. A number of perfervid Catholics, mostly of the nobility, conceived the rash plan of blowing up the building

in which

Parliament met, at a time when

the king and his council

of being

an

This

would be assembled there (the Gunpowder Plot, November 5, 1605). However, the plot was discovered and thwarted and the conspirators together with the Jesuit Provincial Garnet, who was accused accomplice,

were

executed.

unfortunate

affair

served to work still greater hardship on Catholics. In 1606 they were obliged to take a special oath of allegiance to the king and to

swear that the doctrine which held that the pope had power to

excommunicate and depose kings or that subjects had a right to depose and kill an excommunicated prince was ‘‘damnable and heretical.”” Paul V condemned the oath; English Catholics could not agree among themselves as to its liceity. King James, a student of humanism and theology, who had a high regard for the royal power, undertook to defend himself by publishing a tract in answer to Cardinal Bellarmine’s letter regarding the oath of allegiance

(1608). During the reign of Charles I (1625—1649), son of James I, Puritanism made rapid headway and caused great disturbances in

1883/86. F,C. MONTAGUE, Political Hist. of Engl. 1603/60, Lond. 1907. R.LODGE, Hist. of England 1600/1702, Lond. 1910. G.C.TREVELYAN, Engl. under the Stuarts, Lond. 1920. W.H.HUTTON, The Engl. Church 1625/1714, Lond. 1913.

J, W.LEGG, English Church life from the Restoration

to the Tractarian Movement, Lond. 1914. J. MACKINNON, Hist. of Modemn Liberty III {1603/47), Lond. 1908. M.FREUND, Die Idee der Toleranz im Engl. der groBen Revolution,

liberty,

Oxf.

1930.

1927.

P.E.MORE

Lond,

1935.

E. ROUTLEY,

Lond.

1951;

D. H. Willson, Lond.

J. A. R, MARRIOTT,

and

F.L.CROSS,

The crisis of English

Anglicanism

English rel. Dissent, Cambr.

1960, }.W,ALLENS,

Engl. pol. thought 1603/60 1, Lond. 1938, JAMES I: MONOGR.: 1956; W.MCELWEE,

EUNIS, RHE 1954, 157/67 {succession of Elizabeth),

[17, cent.],

Lond.

C, WILLIAMS,

1958,

L. ANTH-

H. WITTE, Die Ansichten

JakobsIv. Engl.iiber Kirche und Staat, Diss. 1940. A.ZIMMERMANN, RO 1902,

375/407 {church policy of James I). A. 0. MEVER, Klemens VIII u. Jakob I, QFitAB 7, 1904, 268{306; HZ 108, 1911, 255/94 (idea of tolerance under the Stwarts). Y. MARTIN, Rev. d’hist, diplomat. 1911, 279 ff., 356 ff. (Clement VIII and James I). ON THE GUNPOWDER PLOT: O, PFULF, StML 56, 1899, 41 fi., 142 ff., 286 ff. P, SIDNEY, Hist. of Gunpowder Plot, Lond. 1904, H. R. WILLIAMSON,

182

The

Gunpowder

Plot, Lond. 1951.

PASTOR

XII,

400 f}

§ 183. Catholic Church in England, Scotland and Ireland

England!. Charles had married the Catholic princess, Henrictta Maria, daughter of Henry IV of France, and due to her influcnee, was well disposed toward Catholics. But his autocratic rule, his

tendency to favor the High Church, and the suppression

of the

Puritans brought him into mortal conflict with the people and Parliament. Revolution and civil war broke out in 1642: Charles

was defeated, the episcopal organization of the Church of Iingland

was changed to Presbyterian (1646), and the “Rump

Parliament”

declared the king “a tyrant, a traitor, a murderer and an encmy

of the country’ and condemned him to death. Charles was beheaded on January 30, 1649 and England was declared a commonwealth (1649—16060). In 1653 Oliver Cromwell (1 1658), Lord Protector of England, a capable organizer, general and statesman and head of the Puritan party of Independents or Congregationalists (§ 185, 3), took over the reins of government. He was a callous politician and, like all Puritans, a bitter antagonist of Catholics and the High Church. His religious enthusiasm was no doubt sincere: but his religion was a blend of robust Old Testament piety and Calvinistic severity. Cromwell made England a world power; but his conquest of Ireland was unspeakably cruel {no. 7 below) and he sought to unite the Protestant powers of Europe against the Catholic powers. Even after Puritanism had been weakened and the monarchy and

High Church had been restored, the English people still retained

many characteristics of austere Scotlish Calvinism, And it was from these roots that the severe Anglo-Saxon attitude toward

professional ethics developed 1 See

literature

on

(§ 168, 3). Puritanism

PURITANISM,

§ 185,

3.

favored

S. R, GARDINER,

the

Hist.

of

the great Civil War 1642/49, 4 vols. Lond. #1893; Hist. of the Commonwealth and Protectorate 1649/60, 4 vols. Lond. 1909. A. STERN, Gesch, der Revalution in England, 21898, W. A. SHAW, Hist. of the English Church 1640/00, 2z vols.

Lond.

1640/60, 1933.

rgoo.

G.LENTZ,

R. STADELMANN,

Demokratie

u. Diktatur

in der cngl,

Gesch. der engl. Rev., 1954.

Revol,

W. K. JORDAN,

The development of relig. tolerance in Engl, 1603/40, Lond. 1936. J.E,C.HILL,

Puritanism du

and

Revolution,

Lond.

1958,

M. NLDONCELLE,

Trois aspects

probléme anglo-cath. au 17¢ 3., Paris 1951. CHARLES I: Monogr.:

field-Stratford, 3 vols. Lond.

1949/50.

1951.

G. ALBION,

of O.

Cr., 4 vols, Cambr, 1937/47.

Faris

1946;

D. MATHEW,

Ch. I and the Court of Rome,

E. wing-

The age of Ch. I, Lond.

Lond.

1935.

W. C. ABBOTT,

Bibliography of O. Cromwell, Cambr. Mass, 1929; The Writings and Speeches 1923; Lond.

BIOG., ON CROMWELL: J. MORLIY, Lond.

F.HOENIG, 3 vols. "1911; H.DBELLOC, %1950; G. R, ST.TAYLOR, 1934: H. BAUER, %1934: M, ASHLEY, Lond. 1958; L.LEMONILR,

C.V,WEDGWOOD,

Lond.

1947;

C,FIRTH,

Lond,

1952.

A. O,

MEYER, in “Meister der Politik"” 113, 1923, 255/92. H. KITTEL, Q. Cromwell, s. Religion u, 8. Sendung, 1928. M. J. HAVRAN, Cath. Historical Rev. 1958,

273/89 (Parliament and Catholicism in Epgland

1626-—1629).

183

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517—1648)

dissolution of the old social bonds and the adoption of the new iberal economic policy. By arousing in the English people the consciousness of being a ‘“‘chosen people,” it gave to mercantilism and the British desire for conquest, its own peculiar religious point

of view.

Yet the Puritans,

Cromwell included, were champions

of

religious liberty and freedom of conscience so long as these prerogatives were enjoyed by Protestants only.

5.In 1660 England again became a momnarchy with another Stuart, Charles Il (1660—1685) as king!. Shortly thereafter the U niformity Act of 1559

was

again

enforced,

and

in

1662

the Anglican

Church

resumed

the

episcopal form of organization. The persecution of Puritans as “dissenters’ continued. Charles JI was well disposed toward Catholics and became a Catholic on his deathbed; his brother James, Duke of York (later King James II), had been received into the Catholic Church in 1672, But the mass of the people were deeply prejudiced against ‘‘papists” (““No Popery”). Responsibility for the great fire of London in 1666 was fixed upon Catholics although there was not a shred of evidence of their guilt. In 1672 Charles II issued the Declaration of Indulgence, by which all Protestants dissenters were granted freedom of worship and Catholics were allowed to hold religious services in private houses. But Parliament forced the Declaration to be rescinded,

and

in

1673

passed

the

Test Act which

required

every

one

in

any way employed in the service of the Crown to take the oaths of allegiance

and

supremacy,

to deny

the doctrine

of Transubstantiation

and

to receive

the Lord's Supper according to the rites of the Anglican Church. A report fabricated by Titus Oafes that Catholics were conspiring to assassinate the king and exterminate Protestantism resulted in Catholics being excluded from both houses of Parliament (1678). Prisons were again filled with 1 A, BROWNING,

1033.

Chicago

1905.

C.L. GROSE, 1939.

Engl.

A

Historical Documents

selected

M.IMMICH,

Bibliography

Gesch.

des

europ.

VIIT

of British

(1660/1714),

Hist.

1660/1760,

S3taatensystems

G. N. CLARK, The later Stuarts 1660/1714, Ox{. 21956.

Lond.

1660/178g,

W. H. HUTTON,

(sec above no. 4). H. F. R, SMITH, The Theory of religious liberty in the Reigns of Charles IT and James II, Cambr. 1911. D. 0GG, England in the

reign of Charles II, z vols. Oxford Popish Plot 1678/81, Lond.

WARDS,

Tond.

1934.

21955.

F.M. G.HIGHAM,

The Jesuits and the

J.LANE, T. Qates, Lond.

Blessed Ol. Plunkett, Dublin

1934;

M.V.HAY,

Lond.

1937.

1934.

1049.

R.D.ED-

JAMES II: monogr.: H. BELLOC,

A.ZIMMERMANN,

RQ

1905,

58/80 (attempt at re-Catholicizing under james II); HpBl 1910 11, 321 ff,, 421 ff. (James 11 and William III); HJG 1900, 683/714 (character of William III). PASTOR XIV, 1025 if. {James II and Innocent XI). J. BERTELOOT, RHE 1951, 505 {f. {James and Wm. and the favor of Rore) ; 1953, 122/40 (Revolt of 1688). J. K. OUDENDIJK, Willem III, Amsterdam 1954. B. HEMPHILL, The early vicars apost. of Engl. 1685/1740, Lond. 1954.

J. H. OVERTON and FR. RELTON, The Engl. Church 1714/1800, Lond. 1006. R.CHALLONER, Memoirs of Missionary Priests {1577/1684), 1741, new edit, by J.H.POLLEN, Lond. 1924. M, TRAPPES-LOMAX, Bishop Challoner, {1691—1781),

Lond.

1938.

E. EVRARD

et G. PLANQUE,

527 ff., 658 if. (Cath. emancipation in 18th cent.).

Question 1688/1829, Lond. 1g92q.

184

RCIFr

1914,

PH. HUGHES,

287 ff.

The Cath.

§ 183. Catholic Churds in England, Scotland and Ireland Catholics of whom about twenty-five were executed. The storm of persecution

which was then raging in Ireland claimed as one of its victims Oliver Plunkel,

archbishop of Armagh and primate of Ireland. He was arrested in Ireland and brought to England for trial on false charges of conspiracy. His execution

on July

Tyburn.

11,

He

1681

was

was

the

last of the

beatified in

1920.

long series of deaths

On

December

15,

beatified one hundred and thirty-six English martyrs between 1541 and 1680. King James IT (1685—1688),

1929,

for the

Pope

faith

at

Pius XI

who lost their lives

a convert to the Catholic faith since 1672,

was eager to free his coreligionists from the frightful burden which oppressed them. But he proceeded so imprudently and precipitately and without regard for Parliament or the national constitution that his actions were

disapproved by intelligent English Catholics as well as by the popc. When he 1ssued a Declaration of Toleration in 1687, repealing all penal laws against dissenters and granting freedom of worship to nonconformists, the Protestant

lords conspired to dethrone him. The

king’s son-in-law,

William

of Orange,

governor (Stadholder) of the Republic of Holland, was offered the crown. After the “glorious revolution’’ of November 1688, Parliament deposed James II, and William and his wife Mary (daughter of James I1) were declared king and queen of England for life. As king of England, William was known as William III {1689—1702). Mary died in 16¢94. James II (¥ 1701) fled to the protection of Louis XIV of France. England now became the foremost Protestant nation. Willlam's Tolerance Act of 1689 exempted Protestant dissenters from attendance at the services of the Church of

England,

but

the persecution

of Catholics

continued,

although

the

death

penalty was no longer inflicted. Catholic bishops and monks were immediately banished from the country and the Bill of Rights enacted that no Catholic could succeed to the throne. The Test Act of 1673 was not repealed until 1328, Anti-Catholic legislation now went still further. A law of 1700 declared Catholics incapable of acquiring property by inheritance or purchase and the estate of a deceased Catholic passed to the next of kin who were Protestants. A priest who celebrated Mass and priests or lay Catholics who taught school were imprisoned for life. Informers who reported any violation of these laws received a substantial reward. In 1778, when the American War of Independence caused the British government to recognize the imperative need of the support of all of its subjects, these cruel measures against Catholics were partly repealed and partly mitigated; but as late as 1780 the Catholics of London were still victims of mob viclence.

6. As was mentioned above (§ 171, 5), Scotland® had long been ripe for a religious revolution. Toward the end of 1557 the Protes1 See lit. § 171, 5.

W. F.LEITH,

Mary Stuart and James VI, Edinb.

Narratives

of Scottish

Catholics

under

1885; Memoirs of Scottish Cath. during

the 17. and 18, Centuries, 2 vols. Lond. 1909. W.C. DICKINSON, A Source Book

of Scottish Hist. IT/III, Edinb. 1953/54. D. NOBBS, England and Scotl. I560---1707, Lond. 1952. C.S.BLACK, The Scottish Church, Lond. 1952.

185

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517—1648)

tant lords formed the Solemn League and Covenant for the protection of the “Congregation of Christ” and the overthrow of the “Congregation of Satan.” The “Reformer of Scotland”’ was the preacher fohn Knox (15057 — 1572), a disciple of Wishart (§ 171, 5). He was a born agitator and had imbibed from Calvin in Geneva all of the latter's gloomy austerity and autocratic ideas of church discipline. LEarly in May 1559 he returhed to Scotland and began with utter ruthlessness his sclf-appointed task of destroying the Catholic Church in that land. He preached publicly the right to resist “unjust” authority, and led a widespread war on images, churches and monasteries. When the regent, Mary of Guise {t 1560), supported by France, attempted to quell the insurgent Protestants, a civil war broke out in 1559. English troops despatched by Elizabeth invaded Scotland and forced a treaty of peace. In August 1560 the Parliament at Edinburgh introduced a Calvinistic confession of faith (Confessio Scotica), abolished papal jurisdiction n Scotland and made it a penal offense entailing loss of property and banishment to say or hear Mass. A third conviction meant death. The episcopal office which had been retained in England was discarded and a presbyterial organization (pastors, clders and deacons) with Reformed Church services was introduced. Most of the church property came into the hands of the mercenary nobility, After the death of her husband, King Francis II of France (December 1560), Mary Stuart, a nineteen year old widow, returned

to her native land to take over the reins of government. She was G. . HENDERSON, Relig, life in 17t Cent. in Scotl., Lond. I1937. K. HEWAT, Makers of the Scottish Church of the Reformation, Edinb. r920. G. DONALDSON, The Scottish Reformation, Cambr. 1960. I. MATHEW, Scotland under Charles I, Lond. 1955. PASTOR VII—X passim, MONOGR, ON P. H. BROWN, 2 vols, Lond. 18¢5; D. MACMILLAN, Lond. 1905;

J. KNOX: E. MUIR,

Lond, 1930; E.PERCY, Lond. I937; W.C.DICKINSON, Lond. 1952. G. McGREGOR, Lond. 1958, H, WATT, N. York 1950. MONOGR. ON MARY STUAR T:

M. PHILIPPSON, 3 vols. Paris 1891 /92;

ED.HEYCK, 1905;

J.F. HENDERSON,

2 vols. Lond. 1906; CH.LADY BLENNERHASSET, 190%7; A. FILON, 1910, G. R. FRANCIS, Lond. 1931; P. HENRY-BORDEAUX, 2 vols. 1938; M. HUMBERT.ZELLER, Paris 1948, A. F. STUART, Edinb.

Paris Paris 19g5I.

ANDR, LANG, The mystery of Mary Stuart, Lond. 1901. L. RIESS, IMe Losung des M. Stuart-Problems, HZ 110, 1912, 237/91; versus B. SEPP, Die Losung der Kasettenbrieffrage, 1914 and with R.. CHAUVIRE, Rev. hist. 174{75,

1934/35.

F. DIGGLE,

The

casket Letters of Mary

St., London

J. H. POLLEN, Papal negotiations with Mary St. 1561/67, Edinb. 1901 1g60. (cfr. A. Bellesheim, HpBl 190z 11, 672 ££.): Mary Queen of Scots and the Babington Plot, Edinb.

1922,

§, R, RAIT and A, ], CAMERON, Negotiations betwe

en Elizabeth and James I relating to the execution of Mazgr Queen of Scots, Ltf:md. 1628. A.C.CHEYNE, Theology today 1g6o, 323/38 {The Confession

of

1560).

186

§ 183. Catholic Churdh in England, Scotland and Ireland

a gifted and amiable woman, but somewhat gay and frivolous, and by no means equal to the difficult task which faced her. Although

she was a convinced Catholic, the frenzied hatred of Knox and his

followers for everything Catholic made a restoration of the old order impossible. It was only with difficulty that she obtained

toleration for herself and her attendants to practice their religion

in her court chapel. The nobles, headed by Mary’s own half-brother Moray (or Murray), openly revolted against her. Her marriage to her cousin, Henry Stuart, Lord Darnley (1565), made matters worse, Darnley was murdered February 10, 1567 and three months

later Mary married James Hepburn, Earl of Bothwell, a Protestant, who had been implicated in the murder of Darnley. She was publicly accused of guilty knowledge of the crime (the so-called “casket letters’”) and of adultery, and Knox demanded her execu-

tion. Mary was now forced to abdicate (July 156%) in faver of her one-year old son, fames

VI. Moray

became

regent.

Mary escaped

arrest by flight and sought the protection and help of her cousin Elizabeth, queen of England (May 1568). Mary was immediately thrown into prison and for nineteen years endured an increasingly harder lot. Every attempt

to free her failed; English politics de-

manded her death. Finally, she was accused of complicity in Babington’s plot against the life of Elizabeth (1586), and was convicted and beheaded February 8 (18), 1587. Her spirit was purified and matured by her imprisonment. During her trial and execution Mary acted with magnificent courage and queenly character. The personal union of Scotland with England was effected when James VI became James I of England (no. 4 above). In spite of the cruelty with which Scottish Catholics were treated under James VI (1567 resp. 1578—1625) and his successors, the old religion did not die out entirely; although the number of steadfast Catholics did decrease considerably from year to year. However, the Catholic Reltef Bill of 1777 and the Emancipation Act of 1829

were followed by a gradual, but continuous increase in their numbers.

7. Ireland! (§ 107, 5) came under English rule about the middle

of the twelfth century; but a part of the “Emerald Isle” rematned 1 J, POKORNY,

Irland,

1916.

R.BASSENKAMP,

Gesch.

Reformation bis zu seiner Union mit Engl. (18o01), 1886.

land under the Tudors, 3 vols. Lond.

and during the Interregnum,

1885/g0;

3 vols. Lond.

Kolonisation in Irland, 2 vols 1906.

Irlands

v,

R. BAGWELL,

der

Ire-

Ireland under the Stuarts

1g07/17.

M, J. BONN,

Die engl.

R. DUNLOP, Ireland under the Common-

187

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517—1648)

almost independent for four centuries. In 154, Henry VIII declared himself King of Ireland and sought to drag the country into the schism. A Parliament in Dublin did, indeed, pass the Act of Supremacy, and under Elizabeth I the Amnglican Church was established in Ireland by law (1560). But these measures by no means representedsthe will of the nation. The majority of the members of Parliament were English usurpers or descendants of such, and some were renegade Irish nobles. The representatives of the clergy refused

to accept

this measure.

Hence

the jrate king

deprived them of their vote and in revenge confiscated church lands and suppressed monasteries; in some cases even shed the blood of their inmates or drove them forth poor and homeless, Under

the Tudors (1534—1603) eighty-three priests and twenty-six laymen

died for their faith in Ireland. But all efforts to make Ireland Protestant proved vain; the clergy and people remained loyal to the old faith. However, for more than two hundred years they were subjected to religious and political persecution the like of which can scarcely be found in history. The English finally achieved their goal of subjugating the entire island after a series of bloody battles early in the seventeenth centur y (1602). Six hundred thousand acres of the best land was confiscated and a systematic plan was carried out of settling English Episcopalians and Scotch Presbyterians in the north (Ulster). The people courageously resisted the new attempts of James I (1605) to force Anglicanism on the country; besides supporting their own poor priests, who were outlawed, they were obliged to pay tithes and stole fees to the Anglican ministers. In 1641 the people, despairing of receiving justice from the oppressors of their civil rights and consciences, tock up arms; many Protestant settlers were evicted or fell in battle. However, the rebellion was quelled in a campaign of eleven years, marked by barbaric cruelty, especially when in 1649 Oliver Cromwell (no. 4 above)}, England’s ablest general, was placed in charge of military operations {(Massacres of Drogheda and Wexford).

The Irish were then driven into the

infertile province of Connacht in the west, while the fertile land thus vacated wealth in

1651/59, Manchester

Irland

Lond. 1919.

II—III,

18¢0/g1.

1893,

A, BELLESHEIM,

H. HOLLOWAY,

The

Gesch. der kath. Kirche

Reformation

in

Ireland,

M. V. RONAN, The Reform. in Ireland under Elizabeth (x558/80),

Lond. 1930; The Irish Martyrs of the penal laws, Lond. 1935.

R, D. EDWARDS,

Church and State in Tudor Ireland I534/1603 Lond. 1935. P. F. CARD, MORA N,

Persecutions suffered by the Catholics of Ireland under Cromwell and the Puritans, Dublin %1917; Catholics of Ireland under the Penal Laws the 18th Century, London 1899. W.BURKE, The Irish Priests in the inpenal Times (1660/1760), Cahir 1913. TH.L.COONAN, The Irish Cath. Confe and the Puritan Revol, Lond. 1954. E. MACLYSAGT, Irish life in deracy the 17th cent. after Cromwell, Dublin 1939. Father LUKE WADDING, Commemor volume, Dublin 1957. D. B, QUINN, Irish Historical Studies 1961, ative 318/44 (Henry VIII and Ireland).

188

§ 184. Revolt of the Netherlands. Poland, Hungary and Sweden was given to English Protestants; thousands of Irish were carried off to the West Indies as slaves, At the same time the religious persecution increased in violence; a price was put on the head of a priest, and priests were hunted dowmn like wild animals. A few decades later when

William IIT {no. 5 above)

invaded the island and defeated the Irish because of their valorous support

of James I1, he made the Treaty of Limerick (1691) in which he promised freedom of worship, but the treaty was never kept. In fact new legislation

was enacted ordering further confiscation (up to ten-elevenths of the arable land}; and disfranchisement and economic restrictions aimed at the utter pauperization of the people. The Irish were excluded from Parliament and

from

all civil offices;

they

could

not

buy,

inherit

or accept

as a gift

a piece of land from a Protestant, nor lease such for more than thirty years. They could not have Catholic schools at home nor attend such schools abroad; and their churches could have neither steeple nor bell. Under the

influence of Liberalism, from about 1750, the Penal Laws, perhaps the most

infamous ever devised, were no longer enforced in all their rigor. After the victory of the American colonies and when danger threatened from France, England began gradually to repeal some of the more oppressive of these laws: in 1778 the Catholics of Ireland were allowed to hold land; in 1779 with the Test Act abolished, they could seek public office; in 1482 Catholic schools could be opened with the consent of the Anglican bishop of the in 1791

diocese;

all restrictions

were

from

removed

worship,

Catholic

and

in 1795 the first Catholic ecclesiastical seminary was founded at Maynooth.

§ 184.

Revolt of the Netherlands. Religious Disturbances in Poland, Hungary and Sweden. I. When Mary, daughter and heir of Charles the Bold, duke of Burgundy, married Maximilian I in 1477, The Netherlands! came 1 5§, CRAMER

I—X,

The

impressa

Hague

and

1500/1727,

F.PIJPER,

1903/14. The

Bibliotheca

W.PERQUIN,

Hague

1955.

Reformatoria

Bibliotheca

P. FREDERICQ,

cath.

Corpus

torum inquisitionis haereticae pravitatis Neerlandicae IV—V, A.C, DE SCHREVEL,

Recueil

des documents

relatifs

aux

Correspondance

de Philippe

Neerlandica

neerlandica documen-

Ghent 1900/6.

troubles

religieux

en Flandre 1577/84, 3 vols. Bruges 1921/28. H. PIRENNE, Bibliographie de I’hist, de Belgique, Brussels 21931. H. PIRENNE, Histoire de Belgique, 7 vols Brussels

1932.

J.LEFEVRE,

II sur les

des Pays-Bas, 2 vols. Brussels 1940/60.

H. FORNERON,

Paris 1g29;

D, LOTH, Paris 1933;

4 vols. Paris 1880/82.

Lond.

1938;

affaires

Hist. de Philippe II,

PHILIP I1: Monogr.: C. BRATLI, Paris 21g12; J.COSS50U,

L. BERTRAND, Paris 1929; L.PFANDL,

1938.

E. GOSSART,

W. TH. WALSH,

L'Etablissement

du

régime

espagnol dans les Pays-Bas et l'insurrection, Brussels 190s5; La domination espagnoie dans les Pays-Bas a la fin du régne de Ph. II, Brussels 1906, F. RACHFAHL,

Marg.

GRANVELLE : Monogr.:

v. Parma,

Statthalterin

M. VAN DURME,

der Niederl.

Brussels 1953.

Monogr.: F. RACHFAHL, 3 vols. (to 1564}, 1906/24;

(1559/67),

WILLIAM

18638.

OF ORANGE:

E, HEYCK, 1908; W.SCHEN-

DELL, 195I. L. VAN DER ESSEN, Alex. Farnese, 4 vols. Brussels 1933/35. E.DE MOREAU, Hist. de I'Eglise en Belgique IV—V {1378/1633), Louv. 1949/52. J.J. ALTMEYER, Les précurseurs de la Réforme aux Pays-Bas,

189

Modern and Recent Times. First Period (1517 —1648)

under Hapsburg rule. Protestantism in the form of Lutheranism and Calvinism had effected an early entrance from neighboring countries;

Charles

but

V, had

owing

to the strict measures

been able

to make

adopted

little headway.

by Emperor

A number

of

heretics, chiefly seditious Amnabaptists, were executed. When Philip 11 of Spain (1556—1598) became sovereign of the Nether-

lands by the abdication of his father, Charles V in 1555, the Prot-

estants, especially the Calvinists, were a power to be reckoned with. Philip, a true Spaniard, was thoroughly conscious of his duty to protect the Catholic religion and preserve the unity of faith; but he was equally imbued with the idea of maintaining the

absolutism of the crown in Church and State and of establishing and uphoiding the ascendancy of Spain throughout FEurope. During the second half of the sixteenth century his court was the

rallying point of the Counter-Reformation; France, Italy and even the papacy (§§ 175, 176) felt his influence. His political ventures against England (§ 183, 3) and France (§ 182, z—s) met with little success; but the turn of events in the Netherlands proved to be the most frustrating experience of Philip’s long career. His reserved and suspicious nature, his interference with the jealously guarded privileges of the natives, the exploitation of the country by the Spaniards and the contemptuous disregard shown to the native nobles 1n distributing public offices, all contributed toward engendering serious dissatisfaction with his rule. At the head of the malcontents were Prince William of Nassau-Orange, surnamed “The Silent,” stadtholder of the provinces of Holland, Zeeland and Utrecht,

z vols. Paris

1886.

P. GEYL,

The revolt of the Nederlands

1 555/1601,

Lond.

1932. L. E. HALKIN, Hist. relig. des régnes de C. de Berghes et de G.d’ Autriche, prince-évéques de Liége, 1538/57, Paris 1936; La Réforme en Belgique sous Charles V. Brussels

rg57.

B, DE

MEESTER,

Le

S.-Sigge

et les

troubles

des

Pays-Bas 1566/79, Louv. 1934. L. JADIN, Les actes de la Congrég. Consistoriale concernant les Pays-Bas ... 1593/1797, Rome 1935. M, DIERICKX, Documents inédits sur 1'érection des nouveaux diocéses aux Pays-Bas

(£521—70), 2 vols. Brussels 1960/61. E. HUBERT, Etude sur la condition des

flotestants

en Belgique depuis Charles V jusqu’a Joseph II, Brussels 1882;

s Pays-Bas espagnols et la. République des Provinces Unies, Mémoires de

I’Acad. Royale de Belg. I1, Sér. 2, Brussels 1g07. E. MARX, Studien z. Gesch.

des niederl. Aunfstandes,

19oz.

den Niederl.,

2 parts

de

Nederlanden

Pays-Bas catholiques Zuidelijke

1903/4.

P. KALKOFF,

A. PASTURE,

1596/1633, Louv. 1598

bis

Die Anfinge der Gegenref. in

1925.

1621,

La restauration religieuse aux H. J. ELIAS,

Antw.

193I.

Kerk en Staat in

L. J. ROGIER,

Ge-

schiedenis van het Katholizisme in Noord-Nederland in der 16¢en 17¢ eeuw, 3 vols. The Hague %1959. J. LINDEBOOM, De confessioneele ontwikkeling