CHAPTER III

PROGRESS OF CALVINISM

(a) In Switzerland.

/Calvini Joannis, Opera quae supersunt/ in the /Corp. Reformatorum/, vols. xxix.-lxxxvii. Doumergue, /Jean Calvin, les hommes et les choses de son temps/, 1900-5. Kampschulte, /Johann Calvin, seine Kirche und sein staat in Genf/, 1899. Fleury, /Histoire de l'Eglise de Geneve/, 3 vols., 1880. Mignet, /Etablissement de la reforme religieuse et constition du calvinisme a Geneve/, 1877. Choisy, /La theocratie a Geneve au temps de Calvin/, 1897. /Cambridge Mod. History/, ii., chap. xi. (Bibliography, 769-83). For complete bibliography, see /Diction. Theologique/ (art. Calvin).

John Calvin, from whom the heresy takes its name, was born at Noyon inPicardy in 1509. In accordance with the wishes of his father hestudied philosophy and theology at the University of Paris, where hewas supported mainly from the fruits of the ecclesiastical beneficesto which he had been appointed to enable him to pursue his studies.Later on he began to waver about his career in life, and withoutabandoning entirely his hopes of becoming an ecclesiastic he turnedhis attention to law in the Universities of Orleans and Bourges. InFrench intellectual circles of this period a certain spirit of unrestand a contempt for old views and old methods might be detected. TheRenaissance ideas, so widespread on the other side of the Alps, hadmade their way into France, where they found favour with some of theuniversity professors, and created a feeling of distrust and suspicionin the minds of those to whom Scholasticism was the highest ideal.Margaret of Navarre, sister of the king, showed herself the generouspatron and defender of the new movement, and secured for it thesympathy and to some extent the support of Francis I. A few of thefriends of the Renaissance in France were not slow to adopt thereligious ideas of Luther, though not all who were suspected of heresyby the extreme champions of Scholasticism had any intention of joiningin a movement directed against the defined doctrines or constitutionof the Catholic Church.

As a student at Bourges, Calvin was brought into close relations withMelchior Wolmar, a German Humanist, who was strongly Lutheran in histendencies, and through whom he became enamoured of Luther's teachingon Justification. On his return to Paris he was soon remarkable as astrong partisan of the advanced section of the university, and by hisability and determination he did much to win over the Renaissanceparty to the religious teaching that had become so widespread inGermany. As a result of an address delivered by Nicholas Cop, rectorof the university, and of several acts of violence perpetrated in thecapital by the friends of heresy Francis I. was roused to take action.Calvin, fearing death or imprisonment, made his escape from Paris toBasle (1534). Here he published his first and greatest theologicaltreatise, /Christianae Religionis Institutio/, which he dedicated tothe King of France (1536). The work was divided into four sections,namely, God the Creator, God the Redeemer, Grace, and the ExternalMeans for Salvation. Both in its style and in its arguments drawn fromthe Scriptures, the Fathers, and the theologians of the Middle Ages,it was far superior, at least for educated readers, to the best thathad been produced by Luther and even to the /Loci Communes/ ofMelanchthon.

He arrived at Basle at a time when a crisis had arisen in thepolitical and religious development of Geneva. For a long period theHouse of Savoy was seeking for an opportunity to annex the territoryof Vaud extending along the Lake of Geneva, and the episcopal citiesof Geneva and Lausanne. Berne, too, had aspirations of a similar kind.The authorities of Berne, having adopted the Zwinglian doctrine,thought that in it they had a means at their hand to detach Geneva andLausanne from any sympathy with Savoy and to secure these territoriesfor themselves. They despatched preachers to Geneva, where there werealready two political factions, one advocating a closer alliance withSavoy, another clamouring for a union with Berne. The supporters ofBerne rallied round William Farel and the Zwinglian ministers, whilethe friends of Savoy undertook to champion the old religion. The wholestruggle was at bottom political rather than religious, but thetriumph of the republican adherents of Berne meant victory for thereforming party in Geneva. The Duke of Savoy issued a declaration ofwar against the rebels to whom the Canton of Berne had pledged support(1534). As a result the forces of Savoy were driven out of Geneva andthe Vaud, a close union was formed between Geneva and Berne, and everyeffort was made to spread the new religion in the city and among theVaudois. A Zwinglian university was established at Lausanne, whichexercised a great influence in propagating the new doctrine, and whichhad the honour of counting among its students Theodore Beza[1] themost gifted and learned assistant of Calvin.

But though the Vaudois had been won over, Geneva was by no meanssecured for the reformers. Farel and his followers, finding themselvesinvolved in serious difficulties, appealed to Calvin to help them incompleting the work they had begun. In 1536 Calvin accepted thisinvitation, and took up his residence at Geneva. Gifted with greatpowers as an organiser and administrator he soon restored order in thecity, and won over the people to his doctrines. Himself a man of verystrict notions, in whose eyes all even the most harmless amusementsappeared sinful or dangerous, he was determined that his followersmust accept his views. Under his rule Geneva, formerly so gay, becamelike a city of death, where all citizens went about as if in mourning.Such an unnatural condition of affairs could not be permanent. Thepeople soon grew tired of their dictator and of his methods; theauthorities of Berne were roused to hostility by his refusal to accepttheir doctrinal programme or their model religious organisation; theSynod of Lausanne declared against him for a similar reason, and in1538 he and his principal supporters were driven from the city.Cardinal Sadoleto took occasion to address a stirring appeal to Genevato return to the old faith, but his appeal fell upon deaf ears.

Calvin retired at first to Strassburg, and later he took charge of aparish in France. During the interval he devoted himself to a closerstudy of the disputed religious questions, and wrote much in favour ofthe Reformation. It was at this time (1540) that he married the widowof one of the Anabaptist leaders. Meanwhile Geneva was torn bydisputes between two factions, the Libertines as they were called, whowere opposed to Calvin, and the Guillermins, who clamoured for hisreturn. The latter body gained ground rapidly, and a decree was issuedrecalling Calvin to Geneva (October 1540). Knowing well that hispresence was necessary to restore peace to the city he refused toreturn unless the conditions imposed by him should be accepted. In theend he went back to Geneva practically as its religious and politicaldictator (1541).

The form of government introduced was theocratic. Calvin wasrecognised as the spiritual and temporal ruler of the city. He wasassisted in the work of government by the Consistory, which wascomposed of six clerics and twelve laymen. The latter was the worstform of inquisition court, taking cognisance of the smallestinfractions of the rules laid down for the conduct of the citizens,and punishing them by the severest form of punishment. Any want ofrespect for the Consistory or opposition to its authority was treatedas a rebellion against God. Calvin formulated a very severe code ofrules for the guidance of the people not merely in their duties ascitizens and as members of his religious organisation, but also intheir social intercourse with one another. Even the privacy of familylife was not sacred in his eyes. All kinds of amusements, theatres,dances, cards, &c., were banned as ungodly, as were also extravaganceof dress and anything savouring of frivolity. Nobody was allowed tosell wine or beer except a limited number of merchants licensed to doso by the Consistory.

Nor were these mere empty regulations designed only to keep religionbefore the eyes of the people without any intention of enforcing them.The preachers were invested with extraordinary powers, and werecommissioned to make house to house visitations, to inquire aboutviolations of the rules. In their reports to the Congregation and tothe Consistory they noted even the most minute transgressions. Notcontent with this Calvin had his spies in all parts of the city, whoreported to him what people were saying about his methods and hisgovernment. The punishment meted out by the courts were of a verysevere and brutal kind. No torture that could be inflicted was deemedtoo much for any one bold enough to criticise the Consistory or thedictator.

It was natural that such methods should be highly distasteful to thoseof the citizens of Geneva who were not religious fanatics. A strongparty tried to resist him. They accused him of being much moretyrannical than the Pope, but Calvin denounced such opponents aslibertines, heretics, and atheists. He handed them over to the devilat least in so far as his ecclesiastical censures were effective,[2]threatened the severest spiritual punishment against their aiders andabettors, and when all such means of reproof failed he had recourse tothe secular arm.

Sebastian Castellio, a well-known preacher and Scriptural scholar, waspunished because he could not agree with Calvin's teaching onpredestination, as was also the physician Bolsec; Ameaux one of themembers of the Council was put to death because he denounced thetyranny of Calvin and of the Consistory; Gentilis was condemned toexecution for differing with Calvin's teaching on the Trinity, and wascompelled to make a most abject public retraction before he couldobtain a reprieve. Several of the citizens were punished with longimprisonment for dancing even on the occasion of a wedding, ashappened in the case of Le Fevre, whose son-in-law was obliged to fleeto France because he resented warmly such methods of promotingreligion. In Geneva and in the adjoining territory all Catholicpractices were put down by violence, and the peasants were allowed nochoice in their religious views. Possibly, however, the most glaringexample of Calvin's tyranny and high-handed methods was his treatmentof Michael Servetus, a Spaniard who had written against the Trinity.He was on a journey through the territory of Geneva and was doingnothing to spread his doctrines nor acting in any way likely to bringhim under the ire of Calvin. The latter having heard of his presencethere had him arrested, tried, and condemned to death. To justify suchharshness he published a pamphlet in which he advocated death as theonly proper remedy for heresy. Theodore Beza wrote strongly in supportof this opinion of his master's, as did also Melanchthon who, thoughdiffering from Calvin on so many points, hastened to forward hiswarmest congratulations on the execution of Servetus.[3]

Calvin's acts of cruelty were not the result of violent outbursts oftemper. By nature cold and immovable, he did not allow himself to behurried to extremes either by anger or by passion. How he succeeded inmaintaining his position for so many years in Geneva is intelligibleonly to those who understand the strength of the religious fanaticismthat he was able to arouse amongst his followers, the terror which hisspiritual and temporal punishments inspired among his opponents, hisown wonderful capacity for organisation and administration, theactivity of his ministers and spies, and the almost perfect system ofrepression that he adopted in his two-fold character of religious andpolitical dictator.

To strengthen his position and to provide for the continuance of hissystem he established an academy at Geneva (1558) principally for thestudy of theology and philosophy. It was attended by crowds ofscholars from Switzerland, France, Germany, the Netherlands, England,and Scotland. By means of the academy, Calvinism was spread throughoutSwitzerland notwithstanding the opposition of the Zwinglian preachers,and Calvin's system of ecclesiastical organisation became the modelaimed at by his disciples in most countries of Europe, notably France,the Netherlands, and Scotland. The Zurich school, at the head of whichstood Bullinger, did not yield ground to the new teaching without asevere struggle, and Calvin found himself obliged to come to termswith them in the /Consensus Tigurninus/ (1549). In his desire tosecure the religious unity of Switzerland he had no difficulty inabandoning or minimising his own doctrine in the hope of overcoming orwinning over his opponents. After a life of tireless energy his healthbegan to fail in 1561, and three years later he passed away (1564).

Calvin was a man of morose and gloomy temperament, severe even toharshness with his followers, and utterly devoid of human sympathy.Not so however his disciple and assistant Theodore Beza. The latterwas born in Burgundy in 1519, and after completing his classicalstudies at Orleans he drifted to Paris, where he plunged into all thepleasures and dissipations of the capital, and where at first he wasremarkable more for his love songs than for his theology. He devotedhimself to the study of law, and in 1539 he took his licentiate atParis. Having become attached to the opinions of the Swiss Reformershe left Paris and settled at Geneva, where he fell completely underthe influence of Calvin, but not even Calvin's temperament and systemcould change his naturally gay and sympathetic disposition. For thisreason he became a general favourite, and did much to win the good-will of those who felt themselves rebelled by the harshness of thedictator. Beza was, besides, a man of very superior ability, and hadbeen especially well equipped in Hebrew and in the classics. He wasmaster of a striking style whether he wrote in French or in Latin,eloquent beyond most of his contemporaries, and in every way capableof making a good impression not merely on the ordinary citizen but onthe more educated classes. His writings in defence of Calvin's systemand his translations of the Scriptures gave him a great reputationthroughout Europe, and gained for him a commanding position in Geneva,where he died in 1605.

Calvin's system was modelled to a great extent on the doctrines ofLuther and Zwingli, but it was coloured largely by his own harsh andmorose disposition. For the distinguishing feature of his system,namely, absolute predestination, he was dependent largely upon theworks of Wycliffe. Like Luther, he began with the assumption that thecondition of man before the Fall was entirely natural, and thatconsequently by the Fall he was deprived of something that wasessential to his nature and without which human nature was completelycorrupted. Man was no longer free, and every act of his was sinful.His want of freedom was the result of the play of external forcesdirected and arranged by God, rather than of any internal necessity bywhich he was forced to sin. God is, according to Calvin, the author ofsin, in the sense that he created a certain number of men to work evilthrough them in order that He might have an opportunity of displayingthe divine attribute of mercy. Hence the motive of God in bringingabout evil is different from the motive of the sinner, and thereforethough the sinner is blameworthy God is nowise responsible for hiscrime.

Adam sinned because it was decreed by God that he should fall in orderthat the divine mercy should be manifested to the world. For the samereason God did not intend that all should be equally good or that allshould be saved. He created some men that they might sin and thattheir punishment might afford an example of God's justice, while Hemade others that they might be saved to show His overwhelming mercy.The former are condemned to hell by an irreversible decree, theothers, the elect, are predestined absolutely to glory. The elect areassured of justification through the merits of Christ, and oncejustified they are always justified, for justification cannot be lost.Faith such as that advocated by Luther was the means of acquiringjustification, but, mindful of his other doctrine that even the bestof men's works are sinful, Calvin took care to explain that justifyingfaith was only the instrument by which a man laid hold of the meritsof Christ. It was like a vessel which, though containing somepriceless treasure, was in itself worthless.

As might be expected, Calvin refused to admit that the sacraments wereendowed with any objective power of conferring Grace. In the case oftheir reception by the elect, however, he held that they were themeans of strengthening the faith by which justification is acquired,but for those predestined to damnation they were mere signs withoutany spiritual effect. In regard to the Eucharist, while he rejectedthe Catholic view of Transubtantiation, he maintained against theLutherans that Impanation or Companation was equally absurd. Nor didhe agree with Zwingli that the Eucharist is a mere sign of Christ'slove for men. According to him Christ is really present, in the sensethat though the bread and wine remain unchanged, the predestinedreceive with the Eucharistic elements a heavenly food that proceedsfrom the body of Christ in Heaven.

Like Luther he contended that the true Church of Christ is invisible,consisting in his view only of the predestined, but, realising thenecessity for authority and organisation, he was driven to hold thatthe invisible Church manifested itself through a visible religioussociety. Unlike Luther, however, he was unwilling to subordinate theChurch to the civil power, believing as he did that it was a societycomplete in itself and entirely independent of temporal sovereigns.Each Calvinistic community should be to a great extent a self-governing republic, all of them bound together into one body by thereligious synods, to which the individual communities should electrepresentatives. The churches were to be ruled by pastors, elders, anddeacons. Candidates for the sacred ministry were to receive theconfirmation of their vocation by a call from some Calvinistic churchbody, and were to be ordained by the imposition of the hands of thepresbyters or elders. For Calvin as for Luther the Holy Scriptureswere the sole rule of faith to be adopted by both the preachers andthe synods. The special illumination of the Holy Ghost was sufficientto guard individuals from being deceived either in determining whatbooks are inspired, or what is the precise meaning which God wished toconvey in any particular book or passage.[4] ----------

[1] Baird, /Theodore Beza, Counsellor of the French Reform/, 1900.

[2] Galli, /Die Lutheran, und Calvinist, Kirchenstrafen im Reformationszeitalter/, 1878.

[3] Rouquette, /L'Inquisition protestante. Les victimes de Calvin/, 1906. Galiffe, /Quelques pages d'histoire exacte sur les proces intentes a Geneve/, 1862. Paulus, /Luther und Gewissensfreiheit/, 1905. Id., /Melanchthon und Gewissensfreiheit/ (/Katholik/, i., 546 sqq.).

[4] Schwane, /Dogmengeschichte der neuerenzeit/. Cunningham, /The Reformers and the Theology of the Reformation/, 1862.

(b) Calvinism in France.

Lavisse, /Histoire de France/ (vols v.-vi.), 1904-5. De Meaux, /Les luttes religieuses en France au XVIe siecle/, 1879. Imbart de la Tour, /Les origines de la Reforme/, vols. i.-ii., 1904-9. Hauser, /Etudes sur la Reforme francaise/, 1909. Capefigue, /Histoire de la reforme, de la ligue et du regne de Henri IV./, 4 vols., 1834. Maimbourg, /Histoire du Calvinisme/, 1682. Soldan, /Geschichte des Protestantismus in Frankreich bis zum Tode Karls ix./, 2 Bde, 1855. Baird, /History of the Rise of the Huguenots in France/, 2 vols., 1879. See also bibliography, chap. iii. (a).

Many causes combined to favour the introduction of the reformeddoctrines into France. Owing to the anti-papal attitude adopted by theFrench theologians during the Great Western Schism, there was stilllurking in many circles a strong feeling against the Holy See and infavour of a national Church, over which the Pope should retain merelya supremacy of honour. Besides, the influence of the old sects, theAlbigenses and the Waldenses, had not disappeared entirely, and theprinciples of the French mystics favoured the theory of religiousindividualism, that lay behind the whole teaching of the reformers.The Renaissance, too, was a power in France, more especially in Paris,where it could boast of powerful patrons such as Margaret of Navarre,sister of Francis I. and wife of the King of Navarre, the king'smistress, his favourite minister Du Bellay, and the latter's brother,the Bishop of Paris. Not all the French Humanists, however, wereequally dangerous. A few of them were undoubtedly favourable toLuther's views, while many others, infuriated by the charges ofunorthodoxy levelled against them, were inclined to look withcomplacency on whatever was condemned by their Scholastic opponents.The proximity of Strassburg, where Lutheran and Zwinglian doctrinesfound support, and the close relations existing between the ParisUniversity and German scholars helped to disseminate among Frenchmenthe writings of Erasmus, Luther, and Melanchthon and with them the newreligious views.

Against the success of the Reformation in France was the fact that thepeople, Latin rather than Teuton in their sympathies, were thoroughlydevoted to their religion and to the Holy See, that the bishops thoughnominated by the king according to the Concordat of 1516, were morezealous than their German brethren, that in the main Paris University,then the great centre of intellectual life in France, was thoroughlyCatholic, and that the queen-mother, the chancellor of state, theleading ministers both lay and ecclesiastic, and the parliamentaryauthorities could be relied upon to offer Lutheranism their strongestopposition. Nor, however much Francis I. might be inclined tovacillate in the hope of securing the help of the German Protestantprinces in his struggle with the empire, had he any desire to see hiskingdom convulsed by the religious strife raging on the other side ofthe Rhine.

In 1521 the Parliament of Paris with the approval of the king forbadethe publication of writings dealing with the new religious views.Luther's books were condemned, and the Paris University drew up a listof erroneous propositions extracted from the works of the Germantheologians (1523). At the request of the queen-mother the theologicalfaculty of Paris formulated a plan for preventing the spread of theGerman errors in France, the main points of which were that hereticalbooks should be forbidden, that the bishops should be exhorted to seekout such works in their dioceses and have them destroyed, and that theSorbonne should have a free hand in maintaining religious unity. Yetin spite of these precautions a Lutheran community was formed at Meauxin the vicinity of Paris, and in the South of France, where theWaldensian party was still strong, Lutheran teaching found manysupporters. In some places various attempts were made to imitate thetactics adopted so successfully at Wittenberg and Berne to bring aboutby force the discontinuance of Catholic worship. But these attemptsfailed, owing mainly to the independent attitude of the localparliaments and to the energy of the bishops, who removed one of themost dangerous weapons wielded by the heretics by insisting on athorough reform of the clergy.

But though Francis I. had been moved to take action against thesectaries, and though Calvin and other leaders were obliged to leaveFrance, the reforming party, relying on the influence of patrons likeMargaret of Navarre[1] and on the Humanist section at the universityand at the newly established College de France, felt confident ofultimate success. They realised that the king was most anxious toarrive at an understanding with the Protestant princes of Germanyagainst Charles V., and that therefore it was unlikely that he wouldindulge in a violent persecution of their co-religionists at home.They knew, too, that Francis I. had set his heart on securing completecontrol of the Church in his own dominions, as was evident by the hardbargain which he drove with Leo X. in the Corcordat of 1516,[2] andthey were not without hope that Luther's teaching on the spiritualsupremacy of the civil rulers might prove an irresistible bait to aman of such a temperament. Negotiations were opened with Francis I. bysome of the German reformers, who offered to accept most of theCatholic doctrines together with episcopal government if only the kingwould support their cause (1534). As it was impossible to arrange fora conference, the Lutheran party submitted a summary of their viewsembodied in twelve articles to the judgment of the Sorbonne. In replyto this communication the doctors of the Sorbonne, instead of wastingtheir energies in the discussion of particular tenets, invited theGermans to state explicitly whether or not they accepted the authorityof the Church and the writings of the Fathers. Such an attitude put anend to all hopes of common action between the French and Germantheologians, but at the same time Francis I. was not willing, forpolitical reasons, to break with Protestantism. The publication,however, of a particularly offensive pamphlet against Catholicism,printed in Switzerland and scattered broadcast throughout France,served as a warning to the king that his own country was on the brinkof being plunged into the civil strife which Protestantism hadfomented in Germany, and that if he wanted to preserve national unityand peace the time for decisive action had arrived. Many of theleading reformers were arrested and some of them were put to death,while others were banished from France (1535).

From this time the Lutherans began to lose hope of securing the activeco-operation of Francis I., but the friendly political relationsbetween the king and the German Protestant princes, together with theclose proximity of Strassburg, Geneva, and Berne, from which preachersand pamphlets made their way into France, helped to strengthen theheretical party in the country despite the efforts of theecclesiastical and lay authorities. In the South many of the Waldensesin Dauphiny and Provence went over formally to the side of theCalvinists. In places where they possessed considerable strength theyindulged in violent attacks on the clergy, for which reason severemeasures of repression were adopted by the local administrators and bythe king. As in Switzerland, so too in France Calvinism proved to bethe most attractive of the new religious systems. Calvinisticcommunities were formed at Paris, Rouen, Lyons and Orleans, all ofwhich looked to Geneva for direction. The name given to the Frenchfollowers of Calvin was Huguenots.

Henry II. (1547-59), who succeeded on the death of Francis I. had nodifficulty in allying himself with the German Protestants, and indespatching an army to assist Maurice of Saxony in his rebellionagainst the Emperor, while at the same time taking every precautionagainst the spread of heresy at home. He established a new inquisitiondepartment presided over by a Dominican for the detection andpunishment of the Huguenots, and pledged the civil power to carry outits decisions. In this attitude he was supported strongly by theUniversity of Paris, which merited the heartiest congratulations ofJulius III. by its striking defence of Catholic doctrines, especiallythe necessity of obedience to the Holy See. Yet notwithstanding allmeasures taken against them the Huguenots continued to increase innumbers. The Bishop of Navarre went over to their side, as did acertain number of the clergy, and the attitude of some of the otherswas uncertain. So strong did the Huguenot party find itself in Francethat a Synod representing the different reformed communities was heldin Paris in 1559, at which the doctrine and ecclesiasticalorganisation introduced by Calvin into Switzerland were formallyadopted. The accession of Elizabeth to the throne in England, and thehopes entertained in France of detaching that country from Spain madethe French government less anxious to adopt severe measures againstthe Protestants. After the Peace of Cateau Cambresis (1559), whenHenry determined to make a great effort to extirpate Calvinism, he wasprevented by death.

Francis II. who lived only one year (1559-60) succeeded, and he wasfollowed by Charles IX. (1560-74). The latter of these was a merechild, and during the minority the government of the country was inthe hands of Catharine de' Medici, his mother, who became regent ofFrance. At the court two parties struggled for supremacy, the familyof Guise which stood for Catholicism, and the Bourbons who favouredCalvinism. The regent, not being a woman of very decided religiousconvictions or tendencies, set herself to play off one party againstthe other so as to increase her own power, and in this way a splendidopportunity was given to the Calvinists to pursue their religiouscampaign. Several of the more powerful people in the kingdom favouredtheir schemes solely out of hatred to the Duke of Guise[3] and withthe hope of lessening his power. Amongst the prominent Calvinistleaders at this period were Antoine de Bourbon,[4] King of Navarre,and his brother Louis Prince de Conde, the Constable de Montmorencyand Admiral Coligny,[5] the recognised head and ablest leader of theHuguenot party.

Taking advantage of the bitter feeling aroused amongst their followersby the execution of some of their number, the Huguenots formed aconspiracy (Tumult of Amboise 1560) to seize the young king, tooverthrow the Duke of Guise, and to set up in his place the Prince deConde. The Calvinist theologians, having been consulted about thelawfulness of such an enterprise, declared that the conspirators mightproceed without fear of sinning so long as a prince of the royalfamily was amongst their leaders. The plot was discovered, however,before their plans were matured, and several of those who took part init were put to death. Instead of weakening, it served only tostrengthen the family of Guise. Francis, Duke of Guise, was appointeda lieutenant-general of France with the title of saviour of hiscountry, while his brother, the Cardinal of Lorraine, became chiefinquisitor and one of the papal legates appointed for the reform ofabuses in France. The King of Navarre, to whom Pius IV. addressed apersonal appeal, confessed his unfaltering loyalty to the Catholicreligion, although at the same time he was doing much to spreadCalvinism in his own dominions and throughout the South of France.

Though the royal edict against the Calvinists, published in 1560, wassevere, yet little was done to enforce its terms except against thosewho had recourse to arms. The Prince de Conde organised a newconspiracy and attempted to secure Lyons. He was arrested, tried, andcondemned to death, but before the sentence could be carried outFrancis II. passed away.

A new grouping of parties now took place. The regent, Catharine de'Medici, alarmed at the growing influence of the Guise faction, threwthe whole weight of her influence into the scales in favour of thePrince de Conde and of the Huguenots. A royal edict was issuedsuspending all prosecutions against heretics and ordering the releaseof all prisoners detained on account of their religion (1561). Theregent wrote to the Pope praising the religious fervour of theCalvinists, and calling upon him to suppress several Catholicpractices to which the heretics had taken exception. She professedherself anxious for a national council to settle the religiousdifferences, and failing this she insisted upon a religiousdisputation at Poissy. The disputation ("Colloquy" of Poissy) tookplace (1561) in presence of the young king, his mother, and a largenumber of cardinals, bishops, and ministers of state. The Catholicswere represented by the Cardinal of Lorraine, the Jesuit GeneralLainez, and other distinguished clergy, while the Calvinists sent alarge number of their ablest leaders, conspicuous amongst whom wereTheodore Beza and Francois de Morel. The principal doctrines indispute, notably the authority of the Church and the Eucharist, werediscussed at length without result. Then a small committee, composedof five theologians representing each side, was appointed, but withoutany better success. In the end, as no agreement could be secured, theconference was dismissed.

Owing to the close alliance between the regent and the Prince de Condethe former issued a new edict, in which she allowed the Calvinistsfree exercise of their religion outside the cities provided that theyassembled unarmed, commanded them to restore the goods and churchesthey had seized, and forbade them to have recourse to violence or toconspiracies to promote their views (1562). Encouraged by theseconcessions, the Calvinists especially in the South of Franceattempted to force their religion on the people. They attackedchurches, profaned the Blessed Sacrament, murdered several priests andlaymen, and obliged the peasants to listen to their preachers. Feelingbetween the two parties was extremely bitter, and the Catholics wereespecially incensed that a small minority should be allowed to havetheir own way regardless of the opinions of the vast body of theFrench people.

In these circumstances it required very little to lead to seriousconflict. At Vassy some soldiers accompanying the Duke of Guisequarrelled with a party of Calvinists, whose psalm-singing wasdisturbing the Mass at which the Duke was assisting. The latter,hearing the noise, hastened out to restore peace, and was struck witha stone. His followers, incensed at this outrage, drew their swordsand killed a large number of the Calvinists. This incident, referredto generally as the massacre of Vassy, led to a new civil war (1562).The Calvinists hastened to take up arms, and the Prince de Conde wasassured of English assistance. A large army attacked Toulouse, butafter a struggle lasting four days the Calvinists were defeated anddriven off with severe loss. In Normandy and other centres where theywere strong they carried on the war with unheard of cruelty; but asthey were in a hopeless minority and as the English failed to givethem the necessary assistance they lost many of their strongholds, andfinally suffered a terrible defeat at Dreux where the Prince de Condewas taken prisoner (Dec. 1562). Coligny escaped to Orleans, which citywas besieged by the Duke of Guise, who was murdered during the siegeby one of the followers of Coligny.[6] Before his execution theprisoner accused Coligny and Beza as being accessories to his crime,but it is only fair to say that Coligny denied under oath the truth ofthis statement.

Though the Catholics were victorious the awful struggle had cost themdearly. Their ablest leader the Duke of Guise had fallen, as had alsoAntoine de Bourbon, King of Navarre, who had been converted fromCalvinism; many of their churches and most valuable shrines weredestroyed; and to make matters worse they recognised that the strugglehad been fought in vain, as the regent proclaimed a general amnestyand concluded a peace with the Huguenots (Peace of Amboise, 1563),whereby Calvinist nobles and their followers were allowed freeexercise of their religion with certain restrictions.

Neither side was satisfied with these terms. Coligny and the Prince deConde were annoyed furthermore by the fact that the regent broke offher close relations with them, and began to lean towards the Catholicside and toward an alliance with Spain. After raising large sums ofmoney and arming their forces for a new effort they determined toseize the king and his court at Monceau, but the Constable deMontmorency with six thousand trusty Swiss soldiers hastened to theking's defence, and brought him safely from the midst of his enemies(1567). This attempt together with the terrible slaughter of Catholicsat Nimes (29 Sept.)[7] led to the outbreak of the second civil war.The Catholic forces were successful at St. Denis though they lost oneof their ablest generals, the Constable de Montmorency, and weredeprived of the fruits of their victory by the intervention of theElector of the Palatinate. Owing to the mediation of the latter a newtreaty was made in 1568, but as the Huguenots continued to seekalliances with England, Germany, and the Netherlands, Charles IX.recalled the concessions he had made, and forbade the exercise ofCalvinist worship under penalty of death.

Thereupon the third civil war broke out (1569). The Huguenots receivedassistance from England, the Netherlands, and Germany, while theCatholics were supported by Spain and the Pope. The war was carried onwith relentless cruelty on both sides. In the battle of Jarnac theHuguenot forces were defeated, and the Prince de Conde was slain(1569). The struggle was however continued by Coligny supported byHenry King of Navarre and the young de Conde. By wonderful exertionsColigny put a new army into the field only however to suffer anotherterrible defeat at Montcontour, where the Huguenots were almostannihilated. It seemed that the long struggle was to end at last andthat peace was to be restored to France. But unfortunately at thisjuncture some of his courtiers succeeded in convincing Charles IX.that his brother, the Duke of Anjou, who with the young Duke of Guisewas mainly responsible for the Catholic victories, might use hisrecognised military ability and his influence with the people to makehimself king of France. Alarmed by the prospect of such a contingencyCharles IX., already jealous of his brother's triumphs, turned againstthe Catholic party and concluded the Peace of St. Germain-en-Laye withthe Huguenots (1570).

According to the terms of this Peace the Huguenots were allowed freeexercise of their religion in France with the sole exception of thecapital. They were not to be excluded from any office of the state,and four of the strongest fortresses of the country, La Rochelle,Montauban, Cognac, and La Charite were to be delivered to them fortheir protection and as a guarantee of good faith. The whole policy ofCharles IX. underwent a complete change. Obsessed with the idea thatthe Catholic party, led by the Duke of Anjou, was becoming toopowerful to be trusted, he turned to Coligny and the Calvinists, brokeoff the alliance concluded with Spain the previous year, and sought tobring over France to the side of England and of the rebel subjects ofSpain in the Netherlands. Coligny was invited to court, where he soonbecame the most trusted and influential councillor of the king. Heendeavoured to embitter the mind of Charles IX. against his mother,against the Duke of Anjou and the family of Guise. No effort wasspared by him to bring France into the closest relations with Englandand the Netherlands against Spain, and as a sign of the reconciliationthat had been effected between the court and the Huguenots a marriagewas arranged between Henry, the Calvinist King of Navarre and Margaretof Valois, the sister of Charles IX.

The Catholics were highly indignant at this sudden change of policy.Mindful of the misfortunes brought upon their country by the Huguenotsand of the losses and cruelties they had suffered at the hands of thisimplacable minority, they resented the domination of Coligny, whomthey regarded as their most dangerous enemy, and they were embitteredby the thought that the victories they had won at so much cost hadresulted only in their own downfall and in the triumph of their worstenemies. Catharine de' Medici, the queen-mother, felt more acutelythan the rest the influence of Coligny. She believed that he was usinghis power to alienate the young king from herself, and to win him fromthe policy she had advocated. She was only waiting an opportunity towreak her vengeance on Coligny and the whole Huguenot party, knowingwell as she did that she could count upon the popular feeling of thenation to support her.

The opportunity came on the occasion of the marriage between the Kingof Navarre and Margaret of Valois. The leading Calvinists anxious totake part in the ceremony flocked to Paris, where they and theirfollowers paraded the streets armed to the teeth and with the air ofconquerors. Catharine de' Medici took steps to secure the murder ofColigny on the 22nd August, 1572, but the attempt failed. Such a stepserved, however, to embitter feelings on both sides, and to arouse thequeen-mother to make one final effort for the destruction of herHuguenot opponents. In an audience with the king she represented tohim that the Calvinists were plotting to take his life, and that theonly way to secure himself against them was to anticipate them. Inview of the previous history of the party and the suspicioustemperament of the king, it required little to convince him of thetruth of this allegation, and at last he signed an order that on acertain pre-arranged signal having been given the soldiers should letloose on the Huguenots. On the night preceding the feast of St.Bartholomew (23-24 Aug.) the bells of the church of St. Germain-en-Laye were rung, and the troops sallied forth to carry out theirinstructions. Rumours of a Huguenot plot had been spread through thecity. The people were alarmed, and the general body of the citizenstook up arms to support the soldiers. In the melee that followed overa thousand Calvinists including Coligny were put to death. Themovement spread through the provinces where about the same numbersuffered as in the capital, though many of the Catholic clergy, as forexample, the Bishop of Lisieux, exerted themselves to put an end tothe butchery.

This event is known in history as the massacre of St. Bartholomew. Themassacre was in no sense a premeditated affair. It was a suddenoutburst of popular indignation brought about by the machinations ofthe queen-mother, and was neither encouraged nor approved by thebishops of the Catholic Church. The king presented himself before theParliament of Paris on the day following the massacre, and declaredthat he alone was responsible for what had happened. He explained thata plot had been formed against his life and that he had taken the onlymeasures that it was possible for him to take. This was the account ofthe affair that was forwarded to the French diplomatic representativesabroad, and which they gave at all courts to which they wereaccredited. Gregory XIII., acting on the report of the Frenchambassador, ordered that a /Te Deum/ should be sung in thanksgivingfor the safety of the king and royal family, and not, as has been sooften alleged, as a sign of rejoicing for the murder of theCalvinists. On the contrary he was deeply pained when he learned thetrue state of affairs. The massacre of St. Bartholomew was indeedunjustifiable, but it was done neither to promote religion nor at theinstigation of the Church. It was merely political in its object asfar as the king and the queen-mother were concerned, and it was asudden popular outburst in so far as the citizens of Paris or thepeople of the country took part in it. In judging the responsibilityand blame for what took place nobody can put out of mind the terribleexcesses, of which the Huguenots had been guilty during their longstruggle against their own countrymen. The German Lutherans, wholooked upon the slaughter as a judgment from Heaven on the Calvinistheretics, were rejoiced at their execution.[8]

The Huguenots flew to arms to avenge their brethren who had fallen,and the fourth civil war began. The Duke of Anjou laid siege to theirstrongest fortress, La Rochelle, but failed to take it, and on hiselection as King of Poland (1573) a treaty was concluded according towhich the Huguenots were allowed free exercise of their religion. Alarge number of French politicians were at last growing tired of astruggle which was costing their country so dearly, and were anxiousto conclude peace even though it were necessary to yield to thedemands of the Huguenots. At the head of this party stood some of themost powerful nobles of France including the Duc d'Alencon, and whenon the death of Charles IX. the Duke of Anjou succeeded as Henry III.(1575-89) his sympathies were entirely with the party of the moderatesas against the extremists of both sides. By the terms of the Peace ofBeaulieu (1576) the Huguenots were assured of complete freedom exceptin Paris and at the French Court, and of full civil rights, and as aguarantee of good faith they were continued in possession of theirfortresses.

Indignant at such concessions the Catholic party formed the League[9]with the young Duke of Guise at its head. Henry III., finding that itwas impossible to oppose this combination with any hope of success,determined to control it by becoming himself its leader. Theconcessions made to the Huguenots were recalled (1577), and the fifthcivil war broke out. This was brought to an end by the Peace ofPoitiers (1577). The Huguenot party, under the King of Navarre and theyoung Prince de Conde, continued to make headway against the League,and sought to strengthen themselves by an alliance with England andthe Netherlands.

The question of the succession to the French throne became serious forboth parties. Henry III. was childless, and on the death of the heir-apparent, his brother the Duke of Anjou (Alencon, 1584), thesuccession devolved apparently on Henry King of Navarre, but as he wasa Calvinist the Catholics were unwilling to recognise him. The Leaguedeclared Cardinal de Bourbon son of the Duke of Vendome as the lawfulheir to the French throne, though many of its out and out supporterswere in favour of the Duke of Guise. An attempt was made to get theapproval of the Pope for the League and its policy, but both GeorgeXIII. and Sixtus V. were not inclined to support its pretensions. Atthe earnest request of Spain the latter, however, issued aconstitution in 1585, by which he declared that Henry of Navarre andthe Prince de Conde, as notorious heretics excommunicated by theChurch, had forfeited all claim to the throne of France. Henry ofNavarre lodged a solemn protest in Rome, and he appealed to theParliament of Paris, which refused to approve of the publication ofthe papal document. Both sides had recourse once more to arms, and theHuguenots under the leadership of Henry of Navarre were victorious inthe battle of Coutras (1587). The League however continued thestruggle, captured some of the principal cities such as Lyons,Orleans, and Bourges, while Henry III. favoured both parties in turn.Overawed by the successful exploits of the Duke of Guise he pledgedhimself to put down the Huguenots, and the French people were calledupon by royal proclamation to swear that they would never accept aheretic as their king (1588).

But in his heart Henry III. favoured the cause of the King of Navarre,if for no other reason because he wished to escape from thedictatorship of the Duke of Guise. In 1588 he procured the murder ofthe two greatest leaders of the League, Henry Duke of Guise and hisbrother Louis the Cardinal-archbishop of Lyons. This outrage drew uponhim the wrath of the League and of the great body of the FrenchCatholics. Charles de Lorraine, brother of the murdered Duke of Guise,put himself at the head of the king's enemies. Sixtus V. issued astrong condemnation of the murder of the cardinal-archbishop, and theSorbonne declared that the nation no longer owed any allegiance to theking. The war was renewed vigorously on both sides, the League beingsupported by Philip II. of Spain and its opponents by Protestanttroops from Germany and Switzerland. While the combined forces ofHenry III. and of the King of Navarre were besieging Paris, Henry III.was assassinated (1589).

Thereupon Henry of Navarre had himself proclaimed King of France underthe title of Henry IV., but the League refused to recognise his claimsand put forward instead the aged Cardinal de Bourbon, then a prisonerin the hands of the King of Navarre. The Cardinal also was proclaimedking (Charles X.). Spain, too, refused to acknowledge Henry IV., andassisted the League with both money and soldiers. The Popes, Sixtus V.Gregory VIX. and Clement VIII. adopted an attitude of great reserve.While they were not inclined to support the demands of the League intheir entirety they were unshaken in their reserve to acknowledge noheretic as king of France. Henry IV., though supported by many of themoderate Catholics (/Les Politiques/), began to recognise that as aCalvinist he could never hope for peaceful possession of the Frenchthrone. He determined, therefore, to yield to the entreaties of hismost powerful supporters and to make his submission to the CatholicChurch. In July 1593 he read a public recantation in the Church of St.Denis, and was absolved conditionally from the censures he hadincurred. The following year he made his formal entrance into Paris,where he was welcomed by the people, and acknowledged as lawful kingof France by the Sorbonne. Having pledged himself to accept thedecrees of the Council of Trent, to abide by the terms of theConcordat of 1516, and to rear his heir and successor as a Catholic hewas reconciled to the Holy See. The League dissolved itself in a shorttime, and so far as Catholics were concerned peace was restored toFrance.

The Huguenots, Henry IV.'s former co-religionists, were deeply painedat the step taken by their leader, and they insisted that theirdemands must be satisfied. Henry IV., more anxious for the unity andwelfare of France than for the triumph of either religious party,determined to put an end to the civil strife by the publication of theEdict of Nantes (1598). The principal articles of the Edict were thatthe Calvinists should enjoy freedom of worship throughout the greaterpart of the kingdom, that they should be eligible for all positions ofhonour and trust in the state, that they should have for their own usethe Universities of Montauban, Montpelier, Sedan, and Samur, that thefunds for the upkeep of these universities and for the maintenance oftheir religion should be supplied by the state, and that for a periodof eight years they should have possession of some of the principalfortresses. On their side they engaged to break off all alliances withforeigners, to allow Catholic worship to be restored in the placeswhere it had been suppressed, to observe the marriage laws of theCatholic Church, and to abstain from anything that might be regardedas a violation of Catholic holidays. Such concessions were regardedwith great disfavour by the Pope, the clergy, and the vast majority ofthe French people as being opposed to the entire national tradition ofFrance, and it required all the efforts of the king to secure for themthe approval of the Paris Parliament (1599). Similarly the Calvinistswere not content with what had been conceded to them, nor were theywilling to abide by the terms of the Edict of Nantes in so far as toallow the establishment of Catholic worship in the places which wereunder their control. Their public attacks on the Blessed Eucharist andon the Pope were very irritating to their countrymen, but Henry IV.,who was a good king deeply interested especially in the welfare of thelower classes, continued to keep the peace between both parties. Hissympathies were, however, with the Protestants of Germany, and he wasactually on his way to take part in a war against the Emperor when hewas assassinated (1610).

He was succeeded by his son Louis XIII. (1610-43) who was then a boyof nine years. His mother Mary de' Medici, who acted as regentapproved the terms of the Edict of Nantes, but the Huguenots relyingon the weakness of the government refused to carry out those portionsof the Edict favourable to Catholics, and made demands for greaterprivileges. They rose in rebellion several times especially in theSouth, entered into alliance with every rebel noble who took up armsagainst the king, and acted generally as if they formed a state withina state. Cardinal Richelieu who was for years the actual ruler ofFrance (1624-42),[10] inspired solely by political motives, determinedto put an end to a condition of affairs that was highly dangerous tothe strength and national unity of the kingdom. He saw that it wasimpossible for France to extend her power so long as there existed athome a well-organised body of citizens prepared to enter intotreasonable relations with foreign enemies, and to turn to their ownadvantage their country's difficulties. His opportunity came when theHuguenots having concluded an alliance with England rose in rebellion(1627). He laid siege to their strongest fortress, La Rochelle, droveback the fleet which England sent to their assistance, and compelledthe city to surrender (1628). By this strong measure he put an end tothe power of the Huguenots in France and secured peace and unity forthe country, while at the same time he treated the conquered withcomparative mildness, confirming the Edict of Nantes (Edict of Nimes,1629), proclaiming a general amnesty, and restoring the leaders of therebellion to the property and positions they had forfeited.

During the reign of Louis XIV. (1643-1715) the whole tendency of thegovernment was dangerous to the Huguenots. Louis XIV. was determinedto make himself absolute ruler of France, and, therefore, he couldregard only with the highest disfavour the presence in his territoriesof a well-organised privileged party like the Huguenots. Anopportunity of carrying out his designs came in 1659, when with theapproval of the Synod of Montpazier they attempted to negotiate analliance with England. They were punished with great severity,forbidden to preach in any place without express permission, to attackCatholic doctrines publicly, or to intermarry with Catholics. Convertsfrom Calvinism were encouraged by promises of special concessions.Owing to the disfavour of the king and the energetic action of theclergy and bishops, whose education and culture at that time stoodexceedingly high, large numbers of the Huguenots returned to theChurch so that in some places, as for example in Normandy, where oncethey could boast of considerable influence, the sect became almostextinct.

The severity of the measures taken by Louis XIV. led to newrebellions, which were suppressed with great severity. Finally in 1685a royal proclamation appeared announcing the revocation of all theprivileges granted to the Huguenots and more particularly all thosecontained in the Edict of Nantes (1685). The churches which they hadbuilt recently were to be destroyed, their religious assembles wereforbidden, and their clergy were offered their choice betweensubmission to the Church or exile. The prime minister Louvois sentsoldiers to enforce this proclamation, and the unfortunate Huguenotswere treated with great harshness and cruelty. Many of them, unwillingto change their religion and unable to endure their hard lot at home,left the country and sought refuge in England, Germany, Denmark, andHolland. The revocation of the Edict of Nantes was not due to thereligious zeal of Louis XIV. or of his ministers. Indeed at the verytime that Louis XIV. was engaged in dragooning the Huguenots into theCatholic Church he was in bitter conflict with the Pope, and wascommitted to a policy that seemed destined to end in national schism.Some of the French bishops, notably Fenelon, disapproved of thisattempt at conversion by violence, and Pope Innocent XI., having norepresentative in Paris at the time, instructed his nuncio at Londonto induce James II. of England to bring pressure to bear on Louis XIV.to favour the Huguenots.[11] Several times during the reign of Louisthe Calvinists rose in arms to defend their religion but withouteffect. After his death the decrees against them were not enforcedwith much severity, but it was only in 1787 that a measure of almostcomplete political equality was granted to them by Louis XVI. ----------

[1] Lefranc, /Les idees religieuses de Marguerite de Navarre/, 1898.

[2] Thomas, /Le Concordat de 1516/, 3 vols., 1910.

[3] Forneron, /Les Ducs de Guise/, 1877.

[4] De Ruble, /Antoine de Bourbon/, 2 vols., 1881-2.

[5] Marcks, /Gaspard von Coligny/, 1892. Delaborde, /Gaspard de Coligny/, 3 vols., 1879-83.

[6] De Ruble, /L'assassinat de Francois de Lorraine/, 1898.

[7] Rouquette, /L'inquisition protestante, Les Saint-Barthelemy calvinistes/, 1906.

[8] On the massacre of St. Bartholomew, cf. De la Ferriere, /La St. Barthelemy/, 1892. Fauriel, /Essai sur les evenements qui ont precede et amene la St. Barthelemy/, 1838. Bordier, /La St. Barthelemy et la critique moderne/, 1879. Hanoteaux, /Etudes historiques sur le XVIe et le XVIIe siecle en France/, 1886. Vacandard, /Etudes de critique et d'histoire religieuse/, 1905. Id., /Les papes et la St. Barthelemy/ (/Rev. du Cler. Francais/, 1904).

[9] Richard, /La papaute et la ligue francaise/, 1901. De Chalambert, /Histoire de la Ligue sous Henri III. et Henri IV./, 1898. De l'Epinois, /La Ligue et les papes/, 1886.

[10] Caillet, /L'Administration en France sous le ministere du cardinal de Richelieu/, 2 vols., 1863.

[11] Gerin, /Le Pape, Innocent XI. et la Revocation de l'Edit de Nantes/ (/Rev. des Quest. Historiques/, xxiv.).

(c) Calvinism in the Netherlands.

Cramer-Piper, /Bibliotheca Reformatoria Neerlandica/, 1903-11. Juste, /Histoire de la revolution des Pays Bas sous Philippe II./, 2 vols., 1863-7. De Lettenhove, /Les Huguenots et les Gueux/, 6 vols., 1882-5. Gossart, /La domination espagnole dans les Pays Bas a la fin du regne de Philippe II./, 1906. Holzwarth, /Der Abfall der Niederlanden/, 2 Bde, 1865-72.

The Netherlands formed part of the vast territories ruled over byCharles V. For many reasons it was not to be wondered at that thepeople should sympathise with the great religious revolt in Germany.They were allied closely with the Germans by blood and language. Likethem, too, they looked upon Spain and upon the Spaniards with feelingsof distrust. Again, as in other parts of the world, so too in theNetherlands the wealth of the Church had led to grave abuses as wellas to a loss of respect for ecclesiastical authority, the latter ofwhich was fostered in the minds of some by the spirit of mysticismthat flourished in the land of St. Thomas a Kempis.

Yet, notwithstanding these favourable circumstances, the Reformationmade little progress in the Netherlands during the reign of Charles V.He was a man who understood the people and who respected their rightsand privileges. He visited the country frequently, was always ready tolisten to their demands, and he took care not to offend their nationalinstincts by a display of Spanish troops or Spanish officials.Besides, having a freer hand to deal with the new religious movementin the Netherlands than he had in Germany, he was determined topreserve his hereditary dominions from the dimensions and civil strifethat had done so much to weaken the empire. He insisted on theproclamation and execution of the decree of the Diet of Worms againstLuther, forbade the spread of heretical writings, introduced theInquisition, and punished with great severity those who were foundguilty of attempting to tamper with the faith of the people. Butdespite his efforts the trouble that had broken out in theneighbouring countries, France and Germany, could not fail to find anecho in the Netherlands, and the views of Calvin and Luther found somesupport.

In 1555 Charles retired and was succeeded by his son Philip II. (1555-98). The new ruler unlike his father made no effort to win theaffections of his subjects in the Netherlands, or to attach them tohimself by bonds of loyalty. On the contrary he came amongst them onlytoo seldom, and after 1559 he never set foot in the country. He showedhimself careless about their commercial interests, regardless of theirconstitutional rights and privileges, and indifferent to theirnational prepossessions. Instead of relying on the native officialsand nobles to carry on the administration of the kingdom, he sought tostrengthen his own power by appointing Spaniards to offices of trustand by sending Spanish troops to suppress all symptoms of discontent.He set aside the Grand Council which by custom had the rights of aparliament, and without consultation with the authorities in theNetherlands he decided upon a new ecclesiastical division of thecountry. Hitherto there were only four bishops, whose Sees weresubject to foreign metropolitans. Philip decided that the time hadcome when the number of bishoprics should be increased, and thejurisdiction of foreign metropolitans should be abolished. The mainreason that influenced him to adopt this decision was the fact that,as matters stood, a complete and far-reaching scheme of reform couldnot be put into operation. In conjunction with Pope Paul IV. hearranged (1559) that the Spanish Netherlands should be placed underthe three newly-erected archiepiscopal Sees of Utrecht, Cambrai, andMechlin, and that suitable provision should be made for themaintenance of the new bishops out of the possessions of themonasteries and of the ecclesiastical institutions as well as from thecontributions of the laity.

Many of the nobles were already tired of the Spanish rule, and werenot unwilling to look favourably on the religious struggle as a meansof securing independence. They objected to several unconstitutionalacts of which the government of Philip II. had been guilty. Theydisliked Cardinal de Granvelle, the prime minister in the Netherlands,and insisted on his recall. They objected to the introduction of theInquisition, and they protested against the new diocesan division asunnecessary, burdensome to the country, and an infringement of therights and privileges of certain individuals. The clergy and people,whose positions were affected by the new arrangement, supported themstrongly in their opposition to this measure. The leaders of thismovement were the Count of Egmont and William of Orange,[1] the latterof whom was a clever politician of boundless ambitions, who was notwithout hope that a rebellion against Spain might be the means ofsecuring supreme power in the Netherlands. His brother, the Prince ofNassau, had adopted Calvinism, and William himself was not troubledwith any particularly strong religious convictions. By his marriagewith the daughter of Maurice of Saxony he sought to assure himself ofthe support of the German Protestant princes, while at the same timehe was intimately connected with the Huguenots of France, and was onterms of the closest friendship with Counts Egmont and Horn, both ofthem, though for different reasons, hostile to Philip II. For Williamand for many of his abettors religion was but a secondary issue,provided only that by means of a religious revolution the power ofSpain could be overthrown. Cardinal Granvelle, the minister of theDuchess of Parma,[2] who was then regent of the country, was a strongman and a dangerous opponent, for whose removal the party of Williamof Orange strove with all their might. They succeeded at last in 1564,but despite all their efforts they could not prevent the publicationof the decrees of the Council of Trent. They met together in thefollowing year (1565) and formed the union known as the Compromise ofBreda, nominally for the preservation of their constitutional rightsbut in reality to promote a political and religious rebellion. Manyearnest Catholics unaware of the motives that inspired the leaders ofthis movement lent them their support. Having strengthened themselvesby negotiations with some of the Protestant princes of Germany, therevolutionary party presented themselves before Margaret of Parma atBrussels to demand redress (1566). During the course of the interviewCount de Berlaymont referred to them as a crowd of "gueux" or beggars,and this was the name they adopted to designate their party (/LesGueux/).

Though they professed themselves willing to maintain the Catholicreligion the friends of William of Orange had strong leanings towardsProtestantism. Calvinist preachers flocked in from France; Calvinistcommunities began to be formed; and in districts where the party founditself powerful enough to do so, attacks were made on Catholicchurches and Catholic worship. These outrages served to indicate thereal tendency of the movement, and to drive into the opposite campmany Catholics who had joined the party merely to secure redress ofpolitical grievances. The Duchess of Parma, having failed to put anend to the disturbances by friendly negotiations, determined to employforce against the rebels. She was completely successful. William ofOrange fled to Germany, and Counts Egmont and Horn surrenderedthemselves to the mercy of the king (1567). Had Philip II. known howto take advantage of this victory he might have put an end toCalvinism in the Netherlands, for as yet the vast majority of theinhabitants were at heart loyal to the Catholic church.

But instead of coming to make a personal appeal for the allegiance ofhis subjects and of trying to win over the malcontents by a policy ofmoderation Philip II., more concerned for the suppression of heresythan for the maintenance of Spanish rule, sent the Duke of Alva[3](1567-72) with an army of ten thousand men to punish the offenders andto wipe out all traces of Calvinism. Alva was a soldier who haddistinguished himself on many a field against the Turks and againstFrance. His character is sufficiently indicated by the title "the ironduke" given him by those who knew him best. He had no faith indiplomacy or concession. For him martial law was the only means ofreducing rebels to subjection. The Duchess of Parma, unwilling toshare the responsibility of government with such an associate,petitioned for her recall, and the Duke of Alva was appointed regentof the Netherlands. Two leaders of the rebellion, Counts Egmont andHorn, were tried and put to death (1568), as were also many of theirfollowers. The goods of the rebels were confiscated, soldiers werequartered on the districts which were supposed to be sympathetic withthe movement, and martial law became the order of the day. But thecruel measures adopted by the Duke of Alva did not put an end to therebellion in the Netherlands. On the contrary, the contempt shown byhim for the constitution of the country and the rights of individualcitizens, the excessive taxation, and the license given to thesoldiers in their treatment of civilians served only to embitter theissue and to drive even moderate men into the path of rebellion.William of Orange, backed by his brother, Louis of Nassau, madedescents upon the country, while vessels manned by their supportersset themselves to do as much harm as possible to Spanish trade. Withthe aid of England they managed to capture the city and port of Briel(1572). Several of the northern states threw off the yoke of Spain andacknowledged William of Orange as their ruler, so that in a short timethe Provinces of Holland and Zeeland were practically lost to PhilipII. William of Orange tried to obscure the religious nature of thecampaign by proclaiming religious freedom, but his followers could notbe restrained. The Catholic churches were attacked, the clergy wereexpelled, and in 1572 nineteen priests were martyred for the faith atGorcum. Holland and Zeeland went over completely to Calvinism, norwere the southern provinces, which were still Catholic, contented withthe rule of Alva. Driven to desperation by his taxation andunconstitutional policy they formed a league with the followers ofWilliam of Orange to put an end to Spanish rule in the Netherlands.Philip II. began to realise that he had been unfortunate in hisselection of a governor. A deputation that was sent from theinsurgents was received kindly, and Alva's resignation of his officewas accepted.

In his place Don Louis Requesens was sent as governor of theNetherlands (1573-5). Though inferior to Alva in military skill he wasmuch superior to him in the arts of diplomacy and conciliation. Hewithdrew promptly the financial decrees that had caused such generaldiscontent, yielded to most of the demands made by the people, andoffered a general amnesty to those who would return to theirallegiance. It required all the skill of William of Orange to preventthe submission of his adherents. Disappointed by the removal of thegrievances that had provoked a national uprising, he was forced tohave recourse more and more to the religious issues in order tomaintain his power. He proclaimed himself the protector and championof Calvinism, and as such he could still count on the aid of thenorthern provinces. Unfortunately, too, at the very time when thesuccess of his policy of mildness seemed assured, Requesens diedleaving it to his successor to complete his work.

Don Juan of Austria, the natural son of Charles V., who had won renownthroughout the world by his annihilation of the Turkish fleet atLepanto, was appointed in his place. Before his arrival the southernand northern provinces had bound themselves together in thePacification of Ghent (1576). Don Juan was obliged to accept the termsof the Pacification and to dismiss the Spanish troops before hisauthority would be recognised. William of Orange, secure in the north,determined to occupy the southern provinces, but his public professionof Calvinism and the religious intolerance of his followers preventeda combined national effort. The Catholic nobles of the Walloonprovinces objected to the Protestant campaign that was being carriedon in the name of liberty, and showed themselves not unwilling to cometo terms with Don Juan. The latter, only too glad to meet them half-way, issued a very conciliatory decree (1577), which secured him thesupport of many of the Catholic party, and partly by force, partly bynegotiation he succeeded in winning back much of what had been lost.

On the death of Don Juan (1578) Alexander Farnese, son of the formerregent Margaret of Parma, was appointed his successor. Being somethingof a statesman as well as a soldier he lost no opportunity ofendeavouring to break the power of the Prince of Orange. He devoted agreat deal of his energies to the work of detaching the southernprovinces, which still remained Catholic, from the northern, which hadgone over to Calvinism. The intolerance of the Calvinists and theiropen violation of the religious freedom guaranteed to all partiestended to the success of his plans. During his term of office Belgiumreturned its allegiance to Spain, and this step put an end to thehopes entertained by the Calvinists of winning that country to theirside. Meanwhile the northern provinces were entirely in the hands ofWilliam of Orange. In 1579 the five provinces Holland, Zeeland,Friesland, Geldern, and Zutphen bound themselves together by a solemncompact in the Union of Utrecht under the name of the UnitedProvinces, and practically speaking established a Dutch republic. Theyagreed to make common cause in war and in peace, and appointed Williamof Orange as Stadtholder for life. A short time later (1581) Williamof Orange, notwithstanding all his proclamations regarding religiousliberty, forbade the public exercise of the Catholic religion, andrefused to allow the new Archbishop of Utrecht to take possession ofhis See. In these circumstances nothing remained for the Pope exceptto appoint a vicar-apostolic to take charge of the religious interestsof the Catholics, who formed two-fifths of the population of Holland,but even the vicar-apostolic was soon banished from the country.

In 1584 William of Orange was assassinated, and his son Maurice wasappointed to succeed him. The English Government anxious to strike ablow at Spain encouraged the Dutch to continue the war, and despatchedtroops to their assistance. After the defeat of the Spanish Armada thesituation was much more favourable to the rebels, and at last in 1609a twelve years' truce was concluded. On the expiration of the trucethe war was renewed without any very striking success on either side.Finally in the Peace of Westphalia (1648) the independence of theDutch republic was acknowledged by Spain. From the very beginning ofthe religious revolt in the Netherlands Calvinism was the sect mostfavoured by the people, as is evidenced by the /Confessio Belgica/ in1562. The University of Leyden decided in its favour, as did also theSynods of Dordrecht in 1574 and 1618. The Catholic minority in Hollandwere treated with the greatest severity, but in spite of all theefforts to induce them to change their faith many of the districtsremained completely Catholic.

The Catholic provinces, which remained true to Spain and to theCatholic Church, suffered very severely from the long-drawn-outstruggle, but despite the ravages of war they were soon the centre ofa great religious, literary and artistic revival. The University ofLouvain, founded in 1425, developed rapidly under the generouspatronage of the civil rulers. During the sixteenth century it wasrecognised as an important centre of learning whither scholars flockednot merely from the Low Countries but from all parts of Europe.Throughout the Reformation struggle Louvain and Douay, the latter ofwhich was founded in 1562 by Philip II. to assist in stemming therising tide of Calvinism, remained staunch defenders of Catholicorthodoxy, though the unfortunate controversies waged round thedoctrines of Baius and Jansenius did something to dim the glory of theuniversity to which both belonged. The Jesuits, too, renderedinvaluable service to religion and learning, particularly the men whohastened to offer their services to Father van Bolland in his famous/Acta Sanctorum/. Nor can it be forgotten that it was in these daysCatholic Belgium gave to the world the great Flemish school ofartists, amongst whom must be reckoned such men as Rubens, Van Dyck,and Jordaens. ----------

[1] Lacheret, /L'evolution religieuse de Guillaume le Taciturne/, 1904.

[2] Rachfal, /Margareta von Parma/, 1898.

[3] /Vita Ferdinandi Toletani, ducis Albani/, 1669.