CHAPTER IX

THE PAPACY

See bibliography, chap. iv. (b). Ciacconius, /Vitae et res gestae Romanorum Pontificum/, 1677. Sandini, /Vitae Rom. Pontif./, etc., 1753. Guarnacci, /Vitae et res gestae Rom. Pontif./, etc., 1751. Ranke, op. cit., Reumont, op. cit. Della Gattina, /Histoire diplomatique des conclaves/, 1865. /Bullarium Romanum/.

Difficult as had been the situation with which the Popes wereconfronted during the sixteenth century and the first half of theseventeenth century, when heresy was rampant throughout Europe, andwhen Catholic nations were obliged to fight for their very existence,it was not a whit more difficult or more critical than that created bythe increasing and selfish demands of Catholic rulers, whichconfronted their successors during the age of absolute government. ThePeace of Westphalia (1648), by giving official sanction to theprinciple of state neutrality, meant nothing less than a completerevolution in the relations that had existed hitherto between Churchand State. So long as the Christian world was united in one greatreligious family, acknowledging the Pope as the common Father ofChristendom, it was not strange that in disputes between princes andsubjects or between the rulers of independent states the authority ofthe Pope as supreme arbitrator should have been recognised, or thathis interference even in temporal matters should not have beenregarded as unwarrantable.

But once the religious unity of Europe was broken by the separation ofentire nations from the Church, and once the politico-religiousconstitution of the Holy Roman Empire was destroyed by the acceptanceof the principle of religious neutrality, the Popes felt that theirinterference even indirectly in temporal matters, however justifiableit might be in itself, could produce no good results. Hence apart fromtheir action as temporal sovereigns of the Papal States, a positionthat obliged the Popes to take part in political affairs, the wholetendency was to confine themselves strictly to spiritual matters, andto preserve harmony if possible between Church and State. This policydid not, however, satisfy the selfish designs of rulers, who haddetermined to crush all representative institutions and to assert forthemselves complete and unlimited authority. Catholic rulers, jealousof the increased powers secured by Protestant princes through theexercise of supreme ecclesiastical jurisdiction, determined to assertfor themselves a somewhat similar authority over the Catholic Churchin their own territories. It was no longer the supposed inroads of theChurch upon the domain of the State but the attacks of the State uponthe rights of the Church, that were likely to disturb the goodrelations between Catholic princes and the Pope. These rulers demandedan overwhelming voice in all ecclesiastical appointments; theyinsisted upon exercising the /Royal Placet/ upon papal documents andepiscopal pronouncements; they would tolerate no longer the privilegesand exemptions admitted by their predecessors in favour of clerics orof ecclesiastical property; they claimed the right of dictating to thecardinals who should be Pope and of dictating to the Pope who shouldbe cardinals; of controlling education in their own dominions; ofdetermining the laws and rules concerning marriages and matrimonialdispensations, and of fixing the constitutions of those religiousorders the existence of which they were willing to tolerate.

Unfortunately in their designs for transferring ecclesiasticaljurisdiction from the Popes to the crown the princes were favoured bymany of the bishops, who were annoyed at the continual interference ofRome and who failed to realise that the king was a much greater dangerto their independence than the Pope; by a large body of clerics andlaymen, who looked to the civil authority for promotion; by theJansenists who detested Rome, because Rome had barred the way againstthe speculative and practical religious revolution which theycontemplated; by the philosophers and rationalists, many of whom,though enemies of absolute rule, did not fail to recognise thatdisputes between Church and State, leading necessarily to a weakeningof Church authority, meant the weakening of dogmatic Christianity; andby liberal-minded Catholics of the /Aufklarung/ school, who thoughtthat every blow dealt at Rome meant a blow struck for the policy ofmodernising the discipline, government, and faith of the Church. Theeighteenth century was a period of transition from the politico-religious views of the Middle Ages to those of modern times. It was aperiod of conflict between two ideas of the relations that shouldexist between Church and State. The Popes were called upon to defendnot indeed their right to interfere in temporal matters, for of thatthere was no question, but their right to exercise control in purelyspiritual affairs. It is necessary to bear this in mind if one wishesto appreciate the policy of those, upon whom was placed the terribleresponsibility of governing the Church during the one hundred andfifty years that elapsed between the Peace of Westphalia and theoutbreak of the French Revolution.

In the conclave that followed the death of Innocent X., CardinalChigi, who had been nuncio at Cologne, envoy-extraordinary of the HolySee during the negotiations that ended in the Peace of Westphalia, andafterwards Secretary of State, was elected, and took the title ofAlexander VII.[1] (1655-67). At first the people were rejoiced becausethe new Pope had shown himself so determined an opponent of thatnepotism, which had dimmed the glory of so many of his predecessors,but at the request of the foreign ambassadors and with the approval ofthe cardinals he changed his policy after some time, brought some ofhis relatives to Rome, and allowed them too much influence. Hiselection had been opposed by Cardinal Mazarin in the name of France,and throughout his reign he was doomed to suffer severely from theunfriendly and high-handed action of Louis XIV., who despatched anarmy to the Papal States to revenge an insult to his ambassador, theDuc de Crequi, and forced the Pope to sign the disgraceful Peace ofPisa (1664). Alexander VII. condemned the Jansenistic distinctionbetween law and fact by the Bull, /Ad Sanctam Petri Sedem/ (1665), toenforce which he drew up a formulary of faith to be signed by theFrench clergy and religious. He observed an attitude of neutrality inthe disputes between Spain and Portugal, secured the return of theJesuits to Venice, and welcomed to Rome Queen Christina of Sweden, whoabandoned Lutheranism to return to the Catholic Church.

His successor, Cardinal Rospigliosi, formerly nuncio at Madrid andSecretary of State was proclaimed Pope as Clement IX. (1667-69). Hewas deeply religious, generous in his donations to the poor and tohospitals, and uninfluenced by any undue attachment to his relations.He put an end to the religious disorders that had reigned in Portugalsince 1648, when that country seceded from Spain to which it had beenunited since 1580, and proclaimed the Duke of Braganza king under thetitle of John IV. Matters had reached such a crisis that many of thebishoprics in Portugal and the Portuguese colonies were left vacant.In 1668 after the conclusion of the Peace of Lisbon the Pope appointedthose who had been nominated to the vacant Sees. Deceived by the falserepresentations made to him from France, he restored the Frenchbishops who had adhered publicly to the distinction between law andfact. He offered generous assistance to Venice more especially in itsdefence of Crete against the Turks. During his reign he canonised MaryMagdalen de Pazzi, and Peter of Alcantara.

On the death of Clement IX. the cardinals could not at first agreeupon any candidate, but finally as a compromise they elected, muchagainst his own will, Cardinal Altieri, then an old man eighty yearsof age.[2] He was proclaimed as Clement X. (1670-76). Unable totransact much business himself he left too much in the hands ofothers, especially to Cardinal Paoluzzi. He encouraged and assistedthe Poles in their struggles against the Turks, and resisted thedemands of Louis XIV. concerning the /Regalia/. He canonised JohnCajetan, Philip Benitius, Francis Borgia, Louis Bertrand, and Rose ofLima.

In the conclave that followed the demise of Clement X. CardinalOdescalchi, against whom France had exercised the veto on a previousoccasion, was elected and took the name of Innocent XI.[3] (1676-1689). He was zealous for religion, charitable to the poor, economicand prudent in the administration of the Papal States, anxious for animprovement in clerical education, and a strong opponent of everythingthat savoured of nepotism. His whole reign was troubled by theinsolent and overbearing demands of Louis XIV. in regard to the/Regalia/, the right of asylum, and the Declaration of the FrenchClergy (1682), but Innocent XI. maintained a firm attitude in spite ofthe threats of the king and the culpable weakness of the Frenchbishops. He encouraged John Sobieski, King of Poland, to take up armsagainst the Turks who had laid siege to Vienna, and contributedgenerously to help Hungary to withstand these invaders.

After the short and by no means glorious reign of Alexander VIII.(Cardinal Ottoboni, 1689-91), the cardinals were divided into twoparties, the French and the Spanish-Austrian. When the conclave hadcontinued five months without any result they agreed finally to electa compromise candidate (Cardinal Pignatelli) who took the name ofInnocent XII. (1691-1700). In every respect he showed himself worthyof his holy office. Nepotism was condemned in the Bull /Romanum DecetPontificum/, better arrangements were made for the administration ofjustice throughout the Papal States; the disputes with Louis XIV.regarding the Declaration of the French Clergy were settled when thebishops who signed these articles expressed their regret for theirconduct (1693); and several propositions taken from the /Maximes/ ofFenelon were condemned. The Pope was involved in a serious disputewith the Emperor Leopold I. concerning the right of asylum attached tothe imperial embassy in Rome, and the aggressive policy of Martinitz,the imperial ambassador. As a result of this quarrel the Pope, withoutconsulting Charles II. of Spain who had no heirs, favoured thepretensions of Philip Duke of Anjou (Philip V.) to the throne of Spainin preference to the Emperor's son the Archduke Charles.

In the conclave that assembled after the death of Innocent XII. themajority of the cardinals favoured Cardinal Mariscotti, but, as hiselection was vetoed by France, they concentrated their votes onCardinal Albani. For three days he refused to accept the onerousoffice, but at last he gave way to the earnest entreaties of thecardinals, and allowed himself to be proclaimed as Clement XI.[4](1700-21). His election was acclaimed in Rome, in Italy, andthroughout the Catholic world. He was a man of great sanctity of life,devoted to prayer and labour, who set an example to others bypreaching and hearing confessions regularly in St. Peter's. While hewas Pope there was no danger of nepotism at the papal court, and noprospect for unworthy or greedy officials in the Papal States. Duringhis entire reign he was involved in disputes with the Catholic powers.The death of Charles II. of Spain led to a conflict between LouisXIV., who claimed the crown for his grandson Philip of Anjou (PhilipV.), and the Emperor Leopold I., who supported the cause of his son,the Archduke, Charles III. Clement XI. endeavoured at first tomaintain an attitude of neutrality, but as Philip had been crowned andhad established himself apparently on the throne of Spain the Pope wasobliged to acknowledge him. This action gave great offence to LeopoldI. and to his successor, Joseph I., who retaliated by interfering inecclesiastical affairs and by despatching an army against the PapalStates. Clement XI., abandoned by Louis XIV. and by Philip V. wasobliged to come to terms with the Emperor, and to acknowledge CharlesIII. as king of Spain. Immediately Louis XIV. and Philip V. were up inarms against the Pope. The nuncio was dismissed from Madrid andrelations between Spain and Rome were interrupted for a long period;the papal representatives were excluded from the negotiationspreceding the Peace of Utrecht (1713); and feudal territories of theHoly See were disposed of without consulting the wishes of the Pope,Sicily being handed over to Victor Amadeus of Savoy (1675-1713) withwhom Clement XI. was then in serious conflict.

To put an end to difficulties with the foreign bishops, who exercisedjurisdiction in portion of his territory, the Duke of Savoy haddemanded full rights of nomination to episcopal Sees. When this demandwas refused he recalled his ambassador from Rome (1701), and took uponhimself the regulation of ecclesiastical affairs. He appointed anadministrator to take charge of the revenues of vacant Sees, enforcedthe /Royal Placet/ on episcopal and papal documents, and forbade thepublication of Roman censures (1710). A partial agreement was arrivedat when the royal administrator consented to accept his appointmentfrom the Pope, but the transference of Sicily to the Duke of Savoy ledto a new and more serious quarrel. The latter attempted to revive theprivileges known as the Sicilian Monarchy, accorded formerly to theruler of Sicily. The Pope refused to recognise these claims, and asthe king remained stubborn nothing was left but to place the islandunder interdict. To this the king replied by expelling those priestswho observed the interdict. This state of affairs lasted until Sicilypassed into the hands of the King of Spain (1718).

The Turks were active once more and threatened Europe by land and sea.Clement XI. sent generous supplies to Venice to equip its fleet,encouraged Stanislaus Augustus of Poland who had joined the CatholicChurch, granted tithes upon ecclesiastical property to help him in thestruggle, and allowed Philip V. of Spain portion of the revenuesderived from the benefices in Spain and in the Spanish-Americancolonies, on condition that the Spanish fleet should be sent into theMediterranean to take part in the war against Turkey. The victories ofPrince Eugene (1716-18) dealt a severe blow to the power of theSultan, but the Spanish fleet instead of assisting the Christianforces was used for the capture of Sardinia from the Emperor. Asevidence of the difficult position of Clement XI. in face of thepowers of Europe it is sufficient to point to the fact that at onetime or another during his reign, his nuncios were driven from Vienna,Turin, Madrid, and Naples.

The conclave that followed was, as might be expected, a stormy one;but in the end Cardinal Conti, who had been nuncio in Lucerne andLisbon, was elected and took as his title Innocent XIII. (1721-24). Hegranted the kingdom of Naples to the Emperor, who in turn withoutconsulting the Pope bestowed the papal fiefs of Parma and Piacenza onPrince Charles of France. Peace was restored between the Holy See andSpain (1723), and Innocent XIII., yielding very unwillingly to theimportunate demands of France, conferred a cardinal's hat on Dubois,the prime minister.

His successor was Benedict XIII. (1724-30). Cardinal Orsini, as he wasknown before his election, belonged to the Dominican Order, and at thetime of the conclave held the Archbishopric of Benevento. Asarchbishop he was most zealous in the administration of his diocese,and as Pope he followed the same strict simple life to which he hadbeen accustomed when a Dominican friar. He made peace with the Emperorby granting him practically all the rights contained in the SicilianMonarchy, reserving to the Holy See only the final decision ofimportant cases (1728), and with the King of Savoy by acknowledginghis title over Sardinia and by granting him the right of episcopalnomination in the island. With the demand of King John of Portugal,namely, that Portugal should enjoy the privilege of presentingcandidates for appointment to the college of cardinals, Benedict XIII.refused to comply, and as a consequence the Portuguese ambassador wasrecalled from Rome and communications with the Holy See wereinterrupted. The extension of the feast of Gregory VII. (Hildebrand)to the whole Church gave great offence to many rulers both Catholicand Protestant, because such a step was interpreted as a directchallenge to the new theories of secular intervention inecclesiastical affairs. Benedict XIII. was a saintly ruler, whose onlymisfortune was that he relied too much on unworthy councillors likeCardinal Coscia and Cardinal Lercari, who deceived him in theirnegotiations with the governments of Europe and in the administrationof the Papal States. A rebellion against these men broke out in Romewhen the news of the Pope's death became public. Cardinal Coscia wasdeprived of his dignity and imprisoned, while many of his associatesand subordinates were punished no less severely.

Cardinal Corsini who succeeded as Clement XII. (1730-1740) was facedwith a very difficult situation in Rome and in the Papal States. Thetreasury was empty, the finances were in disorder, and the discontentwas general. The Pope, though very old, delicate, and almostcompletely blind, showed wonderful energy and administrative ability.The financial affairs of the government were placed upon a properfooting. Instead of a deficit there was soon a surplus, which wasexpended in beautifying the city, in opening up the port of Ancona,and in the drainage and reclamation of the marshes. Like hispredecessors, Clement XII. had much to suffer from the Catholic rulersof Europe. He was engaged in a quarrel with the King of Savoy becausehe tried to limit the privileges that had been conceded to thissovereign by his predecessor. Philip V. of Spain demanded that thePope should confer a cardinal's hat together with the Archbishopricsof Seville and Toledo on his son, then only nine years of age. ThePope endeavoured to satisfy the king by granting the temporaladministration of Toledo until the boy should reach the canonical agefor the reception of Orders (1735), but owing to an attack made uponthe Spanish ambassador in Rome during a popular commotion the courtsof Naples and Madrid dismissed the papal ambassador and broke offrelations with the Holy See. Peace, however, was restored with Spainin 1737, and with Naples in the following year. Clement XII. condemnedthe Freemasons (1738). He canonised Vincent de Paul, John FrancisRegis, and Juliana Falconieri.

The conclave that followed lasted six months before any of thecandidates could secure the required majority. At last CardinalLambertini was elected and proclaimed under the title of BenedictXIV.[5] (1740-58). In many particulars, but more especially as ascholar and a writer, he may be regarded as one of the greatest Popesof modern times. He was born in 1675, was educated at Rome andBologna, and even as a very young man he was looked upon as a leadingauthority on canon law and theology. He rose steadily from position toposition in Rome till at last he found himself cardinal and Archbishopof Bologna. As archbishop he was most successful in the discharge ofall the duties that appertained to his office. He held diocesan synodsregularly, visited the most distant parishes of his diocese,superintended the education of his clerical students for whom he drewup a new plan of studies, and above all he strove to maintain mostfriendly relations with both priests and people. But notwithstandinghis cares of office he found time to continue his studies, and toprepare learned volumes on Canon Law, Theology, and History, thatplaced him amongst the leading scholars of his time.

Nor did he change his policy or his course of life after his electionto the papal throne. Benedict XIV. was convinced that a bettertraining would help to strengthen the influence of the clergy, andwould enable them to combat more successfully the rising spirit ofunbelief. Hence he was anxious to introduce into the colleges moremodern educational methods. He founded four academies, one forChristian Archaeology, one for Canon Law, one for Church History, andone for the special study of the history of the Councils. He gaveevery encouragement to priests who wished to devote themselves toliterary pursuits, and in his own person he showed how much could bedone in this direction without any neglect of duty. His instructionsand encyclicals were learned treatises, in which no aspect of thesubject he handled was neglected. His decrees on marriage, especiallyon mixed marriages (/Magnae Nobis admirationis/, 1748), on Penance,and on the Oriental Rites were of vital importance. Both before andafter his elevation to the papacy he published many learned works, themost important of which were the /Institutiones Ecclesiasticae/, /DeSynodo Diocesana/, /De Servorum Dei Beatificatione et de Beatorumcanonizatione/, /Thesaurus Resolutionum Sacrae CongregationisConcilii/, and the /Casus Conscientiae/.

In his administration of the Papal States Benedict XIV. was no lesssuccessful. The enormous expenses incurred by his predecessor haddepleted the papal treasury, but the schemes of retrenchment enforcedby Benedict XIV. produced such good results that in a few years moneywas available for the development of agriculture, industries, andcommerce. With the civil rulers of Europe he had a difficult part toplay. Convinced that disputes between the civil and ecclesiasticalauthority resulted only in promoting the schemes of the enemies ofreligion, he was determined to go to the very limits of concession forthe sake of peace and harmony. For a time at least he was able tosecure a partial reconciliation, and had his overtures been met in theproper spirit a working arrangement might have been established, thatwould have enabled both powers to combine against the forces at workfor the overthrow of Church and State.

The title of King of Prussia assumed by the Elector of Brandenburg wasrecognised by the Pope; peace was made with Portugal by granting tothe crown rights of patronage over bishoprics and abbeys (1740), andto set the seal on this reconciliation the title of /Rex Fidelissimus/was bestowed on the King of Portugal. With the court of Turin the Popehad still greater difficulties, but an agreement was arrived at,whereby the king was to have the right of nomination to ecclesiasticalbenefices; the foreign bishops having jurisdiction in the territory ofSavoy were to appoint vicars-general for the administration of theseportions of their dioceses, and the administrator of vacant beneficesappointed by the king was to act as the deputy of the Pope (1741).With Spain a formal concordat was concluded in 1753. The dispute inNaples regarding the Sicilian Monarchy was settled by the appointmentof a mixed tribunal composed of laymen and clerics, presided over by acleric for the settlement of ecclesiastical affairs. The Pope'sdecision that only those who refused publicly to accept the papalcondemnation of Jansenism were to be excluded from the sacramentshelped to ease considerably the situation in France. He condemned theFreemasons (1751), and reduced the number of holidays for Spain in1742 and for Austria, Tuscany, and Naples in 1748.

His successor Clement XIII. (1758-69) found himself in a peculiarlyunhappy position. Despite the friendly policy adopted by Benedict XIV.towards the civil rulers, or, as some would say, as a result of theconcessions that he made, their demands became still more exorbitant.The Rationalists, liberal Catholics, Jansenists, and Freemasons unitedtheir forces for a grand attack upon the Society of Jesus, thesuppression of which they were determined to secure. Already rumblingsof the storm had been heard before the death of Benedict XIV. Hissuccessor, who had the highest admiration for the Jesuits, stoodmanfully by the Society, and refused to yield to the threats of theBourbon rulers thirsting for its destruction. His sudden death wasattributed not without good reason to the ultimatum, demanding theimmediate suppression of the Jesuits, addressed to him by theambassadors of France, Spain, and Naples.

In the conclave the cardinals were divided into two parties, the/Zelanti/ who stood for resistance to the demands of the civil rulers,and the moderate men who supported the policy of conciliation. Therepresentatives of France, Spain, Portugal, and Naples, left no stoneunturned to prevent the election of a /Zelanti/, and the veto was usedwith such effect that the choice of the cardinals was at last limitedto only three or four. Threats were made that, if a candidate waselected against the wishes of the Bourbons, Rome might be occupied byforeign troops, and obedience might be refused to the new Pope. In theend a Franciscan friar, Cardinal Ganganelli, who was not an extremepartisan of either party among the cardinals, received the requiredmajority of votes, and was proclaimed as Clement XIV. (1769-74). Thenew Pope was not unfriendly to the Jesuits, nor had he any evidencethat could induce him to reverse the very favourable judgmentdelivered in their favour by his immediate predecessor. He endeavouredto avert the storm by making generous concessions to the Bourbons andto Portugal, by adopting an unfriendly attitude towards the Society,and by offering to effect serious changes in its constitution. Butthese half-way measures failed to put an end to the agitation, and atlast Clement XIV. found himself obliged to make his choice betweensuppression and schism. In the circumstances he thought it best forthe sake of peace to sacrifice the Society (1773) but he was soon torealise that peace could not be procured even by such a sacrifice. Hisweakness led only to more intolerable demands from France, Spain andNaples.

The cardinals assembled in conclave after his death found it difficultto agree upon any candidate, but finally after a conclave lasting morethan four months they elected Cardinal Braschi, who took the title ofPius VI.[6] (1775-99). The new Pope was a zealous ecclesiastic,anxious to promote a policy of conciliation, but immovable as a rockwhen there was a question of the essential rights of the Church. Hewithstood manfully the Febronian policy of Joseph II. and of theprince-bishops of Germany, and condemned the decrees of the Synod ofPistoia (1794). He endeavoured to maintain friendly relations withPortugal, Spain, Naples, and Sardinia, though the old policy of statesupremacy was still the guiding principle of the rulers andpoliticians. The storm that had been gathering for years broke overEurope during the latter years of his reign; the Bourbon throne inFrance was overturned, and no man could foretell when a similar fateawaited the other royal families of Europe. Pius VI., though notunwilling to recognise the new order, was stern in his refusal topermit the constitution of the Church to be changed. For this reasonhis capital was occupied; his cardinals were dispersed, and he himselfwas brought as a prisoner to Valence, where he died in exile (1799).The enemies of religion could not conceal their delight. They declaredtriumphantly that with him the long line of Peter had ceased to exist,but the conclave at Venice and the election of Pius VII. (1800) soonshowed the world that though kingdoms and dynasties might disappearthe Papacy still survived, as Christ had foretold it should survive. ----------

[1] Pallavicini, /Vita de Alessandro VII./, 1849.

[2] De Bildt, /The Conclave of Clement X./, 1905.

[3] Bonamici, /Da Vita Innocenti XI./, 1776.

[4] Lafiteau, /Vie de Clement XI./, 1752.

[5] /Benedicti XIV. Opera/, 17 vols., 1839-46. Heiner, /Opera inedita/, 1904. Guarnacci, /Vie du Pape Benoit XIV./, 1783.

[6] Ferrari, /Vita Pii VI./, 1802. Bourgoing, /Memoires historiques et philosophiques sur Pie VI. et son pontificat/, 1800.