CHAPTER IV

THE COUNTER-REFORMATION

For more than thirty years the new religious movement continued tospread with alarming rapidity. Nation after nation either fell awayfrom the centre of unity or wavered as to the attitude that should beadopted towards the conflicting claims of Rome, Wittenberg, andGeneva, till at last it seemed not unlikely that Catholicism was to beconfined within the territorial boundaries of Italy, Spain, andPortugal. That the world was well prepared for such an outburst hasbeen shown already,[1] but it is necessary to emphasise the fact thatthe real interests of religion played but a secondary part in thesuccess of the Protestant revolt. Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, and Knoxmay be taken as typical of the new apostles, and however gifted andenergetic these men may have been, yet few would care to contend thateither in their own lives or in the means to which they had recoursefor propagating their views they can be regarded as ideal religiousreformers.

Protestantism owed its success largely to political causes, andparticularly in the case of Lutheranism to its acknowledgment of theprinciple of royal supremacy. At its inception it was favoured by thealmost universal jealousy of the House of Habsburg and by the dangerof a Turkish invasion. If attention be directed to the countries whereit attained its largest measure of success, it will be found that inGermany this success was due mainly to the distrust of the Emperorentertained by the princes and their desire to strengthen their ownauthority against both the Emperor and the people; in Switzerland tothe political aspirations of the populous and manufacturing cantonsand their eagerness to resist the encroachments of the House of Savoy;in the Scandinavian North to the efforts of ambitious rulers anxiousto free themselves from the restrictions imposed upon their authorityby the nobles and bishops; in the Netherlands to the determination ofthe people to maintain their old laws and constitutions in face of thedomineering policy of Philip II.; in France to the attitude of therulers who disliked the Catholic Church as being the enemy ofabsolutism, and who were willing to maintain friendly relations withthe German Protestants in the hope of weakening the Empire by civilwar; in England, at first to the autocratic position of the sovereign,and later to a feeling of national patriotism that inspired Englishmento resent the interference of foreigners in what they regarded astheir domestic affairs; and in Scotland to the bitter rivalry of twofactions one of which favoured an alliance with France, the other, aunion with England. In all these countries the hope of sharing in theplunder of the Church had a much greater influence in determining theattitude of both rulers and nobles than their zeal for reform, as theleaders of the so-called Reformation had soon good reason to recogniseand to deplore.

Protestantism had reached the zenith of its power on the Continent in1555. At that time everything seemed to indicate its permanentsuccess, but soon under the Providence of God the tide began to turn,and instead of being able to make further conquests it found itimpossible to retain those that had been made. The few traces ofheresy that might have been detected in Italy, Spain, and Portugaldisappeared. France, thanks largely to the energy of the League andthe political schemes of Cardinal Richelieu, put an end to theCalvinist domination. Hungary and Poland were wrested to a greatextent from the influence of the Protestant preachers by the laboursof the Jesuits. Belgium was retained for Spain and for Catholicitymore by the prudence and diplomacy of Farnese than by the violence ofAlva; and in the German Empire the courageous stand made by some ofthe princes, notably Maximilian of Bavaria, delivered Austria,Bohemia, Bavaria and the greater part of Southern Germany fromProtestantism.

Many causes helped to bring about this striking reaction towardsCatholicism. Amongst the principal of these were the reforms initiatedby the Council of Trent, the rise of zealous ecclesiastics and aboveall of zealous popes, the establishment of new religious orders,especially the establishment of the Society of Jesus, and finally thedetermination of some of the Catholic princes to meet force by force.Mention should be made too of the wonderful outburst of missionaryzeal that helped to win over new races and new peoples in the East andthe West at a time when so many of the favoured nations of Europe hadrenounced or were threatening to renounce their allegiance to theChurch of Rome. ----------

[1] Chap. I.

(a) The Council of Trent.

Le Plat, /Monumentorum ad historiam concilii Tridentini spectantium amplissima collectio/, 7 vols., 1781-5. Theiner, /Acta genuina S. oecumenici Concilii Tridentini/, etc., 1874. /Concilium Tridentinum Diariorum, Actorum, Epistularum, Tractatuum Nova Collectio Edidit Societas Goerresiana/, vols. i., ii., iii. (/Diariorum/), iv., v. (/Actorum/), 1901-14. Pallavicino, /Istoria del Concilio di Trento/, 3 vols., 1664. Maynier, /Etude historique sur le concile de Trent/, 1874. Mendham, /Memoirs of the Council of Trent/, 1834. Marchese, /La riforma del clero secondo il concilio de Trento/, 1883. Deslandres, /Le concile de Trente, et la reforme du clerge/, 1906. /Canones et decreta sacrosancti oecumenici concilii Tridentini/.

For more than a century and a half reform of the Church "in its headand members" was the watchword both of the friends and the enemies ofreligion. Earnest men looked forward to this as the sole means ofstemming the tide of neo-paganism that threatened to engulf theChristian world, while wicked men hoped to find in the movement forreform an opportunity of wrecking the divine constitution that Christhad given to His Church. Popes and Councils had failed hitherto toaccomplish this work. The bishops had met at Constance and Basle, atFlorence and at Rome (5th Lateran Council), and had parted leaving theroot of the evil untouched. Notwithstanding all these failures thefeeling was practically universal that in a General Council lay theonly hope of reform, and that for one reason or another the RomanCuria looked with an unfavourable eye on the convocation of such anassembly. Whether the charge was true or false it was highlyprejudicial to the authority of the Holy See, and as a consequence ofit, when Luther and his followers appealed from the verdict of Leo X.to the verdict of a General Council, they evoked the open or secretsympathy of many, who had nothing but contempt for their religiousinnovations. Charles V., believing in the sincerity of their offer tosubmit themselves to the judgment of such a body, supported stronglythe idea of a council, as did also the Diets held at Nurnberg in 1523and 1524.

The hesitation of Adrian VI. (1522-3) and of Clement VII. (1523-34) toyield to these demands was due neither to their inability toappreciate the magnitude of the abuses nor of their desire to opposeany and every proposal of reform. The disturbed condition of thetimes, when so many individuals had fallen away from the faith andwhen whole nations formerly noted for their loyalty to the Popethreatened to follow in their footsteps, made it difficult to decidewhether the suggested remedy might not prove worse than the disease.The memory, too, of the scenes that took place at Constance and Basleand of the revolutionary proposals put forward in these assemblies,made the Popes less anxious to try a similar experiment with thepossibility of even worse results, particularly at a time when theunfriendly relations existing between the Empire, France, and Englandheld out but little hope for the success of a General Council. Asevents showed the delay was providential. It afforded an opportunityfor excitement and passion to die away; it helped to secure moderationin the views both of the radical and conservative elements in theChurch; and it allowed the issues in dispute to shape themselves moreclearly and to be narrowed down to their true proportions, therebyenabling the Catholic theologians to formulate precisely the doctrinesof the Church in opposition to the opinions of the Lutherans.

Clement VII. (1523-34), one of the de' Medici family, succeeded to thePapacy at a most critical period in the civil and religious history ofEurope. The time that he spent at the court of his cousin, Leo X., andthe traditions of his family and of his native city of Florence madeit almost impossible for him to throw himself into the work of reformor to adopt the stern measures that the situation demanded. Instead ofallying himself closely with Charles V. or Francis I. of France, orbetter still of preserving an attitude of strict neutrality towardsboth, he adopted a policy of vacillation joining now one side now theother, until the terrible sack of Rome by the infuriated and half-savage soldiery of Germany forced him to conclude an agreement withthe Emperor. During the earlier years of Clement VII.'s reign theGerman people, Catholic as well as Lutheran, demanded the convocationof a general or at least a national council, and their demands metwith the approval of Charles V. The naturally indolent temperament ofthe Pope, the fear that the eagerness for reform might develop into aviolent revolution, and the danger that a council dominated by theEmperor might be as distasteful to France and England as dangerous tothe rights and prerogatives of the Holy See, made him more willing toaccept the counsels of those who suggested delay. When peace was atlast concluded between the Pope and the Emperor (1529) Charles V. hadchanged his mind about the advisability of a General Council, havingconvinced himself in the meantime that more could be done for thecause of peace in his territories by private negotiations between thedifferent parties.

It was only on the accession of Paul III. (1534-49) that a reallyvigorous effort was made to undertake the work of reform. The newPope, a member of the Farnese family, was himself a brilliantHumanist, a patron of literature and art, well known for his strictand exemplary life as a priest, and deservedly popular both with theclergy and people of Rome. His one outstanding weakness was hispartiality towards his own relatives, on many of whom he conferredhigh positions both in church and state. In justice to him it shouldbe said, however, that the position of affairs in Rome and in Italymade such action less reprehensible than it might seem at first sight,and that he dealt severely with some of them, as for example, the Dukeof Parma and Piacenza, once he discovered that they were unworthy ofthe confidence that had been reposed in them. He signalised hispontificate by the stern measures he took for the reform of the RomanCuria, by the appointment of learned and progressive ecclesiasticslike Reginald Pole, Sadoleto, Caraffa, and Contarini to the college ofcardinals, and by the establishment of special tribunals to combatheresy.

After a preliminary agreement with the Emperor, Paul III. convoked theGeneral Council to meet at Mantua in 1537; but the refusal of theLutheran princes to send representatives, the prohibition issued byFrancis I. against the attendance of French bishops, and theunwillingness of the Duke of Mantua to make the necessary arrangementsfor such an assembly in his territory unless under impossibleconditions, made it necessary to prorogue the council to Vicenza in1538. As hardly any bishops had arrived at the time appointed it wasadjourned at first, and later on prorogued indefinitely. Negotiationswere, however, continued regarding the place of assembly. The Pope wasanxious that the council should be held in an Italian city, whileCharles V., believing that the Lutherans would never consent to go toItaly or to accept the decrees of an Italian assembly, insisted that aGerman city should be selected. In the end as a compromise Trent wasagreed upon by both parties, and the council was convoked once more tomeet there in 1542. The refusal of the Lutherans to take part in theproposed council, the unwillingness of Francis I. to permit any of hissubjects to be present, and the threatened war between France and theEmpire, made it impossible for the council to meet. Finally, on theconclusion of the Peace of Crepy (1544), which put an end to the warwith France, the council was convoked to meet at Trent in March 1545,and Cardinals del Monte, Reginald Pole, and Marcello Cervini wereappointed to represent the Pope. When the day fixed for the openingceremony arrived, a further adjournment was rendered imperative owingto the very sparse attendance of bishops. The First Session was heldon the 13th December 1545, and the second in January 1546. There werethen present in addition to the legates and theologians only fourarchbishops, twenty-one bishops, and five generals of religiousorders.

These two preliminary sessions were given over almost entirely to adiscussion of the procedure that should be followed. In the end it wasagreed that the legates should propose to the council the questions onwhich a decision should be given, that these questions should beexamined by committees of bishops aided by theologians and jurists,that the results of these discussions should be brought before a fullcongregation of the bishops, and that when a decision had been agreedto the formal decrees should be promulgated in a public session. Thenovel method of voting by nations, introduced for the first time atConstance and Basle, was rejected in favour of individual voting, adefinitive vote being allowed only to bishops, generals of religiousorders and abbots (one vote to every three abbots). Procurators ofabsent bishops were not allowed to vote, though later on a specialconcession was made in favour of some German bishops detained at homeby the serious religious condition of their dioceses. The legates wereanxious that the dogmatic issues raised by the Lutherans should bedealt with at once, while the Emperor was strongly in favour ofbeginning with a comprehensive scheme of reform. By this time he hadmade up his mind to put down his opponents in Germany by force ofarms, and he believed that if nothing were done in the meantime towiden the breach the defeat of the Lutheran princes might make themmore willing to take part in the council. As a compromise it wasagreed that doctrine and discipline should be discussedsimultaneously, and, hence, at most of the public sessions two decreeswere published, one on matters of faith, the other on reform (/DeReformatione/).

It was only at the 4th public session (8th April 1546) that the firstdoctrinal decree could be issued. Since the Lutherans had called inquestion the value of Tradition as a source of divine revelation, andhad denied the canonicity of several books accepted hitherto asinspired, it was fitting that the council should begin its work bydefining that revelation has been handed down by Tradition as well asby the Scriptures, of which latter God is the author both as regardsthe Old Testament and the New. In accordance with the decrees ofprevious councils a list of the canonical books of the Scriptures wasdrawn up. Furthermore, it was defined that the sacred writings shouldnot be interpreted against the meaning attached to them by the Church,nor against the unanimous consent of the Fathers, that the VulgateVersion, a revised edition of which should be published immediately,is authentic, that is to say, accurate as regards faith and morals,and that for the future no one was to print, publish, or retain anedition of the Scriptures unless it had been approved by the localbishop.

The next subject proposed for examination was Original Sin. TheEmperor showed the greatest anxiety to secure a delay, and at a hintfrom him several of the Spanish bishops tried to postpone a decisionby prolonging the discussions and by raising the question of theImmaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin. That the Fathers of Trentwere not opposed to this doctrine is clear enough from the decreesthey formulated, but the majority of them were of opinion that purelydomestic controversies among Catholic theologians should be leftuntouched. In the fifth general session (17th June 1546) it wasdefined that by his transgression of the commandment of God the headof the human race had forfeited the sanctity and justice in which hehad been created, and had suffered thereby in both soul and body, thatin doing so he had injured not merely himself but all his descendants,to whom Original Sin is transmitted not by imitation merely but bypropagation, that the effects of this sin are removed by the sacramentof Baptism, necessary alike for adults and infants, and that theconcupiscence, which still remains in a man even after baptism hasproduced its effects, is not in itself sinful. It was declared,furthermore, that in the decrees regarding the universality ofOriginal Sin it was not intended to include the Blessed Virgin or toweaken the binding force of the decrees issued by Sixtus IV. regardingher Immaculate Conception.

The way was now cleared for the question of Justification.[1] This wasthe doctrine on which Luther first found himself in disagreement withthe Church, and which he put forward in his sermons as the foundationof his new gospel. The importance of the subject both in itself and inthe circumstances of the time cannot be exaggerated, nor can it becontended that the Fathers at Trent failed to realise theirresponsibilities or to give it the attention it deserved. Had theydone nothing else except to give to the world such a complete andluminous exposition of the Catholic teaching on Justification theirmeeting would not have been held in vain. In the 6th public session(13th January 1547), at which there were present besides the legates,ten archbishops, forty-two bishops, two procurators, five generals ofreligious orders, two abbots and forty-three theologians, it wasdefined that, though by the sin of Adam man had lost original justiceand had suffered much, he still retained free-will, that God had beenpleased to promise redemption through the merits of Jesus Christ, andthat baptism or the desire for baptism is necessary for salvation. Thedecrees dealt also with the method of preparing for Justification,with its nature, causes, and conditions, with the kind of faithrequired in opposition to the confidence spoken of by the Reformers,with the necessity and possibility of observing the commandments, withthe certainty of Justification, perseverance, loss of Grace by mortalsin, and with merit. The 7th public session (3rd March) was given todecrees regarding the Sacraments in general and Baptism andConfirmation in particular.

Meanwhile the long-expected civil war had begun in Germany, and Europeawaited with anxiety the result of a struggle upon which suchmomentous interests might depend. Charles, supported by most of theCatholic and not a few of the Protestant princes, overthrew the forcesof the Elector of Saxony and of Philip of Hesse (1547) and by hisvictory found himself for the first time master in his ownterritories. Coupled with rejoicing at the success of the imperialarms there was also the fear in many minds that the Emperor might usehis power to overawe the Council, and force it to agree tocompromises, which, however useful for the promotion of unity inGermany, might be subversive of the doctrine and discipline of theChurch and dangerous to the prerogatives of the Holy See. Theselection of Trent as the place of assembly for the council was neververy satisfactory to the Pope, but now in the changed circumstances ofthe Empire it was looked upon as positively dangerous. An epidemicthat made its appearance in the city afforded an excellent pretext forsecuring a change of venue, and at the 8th public session (11th March1547) a majority of the members present voted in favour of retiring toBologna. The legates accompanied by most of the bishops departedimmediately, while the bishops who supported the Emperor remained atTrent. For a time the situation was critical in the extreme, but underthe influence of the Holy Ghost moderate counsels prevailed with bothparties, and after a couple of practically abortive sessions atBologna the council was prorogued in September 1549. A few monthslater, November 1549, Paul III. passed to his reward.

In the conclave that followed the cardinals were divided into threeparties, namely, the Imperial, the French, and the followers of theFarnese family. By an agreement between the two latter Cardinal delMonte was elected against the express prohibition of Charles V., andtook as his title Julius III.[2] (1550-5). He was a man of goodeducation, of sufficiently liberal views, and with a rather largeexperience acquired as a prominent official in Rome and as one of thelegates at the Council of Trent. While acting in the latter capacityhe had come into sharp conflict with the Emperor, but as Pope he foundhimself forced by the conduct of the Farnese family to cultivatefriendly relations with his former opponent. The alliance concludedwith the Emperor turned out disastrously enough owing to the Frenchvictories in Italy during the campaign of 1552, and in consequence ofthis Julius III. ceased to take an active part in the struggle betweenthese two countries. During the earlier years of his reign the Popetook earnest measures to push forward the work of reform, patronisedthe Jesuits, established the /Collegium Germanicum/ at Rome for theuse of ecclesiastical students from Germany, and succeeded inrestoring England to communion with the Holy See, but as time passed,discouraged by the failure of his cherished projects, he adopted apolicy of /laissez-faire/, and like many of his predecessors laidhimself open to damaging though to a great extent unfounded charges ofnepotism.

Julius III. was anxious to continue the work of reform that had beenbegun in Trent. In 1550 he issued a Bull convoking the council to meetonce more in Trent on the 1st May 1551. When the papal legatesattended at the time fixed for the opening of the council they foundit necessary owing to the small numbers present to adjourn it at firsttill the 1st September, and later till the 11th October. On account ofthe unfriendly relations existing between France and the Empireregarding the Duchy of Parma, and to the alliance of the Pope and theEmperor, the King of France would not permit the French bishops toattend. The majority of the bishops present were from Italy, Germany,and Spain. In the 13th public session (11th Oct. 1551), at which therewere present in addition to the legates, ten archbishops and fifty-four bishops, decrees were passed regarding the Real Presence ofChrist in the Eucharist, Transubstantiation, the institution,excellence and worship of the Eucharist, its reservation and theconditions necessary for its worthy reception. In the 14th publicsession (25th Nov. 1551) the council dealt with the sacraments ofPenance and Extreme Unction. In the meantime the Emperor wasnegotiating with the Lutherans with the object of inducing them tosend representatives to Trent. Some of their procurators had arrivedalready, amongst them being the well-known theologian and historianJohn Sleidanus of Strassburg, but their demands, including thewithdrawal of the decrees contravening the articles of the AugsburgConfession and the submission of the Pope to the authority of aGeneral Council, were of such an extravagant character that they couldnot be entertained. While the subject was under consideration newsarrived that Maurice of Saxony had gone over to the side of theLutherans, that there was no army in the field to hold him in check,that the passes of the Tyrol were occupied by his troops, and that anadvance upon Trent was not impossible. Many of the bishops took theirdeparture immediately, and in April 1552 against the wishes of a fewSpanish bishops the council was suspended for two years. As a matterof fact close on ten years were to elapse before the work that hadbeen interrupted could be resumed.

On the death of Julius III. (1555) Marcellus II. succeeded, but hisreign was cut short by death (22 days). In the conclave that followedCardinal Pietro Caraffa, the first general and in a certain sense thefounder of the Theatines, received the required majority of votesnotwithstanding the express veto of the Emperor. He was proclaimedPope under the title of Paul IV.[3] (1555-9). During his life as anecclesiastic the new Pope had been remarkable for his rigid views, hisascetic life, and his adherence to Scholastic as opposed to Humanistviews. As nuncio in Spain he had acquired a complete distrust of theSpanish rulers, nor was this bad impression likely to be removed bythe treatment he received from the Austro-Spanish party when appointedArchbishop of Naples. The conclusion of the religious peace ofAugsburg (1555) and the proclamation of Ferdinand I. were notcalculated to win the sympathy of Paul IV. for the House of Habsburg.Hence, he put himself in communication with the Italian opponents ofPhilip II. of Spain, and concluded an alliance with France. The Frencharmy despatched to Naples under the leadership of the Duke of Guisewas out-manoeuvred completely by the Spanish Viceroy, the Duke of Alva,who followed up his success by invading the Papal States andcompelling the Pope to sue for peace (1556). The unfriendly relationsexisting between Paul IV. and Philip II. of Spain, the husband ofQueen Mary I., rendered difficult the work of effecting a completereconciliation between England and the Holy See. Owing to thedisturbed condition of Europe and the attitude of the Emperor and theKing of Spain, it would have been impossible for the Pope even had hebeen anxious to do so to re-convoke the council. He would not so muchas consider the idea of selecting Trent or any German city as a fitplace for such an assembly, while the Austro-Spanish rulers wereequally strong against Rome or any other place in Italy. But of hisown initiative Paul IV. took strong measures to reform the RomanCuria, established a special commission in Rome to assist him in thiswork, stamped out by vigorous action heretical opinions that began tomanifest themselves in Italy, and presided frequently himself atmeetings of the Inquisition. He even went so far as to arrest CardinalMorone on a suspicion of heresy, and to summon Cardinal Pole to appearbefore the tribunal of the Inquisition. By the Romans he had beenbeloved at first on account of his economic administration whereby thetaxes were reduced considerably, but the disastrous results of the waragainst Philip II. in Naples effaced the memory of the benefits he hadconferred, and he died detested by the people. After his death thecity was at the mercy of the mob, who plundered and robbed wholesalefor close on a fortnight before order could be restored.

In the conclave that followed the two great parties among thecardinals were the French and the Austro-Spanish, neither of which,however, was strong enough to procure the election of its nominee.After a struggle lasting three months Cardinal Giovanni Angelo de'Medici, who was more or less neutral, was elected by acclamation. Hewas proclaimed under the title of Pius IV. (1559-65). The new Pope hadnothing of the stern morose temperament of his predecessor. He was ofa mild disposition, something of a scholar himself, inclined to act asa patron towards literature and art, and anxious to forward theinterests of religion by kindness rather than by severity. He wasdetermined to proceed with the work of the council at all costs, andas a first step in that direction he devoted all his energies to theestablishment of friendly relations with the Emperor Ferdinand I. andwith Spain. In all his schemes for reform he was supported loyally byhis nephew, Charles Borromeo, whom he created cardinal, and to whom heentrusted the work of preparing the measures that should be submittedto the future council.

When all arrangements had been made the Bull of re-convocation,summoning the bishops to meet at Trent at Easter 1561, was publishedin November 1560. Though not expressly stated in the document, yet itwas implied clearly enough that the assembly was not to be a newcouncil but only the continuation of the Council of Trent. This wasnot satisfactory to France, which demanded a revision of some of thedecrees passed at Trent, and which objected strongly to the selectionof Trent as the meeting-place. The Emperor Ferdinand I. and Philip II.expressed their anxiety to further the project of the Pope. Delegateswere sent from Rome to interview the Lutheran princes and theologians,but only to meet everywhere with sharp rebuffs. In an assembly held atNaumburg in 1561 the Lutherans refused to attend the council, unlessthey were admitted on their own terms, while many of the Catholicprinces and bishops showed no enthusiasm to respond to the papalconvocation. When the legates arrived to open the council they foundso few bishops in attendance that nothing could be done except toprepare the subjects that should be submitted for discussion.

It was only on the 15th January 1562 the first (17th) public sessioncould be held. There were present in addition to the legates, threepatriarchs, eleven archbishops, forty bishops, four generals ofreligious orders, and four abbots. From the very beginning the legatesfound themselves in a very difficult position owing to the spirit ofhostility against the Holy See manifested by some of the bishops andrepresentatives of the civil powers. At this session very little wasaccomplished except to announce the formal opening of the council, tofix the date for the next public session, and to prepare safe conductsfor the delegates of the Protestant princes. Similarly in the 18thpublic session (25th February) no decrees of any importance could bepassed. Despite the earnest efforts of the presidents it was foundimpossible to make any progress. Grave differences of opinionmanifested themselves both within and without the council. Thequestion whether bishops are bound to reside in their dioceses bydivine or ecclesiastical law gave rise to prolonged and angry debates.Spain demanded that it should be stated definitely that the councilwas only a prolongation of the council held previously at Trent, whileFrance insisted that it should be regarded as a distinct andindependent assembly. The Emperor put forward a far-reaching scheme ofreform parts of which it was entirely impossible for the legates toaccept.[4] At length after many adjournments the 21st public sessionwas held (16th July 1562), in which decrees regarding the BlessedEucharist were passed. It was defined that there was no divine lawobliging the laity to receive Holy Communion under both kinds, thatthe Church has power to make arrangements about Communion so long asit does not change the substance of the sacrament, that Christ isreally present whole and entire both under the appearance of bread andunder the appearance of wine, that infants, who have not come to theuse of reason, are not bound to receive Holy Communion because theyhave been regenerated already by baptism. At this session there werepresent six cardinals, three patriarchs, nineteen archbishops, and onehundred and forty-eight bishops.

In the 22nd public session (17th Sept. 1562) decrees were publishedconcerning the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. It was laid down that inplace of the sacrifices and the priesthood of the Old Law Christ setup a new sacrifice, namely the Mass, the clean oblation foretold bythe prophet Malachy (Mal. I., 11) and a new priesthood, to whom thecelebration of the Mass was committed, that the sacrifice of the Massis the same sacrifice as that of the Cross having the same high priestand the same victim, that the Mass may be offered up for the dead aswell as for the living, that it may be offered up in honour of theSaints, that though the faithful should be advised to receive HolyCommunion whenever they assist at Mass, yet private Masses at whichnobody is present for Communion are not unlawful, and that, though itwas not deemed prudent to allow the sacrifice to be offered up in thevulgar tongue, it was the earnest wish of the council that priestsshould explain the ceremonies of the Mass to the people especially onSundays and holidays. The question of allowing the laity to receivethe chalice was discussed at length, and it was decided finally tosubmit it to the decision of the Pope. Pius IV. did, indeed, make aconcession on this point in favour of several districts in Austria;but as the Catholics did not desire such a concession and theLutherans refused to accept it as insufficient the indult remainedpractically a dead-letter, and later on was withdrawn.

The next session was fixed for November 1562 but on account of verygrave difficulties that arose a much more prolonged adjournment wasrendered necessary. During this interval the old controversies brokeout with greater violence and bitterness, and more than once itappeared as if the council would break up in disorder; but theperseverance, tact, and energy of the new legates, Cardinals Moroneand Navagero, strengthened by the prudent concessions made by thePope, averted the threatened rupture, and made it possible for theFathers to accomplish the work for which they had been convoked.Cardinal Guise[5] (de Lorraine) accompanied by a number of Frenchbishops and theologians arrived at Trent in November 1562. His arrivalstrengthened the hands of those Spanish bishops who were insisting onhaving it defined that the obligation of episcopal residence was /dejure divino/. The question had been adjourned previously at therequest of the legates, but with the advent of the discussion on thesacrament of Orders further adjournment was impossible. Several of thebishops maintained that the obligation must be /jure divino/, becausethe episcopate itself was /de jure divino/. From this they concludedthat the bishops had their jurisdiction immediately from Christ, notmediately through the Pope as some of the papal theologiansmaintained. Consequently they asserted that the subordination of thebishops to the Pope was not, therefore of divine origin, therebyraising at once the whole question of the relations of a generalcouncil to a Pope and the binding force of the decrees regarding thesuperiority of a council passed at Constance and Basle.

At the same time danger threatened the council from another quarter.The Emperor, Ferdinand I. had put forward a very comprehensive schemeof reform. Some portions of this were considered by the legates to beprejudicial to the rights of the Holy See, and were therefore rejectedby them after consultation with the Pope. Ferdinand annoyed by theiraction asserted that there was no liberty at the council, that it wasbeing controlled entirely from Rome, and that the assembly at Trenthad become merely a machine for confirming what had been decreedalready on the other side of the Alps. At his request several of hissupporters left Trent and joined him at Innsbruck, where a kind ofopposition assembly was begun. Cardinal Morone, realising fully theseriousness of the situation, betook himself to Innsbruck (April 1563)for a personal interview with the Emperor. The meeting had the resultof clearing away many of the misunderstandings that had arisen, and ofbringing about a compromise. At the same time the Pope wrote a letterpointing out that it was only reasonable that the Head of the Church,not being present at the council, should be consulted by his legatesin all important matters that might arise.

Meanwhile the council was still engaged in discussing the authority ofthe bishops. On the ground that the Fathers should define at one andthe same time both the rights of the bishops and the rights of theHoly See Cardinal Guise, who represented the Gallican school ofthought, brought forward certain proposals highly derogatory to theprerogatives of the Pope. In face of this counter-move the legateswere firm but conciliatory. They pointed out that the whole questionof the jurisdiction of the Holy See had been decided already by theCouncil of Florence and that the decrees of Florence could not bewatered down at Trent. On this question the Italian bishops foundthemselves supported by the vast majority of the Spanish, Austro-German and Portuguese representatives; but in deference to the requestof the Pope, who wished that nothing should be defined unless with theunanimous consent of the Fathers, and to the feelings of the French,whose secession from the council was anticipated, it was agreed toissue no decree on the subject. As the supreme authority of the Popehad been recognised implicitly by the council[6] no definition wasrequired.

As a result of the negotiations inside and outside the council it waspossible to hold the 23rd public session on the 15th July 1563. Inthis it was defined that the priesthood of the New Law was institutedby Christ, that there were seven orders in the Church about two ofwhich, the priesthood (/de sacerdotibus/) and the diaconate (/dediaconis/) express mention is made in the Scriptures, that the bishopswho have succeeded to the place of the Apostles pertain especially tothe hierarchy and are superior to priests, that neither the consent ofthe people nor of the civil power is necessary for the valid receptionof orders, and that bishops who are appointed by the authority of theRoman Pontiff are true bishops.[7] The question whether the duty ofepiscopal residence is /de jure divino/, about which such a protractedand heated controversy had been waged, was settled amicably bydeciding that the bishops as pastors are bound by divine command toknow their flocks, and that they cannot do this unless they reside intheir dioceses. At this session there were present four cardinals,three patriarchs, twenty-five archbishops and one hundred and ninety-three bishops.

Many of the bishops were anxious to return to their dioceses, andnearly all of them hoped for a speedy conclusion of the council. ThePope, the Emperor, and the King of France were in agreement, thoughfor different reasons, in endeavouring to dissolve the assembly assoon as possible. The sacrament of Matrimony was next proposed fordiscussion. The French party wished that marriages contracted withoutthe consent of the parents as well as clandestine marriages should bedeclared invalid, but the council refused to make the validity ofmarriage dependent upon parental consent. In deference to the wishesof Venice, which stood in close relation to the Greeks, it was agreedto define merely that the Church does not err when she states inaccordance with the apostolic and evangelic teaching that the bond ofmarriage is not broken by adultery. In the 24th public session (11thNov. 1563) the decrees on Matrimony were proclaimed.

The greatest anxiety was displayed on all sides to bring the work to aconclusion. The action of the papal legates in proposing that theinterference of Catholic rulers in ecclesiastical affairs should beconsidered and if necessary reformed did not tend to delay thedissolution. The princes were most anxious to reform the Pope andclergy, but they were determined not to allow any weakening of theirown so-called prerogatives. In accordance with the general desire theaddresses were cut short, and so rapid was the progress made that thelast public session was held on the 3rd and 4th December 1563. Thedecrees on Purgatory, on the honour to be paid to relics and images ofSaints and on Indulgences were passed. It was agreed, furthermore,that in regard to fast days and holidays the usage of the Roman Churchshould be followed, and that the Holy See should undertake thepreparation of a new edition of the missal and breviary. The decreesthat had been passed under Paul III. and Julius III. were read andapproved. The legates were requested to obtain the approval of theHoly Father for the decisions of the council, and Cardinal Guise inthe name of the bishops returned thanks to the Pope, the Emperor, theambassadors of the Catholic nations, and to the legates. Finally theFathers subscribed their names to the acts of the council. There werethen present six cardinals, three patriarchs, twenty-five archbishops,one hundred and sixty-seven bishops, and nineteen procurators.

The Council of Trent met in peculiarly difficult circumstances, and itcarried on its work in face of great opposition and disappointments.More than once it was interrupted for a long period, and more thanonce, too, it was feared by many that it would result in promotingschism rather than unity. But under the Providence of God the dangerswere averted, the counsels of despair were rejected, the arms of itsenemies were weakened, and the hearts of the faithful children of theChurch throughout the world filled with joy and gratitude. It founditself face to face with a strong and daily increasing party, whorejected the authority that had been accepted hitherto withoutdifficulty, and who called in question many of the most cherisheddoctrines and practices of the Catholic world. Without allowingthemselves to be involved in purely domestic disputes among Catholictheologians or to be guided by the advice of those who sought tosecure peace by means of dishonourable compromises, the Fathers ofTrent set themselves calmly but resolutely to sift the chaff from thewheat, to examine the theories of Luther in the light of the teachingof the Scriptures and the tradition of the Church as contained in thewritings of the Fathers, and to give to the world a clear-cutexposition of the dogmas that had been attacked by the heretics. Neverhad a council in the Church met under more alarming conditions; neverhad a council been confronted with more serious obstacles, and neverdid a council confer a greater service on the Christian world than didthe 19th ecumenical council held at Trent (1545-63).

It was of essential importance that the council should determine thematters of faith that had been raised, but it was almost equallyimportant that it should formulate a satisfactory scheme of reform.Reform of the Church in its Head and members was on the lips of manywhose orthodoxy could not be suspected long before Luther had madethis cry peculiarly his own, the better thereby to weaken the loyaltyof the faithful to the Holy See. As in matters of doctrine so also inmatters of discipline the Council of Trent showed a thoroughappreciation of the needs of the Church, and if in some things itfailed to go as far as one might be inclined to desire the fault isnot to be attributed to the Popes or the bishops, but rather to thesecular rulers, whose jealousies and recriminations were one of thegreatest impediments to the progress of the council, and who, whilecalling out loudly for the reform of others, offered a stubbornresistance to any change that might lessen their own power over theChurch, or prevent the realisation of that absolute royalty, towardswhich both the Catholic and Protestant rulers of the sixteenth centurywere already turning as the ultimate goal of their ambitions.

The council struck at the root of many of the abuses that afflictedthe Christian world by suppressing plurality of benefices, provisions,and expectancies, as well as by insisting that, except in case ofpresentation by a university, nobody could be appointed to a beneficeunless he had shown that he possessed the knowledge necessary for theproper discharge of his duty. It determined the method of electingbishops, commanded them to reside in their dioceses unless exemptedfor a time on account of very special reasons, to preach to theirpeople, to hold regular visitations of their parishes, to celebratediocesan synods yearly, to attend provincial synods at least once inthree years, and to safeguard conscientiously the ecclesiasticalproperty committed to their charge.

It put an end to abuses in connexion with the use of ecclesiasticalcensures, indulgences, and dispensations, and ordained that all causesof complaint should be brought before the episcopal court before beingcarried to a higher tribunal. It made useful regulations concerningthose who should be admitted into diocesan chapters, defined therelations between the bishop and his canons, and arranged for theadministration of the dioceses by the appointment of vicars-capitularto act during the interregnum. It ordered the secular clergy to bemindful always of the spiritual dignity to which they had been called,not to indulge in any business unworthy of their sacred office,condemned concubinage in the strongest terms, and commanded priests tolook after the religious education of the young, to preach to theirflocks on Sundays and holidays, and to attend zealously to thespiritual wants of the souls committed to their charge.

The council recognised, furthermore, that the best method of securinga high standard of priestly life was the careful training ofecclesiastical students. Hence it ordained that in the individualdioceses seminaries should be established, where those who weredesirous of entering the clerical state should live apart from theworld, and where they should receive the education and disciplinenecessary for the successful discharge of their future obligations. Itput an end to many abuses of monastic life, suppressed questing foralms, drew up rules for the reception of novices, gave the bishoppower to deal with irregularities committed outside the monasteries,and subjected all priests both regular and secular to episcopalauthority by insisting on the necessity of Approbation for all whowished to act as confessors. Finally, in order to apply a remedyagainst the many scandals and crimes that resulted from secretmarriages, the Council of Trent laid it down that those marriages onlyshould be regarded as valid which should be contracted in the presenceof the parish priest of one of the contracting parties and twowitnesses.

On the conclusion of the Council of Trent Cardinal Morone hastened toRome with the decrees to seek the approval of the Pope. Some of theRoman officials, who felt themselves aggrieved by the reforms, advisedthe Pope to withhold his approval of certain decrees, but Pius IV.rejected this advice. On the 26th January 1564 he issued the Bull ofconfirmation, and set himself to work immediately to put the reformsinto execution. To assist him in this design he appointed acommission, one of the ablest members of which was his own nephew,Charles Borromeo, and he despatched representatives to the princes andbishops to ensure their acceptance of the decrees. As an example toothers he established the Roman Seminary for the education of priestsfor the city. All the princes of Italy received the decrees in afriendly spirit and allowed their publication in their territories, asdid also the King of Portugal. Philip II. acted similarly except thathe insisted upon the addition of a saving clause "without prejudice toroyal authority." The Emperor Ferdinand I. hesitated for some time,but at last he accepted them in 1566. In France very little oppositionwas raised to the dogmatic decrees, but as several of the practicalreforms, notably those relating to marriages, benefices,ecclesiastical punishments, etc., were opposed to civil law,permission to publish them was refused.

A profession of faith based on the decrees of the Council of Trent andof previous councils was drawn up by Pius IV. (13th Nov. 1564), andits recitation made obligatory on those who were appointed toecclesiastical benefices or who received an academic degree as well ason converts from Protestantism. The Catechism of the Council of Trent(/Catechismus Romanus/)[8] was prepared at the command of Pius V. andpublished in 1566. It is a valuable work of instruction, approved bythe highest authority in the Church, and should be in the hands of allthose who have care of souls. ----------

[1] Hefner, /Die Enstehungsgeschichte des trienter Rechtfertigungsdekrets/, 1909.

[2] Pastor, op. cit., v., Ciacconius, /Vitae et res gestae Pontificum Roman/, 1677. (741-98).

[3] Bromato, /Storia di Paolo IV./, 1748.

[4] Kassourtz, /Die Reformvorschlage Kaiser Ferdinands I. auf dem Konzil von Trient/, 1906.

[5] Guillemin, /Le Cardinal de Lorraine, son influence politique et religieuse/, 1881.

[6] Denzinger, /Enchiridion/, 11th edition, 1908 (nos. 859, 903, 968, etc.)

[7] Op. cit., nos. 958-69.

[8] English translations by Donovan (1829), Buckley (1852), and Dr. Hagan (1912).

(b) The Reforming Activity of the Popes.

Pastor, /Geschichte der Papste im Zeitalter der Renaissance und der Glaubenspaltung/ (Eng. Trans. /History of the Popes/). Ciacconius, /Vitae et res gestae Roman. Pontificum/, 1688. Ranke, /Die Romischen Papste/ (vols. 37-39), 1894 (Eng. Trans., 1847). Von Reumont, /Geschichte der Stadt Rom./, 3 Bde, 1867-70. Artaud de Montor, /History of the Popes/, 1867. Theiner, /Annales ecclesiastici/, etc., Rome, 1856.

The Council of Trent had accomplished the work for which it wascalled. Though it failed to extinguish the rising flames of heresy orto restore peace to the Christian world, it had swept away most of theglaring abuses that had proved the main source of Luther's success,and rendered impossible for the future any misunderstanding about thedoctrines that had been called in question. The Catholic Church,purified by the severe trials through which she had passed, stoodforth once again active and united under the leadership of theSuccessor of St. Peter, still face to face it is true with a powerfulopposition, but an opposition on which the disintegrating influence ofprivate judgment was already making itself felt. Thus the foundationsof the great Catholic Counter-Reformation were laid securely, and amovement was begun which stayed the further advance of Protestantism,secured the allegiance of individuals and nations that were wavering,and won back many who had been seduced from the faith during the earlydays of the religious upheaval.

But if the labours of the Fathers of Trent were to be productive ofthe good results that might be anticipated, earnest, religious,energetic Popes were required to give a lead to their spiritualchildren, whose courage had been damped by over thirty years of almostuninterrupted defeats, to put into force the valuable reforms that hadbeen planned with such minute care, and above all to make the courtand city of Rome an example for the princes and people of the world.Here, again, the providence of God watching over His Church wasmanifested in a striking manner. Pius IV. deserves to be rememberedwith gratitude by all future generations for the part that he took inbringing to a successful conclusion the Council of Trent in face ofalmost insuperable difficulties, for having taken such energetic andwithal such prudent action to secure the acceptance of its decrees andtheir reduction into practice, and for having given to Rome and to theCatholic Church so gifted, so saintly, and so disinterested anecclesiastic as his nephew, the Cardinal-Archbishop of Milan, St.Charles Borromeo.

On the death of Pius IV. the conclave, mainly through the exertions ofCardinal Borromeo, elected Cardinal Ghisleri, who took the title ofPius V.[1] (1566-72) in memory of his predecessor. In his youth thefuture Pope joined the Order of St. Dominic, and for years had actedas professor of theology, master of novices, and prior. He was notedspecially for his simplicity and holiness of life, a holiness which itmay be remarked had nothing in common with the morose rigour of PaulIV., for his humility, his love of silence and meditation, and for hiskindness towards the poor and the suffering. As a man of goodeducation and of conservative tendencies he was summoned to assistCardinal Caraffa, then president of the Holy Office, and when thelatter became Pope he was created cardinal and appointed GrandInquisitor. After his election Pius V. followed still the strict lifeof fasting and prayer to which he had been accustomed as a Dominicanfriar. He did not seek to create positions, or to carve out estatesfrom the papal territories for his relatives. Anxious to promote thetemporal as well as the spiritual welfare of the people in histemporal dominions he took steps to see that justice was meted out topoor and rich, banished women of loose character from the streets, putan end to degrading amusements, enforced the observance of the Sunday,and, backed by St. Charles Borromeo and the princes of Italy, hechanged the whole face of the capital and the country. Rome was nolonger the half-pagan city of the days of Leo X., nor yet did itpartake of the savage rigour of Geneva.

Pius V. was most anxious to enforce the decrees of Trent, and it wasfor the accomplishment of this object that he had prepared for theinstruction of pastors the Catechism of the Council of Trent. Incompliance with the wishes of the bishops he published also a revisededition of the Roman Breviary and of the Missal. With the Catholicprinces of Europe he maintained very friendly relations. He furnishedsupplies to Charles IX. of France in his struggle with the Huguenots,and to Philip II. of Spain in his wars against the Calvinists of theNetherlands. He encouraged the Emperor, Ferdinand I., and Maximilianof Bavaria to stand firm against the further encroachments of theLutherans, and sympathised actively with the unfortunate Queen ofScotland. Having realised that Queen Elizabeth was lost hopelessly tothe Church and that she was making every effort to involve the wholeEnglish nation in heresy, he directed against her a Bull ofexcommunication and deposition. But though he endeavoured to cultivatefriendly relations with the Catholic rulers he had no intention ofabandoning the rights of the Church or of yielding in the slightest tothe increasing demands of the civil power. Against the wishes of someof his advisers and to the no small annoyance of the Catholic princeshe republished the Bull, known as the /In Coena Domini/, because hecommanded that it should be read in all churches on Holy Thursday.

Like his great namesake Pius II. he had especially at heart thedefence of Europe against invasion by the Turk. Owing to the religiouscontroversies and the eagerness of some of the princes to allythemselves with the Sultan the followers of Islam had grown bolder,and had shown that they dreamed still of overcoming Western Europe andof planting the crescent even in the very city of the Popes. Pius V.appealed to the rulers of Europe to close up their ranks against theircommon enemy. He granted generous subsidies to the Knights of Maltaand the rulers of Venice and Hungary upon whom the brunt of thestruggle must inevitably fall. When on the accession of Selim II. in1570 the danger was pressing, the Pope succeeded in bringing about aChristian confederacy composed of Spain, Venice, and the Papal Stateswith Don Juan of Austria in command of the Christian forces. For thesuccess of the enterprise the Pope ordered that public prayers andparticularly the Rosary should be recited in the churches throughoutthe world. The decisive struggle between the two forces, as a resultof which the Turkish fleet was almost completely annihilated, wasfought in the Bay of Lepanto on Sunday, 7th October 1571.[2] In memoryof this great victory the Pope instituted the Feast of the Holy Rosaryto be celebrated for ever on the first Sunday of October. While he wasengaged in making arrangements to follow up his success by driving theTurks beyond the Bosphorus he was called to his reward. Even by hiscontemporaries Pius V. was regarded as a saint. It is not to bewondered at, therefore, that one hundred years after his death he wasbeatified, and forty years later, in 1712, he was canonised formallyby Clement XI.

When the cardinals met in conclave, mainly by the intervention ofCardinal Granvelle, viceroy of Philip II. in Naples, CardinalBuoncompagni was elected almost immediately, and proclaimed under thetitle of Gregory XIII. (1572-85). He had been a distinguished studentand professor of law at the University of Bologna, where he had thehonour of having as his pupils many of the ablest ecclesiastics of theage. Later on he was sent as confidential secretary to the Council ofTrent. On his return from this assembly he was created cardinal, andappointed papal legate in Spain. At the time of his election to thePapacy he had reached his seventieth year. As a young man his life wasnot blameless from the point of view of morality, but after he becamea priest nothing could be urged against his conduct even by his worstenemies. Though it must be admitted that he was not of such an asceticand spiritual temperament as his predecessor, he was a man ofirreproachable character, not over anxious to promote his ownrelatives, and determined to strengthen the Catholic Church by raisingthe standard of education and by appointing to the episcopate none butthe most worthy ecclesiastics. Hence he drew lavishly upon the fundsof the Holy See to erect Catholic Colleges in Rome and in severalcountries of Europe. He founded the magnificent /Collegium Romanum/for the education of students from all parts of the world, and placedit under the administration of the Jesuits, in whom he reposed themost signal confidence. As the circumstances that led to theestablishment of the /Collegium Germanicum/ had not improved, heconferred on it more generous endowments, and united it later on withthe college which he had founded for the Hungarians. Owing to thepersecutions in England and Ireland and the suppression ofinstitutions for the education of the clergy, Gregory XIII. founded anEnglish College (1579) and provided funds for the erection of an IrishCollege. The money intended for this latter institution was spent inassisting the Irish in their wars against Elizabeth. In addition tothis, more than twenty colleges situated in various parts of Europe,amongst them being the Scotch College at Pont-a-Mousson, owe theirorigin in whole or in part to his munificence. He was, also, verydetermined that none but the most worthy men should be appointed toepiscopal sees, and with this object in view he took pains to inquirepersonally about the merits of distinguished ecclesiastics in eachcountry, and to prepare lists of them for use as vacancies mightarise. He was equally careful in the appointments which he made to thecollege of cardinals. In order to keep touch with the progress ofaffairs in Germany he established a nunciature at Vienna in 1581, andanother at Cologne in the following year. The results of thisexperiment were so successful that in a short time nunciatures wereestablished in nearly all the Catholic countries.[3]

Like his predecessor he was determined to continue the war against theTurks, but the circumstances were unfavourable in France and in theEmpire, while Venice and Spain, the former allies of the Holy See,concluded peace with the Sultan. In England and Ireland neither bypeaceful measures nor by the expeditions fitted out by him inconnexion with the Desmond Rebellion was he able to achieve anylasting results. His legates succeeded in inducing John III. of Swedento abjure heresy and to return to the bosom of the Catholic Church,but, unfortunately, the conversion lasted only until politicalcircumstances demanded another change. In Russia his representativesarranged a peace with Poland, and put an end for the time to anyactive persecution of Catholicism within the Russian dominions.[4] Inall parts of Europe, where Catholic rulers found themselves indifficulties, subsidies were sent by Gregory XIII. to theirassistance. Charles IX. in France, Philip II. of Spain, Austria, theKnights of Malta, and the Catholics of England and Ireland sharedlargely in his munificence.

He issued a new edition of the Roman Martyrology in 1584, and directedthat it should be used to the exclusion of all others. His predecessorhad appointed a committee of jurists to prepare a revised edition ofthe Decrees of Gratian. He had been a member of that commission, andas Pope he brought the work to a successful conclusion. But theachievement for which he will be best remembered is undoubtedly theGregorian Calendar. The errors of the calendar had been noticed bymany, but how to correct them and prevent them for the future was theproblem that was still unsolved. Gregory XIII. appointed a body ofexperts to examine the subject, the most prominent of whom were theJesuit Father Clavius and Cardinal Sirleto. The committee had theadvantage of having before them the papers of the Italian scientist,Lilius, and the suggestions of the Catholic universities. In 1582 theGregorian Calendar was published, and was accepted generally in allthe Catholic countries of Europe. But for a long time the Protestantcountries, believing that nothing good could come from Rome, remainedattached to the old style. It was only in 1700 that the GregorianCalendar was accepted in Germany and Holland, and at a still laterperiod (1752) England consented to the change. The following yearSweden followed suit, and by 1775 the use of the new calendar hadbecome general outside Russia and the other countries involved in theEastern schism, in which the old style is followed till the presentday.

The immense sums expended by Gregory XIII. in endowing colleges andsubsidising Catholic sovereigns proved too great a strain on theresources of the papal treasury. To raise funds the Pope was obligedto increase the taxes, to impose tariffs on imports and exports, tocurtail the privileges of certain sections of his subjects, and torecall many of the fiefs granted to feudal proprietors. These measuresled to grave discontent among all classes. Secret societies wereformed, in which the dispossessed nobles encouraged their poorerfollowers to acts of violence. Robber bands led by some of the youngerbarons made their appearance in all parts of the Papal States, so thateven in the very streets of Rome the lives of the papal officials werenot secure. Gregory XIII. was too old to cope with such a serioussituation. Before order could be restored he passed away leaving hissuccessor a very difficult task.

After a conclave lasting only four days Cardinal Felice Peretti,better known as the Cardinal di Montalto, secured the requiredmajority of votes, and ascended the papal throne under the name ofSixtus V.[5] (1585-90). He belonged to a very poor family in Italy,had joined the Franciscans as a boy, and had risen from office tooffice till at last in 1570 he was created cardinal. At the time ofhis election he was practically unknown, partly because he was not ascion of one of the leading families of Italy, partly, also, becauseduring the reign of Gregory XIII. with whom he was in disagreement helived a retired life, devoting himself almost completely to thepreparation of an edition of the works of St. Ambrose. Throughout theCatholic world the news of his elevation was received with joy. He wasa man of strict life and tireless activity, more inclined to act thanto speak, unwilling to burthen his spiritual or temporal subjects withnew laws, but fully determined to enforce those already made, andalmost unchangeable in his views once his decision had been given.

The restoration of order in the Papal States and the suppression ofthe robbers who terrorised peaceful citizens were the first work towhich he directed his attention. Nor was it long till the severe andalmost extreme measures he adopted, and in which he was supported bythe Italian princes, produced their effect. The bankrupt condition ofthe papal treasury necessitated a close revision of the papalfinances, and so well did Sixtus V. succeed in this respect that hewas able to bequeath to his successor immense reserves. Though verycareful about expenditure for his own uses or on the papal court hespent money freely on the erection and decoration of churches, and onthe improvement of the city of Rome. He extended the Vatican Library,in connexion with which he established a new printing-press, provideda good water supply (/Acqua Felice/), built the Lateran Palace,completed the Quirinal, restored the columns of Trajan and Antoninus,erected the obelisks of the Vatican, St. Mary Major, the Lateran andSanta Maria del Popolo, and built several new streets to beautify thecity and to prevent congestion.

His administrative ability manifested itself in the establishment ofvarious congregations, to each of which was committed some particulardepartment of work in the administration of the Church and of thePapal States. Hitherto most of this work had been done by the/auditores/ or the /penitentiarii/ according as it belonged to theexternal or internal forum, or else in consistories of the cardinals.The idea of Sixtus V. was not entirely a novel one. The Congregationof the Index (1571) and the Holy Office (1588) had been establishedalready, as also a commission to watch over the execution of thedecrees of the Council of Trent (1564). By the Bull, /Immensa AeterniDei/[6] (11th Feb. 1588) Sixtus V. established fifteen differentcongregations, the most important of which were the Congregation ofthe Index, of the Inquisition, of the Signatura, of the Council ofTrent, of Rites and Ceremonies, and of Bishops and Regulars. By meansof these various bodies the work was done better and moreexpeditiously without impairing in the slightest the authority of thePope. In 1586 he issued the Bull, /Postquam verus/ by which he fixedthe number of cardinals at seventy, namely, six cardinal-bishops,fifty cardinal-priests and fourteen cardinal-deacons. He had preparedand published a new edition of the Septuagint (1588) as a preparationfor the revised edition of the Vulgate, which was brought out later,and was of so faulty a character that it was necessary to withdraw itfrom circulation.

Sixtus V. had great hopes of inducing the princes of Europe to form analliance against the Turks, and, indeed, it was with a view to somesuch struggle that he laid aside such immense reserves, but his hopeswere doomed to disappointment. In England no progress could be made,more especially as the defeat of the Spanish Armada served only tostrengthen the throne of Elizabeth. The condition of affairs in Francewas calculated to cause the Pope great anxiety. The murder of theCatholic leaders and the alliance of Henry III. with the CalvinistKing of Navarre compelled the Pope to espouse warmly the cause ofSpain and the League. But towards the end of his reign Sixtus V. beganto realise that Spain's intervention in favour of the League was notnearly so disinterested as it might seem, and that the aim of Spanishstatesmen was the union of the two countries in one great empire, anevent which, were it to come to pass, might be as dangerous for theHoly See as for the succession of Henry of Navarre. He was, therefore,more inclined to compromise than to fight.

After the death of Urban VII., Gregory XIV., and Innocent X., whofollowed one another in rapid succession, a large number of thecardinals, determined to put an end to the dominating influence ofSpain, put forward as the candidate of their choice CardinalAldobrandini, whose election had been vetoed twice before by theSpanish representatives. Notwithstanding the opposition of Spain theysucceeded in their effort, and Cardinal Aldobrandini was proclaimedunder the title of Clement VIII.[7] (1592-1605). The character of thenew Pope both as a man and an ecclesiastic was beyond the shadow ofreproach. He was the special disciple and friend of St. Philip Neriwho acted as his confessor for thirty years. As Pope his choice of aconfessor fell upon the learned and saintly Baronius whom he insistedupon creating cardinal. His activity and zeal were manifested soon inthe visitation which he undertook of the churches and institutions ofRome, and during the course of which he suppressed many abuses.

The situation in France was sufficiently delicate. Henry IV. wasbeginning to recognise that notwithstanding his victories he couldnever reign as a Calvinist over a united France. Clement VIII. wasvery decidedly in favour of a solution that would put an end to thewar and would prevent France from degenerating into a Spanishprovince. Hence as soon as the conversion of Henry IV. was proved tobe genuine the Pope acknowledged his title as king of France, andexhorted French Catholics to receive him as their ruler. Such a courseof action was of necessity displeasing to Spain, but a few years laterthe Pope had the happiness of putting an end to the struggle betweenthese two countries. During his term of office Clement VIII. foundedat Rome a national college for providing priests for the mission inScotland, issued a revised edition of the Vulgate (1598), of theBreviary, the Missal, the Caerimonial and the Pontifical, andinstituted the /Congregatio de Auxilis/ to investigate the matters indispute between the Thomists and the Molinists. He presided personallyat many of its sessions though he never issued a definite sentence. Itwas also during his reign that the infamous ex-monk Giordano Bruno wascondemned by the Inquisition, handed over to the secular power, andburned at the stake (17th Feb. 1600). In his youth Giordano joined theDominicans, from which order he fled because definite charges ofheresy, the truth of which he could not deny, were brought againsthim. Later on he was excommunicated by the Calvinists of Geneva andthe Lutherans of Germany, and refused permission to lecture by theprofessors of Oxford when he visited that seat of learning. Many ofhis writings are strongly anti-Christian, and some of them thoroughlyindecent. He was condemned to die solely on account of his denial ofthe Divinity of Christ and other heretical views and not, as is saidby some, because he defended the Copernican system.[8]

Leo XI. succeeded, but survived his election less than a month. Thechoice of the conclave then fell upon Cardinal Borghese who took ashis title Paul V.[9] (1605-21). He had been a distinguished lawstudent of Bologna and Padua, a papal legate in Spain, and underClement VIII. cardinal-vicar of Rome. He was a man of great energy andzealous for the promotion of religion. During his reign he canonisedSt. Charles Borromeo and issued a decree of beatification in favour ofIgnatius of Loyola, Francis Xavier, and Philip Neri, provided generoussubsidies for the advancement of the missions, endeavoured to bringabout a re-union with some of the separated religious bodies of theEast, and spent money freely on the decoration of the Roman churches,notably St. Peter's, which he had the honour of completing. Like hispredecessors he was desirous of continuing the war against the Turks,but the state of affairs in western Europe rendered such a schemeimpossible of realisation. With France and Spain he preserved friendlyrelations, tried to put an end to the rivalries that weakened theHouse of Habsburg and the Catholic cause in the Empire, and despatchedsupplies of both men and money to the assistance of Ferdinand II. inhis struggle with the Protestants. He wrote to James I. of England(1606) congratulating him on his accession and his escape from deathand asking for toleration of the Catholic religion, in return forwhich he promised to induce the Catholics to submit to all things notopposed to the law of God. The reply of the king to this overture wasthe well-known Oath of Allegiance, that led to such ugly controversiesamong the Catholic body.

As an earnest student of canon law Paul V. was too inclined tomaintain all the rights and privileges of the Church as they wereexpounded in the decretals of the Middle Ages. This attitude of mindbrought him into a prolonged and inglorious conflict with the republicof Venice. This latter state, regardless of the /privilegium fori/imprisoned two clerics without reference to the ecclesiasticalauthorities, and about the same time gave great offence by passinglaws rendering it difficult for the Church to acquire ownership oflanded property, to build new churches or monasteries, or to found newreligious orders or societies. Paul V. lodged a solemn protest againstthese innovations. When his demands were not complied with he issued asentence of excommunication against the Doge, Senate, and Government,and later on he placed Venice under interdict (1606). The quarrel wasso bitter that at one time it was feared that it might end inseparating the republic from the centre of unity. Cardinals Baroniusand Bellarmine entered the lists in defence of the Pope, while thenotorious ex-Servite, Paul Sarpi[10] (1552-1623), undertook to replyto them on behalf of Venice. The government forbade the promulgationof the interdict, and threatened the most severe punishment againstall clergy who should observe it. With the exception of the Jesuits,Capuchins, and Theatines who were expelled, the clergy both secularand regular took no notice of the interdict. It was feared that in theend the issues could be decided only by war in which Spain wasprepared to support the Pope, but through the friendly intervention ofHenry IV. of France peace was concluded without any very decisivevictory on either side (1607). The clergy who were expelled forobeying the interdict were allowed to return except the Jesuits. Theselatter were permitted to settle in Venice again only in 1657.

On the death of Paul V. Cardinal Ludovisi ascended the papal throneunder the title of Gregory XV. (1621-23). The new Pope had beeneducated by the Jesuits, and had risen rapidly in the service of theChurch. At the time of his election he was old and infirm, but by theappointment of his nephew Ludovico to the college of cardinals hesecured for himself an able and loyal assistant. To put an end toseveral abuses that had taken place in connexion with papal electionshe published the Bull, /Decet Romanum Pontificem/ (1622), in whichwere laid down minute regulations about conclaves, the most importantof which were that the cardinals should vote secretly, that theyshould vote only for one candidate, and that no elector should votefor himself.[11] In providing funds for the assistance of the Catholicmissions Gregory XV. was very generous as was also his cardinal-nephew. The success of the missionaries had been so great, and theconditions of the various countries in which they laboured sodifferent, that proper supervision of the new provinces of the Churchwas by no means easy. Gregory XIII. and Clement VIII. had appointedcommissions to look after the spiritual wants of particular districts,but it was reserved for Gregory XV. to establish a permanentcongregation, /De Propaganda Fide/ (Bull, /Inscrutabili/, 1622) tosuperintend the entire field of Catholic missions. He had the honour,too, of canonising St. Ignatius of Loyola, St. Francis Xavier, and St.Philip Neri, and of approving the foundation of several new religiousorders.

During the Thirty Years' War he afforded every possible assistance toFerdinand II., and helped to secure the Palatinate for Maximilian ofBavaria on the expulsion of Frederick. In return for this favourMaximilian presented the Pope with a goodly portion of the library ofHeidelberg. By the judicious interposition of Gregory XV. war wasaverted between Spain and Austria on the one side and France, Venice,and Savoy on the other regarding the possession of the Valtelline,while in England, though the Spanish Match which he favoured wasbroken off, he succeeded in securing some respite for the persecutedCatholics.

In the conclave that followed upon the death of Gregory XV. CardinalBarberini received the support of the electors and was proclaimed Popeas Urban VIII. (1623-44). The new Pope was a man of exemplary lifewhose greatest fault was his excessive partiality towards hisrelatives, though it must be said that some of the relatives on whomhe bestowed favours were by no means unworthy of them. As a native ofFlorence he seems to have caught up something of the spirit ofclassical learning for which that city had been so renowned, as wasshown unfortunately too clearly in the Breviary that he published in1632. He issued the Bull, /In Coena Domini/ in its final form, foundeda national college in Rome for students from Ireland, and issued aseries of strict and minute regulations on canonisation andbeatification, many of which remain in force till the present time.The interests of the foreign missions were specially dear to the heartof Urban VIII. To provide a supply of priests for them he establishedthe celebrated /Collegium Urbanum/ (1627), and established there aprinting-press for the use of the missionaries. He reduced the numberof holidays of obligation, opened China and Japan, till then reservedfor the Jesuits, to all missionaries, and forbade slavery ofwhatsoever kind in Paraguay, Brazil and the West Indies.

For many reasons the political policy of Urban VIII. has beencriticised very severely. Too much money was wasted by him infortifying the Papal States and on the disastrous war with the Duke ofParma (1641-44). He has been blamed also for his failure to supportFerdinand II. more energetically during the Thirty Years' War, but inreality this hostile view is based largely on a distorted view of thewar itself and of the policy of the Pope. It is not true that the Popesympathised with Gustavus Adolphus or that he grieved over his death.Neither is it true that he procured the dismissal of Wallenstein fromthe imperial service. It is a fact undoubtedly that he did not takeenergetic measures to prevent the French from assisting the Protestantprinces and the Swedes against the Emperor, but it remains to beproved that any remonstrances from the Pope, however strong, wouldhave proved effectual in the circumstances. In the later stages at anyrate the war could not be regarded at first sight as a religious one,but at the same time it is to be regretted that Urban VIII. did notrecognise that the triumph of the enemies of the Emperor meant atriumph for Lutheranism. In the war between Spain and Portugalconsequent upon the proclamation of the Duke of Braganza heendeavoured to preserve an attitude of neutrality by refusing toappoint to episcopal sees in Portugal the candidates presented by thenew king. The policy of Urban VIII. in regard to England and Irelandwill be dealt with under these countries.

When the conclave met to elect a successor to Urban VIII. it was soondiscovered that some of the cardinals wished to elect a Pope friendlyto Spain, wile others favoured a pro-French Pope. At length, asneither party was sufficiently strong to ensure the required majorityfor its nominee, a more or less neutral candidate was found in theperson of Cardinal Pamfili who took the title of Innocent X. (1644-55).[12] He was a man of advanced years, who had served in manyoffices with success, and who possessed many of the qualificationsrequired in a good ruler of the Church. Unfortunately, his flagrantnepotism did him much harm and gave occasion to ugly rumours utterlydevoid of truth. Finding the papal treasury empty after his electionand believing that the relatives of the late Pope were responsible forthis, he took steps to secure a return from them; but they fled toFrance, where they placed themselves under the protection of CardinalMazarin, who succeeded in bringing about a reconciliation. Innocent X.restored order in the Papal States, punished the Duke of Parma for hiscrimes, especially for his supposed connexion with the murder of theBishop of Castro, and maintained friendly relations with Venice, whichhe assisted against the Turks. He was deeply pained by the terms ofthe Peace of Westphalia (1648) against which his representatives hadprotested in vain, and which he condemned in the Bull, /Zelus DomusDei/ published in November 1648. ----------

[1] /Catena, Vita del gloriossisimo Papa Pio V./, 1587. Gabutius, /De Vita et rebus gestis Pii V./, 1605. Antony, /Saint Pius V./, 1911. Grente, /Saint Pie V./, ("/Les Saints/"), 1914.

[2] Julien, /Papes et Sultans/, 1880. De la Graviere, /La Guerre de Chypre et la bataille de Lepante/, 1888.

[3] Pieper, /Zur Enstehungsgeschichte der standigen Nuntiaturem/, 1894.

[4] Pierling, /Gregoire XIII. et Ivan le Terrible/ (/Revue des Quest. Histor./, 1886).

[5] Hubner, /Sixte-Quint/, 3 vols., 1870.

[6] /Bullar. Rom./, iv. 4, 392.

[7] Wadding, /Vita Clementis VIII./, Rome, 1723.

[8] McIntyre, /Giordano Bruno/, 1903.

[9] Bzovius, /Vita Pauli V./, 1625.

[10] Campbell, /Vita di Fra Paolo Sarpi/, 1875. /Irish Ecc. Record/ xv., 524-40.

[11] /Bullar. Romanum/ (xii., 662 sqq.).

[12] Chinazzi, /Sede vacante per la morte del papa Urbano VIII. e conclave di Innocenzo X./, 1904.

(c) The Religious Orders and the Counter-Reformation.

Helyot, /Histoire des ordres monastiques religieux/, etc., 8 vols., 1714-19. Heimbucher, /Die Orden und Kongregationen der Katholischen Kirche/, 1907-8. Mabillon, /Annales Ordinis Sancti Benedicti/, 1703-39. Albers, /Zur Reformgeschichte des Benediktiner-ordens im 16 Jahrhundert/ (/Stud. u-Mitteil/, 1900, 1901). Daurignac, /Histoire de la comp. de Jesus/, 1862. Cretineau-Joly, /Histoire religieuse, politique et litteraire de la comp. de Jesus/, 1859. Huber, /Der Jesuitenorden Duhr, Jesuitenfabeln/, 1904. Abelly, /Vie de Ven. serviteur de Dieu, Vincent de Paul/, 1891. Bougaud-Brady, /History of St. Vincent de Paul, etc./, 1908. Boyle, /St. Vincent de Paul, and the Vincentians in Ireland, Scotland, and England/, 1909.

The religious orders, like most other institutions of the agepreceding the Reformation, stood badly in need of re-organisation andreform. Various causes had combined to bring about a relaxation of thediscipline prescribed by their holy founders, and to introduce aspirit of worldliness, that boded ill both for the individual membersas well as for the success of the work for which these orders had beenestablished. The interference of outside authorities lay orecclesiastical in the appointment of superiors, the union of severalhouses under one superior, the accumulation of wealth, the habitualneglect of the superiors to make their visitations, and a generalcarelessness in the selection and training of the candidates to beadmitted into the various institutions, were productive of disastrousresults. It is difficult, however, to arrive at a correct estimate asto the extent of the evil, because the condition of affairs variedvery much in the different religious orders and in the differentprovinces and houses of the same order. At all times a largeproportion of the religious of both sexes recognised and deplored thespirit of laxity that had crept in, and laboured strenuously for areturn to the old ideals long before the Lutheran campaign had made itnecessary to choose between reform and suppression.

The Benedictines, who had done excellent work for the promotion of thespiritual and temporal welfare of the people amongst whom theylaboured, suffered more than any other body from the interference oflay patrons in the appointment of abbots, as well as from the want ofany central authority capable of controlling individual houses and ofinsisting upon the observance of the rules and constitution. Variousefforts were made, however, to introduce reforms during the sixteenthcentury. In France the most important of these reforms was that begunin the abbey of St. Vannes by the abbot, Didier de la Cour.Recognising the sad condition of affairs he laboured incessantly tobring about a return to the strict rule of St. Benedict. His effortswere approved by Clement VIII. in 1604. Many houses in France havingaccepted the reform, it was resolved to unite them into onecongregation under the patronage of St. Maur, the disciple of St.Benedict.[1] The new congregation of St. Maur was sanctioned by LouisXIII. and by Pope Gregory XV. (1621). The Maurists devoted themselvesto the study of the sacred sciences, more especially to history,liturgy and patrology, and set an example of thorough scholarshipwhich won for them the praise of both friends and foes. The names ofD'Achery, Mabillon, Ruinart, Martene, Thierry, Lami and Bouquet arenot likely to be forgotten so long as such works as the /AmplissimaCollectio Veterum Scriptorum/, /Thesaurus Anecdotorum/, /GalliaChristiana/, /Histoire Litteraire de la France/, /De Re Diplomatica/,/L'Art de verifier les dates/, the /Receuil des historiens desGaules/, etc., survive to testify to the labours and research of theCongregation of St. Maur.[2]

The reform movement among the Dominicans had made itself manifest fromthe days of Raymond of Capua (1390), who ordered that in everyprovince there should be at least one house where the rule of St.Dominic might be observed in its original strictness. The success ofthe reform varied in the different countries and even in the differenthouses of the same province, but in the sixteenth century the generaltendency was undoubtedly upwards. The religious rebellion inflictedserious losses on the order and led to the almost complete extinctionof provinces that once were flourishing; but the Spanish andPortuguese discoveries in America and the spread of the missionarymovement opened up for the order new fields, where its members weredestined to do lasting service to religion and to win back in the NewWorld more than they had lost in the Old. Discipline among theCistercians, too, had become relaxed, but a general improvement set inwhich led to the formation of new congregations, the principal ofwhich were the Congregation of the Feuillants approved by Sixtus V.(1587), and of the Trappists, which take their name from the monasteryof La Trappe and owe their origin to the zealous efforts of the Abbotde Rance (1626-1700).

The Franciscans were divided already into the Observants and theConventuals, but even among the Observants the deteriorating influenceof the age had made itself felt. Matteo di Bassi set himself in theconvent of Monte Falco to procure a complete return to the originalrule of St. Francis, and proceeded to Rome to secure the approbationof Clement VII. In 1528 by the Bull, /Religionis Zelus/ the Popepermitted himself and his followers to separate from the Observants,to wear the hood (/cappuccio/, hence the name Capuchins[3]) whichMatteo claimed to have been the dress of St. Francis, to wear thebeard, to found separate houses in Italy, and to preach to the people.Soon the Capuchins spread through Italy, and so popular did theybecome that Gregory XIII. withdrew the regulations by which they wereforbidden to found separate houses outside of Italy. The new ordersuffered many trials more especially after the apostasy of its vicar-general Ochino in 1544, but with the blessing of God thesedifficulties were overcome. The Capuchins rendered invaluable serviceto religion by their simple straightforward style of preaching soopposed as it was to the literary vapourings that passed for sermonsat the time, by their familiar intercourse with the poor whom theyassisted in both spiritual and temporal misfortunes, by theirunswerving loyalty to the Pope and by the work they accomplished onthe foreign missions, more especially in those lands which had oncebeen the glory of the Church but where religion had been extinguishedalmost completely by the domination of the Saracen.

The revival was not confined, however, merely to a reform of the olderreligious orders. The world had changed considerably since theconstitutions of these bodies had been formulated by their holyfounders. New conditions and new dangers necessitated the employmentof new weapons and new methods for the defence of religion.Fortunately a band of zealous men were raised up by God to grapplewith the problems of the age, and to lay the foundation of religioussocieties, many of which were destined to confer benefits on religionhardly less permanent and less valuable than had been conferred inother times by such distinguished servants of God as St. Benedict, St.Dominic, and St. Francis of Assisi.

The Theatines, so called from Chieti (Theate) the diocese of PeterCaraffa, had their origin in a little confraternity founded by Gaetanodi Tiene[4] a Venetian, who gathered around him a few disciples, allof them like himself zealous for the spiritual improvement of bothclergy and people (1524). During a visit to Rome Gaetano succeeded ineliciting the sympathy of Peter Caraffa (then bishop of Theate andafterwards cardinal and Pope) and in inducing him to become the firstsuperior of the community. The institution was approved by ClementVII. in 1524. Its founders aimed at introducing a higher standard ofspiritual life amongst both clergy and laity by means of preaching andby the establishment of charitable institutions. The order spreadrapidly in Italy, where it did much to save the people from theinfluence of Lutheranism, in Spain were it was assisted by Philip II.,in France where Cardinal Mazarin acted as its patron, and in theforeign missions, especially in several parts of Asia, the Theatineswon many souls to God.

The Regular Clerics of St. Paul, better known as the Barnabites fromtheir connexion with the church of St. Barnabas at Milan, were foundedby Antony Maria Zaccaria[5] of Cremona, Bartholomew Ferrari and JacopoMorigia. Shocked by the low state of morals then prevalent in so manyItalian cities, these holy men gathered around them a body of zealousyoung priests, who aimed at inducing the people by means of sermonsand instructions to take advantage of the sacrament of Penance. Theorder was approved by Clement VII. in 1533, and received manyimportant privileges from his successors. Its members worked incomplete harmony with the secular clergy and in obedience to thecommands of the bishops. They bound themselves not to seek or acceptany preferment or dignity unless at the express direction of the Pope.In Milan they were beloved by St. Charles Borromeo who availed himselffreely of their services, and they were invited to Annecy by St.Francis de Sales. Several houses of the Barnabites were established inItaly, France, and Austria. In addition to their work of preaching andinstructing the people they established many flourishing colleges, andat the request of the Pope undertook charge of some of the foreignmissions.

The founder of the Oblates was St. Charles Borromeo[6] (1538-84) whowas created cardinal by his uncle Pius IV., at the age of twenty-three, and who during his comparatively short life did more for thereform of the Church and for the overthrow of Protestantism than anyindividual of his age. It was due mainly to his exertions that theCouncil of Trent was re-convoked, and to his prudent advice that itwas carried to a successful conclusion. Once the decrees of theCouncil had received the approval of the Pope St. Charles spared nopains to see that they were put into execution not only in his owndiocese of Milan but throughout the entire Church. For a long timepersonal government of his diocese was impossible as his presence inRome was insisted upon by the Pope; but as soon as he could securepermission he hastened to Milan, where he repressed abuses with astern hand, introduced regular diocesan and provincial synods, visitedin person the most distant parts of the diocese, won back thousandswho had gone over to heresy in the valleys of Switzerland, anddefended vigorously the rights and the liberties of the Church againstthe Spanish representatives. In all his reforms he was supportedloyally by the religious orders, more especially by the Jesuits andthe Barnabites, with whom he maintained at all times the most friendlyrelations. At the same time he felt the need of a community of secularpriests, who while remaining under the authority of the bishop wouldset an example of clerical perfection, and who would be ready at therequest of the bishop to volunteer for the work that was deemed mostpressing. he was particularly anxious that such a body shouldundertake the direction of the diocesan seminary, and should endeavourto send forth well educated and holy priests. With these objects inview he established the Oblates in 1578, and the community fullyjustified his highest expectations.

The Oratorians[7] were established by St. Philip Neri (1515-95) thereformer and one of the patrons of Rome. He was a native of Florence,who when still a young man turned his back upon a promising career inthe world in order to devote himself entirely to the service of God.Before his ordination he laboured for fifteen years visiting the sickin the hospitals, assisting the poorer pilgrims, and instructing theyoung. He formed a special confraternity, and gathered around him abody of disciples both cleric and lay. After his ordination they wereaccustomed to hold their conferences in a little room (/Oratorium/,Oratory) over the church of St. Girolmao. Here sermons andinstructions were given on all kinds of subjects, particularly on theSacred Scriptures, the writings of the Fathers, and the leading eventsin the history of the Church. The society was approved by GregoryXIII. (1575) under the title of the Congregation of the Oratory. Itwas to be composed of secular priests living together under a rule,but bound by no special vows. St. Philip Neri was convinced that thestyle of preaching in vogue at the time was responsible in greatmeasure for the decline of religion and morality. Being a man of soundeducation himself he insisted that his companions should devotethemselves to some particular department of ecclesiastical knowledge,and should give the people the fruits of their study. Baronius, forexample, the author of the celebrated /Annales Ecclesiastici/, is saidto have preached for thirty years on the history of the Church. Inthis way St. Philip provided both for sound scholarship and usefulinstruction. Many branches of the Oratory were founded in Italy,Spain, Portugal, and in the Spanish and Portuguese colonies in SouthAmerica.

Recognising the need for an improvement in the education and lives ofthe French clergy and mindful of the benefits conferred on Rome by thecommunity of St. Philip Neri, the Abbe, afterwards Cardinal, Pierre deBerulle determined to found an Oratory in Paris.[8] The ParisOratorians were a community of secular priests bound by no specialvows, but living under a common rule with the object of fulfilling asperfectly as possible the obligations they had undertaken at theirordination. The project received the warm support of CardinalRichelieu and was approved by Paul V. in 1613. At the time clericaleducation in Paris and throughout France was in a condition of almosthopeless confusion. The French Oratorians, devoted as they werethemselves to study, determined to organise seminaries on the planlaid down by the Council of Trent, and to take charge of theadministration of such institutions. In philosophy the Oratoryproduced scholars such as Malebranche, in theology Thomassin andMorin, in Scripture Houbigant and Richard Simon, and in sacredeloquence such distinguished preachers as Lajeune and Massillon. TheOratorians survived the stormy days of the Jansenist struggle thoughthe peace of the community was disturbed at times by the action of afew of its members, but it went down before the wild onslaught of theRevolution. It was revived, however, by Pere Gratry in 1852.

The Brothers of Charity were founded by a Portuguese,[9] who havingbeen converted by a sermon of St. John d'Avila, devoted himself to therelief of human suffering in every form. On account of his greatcharity and zeal for souls he received the surname, St. John of God.He gathered around him a band of companions who assisted him in caringfor the sick in the hospital he had founded at Granada. After hisdeath in 1550 the work that he had begun was carried on by hisdisciples, whose constitutions were approved by Pius V. in 1572. Soonthrough the generosity of Philip II. and of the Spanish nobleshospitals were established in various cities of Spain, and placedunder the control of the Brothers of St. John of God. They wereinvited by the Pope to open a house in Rome, and they went also toParis on the invitation of the queen (1601). At the time of the FrenchRevolution they had charge of forty hospitals, from all of which theywere expelled. The founder was canonised in 1690, and named as patronof hospitals by Leo XIII. in 1898.

The Piarists or Patres Piarum Scholarum were founded by St. JosephCalazansa[10] (1556-1648), who had been vicar-general of the dioceseof Urgel in Spain, an office which he resigned in order to betakehimself to Rome. Here he began to gather the poorer children forinstruction, and as the teachers were unwilling to assist him unlessthey were given extra remuneration, he opened a free school in Rome in1597. The school was taught by himself and two or three priests whomhe had interested in the work. From these unpretentious beginningssprang the society of the Fathers of the Pious Schools. The object ofthe society, which was composed of priests, was the education of theyoung both in primary and secondary schools. The society was approvedby Paul V., and established finally as a recognised institution byGregory XV. (1621). It spread rapidly into Italy, Austria, and Poland.Somewhat akin to the Piarists were the Fathers of Christian Doctrine,founded by Caesar de Bus for the purpose of educating the young. Thesociety was composed of priests, and received the approval of ClementVIII. in 1597. Later on it united with the Somaschans, who had beenestablished by St. Jerome Aemilian with a similar purpose, but onaccount of certain disputes that arose the two bodies were separatedin 1647.

The Brothers of the Christian Schools were founded by John Baptist dela Salle[11] (1651-1719). The founder was a young priest of greatability, who had read a distinguished course in arts and theologybefore his ordination. Having been called upon to assist in conductinga free school opened at Rheims in 1679 he threw himself into the workwith vigour, devoting nearly all his energies to the instruction ofthe teachers. These he used to gather around him after school hours toencourage them to their work, to suggest to them better methods ofimparting knowledge and generally to correct any defects that he mighthave noticed during the course of his daily visits to the schools. Inthis way he brought together a body of young men interested in theeducation of the children of the poor, from which body were developedthe Brothers of the Christian Schools. At first he intended that someof the congregation should be priests, but later on he changed hismind, and made it a rule that none of the Brothers should becomepriests, nor should any priest be accepted as a novice. For a longtime the holy founder was engaged in an uphill struggle during whichthe very existence of the institute was imperilled. Distrusted by someof the ecclesiastical authorities, attacked by enemies on all side,deserted by a few of his own most trusted disciples, a man of lesszeal and determination would have abandoned the project in despair.But de la Salle was not discouraged. He composed a constitution forhis followers, and in 1717 he held a general chapter, in which hesecured the election of a superior-general. From this time theInstitute of Christian Brothers progressed by leaps and bounds. Theholy founder of the society was a pioneer in the work of primaryeducation. In teaching, in the grading of the pupils, and inconstructing and furnishing the schools new methods were followed;more liberty was given in the selection of programmes to suit thedistricts in which schools were opened; normal schools wereestablished to train the young teachers for their duties, and care wastaken that religious and secular education should go forward hand inhand. The society spread rapidly in France, more especially after ithad received the approval of Louis XV., and had been recognised as areligious congregation by Benedict XIII. (1725). During the Revolutionthe society was suppressed, and the Brothers of the Christian Schoolssuffered much rather than prove disloyal to the Pope. In 1803 theinstitute was re-organised, and since that time houses have beenopened in nearly every part of the world. John Baptist de la Salle wascanonised by Leo XIII. in 1900.

The Congregation of the Priests of the Mission, better known asLazarists from the priory of St. Lazare which they occupied in Paris,and as Vincentians from the name of their founder, St. Vincent dePaul, was established in 1624. St. Vincent was born at Pouy in Gasconyin 1576, received his early education at a Franciscan school, andcompleted his theological studies at the University of Toulouse, wherehe was ordained in 1600. Four years later the ship on which hejourneyed from Marseilles having been attacked by Barbary pirates, hewas taken prisoner and brought to Tunis, where he was sold as a slave.He succeeded in making his escape from captivity (1607) by convertinghis master, a Frenchman who had deserted his country and his religion.He went to Rome, from which he was despatched on a mission to theFrench Court, and was appointed almoner to queen Margaret of Valois.Later on he became tutor to the family of the Count de Gondi, themaster of the French galleys. During his stay there St. Vincent foundtime to preach to the peasants on the estate of his employer, and tovisit the prisoners condemned to the galleys. The splendid results ofhis labours among these classes bore such striking testimony to thesuccess of his missions that St. Vincent was induced to found acongregation of clergymen for this special work. Something of thiskind was required urgently in France at this period. The absence ofseminaries and the want of any properly organised system of clericaleducation had produced their natural consequences on the clergy. Inthe country districts particularly, the priests had neither theknowledge nor the training that would enable them to discharge theirsacred functions. From this it followed that the people were notinstructed, and the sacraments were neglected.

By opening a house in Paris in 1624 St. Vincent took the firstpractical step towards the foundation of a religious congregation,that was destined to renew and to strengthen religion in France. Lateron the society received the sanction of the Archbishop of Paris,[12]and of Louis XIII., and finally it was approved by Urban VIII. in theBull, /Salvatoris Nostri/, dated 12th January 1632. In the same yearSt. Vincent took possession of the priory of St. Lazare placed at hisdisposal by the canons regular of St. Victor. The Congregation of theMission was to be a congregation of secular clergymen, bound by simplereligious vows. Its principal work, besides the sanctification of itsown members, was to give missions to the poor particularly in countrydistricts, and to promote a high standard of clerical life. Thebishops of France were delighted with the programme of the newcongregation. Invitations poured in from all sides on the disciples ofSt. Vincent asking them to undertake missions, and wherever they wenttheir labours were attended with success. As a rule St. Vincentestablished a confraternity of charity in the parishes that he visitedto help the poor and above all to look after the homeless orphans.[13]

It was not long until he discovered that, however successful hismissions might be, they could effect little permanent good unless thepriests in charge of the parishes were determined to continue the workthat had been begun, and to reap the harvest which the missioners hadplanted. At that time there were no seminaries in France, so thatcandidates for the priesthood were ordained on the completion of theiruniversity course without any special training for their sacredoffice. At the request of some of the bishops St. Vincent determinedto give retreats to those who were preparing for Holy Orders. At firstthese retreats lasted only ten days, but they were productive of suchsplendid results that they were extended to several months. Finallythey led to the establishment of clerical seminaries, of whichinstitutions St. Vincent and his associates took charge in several ofthe dioceses of France. Before his death they had control of elevenFrench seminaries; and at the time of the Revolution fully one-thirdof the diocesan seminaries were in the hands of his disciples.[14] Bymeans of retreats for the clergy, and spiritual conferences organisedfor their improvement St. Vincent kept in close touch with those whomhe had trained, and afforded them an opportunity of renewing theirfervour and completing their education.

It was fortunate for France that God had raised up a man so prudentand zealous as St. Vincent to be a guide to both priests and peopleduring the difficult times through which the country was then passing.From without, danger threatened the Church on the side of the Huguenotheretics, and from within, Jansenism and Gallicanism bade fair tocaptivate the sympathy of both clergy and people. At first St. Vincentwas on friendly terms with the Abbot de St. Cyran, the leader of theJansenists in France, but once he realised the dangerous nature of hisopinions and the errors contained in such publications as the/Augustus/ of Jansen and the /Frequent Communion/ of Arnauld he threwhimself vigorously into the campaign against Jansenism. At court, inhis conferences with bishops and priests, in university circles, andin the seminaries he exposed the insidious character of its tenets. AtRome he urged the authorities to have recourse to stern measures, andin France he strove hard to procure acceptance of the Roman decisions.And yet in all his work against the Jansenists there was nothing ofthe bitterness of the controversialist. He could strike hard when hewished, but he never forgot that charity is a much more effectiveweapon than violence. In his own person he set the example of completesubmission to the authority of the Pope, and enjoined such submissionon his successors. St. Vincent died in 1660. His loss was mourned notmerely by his own spiritual children, the Congregation of the Missionand the Sisters of Charity, but by the poor of Paris and of France towhom he was a generous benefactor, as well as by the bishops andclergy to whom he had been a friend and a guide. To his influence morethan to any other cause is due the preservation of France to theChurch in the seventeenth century.

But the work of the Congregation of the Mission was not confined toFrance. Its disciples spread into Italy, Spain, Portugal, Poland,Ireland, and England. They went as missionaries to Northern Africa tolabour among the Barbary pirates by whom St. Vincent had beencaptured, to Madagascar, to some of the Portuguese colonies in theEast, to China, and to the territories of the Sultan. At theRevolution most of their houses in France were destroyed, and many ofthe Vincentians suffered martyrdom. When the worst storms, however,had passed the congregation was re-established in France, and itsmembers laboured earnestly in the spirit of its holy founder torecover much of what had been lost.

The founder of the Sulpicians was Jean Jacques Olier[15] (1608-57) thefriend and disciple of St. Vincent de Paul. Impressed with theimportance of securing a good education and training for the clergy,he and a couple of companions retired to a house in Vaugirard (1641),where they were joined by a few seminarists, who desired to placethemselves under his direction. Later on he was offered the parish ofSt. Sulpice, then one of the worst parishes in Paris from the point ofview of religion and morality. The little community of priests workingunder the rules compiled by Olier for their guidance soon changedcompletely the face of the entire district. House to house visitationswere introduced; sermons suitable to the needs of the people weregiven; catechism classes were established, and in a very short timeSt. Sulpice became the model parish of the capital.

In 1642 a little seminary was opened and rules were drawn up for thedirection of the students, most of whom attended the theologicallectures at the Sorbonne. Priests and students formed one community,and as far as possible followed the same daily routine. During theirfree time the students assisted in the work of the parish by visitingthe sick and taking charge of classes for catechism. At first Olierhad no intention of founding seminaries throughout France. His aim wasrather to make St. Sulpice a national seminary, from which youngpriests might go forth properly equipped, and qualified to founddiocesan institutions on similar lines if their superiors favouredsuch an undertaking. But yielding to the earnest solicitations ofseveral of the bishops he opened seminaries in several parts ofFrance, and entrusted their administration to members of his owncommunity. The first of these was founded at Nantes in 1648. Duringthe lifetime of the founder a few of the Sulpicians were despatched toCanada, where they established themselves at Montreal, and labouredzealously for the conversion of the natives. Like St. Vincent, thefounder of the Sulpicians worked incessantly against Jansenism, andimpressed upon his followers the duty of prompt obedience to thebishops and to the Pope, lessons which they seem never to haveforgotten. The Sulpicians according to their constitution are acommunity of secular priests bound by no special religious vows.

The religious order, however, that did most to stem the advancing tideof heresy and to raise the drooping spirits of the Catholic bodyduring the saddest days of the sixteenth century was undoubtedly theSociety of Jesus, founded by St. Ignatius of Loyola.[16] By birth St.Ignatius was a Spaniard, and by profession he was a soldier. Havingbeen wounded at the siege of Pampeluna in 1521 he turned his mindduring the period of his convalescence to the study of spiritualbooks, more particularly the Lives of the Saints. As he read of thestruggles some of these men had sustained and of the victories theyhad achieved he realised that martial fame was but a shadow incomparison with the glory of the saints, and he determined to desertthe army of Spain to enrol himself among the servants of Christ. Withthe overthrow of the Moorish kingdom of Granada fresh in his mind, itis not strange that he should have dreamt of the still greater triumphthat might be secured by attacking the Mahomedans in the very seat oftheir power, and by inducing them to abandon the law of the Prophetfor the Gospel of the Christians. With the intention of preparinghimself for this work he bade good-bye to his friends and theassociations of his youth, and betook himself to a lonely retreat atManresa near Montserrat, where he gave himself up to meditation andprayer under the direction of a Benedictine monk. The result of hisstay at Manresa and of his communings with God are to be seen in the/Spiritual Exercises of St. Ignatius/, a work which in the hands ofhis disciples has done wonders for the conversion and perfection ofsouls, and which in the opinion of those competent to judge has noserious rivals except the Bible and the Imitation of Christ. FromManresa he journeyed to the Holy Land to visit its sacred shrines, andto labour for the conversion of the Infidel conquerors, but havingfound it impossible to undertake this work at the time he returned toEurope.

Realising that his defective education was a serious obstacle to theestablishment of the religious order that he contemplated, he went towork with a will to acquire the rudiments of grammar. When this hadbeen accomplished successfully he pursued his higher studies atAlcala, Salamanca, and Paris, where he graduated as a doctor in 1534.But while earnest in the pursuit of knowledge he never forgot thatknowledge was but a means of preparing himself for the accomplishmentof the mission to which God had called him. While at Paris he gatheredaround him a group of students, Francis Xavier, Lainez, Salmeron,Bodadilla, Rodriguez and Faber, with which body Lejay, Codure andBroet were associated at a later period. On the feast of theAssumption (1534) Ignatius and his companions wended their way to thesummit of Montmartre overlooking the city of Paris, where havingreceived Holy Communion they pledged themselves to labour in the HolyLand. Having discovered that this project was almost impossible theydetermined to place themselves at the disposal of the Pope. In RomeIgnatius explained the objects and rules of the proposed society toPaul III. and his advisers. In September 1540 the approval of the Popewas obtained though with certain restrictions, which were abolished in1543, and in the following year Ignatius was elected first general ofthe Society of Jesus.

St. Ignatius had the greatest respect for the older religious orders,the Benedictines, the Dominicans, and the Franciscans, to all of whichhe was deeply indebted; but he believed that the new conditions underwhich his followers would be called upon to do battle for Christnecessitated new rules and a new constitution. The Society of Jesuswas not to be a contemplative order seeking only the salvation of itsown members. Its energies were not to be confined to any particularchannel. No extraordinary fasts or austerities were imposed, nor wasthe solemn chanting of the office or the use of a particular dressinsisted upon. The society was to work "for the greater glory of God"in whatever way the circumstances demanded. On one thing only did St.Ignatius lay peculiar emphasis, and that was the absolute necessity ofobedience to superiors in all things lawful, and above all ofobedience to the Pope. The wisdom of this injunction is evident enoughat all times, but particularly in an age when religious authority,even that of the successor of St. Peter, was being called in questionby so many. Members of the society were forbidden to seek or acceptany ecclesiastical dignities or preferments.

The constitution[17] of the Society of Jesus was not drawn up withundue haste. St. Ignatius laid down rules for his followers, but itwas only when the value of these regulations had been tested bypractice that he embodied them in the constitution, endorsed by thefirst general congregation held in 1558. According to the constitutioncomplete administrative authority is vested in the general, who iselected by a general congregation, and holds office for life. He isassisted by a council consisting of a representative from eachprovince. The provincials, rectors of colleges, heads of professedhouses, and masters of notices are appointed by the general, usually,however, only for a definite number of years, while all minorofficials are appointed by the provincial. The novitiate lasts for twoyears during which time candidates for admission to the order areengaged almost entirely in prayer, meditation, and spiritual reading.When the novitiate has been completed the scholasticate begins.Students are obliged to read a course in arts and philosophy and toteach in some of the colleges of the society, after which they proceedto the study of theology. When the theological course has been endedthey are admitted as coadjutors or professed members according totheir ability and conduct. Between these two bodies, the coadjutorsand the professed, there is very little difference, except that theprofessed in addition to the ordinary vows pledge themselves to gowherever the Pope may send them, and besides, it is from this body asa rule that the higher officials of the order are selected. Laybrothers are also attached to the society.

When the Society of Jesus was founded, Protestantism had already madegreat strides in Northern Europe, and though the Latin countries werenot then affected no man could foresee what change a decade of yearsmight bring. St. Ignatius adopted the best precautions against thespread of heresy. While he himself remained in Rome engaged inorganising the members of his society and in establishing colleges andcharitable institutions, he sent his followers to all parts of Italy.Bishops availed themselves freely of their services as preachers andteachers. Colleges were opened in Venice, Naples, Bologna, Florence,and in many other leading cities. St. Charles Borromeo became thepatron and defender of the society in Milan. Everywhere the labours ofthe Jesuits led to a great religious revival, while by means of theircolleges they strengthened the faith of the rising generation. InSpain, too, the home of St. Ignatius the Jesuits received a friendlywelcome. Their colleges were crowded with students, as were theirchurches with the faithful. Difficulties, indeed, arose owing to thetendency of some of the Spanish Jesuits to have none but Spanishsuperiors, but with a little prudence these difficulties were overcomein 1593. Most of the best known writers on ecclesiastical subjects,Vasquez, Suarez, De Lugo, and Ripalda on Dogmatic Theology, Sanchez onMoral Theology, and Maldonatus and Pereira on Scripture belonged tothe Spanish province.

In France the society met with serious difficulties at first. Hatredof Spain and of everything that savoured of Spanish origin, dislike ofwhat was considered the excessive loyalty of the society to the Pope,and jealousy on the part of the University of Paris were the principalobstacles that were to be overcome. But notwithstanding these theJesuits found a home in Paris, where they opened the College deClermont (Louis-le-Grand), and they founded similar colleges inseveral of the leading cities of France. In the struggle against theCalvinists they were of great assistance to the Catholic body. Theprogress of their numerous colleges and the influence which theyacquired over the young men roused the fierce opposition of theUniversity, but being befriended by the court, where they wereretained as royal confessors, the Jesuits were enabled to hold theirground. During the wars of the League against Henry III. and Henry ofNavarre, though their position was one of extreme delicacy, theprudent action of their general, Aquaviva, in recommending hissubjects to respect the consciences of both parties saved thesituation. They were, however, expelled from Paris in 1594, but HenryIV. allowed them to return in 1603.

In the German States, Hungary, and Poland, where the fate ofCatholicity seemed trembling in the balance, the Jesuit Fathers stayedwhat threatened to be a triumphal progress for Protestantism. St.Ignatius soon despatched some of his disciples to the scene ofconflict under the leadership of the Blessed Peter Canisius.[18] Byhis sermons, his lectures as professor, his prudent suggestions tothose in authority, as well as by his controversial writings, and moreparticularly his celebrated Catechism, Canisius did more to stay theadvance of Protestantism in Germany than any single individual of hisage. Colleges were founded in Vienna, Ingoldstadt, Treves, Mainz, andin most of the cities of Germany that were not subject to theProtestant princes. From these colleges went forth young men who weredetermined to resist the further encroachments of heresy. Maximilianof Bavaria and the Emperor Ferdinand II., both of whom took such aprominent part in the Catholic Counter-Reformation, were pupils of theJesuits, and were but types of the men who left their colleges. InHungary, too, and in Poland the tide was turned in favour of theCatholic Church mainly by the exertions of the Jesuits. In Ireland,England and Scotland, in the Netherlands, and Sweden, in a wordwherever Catholic interests were endangered, the Jesuits risked theirlives in defence of the Catholic religion. It is on account of thedefeats that they inflicted on heresy at this period that the hatredof the Jesuits is so deep-rooted and so universal amongst Protestantseven to the present day.

The Ursulines, so called from their patron St. Ursula, began as areligious association of pious ladies formed by Angela de' Merici[19](Angela of Brescia) in 1537. At first the aim of the association wasto reclaim fallen women, to visit the sick, and to educate the young.The members lived in their own homes according to a scheme of lifedrawn up for their guidance, meeting only for certain spiritualexercises. In 1535 the foundress succeeded in bringing a few of themtogether into a small community. After her death in 1540 the communityincreased in numbers, and was approved by Paul III., who allowed theUrsulines to change their rules according to circumstances. For a longtime the Ursulines did not spread outside Brescia, but as their workbecame known, particularly their work as educationalists, they wereinvited to other parts of Italy. In Milan they had a warm friend inthe person of its Cardinal Archbishop, St. Charles Borromeo. The firstcommunity of the Ursulines was formed in France by Madame de Beuve. Arule was drawn up by Father Gonterey, S.J., and others of his society,and approved by Paul V. (1612). In a comparatively short time theUrsulines spread over most of the Catholic countries of Europe, sothat nearly all the most modern and best equipped schools for Catholicgirls were in their hands. In 1639 they went to Canada where theyopened the convent known as the Hotel-Dieu at Quebec, and in 1727 theysettled in New Orleans.

St. Teresa[20] (1515-82) is the reformer rather than the foundress ofthe Carmelite nuns. Being anxious from an early age to follow herreligious vocation, much against the wishes of her father she enteredthe convent of the Carmelite nuns at Avila (1535). After herprofession she fell ill, and for years was subject to excruciatingtorture. During this period she turned her mind completely tospiritual subjects, and was visited by God with most extraordinarymarks of divine favour, an account of which is to be found in her lifewritten by herself, in her /Relations/, and in many other of herworks. She determined to return to the primitive austerity of theCarmelite rule, and in 1562 she founded the first convent of DiscalcedCarmelite nuns at Avila. Through her exertions other convents of theorder adopted the reform, and in 1580 the existence of the DiscalcedCarmelites as a separate order was approved. She died in 1582, andforty years later she was canonised by Gregory XV.

The Sisters of the Visitation were established by St. Francis deSales[21] and St. Frances de Chantal.[22] St. Francis de Sales (1567-1622), so called from the castle of Sales in Savoy at which he wasborn, made his rhetoric and philosophical studies at Paris under theJesuits. From Paris he went to Padua for law, and having received hisdiploma he returned to his native country, where his father hadsecured for him a place as senator and had arranged a very desirablemarriage. But St. Francis, feeling that he had been called by God toanother sphere of life, threw up his position at the bar, accepted theoffice of provost of the chapter of Geneva, and received Holy Orders(1593). A great part of the diocese of Geneva was at this time overrunby the heretics. St. Francis threw himself with ardour into the workof converting those who had fallen away especially in the district ofLe Chablais, where he won over thousands to the faith. He becamecoadjutor-bishop of Geneva, and on the death of his friend Claude deGranier he was appointed to the See (1602). In conjunction with Madamde Chantal he established a community of women at Annecy in 1610. Hisidea at first was that the little community should not be bound by theenclosure, but should devote themselves to their own sanctificationand to the visitation of the sick and the poor. Objections, however,having been raised against such an innovation, he drew up for thecommunity a rule based mainly on the rule of St. Augustine. In 1618the society received recognition as a religious order under the titleof the Order of the Visitation of the Blessed Virgin. The orderundertook the work of educating young girls as well as of visiting thesick. It spread rapidly in Italy, France, Germany, Poland, and lateron in the United States.

The Sisters of Charity,[23] or the Grey Sisters as they were called,were founded by St. Vincent de Paul. While St. Vincent was cure ofChatillon-les-Dombes he established in the parish a confraternity ofcharitable ladies for the care of the sick, the poor, and the orphans.The experiment was so successful that he founded similarconfraternities in Paris, and wherever he gave missions throughout thecountry. Having found, however, that in Paris the ladies of charitywere accustomed to entrust the work to their servants he brought anumber of young girls from the country, who could be relied upon tocarry out his wishes. These he looked after with a special solicitude,and in 1633 Madam Le Gras took a house in Paris, where she broughttogether a few of the most promising of them to form a littlecommunity. In 1642 after the community had moved into a house oppositeSt. Lazare, some of the sisters were allowed to take vows. The Sistersof Charity have been at all times exceedingly popular in France. Bytheir schools, their orphanages, their hospitals, and by theirkindness to the poor and the suffering they won for themselves a placein the hearts of the French people. For a while during the worst daysof the Revolution their work was suspended, and their communities weredisbanded; but their suppression was deplored so generally that in1801 the Superioress was commanded to re-organise the society. OutsideFrance the Sisters of Charity had several houses in Poland,Switzerland, Spain, and Germany.

Mary Ward[24] (1585-1645) was born of a good Catholic family inEngland. She joined the Poor Clares at St. Omer in 1600, but,preferring an active to a contemplative life, she gathered around hera few companions, and formed a little community at St. Omer mainly forthe work of education. According to her plan, which was derived ingreat measure from the constitution of the Society of Jesus (hence thename Jesuitesses given to her followers by her opponents), her sisterswere not bound by the enclosure, were not to wear any distinctivedress, and were to be subject directly only to Rome. Seriousobjections were raised immediately against such an institute,particularly as Pius V. had declared expressly that the enclosure andsolemn vows were essential conditions for the recognition of religiouscommunities of women. Branches were opened in the Netherlands,Austria, and Italy under the patronage of the highest civilauthorities. As the opponents of the community continued their attacksthe foundress was summoned to Rome to make her defence (1629), but inthe following year the decree of suppression was issued. The house inMunich was allowed to continue, and at the advice of the Pope sheopened a house in Rome. The principal change introduced was that thehouses should be subject to the bishops of the dioceses in which theywere situated. At last in 1703, on the petition of Maximilian Emanuelof Bavaria and of Mary the wife of James II., the rule was approvedformally by Clement XI. The society continued to spread especially inBavaria. The followers of Mary Ward are designated variously, theInstitute of Mary, Englische Fraulein, and Loreto Nuns from the namegiven to Rathfarnham, the mother-house of the Irish branch, founded byFrances Ball in 1821. ----------

[1] /Histoire du Ven Didier de la Cour, reformateur des Benedictins/, 1772.

[2] De Lama, /Bibliotheque des ecrivains de la congregation de St. Maur/, 1882.

[3] Da Forli, /Annali Cappuccini/, 1882.

[4] Dumortier, /Saint Gaetan di Thiene/, 1882.

[5] Dubois, /Le bienheureux A. M. Zaccaria fondateur des Barnabites/, 1896.

[6] Sylvain, /Histoire de St. Charles Borromee/, 3 vols., 1884.

[7] Perraud, /L'Oratoire de France au XVIIe et au XVIIIe siecle/.

[8] Perraud, /L'Oratoire de France au XVIIe et au XVIIIe siecle/, 1866.

[9] Girard, /La vie de St. Jean de Dieu/, 1691.

[10] Hubert, /Der hl. Joseph Calasanza, stifter der frommen Schulen/, 1886.

[11] Ravelet-O'Meara, /The Life of the Blessed John Baptist de la Salle/, 1888. Lucard, /Annales de l'Institut des Freres des Ecoles Chretiennes/, 1883.

[12] Paris became an archiepiscopal See in 1622.

[13] Lorti, /Saint Vincent de Paul et sa mission sociale/, 1880.

[14] Degert, /Histoire des seminaires francais/, 1912.

[15] Faillon, /Vie de M. Olier/, 3 vols., 1873. Thompson, /Life of Jean Jacques Olier/.

[16] Thompson, /Life of St. Ignatius/, 1910. Clair, /La vie de S. Ignace/, 1894.

[17] /Constitutiones Societatis Jesu Latine et Hispanice/, 1892.

[18] Duhr, /Geschichte der Jesuiten in den Landen Deutscher Zunge/, Bd. i., 1907.

[19] O'Reilly, /Life of St. Angela/, 1880. Meer, /Die ersten Schwestern des Ursulinenordens/, 1897.

[20] /Autobiography of St. Teresa/, tr. from the French by B. Zimmerman, 1904.

[21] Hamon, /Vie de St. Francois de Sales/, 2 vols., 1875.

[22] Bougaud, /Histoire de Ste. J. F. Chantal et des origines de la Visitation/, 1899.

[23] Marcel, /Les Soeurs de Charite/, 1888.

[24] Salome, /Mother Mary Ward, a Foundress of the 17th Century/, 1901.

(d) The Thirty Years' War.

See bibliography, chap. ii. (a). Klopp, /Der Dreissigjahrige Krieg bis Zum Tode Gustav. Adolfs u.s.w./, 3 Bde, 1891-6. Bougeant, /Histoire des guerres et des negociations qui precederent le traite de Westphalie/, 3 vols., 1751. Ritter, /Deutsche Geschichte im Zeitalter der Gegenreformation und des Dreissigjahrigen Krieges/, 1889. Huber, /Geschichte Osterreichs/, Bd. v., 1896. /Nunziaturberichte aus Deutschland/, 1892. De Meaux, /La reforme et la politique Francaise en Europe jusqu' a la paix de Westphalie/, 1889. /Cambridge Modern History/, vol. iii. (chap. iii.).

The Religious Peace of Augsburg (1555) did not put an end to thestruggle between the Catholics and Protestants in Germany. Feeling onboth sides was too intense to permit either party to be satisfied withthe arrangement or to accept it as a permanent definition of theirrespective rights. The German Catholics were indignant that a partythat had sprung up so recently and that had done such injury to theirChurch and country, should be rewarded for heresy and disloyalty tothe Emperor by such concessions. Nor was their indignation likely tobe appeased by the manner in which Lutheran and Calvinist preacherscaricatured and denounced the doctrines and practices of the Catholicworld. Possibly it was, however, the clause of the Augsburg Peaceknown as the /Ecclesiasticum Reservatum/ that gave rise to the mostheated controversies, and played the greatest part in bringing aboutcivil war. By this clause it was provided that in case any of thebishops and abbots passed over to the reformed religion they could notbring with them the ecclesiastical property attached to their office.The Lutherans, who had benefited so largely by such secessions fromthe Church in the past, objected to this clause at the Diet, andprotested against the decision when their objections were overruled.

Having realised that the Emperor was unable or unwilling to preventthem they continued to act in open defiance of the /EcclesiasticamReservatum/. Where the territories of a Catholic bishop were situatedin close proximity to the states of Protestant princes recourse washad to various devices to acquire the lands of the Church. Sometimesthe bishop was induced to surrender them in return for a fixed grantor pension, sometimes the chapter was persuaded to elect as bishopsome scion of a princely family, who was well-known to have leaningstowards Protestantism, and in a few cases the bishops themselvessolved the problem by seceding from the Catholic Church whilecontinuing to administer the territories to which their episcopaloffice was their only title. In this way two archbishoprics andfourteen bishoprics, amongst them being such wealthy Sees asMagdeburg, Bremen, Brandenburg, and Osnabruck had passed into thehands of the Lutherans, and it required a very special effort toprevent two such important centres as Cologne and Aachen from meetingwith a similar fate. Gebhard, Archbishop of Cologne, a man ofscandalously immoral life, completed his infamous career by taking ashis wife one who had been his concubine, announcing at the same timethat he had gone over to Calvinism. The chapter of Cologne Cathedralbacked by the people took steps to rid themselves of such a superior,and the chapter was supported warmly by both Pope and Emperor. Gebhardwas obliged to escape to Strassburg in the cathedral of which he helda canonry, and where he succeeded in creating confusion. Twoarchbishops claimed the See of Strassburg, one loyal to the CatholicChurch and one favouring Protestantism. This disgraceful contentionwent on for years, till at last the Protestant champion was induced tosurrender on the payment of a large composition. The See of Aachen wasseized by force in 1581, and was held for fifteen years, at the end ofwhich the Protestants were obliged to abandon their claims.

Unfortunately for the Catholics the Emperors who succeeded Charles V.were not strong enough to deal with such a dangerous situation.Ferdinand I., sincere Catholic though he was, mindful of the terribledisasters brought upon his country by the religious wars, strove withall his might against their renewal. His successor Maximilian II.(1564-76) was so strongly inclined towards Protestantism that he mademany concessions to the Protestants even in his own hereditarydominions. He invited distinguished Lutheran preachers to Vienna,conferred on Protestants influential positions at court, and gavepermission for Protestant religious services at least to the nobles ofBohemia, Silesia, and Hungary. Several of the prince-bishops anxiousto stand well with the Emperor attempted to introduce reforms inCatholic liturgy and Catholic practices without any reference to theHoly See. The alarming spread of Protestantism in Austria, Hungary,Bohemia, and Silesia, fostered as it was by the general policy of theEmperor, tended to make the position of the Catholic Church extremelyinsecure.[1]

But fortunately at that time a strong Catholic reaction began to makeitself felt. The reforming decrees of the Council of Trent did notfail to produce a decided improvement in the condition of the bishopsand clergy. The new religious orders, particularly the Jesuits, hadthrown themselves into the work of defending the Catholic position,and the colleges established by the Jesuits were turning out theyounger generation of Catholics well-equipped for the struggle thatlay before them. The catechisms which the Jesuit preachers scatteredbroadcast through the country, and the attention paid by them to theproper religious instruction of the people helped to remove the badimpressions produced by the misrepresentations of the Lutherans, andtended to arouse a strong, healthy, educated Catholic opinion inpublic life. Fortunately, too, at the time when the Emperors were adanger rather than a protection to the Church, the rules of Bavariaundertook boldly the defence of the old religion, and placedthemselves at the head of the Catholic forces.[2] Albert V. (1550-79)insisted on the promulgation of the decrees of the Council of Trent,and made an oath of loyalty to the Catholic Church an indispensablecondition for office in his kingdom. He favoured the Jesuits,encouraged their schools, and did everything in his power tostrengthen Catholicism amongst his subjects. His policy was continuedby Maximilian I. (1598-1651), who became the recognised leader of theadvanced Catholic party in Germany.

This general unexpected revival, the success of which was shown by thefervour of the people, the unwillingness of the authorities to makeany further concessions, and the determination of all parties toinsist on the strict observance of the /Ecclesiasticum Reservatum/filled the Protestants with such alarm that their princes began toinsist on new guarantees. The Emperor, Rudolph II. (1576-1612),though, unlike his predecessor, a good Catholic, was a mostincompetent ruler, devoting most of his time to alchemy and other suchstudies rather than to the work of government. He endeavoured to solvethe religious difficulties in Silesia and Bohemia by yielding to theProtestant demands (1609), but the interference of his brotherMatthias led to new complications, and finally to Rudolph's abdicationof the sovereignty of Bohemia (1611). Frederick IV. of the Palatinatewas a strong Protestant, and was closely connected with the reformingparty in England, Holland, and France. He thought he saw in the strifebetween the members of the House of Habsburg an opportunity ofimproving the position of Protestantism in the empire, of weakeningthe claims of the House of Habsburg to the imperial dignity, andpossibly also of establishing himself as ruler of a united Germany.

An incident that took place at Donauworth,[3] a city near the Rhine,helped him to realise his scheme of a great Protestant federation.This city was almost exclusively Catholic in 1555, but in one way oranother the Protestants had succeeded in improving their position tillat last only the abbey church remained to the Catholics. Here on theFeast of Corpus Christi in the year 1606 the customary procession ofthe Blessed Sacrament was attacked and dispersed, and the Catholicswere treated with the greatest cruelty. When the matter was broughtbefore the Emperor the city was placed under the ban of the empire,and Maximilian I. of Bavaria was entrusted with the task of carryingout the decree. He advanced with a strong army and captured the city.As the war indemnity could not be raised he retained possession of it,restoring to the Catholics everything they had lost. Frederick IV.made a strong appeal to the Protestant princes to show theirresentment at such an act of aggression, pointing out to them that thefate of Donauworth would be the fate of all their territories unlessthey took united action. As a consequence when both parties met at theDiet of Regensburg (1608) the excitement was intense, and when theEmperor appealed to his princes for support against the Turks, theProtestants refused to lend their aid unless they receivedsatisfactory explanations. The Catholics, encouraged by Maximilian,were equally unconciliatory, with the result that the Diet disbandedwithout having been able to arrive at an agreement.

A short time after the Diet most of the Protestant princes met atAhausen and formed a confederation known as the /Union/ (1608) at thehead of which stood Frederick IV. of the Palatinate, while a littlelater a large number of the Catholic princes bound themselves togetherin the /League/ and accepted Maximilian of Bavaria as their leader(1609). Thus Germany was divided once again into two hostile camps,and only a very trifling incident was required to plunge the countryinto another civil war. For a time it seemed as if the succession tothe Duchy of Cleves was to be the issue that would lead to thecatastrophe. Duke John William of Cleves had died without any directheir, and as the religious issue was still undecided in his territory,the appointment of a successor was a matter of the greatest importanceto both parties. The Emperor with the approval of the /League/nominated his brother Leopold as administrator, while the /Union/,having strengthened itself by an alliance with France, was prepared totake the field in favour of a Protestant. Henry IV. of France, anxiousto turn the disputes that had broken out between the different membersof the imperial family to the advantage of himself and his country,was actually on his way to take part in the campaign when he wasassassinated. On his death both parties agreed to a temporary truce(1610), and thus the outbreak of the war was delayed for some time.

This delay was very fortunate for the Catholics in Germany. With suchan Emperor as Rudolph pitted against a man like Henry IV. there couldhave been very little doubt about the issue. Even in his ownterritories Rudolph could not maintain his authority against hisbrother Matthias, in whose interest he was obliged to abdicate thethrone of Bohemia (1611). On the death of Rudolph (1612) Matthiassucceeded though not without considerable difficulty. As Emperor heshowed himself much less favourable to the Protestants than he hadbeen during the years when he was disputing with his brother, but,however well inclined, he was powerless to put an end to the divisionthat existed or to control the policy of the /League/ or the /Union/.The Duchy of Cleves was still an object of dispute. While the GermanProtestants invoked the aid of William of Orange and the DutchCalvinists, the Catholics called in the forces of Spain. The Emperorcould merely look on while his subjects allied themselves withforeigners to settle their own domestic troubles.

Meanwhile far more serious trouble was brewing in Bohemia, where thefollowers of Hus had blended with the disciples of Luther, and wherein many centres there was a strong feeling against the CatholicChurch. According to the concessions granted by Rudolph (1609),knights and free cities were at liberty to build Protestant churches,but a similar concession was not made to the subjects of Catholiclords. Regardless of or misinterpreting the terms of the concession,however, the Protestant tenants of the Archbishop of Prague and of theAbbot of Braunau built churches for their own use. The archbishop andabbot, considering themselves aggrieved, appealed to the imperialcourt. According to the decision of this court the church built on thelands of the archbishop was to be pulled down, and the other on thelands of the abbot was to be closed (1618). A deputation representingthe Protestant party was appointed to interview the imperialrepresentatives at Prague, and the reply to their remonstrances beingregarded as unfavourable, the mob attacked the building, and hurledthe councillors who were supposed to be responsible for it through thewindows.

Under the direction of Count Thurn and some other Protestant nobles aprovisional government was established in Bohemia, arrangements weremade to organise an army, and as a beginning in the work of reform theJesuits were expelled. Owing to the strong anti-German feeling of thepopulace the rebellion spread rapidly in Bohemia, and Count Mansfeldhastened to the relief of the insurgents with an army placed at hisdisposal by the /Union/. Most of the cities of Bohemia were capturedby the rebels, and the whole of northern Austria stood in the gravestdanger. At this critical moment the Emperor Matthias passed away, andwas succeeded by Ferdinand II. (1619-37). The latter was a devotedCatholic, trained by the Jesuits, and had already done immense serviceto the Church by wiping out almost every trace of heresy in hishereditary dominions. That such a man should succeed to the imperialdignity at such a time was highly distasteful to the Protestants ofBohemia. It was not, therefore, to be wondered at that they refused toacknowledge him as king, and elected in his stead Frederick V. of thePalatinate (1619).

The situation looked exceedingly serious for Ferdinand II. On the oneside he was being pressed hard by the Turks, and on the other he wasbeset so closely by the Bohemian rebels that even the very city ofVienna was in danger of falling into their hands. His opponentFrederick V. could rely upon the forces of the /Union/ in thecampaign, and besides, as the son-in-law of James I. of England andthe nephew of Maurice of Orange the successful leader of the Dutch andthe sworn ally of the French Huguenots, Frederick had littledifficulty in persuading himself that at last Europe was to be freedfrom the domination of the House of Habsburg. He marched into Bohemia,and was crowned solemnly at Prague in 1619. But if Frederick couldcount upon support from many quarters so, too, could Ferdinand.Maximilian II. of Bavaria was active on his side, as were indeed thewhole forces of the /League/. Saxony, too, which was devoted toLutheranism and detested the Calvinist tendencies of Frederick,fearing that a victory for him might mean a victory for Calvinism,ranged itself under the banner of the Emperor. The Pope sent generoussubsidies, as did also Spain. Finally, during the course of thecampaign Ferdinand was fortunate in having the service of two of theablest generals of their time, Tilly,[4] who commanded the forces ofthe /League/, and Wallenstein[5] who had charge of the imperialtroops. Maximilian of Bavaria marched into Austria at the head of thearmy of the /League/ and drove the rebels back into Bohemia, whitherhe followed them, and inflicted upon them a severe defeat in thebattle of the White Mountain (1620). Frederick was obliged to savehimself by flight after a reign of a few months. The leaders of therebellion were arrested and put to death. In return for the serviceshe had rendered Maximilian of Bavaria became ruler of the Palatinate,from which Frederick had been deposed. But though Frederick wasdefeated the struggle was by no means finished. The Count of Mansfeld,acting on behalf of the /Union/, espoused the cause of the Palgraveand was supported by an army led by Christian IV. of Denmark,Frederick's brother-in-law, who marched into Germany to the aid of hisfriends. James I. of England, though unwilling to despatch an army,helped by grants of money. The war was renewed with great vigour, butthe allies had little chance of success against two such experiencedgenerals as Tilly and Wallenstein. Christian IV. suffered a terribledefeat at the Barenberg near Lutter (1626), and three years later hewas forced to agree to the Peace of Lubeck (1629), by which hepromised to withdraw from Germany and never again to mix himself up inits domestic affairs.

The forces of the Emperor and of the /League/ were so victorious allalong the line that the former felt himself strong enough to deal withthe burning question of the ecclesiastical property that had beenseized. In a short time he issued what is known as the /Edict ofRestitution/ (1629), by which he ordered that all property acquired bythe Protestants contrary to the /Ecclesiasticum Reservatum/ clause ofthe Peace of Augsburg (1555) should be restored. He commanded,besides, that the terms of the Peace of Passau-Augsburg should bestrictly observed, allowed Catholic and Protestant princes the rightof establishing their own religion in their own territories (/Cuiusregio illius religio/), and permitted Protestant subjects of Catholicprinces who felt their consciences aggrieved to emigrate if theywished to do so. About the justice of this decree there could be verylittle dispute, for it dealt only with the return of what had beenacquired by open or veiled spoliation, but it may well be doubtedwhether it was prudent considering the circumstances of the case. Inthe first place, it meant the loss of enormous territories for some ofthe Protestant princes who had enriched themselves from the lands ofthe bishops and abbots. During the earlier stages of the war many ofthose men had stood loyally by the Emperor in his struggle againstrebels and foreign invaders, but now, mindful of their own temporalinterests and the future of their religion, they were prepared torange themselves on the side of their co-religionists in what hadbecome purely a religious war. France, too, alarmed by the victory ofFerdinand II., and fearing that a victory for the House of Habsburgmight lead to the establishment of a united empire and the indefinitepostponement of the project of securing for France the provinces alongthe Rhine, was only too glad to pledge its support to the Protestantprinces in the war against the Emperor. The young and valiant king ofSweden, Gustavus Adolphus,[6] was a keen spectator of the trend ofaffairs in Germany, and was anxious to secure for his country theGerman provinces along the shores of the Baltic. He was not withouthopes also that, by putting himself forward as the champion ofProtestantism and by helping the Protestant princes to overthrow theHouse of Habsburg, he might set up for himself on the ruins of theHoly Roman Empire a great Protestant confederacy embracing most ofNorthern Europe. Finally, even though Saxony had been induced byspecial concessions to accept the Edict of Restitution, it might havebeen anticipated that in a purely religious struggle between Catholicsand Protestants hatred of the Roman Church would prove stronger thanthe prejudices against Geneva, and its ruler would be forced to jointhe enemies of the Emperor.

Gustavus Adolphus, having strengthened himself by a formal agreementwith France, marched into Germany at the head of a body of pickedtroops (1630). He issued a proclamation announcing that he had come tofree the Germans from slavery, and he opened negotiations with theProtestant princes, some of whom to do them justice showed themselvesvery reluctant to become allies of a foreign invader. Ferdinand II.was but poorly prepared to meet such an attack. The imperial troopshad been disbanded, and what was much worse, Wallenstein had retiredinto private life. Many of the Catholic princes, notably Maximilian ofBavaria, resented his rapid promotion and the grant that had been madeto him of the Duchy of Mecklenburg. They prejudiced the mind ofFerdinand against him just at the time his services were most urgentlyrequired. Nor, when the first fit of zeal had passed away, were allthe Catholic princes anxious to hasten to the support of the Emperor.Tilly with the forces of the /League/ advanced to bar the progress ofthe Swedes. He was defeated at Breitenfeld (1631) and his army wasnearly destroyed. Gustavus Adolphus pushed rapidly forward towardsBavaria, captured the cities of Wurzburg, Mainz, and Augsburg, and fora time it seemed as if his advance to Vienna was going to be atriumphal march. Over-joyed with the success of his campaign he beganto act as if he were really emperor of Germany, thereby giving greatoffence to many of his German followers. His dreams of power were,however, brought to an abrupt termination. In April 1632 he fought anindecisive battle at Rain on the Lech, where Tilly was woundedmortally, but in November he was slain at Lutzen though his army wasvictorious.

Ferdinand found himself in great danger. He appealed for aid to UrbanVIII. and to Spain but at first the former, believing that thestruggle was more political than religious, refused to assist him,though later on, when he realised that the very existence of theCatholic Church in the empire was endangered, he changed his mind andforwarded generous subsidies. Maximilian of Bavaria, who had heldaloof for a time, espoused warmly the cause of the Emperor, andWallenstein, who had been recalled in the hour of danger, raised animmense army in an incredibly short space of time. Oxenstierna, thechancellor of Sweden, took up the work of his master Adolphus andsucceeded in bringing about an alliance with the Protestant princes(1633). So low had the national feeling sunk in the empire that theProtestant princes consented to appoint this upstart as director ofthe campaign and to fight under his command. France supplied the fundsto enable the Swedes to carry on the war. For some time very littlewas done on either side. Negotiations were carried on by Wallensteinwith the Swedes, with Saxony, and with France. It was represented tothe Emperor that his chosen general was guilty of gross disloyalty.Though the charge of absolute disloyalty has not been proved, stillcertain actions of Wallenstein coupled with his inactivity gave goodcolour to the accusation. The Emperor dismissed him from his command,and a little later he was murdered by some of his own soldiers.

The war and the negotiations were renewed alternately, but without anyresult as peace was not desired by either Sweden or France. At lastthe forces of the Emperor gained a signal victory at Nordlingen(1634). This success had at least one good result in that it detachedthe Elector of Saxony from the side of Sweden. He had never thrownhimself whole-heartedly into the struggle, as he disliked the idea ofsupporting a foreign invader against his own Emperor, and was notsorry to escape from a very awkward position. The Peace of Prague wasconcluded between the Emperor and Saxony (1635), according to whichthe Edict of Restitution was abandoned in great measure, and religiousfreedom was guaranteed to the Protestants of Silesia.

But to promote their own interests the Swedes and the French insistedon complete equality between the Protestants and Catholics as anindispensable condition for peace. From this time onward it was apurely political struggle, inspired solely by the desire of these twocountries to weaken Germany and to break the power of the House ofHabsburg. On the death of Ferdinand II. in 1637 it was thought thatthe war might have been ended, but these hopes were disappointed.Ferdinand III. (1637-57) who succeeded offered a general amnesty atthe Diet of Regensburg (1641) without avail. French soldiers crossedthe frontiers to support the Swedes and the Protestants. Finally afterlong negotiations the Peace of Westphalia (1648) put an end to astruggle, in which Germany had suffered enormously, and from whichforeigners were to derive the greatest benefits.

The Peace of Westphalia was dictated to Germany by France and Sweden.As a reward for the injury they had inflicted on the country bothreceived large slices of German territory. France insisted on gettingpossession of Alsace, while Sweden received large grants of territoryalong the Baltic together with a war indemnity of five millionthalers. In order to provide compensation for the secular princes,portion of whose territories had been ceded to these two powers, andalso to reward others who had suffered for their alliance with Sweden,the secularisation of a considerable amount of the ecclesiasticalstates was arranged. Saxony, Brandenburg, Hesse-Cassel, Brunswick, andMecklenburg were enriched by the acquisition of lands formerly ruledover by the bishops and abbots. This step meant that the Protestantstates of Germany were strengthened at the expense of the CatholicChurch, and that the people of these districts being now transferredto Protestant rulers were in great danger of being drawn over to thereligion of their new masters. The jurisdiction of the bishops wasabolished in these territories, and even in some of the new chapters,as for example at Osnabruck, Protestant canons were installed side byside with Catholics.

Furthermore, it was arranged that the terms of the Peace of Augsburgshould be observed, with this important change, that the rightsguaranteed in it to the Lutherans should be extended even to those whodid not accept the Augsburg Confession. This concession was intendedto meet the demands of the Calvinists. Again, complete equality wasestablished between Catholics and Protestants in the empire. To giveeffect to this clause it was arranged that in all imperial committeesand courts both parties should be represented in equal numbers. Incase religious issues were discussed at the Diet, where the Catholicsstill had the majority, it was agreed that the matter should not bedecided by voting but by friendly compromise. The princes werepermitted to determine the religion of their subjects, the principalrestriction being that those subjects who were in the enjoyment of acertain form of public or private religious worship in 1624 should notbe forced to change their religion. For the others nothing remainedbut to seek a home where their conscientious convictions might berespected. In regard to ecclesiastical property the year 1624 wastaken as the normal year, the property that the Protestants held inthat year being allowed to remain in their hands. The /EcclesiasticumReservatum/ clause was retained, and made obligatory on both parties.These terms, it was provided, should not extend to the Protestants inthe hereditary dominions of the Emperor.

The Peace of Westphalia by its practical recognition of stateneutrality in religious matters put an end to the constitution of theHoly Roman Empire, and reduced the Emperor to the position of a merefigurehead, depending for strength entirely on his own hereditarystates. Instead of preventing disunion it made national unity almostimpossible, and exposed Germany to attack from any hostile neighbourwho might wish to strengthen himself by encouraging strife amongst itsvarious states. Besides, it inflicted a severe injury on the Churchnot merely by its recognition of the Protestant religion, but by theseizure of ecclesiastical property, the abolition of bishoprics, theinterference with cathedral chapters, and the recognition of the rightof the temporal sovereign to determine the religion of his subjects.It was no wonder then that the papal legate Fabio Chigi lodged astrong protest against the Peace, and that the protest was renewed inthe most solemn form by Innocent X. (1648).[7] This action was notinspired by the Pope's opposition to peace. On the contrary, again andagain during the civil war the Holy See had sought to bring about afriendly understanding, but no Pope, unless he was disloyal to thetrust confided in him, could permit such interference in purelyreligious matters without making it clear that he was not a consentingparty. Innocent X. foresaw that this was but the herald of new claimson the part of the civil rulers, and that in a short time even theCatholic sovereigns would endeavour to regulate the ecclesiasticalaffairs of their subjects without reference to the authority of theChurch. Nor was it long until events showed that his suspicions werenot without good foundation. ----------

[1] Losche, /Geschichte des Protestantismus in Osterreich/, 1902.

[2] Hartmann, /Der Prozess gegen die Protestantischen Landstande in Bayern unter Albrecht V./, 1904.

[3] Stieve, /Der Kampf um Donauworth/, 1875.

[4] Villermont, /Tilly ou la guerre de trente ans/, 1860.

[5] Halwich, /Geschichte Wallensteins/, 1910.

[6] Gfrofer, /Gustav. Adolf./, 1863.

[7] Bull, /Zelo domus Dei/.