FROM THE LIBRARY OF REV. LOUIS FITZGERALD BENSON, D. D BEQUEATHED BY HIM TO THE LIBRARY OF PRINCETON THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY ScS> I ¥2% Division Section Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2013 http://archive.org/details/councilOObuck HISTORY , OF THE COUNCIL OF TRENT. $' ^ op pb% /; HISTORY JAN 20 1932 COUNCIL OF TRENT COMPILED FROM A COMPARISON OF VARIOUS WRITERS CHRONOLOGICAL SUMMARY. BY V THE REV. THEODORE ALOIS BUCKLEY", B.A.. CHAPLAIN OF CHRIST CHURCH, Editor of Translations of the " Decrees and Canons" and "Catechism of t/ie Council of Trent," etc. Destruenda sunt aliena, ut nostris credatur." Phaebadius contra Arianos, p. 1, ed. Steph. 1570. LONDON: GEORGE ROUTLEDGE AND CO., FARRINGDON STREET. 1853. RIGHT REVEREND AND RIGHT HONOURABLE CHARLES JAMES BLOMFIELD, D.D, LORD BISHOP OF LONDON, THIS VOLUME IS MOST GRATEFULLY DEDICATED BY THE AUTHOR. PREFACE In bringing before the public a new sketch of the history of the Council of Trent, I feel that, although the increased study of the fathers and councils of late years has enlarged our opportunities of entering fairly into the merits of theo- logical questions, and has, in many instances, substituted fair deductions for prejudged assertion, still, in the case of this Council, we cannot hope to arrive at new conclusions. Neverthe- less, a greater acquaintance with scholastic technology, a more complete system of critical canons, and a stricter appliance of that system to particular instances, will doubtless help us to discern more safely between truth and error, and, while doing away with conventional prejudices and traditional exaggerations, will make us, if not perfect reasoners on our own side, at least more lenient in considering the views of our opponents. If the pursuit of such literature has been perverted by some into a reason for a reunion with error, we have, at the same time, the assurance that a far greater number have been led to very different conclusions ; and that, whilst we have learned the real nature of Romanism from its own sources, we have often found the confutation of its tenets in the very writings to which it appeals as the main-spring of their existence — writings which it would fain elevate to the rank of inspired Scripture. But this revival of a more extended system of theolo- gical study, while it has led to a clearer and less prejudged understanding of the errors of Rome, has had less in- VOl PREFACE. fluence with regard to the history of her Church. Less has been done in this respect, simply because less remained to be done. The leading features of the history of that Church are too recent in their development, to require the sagacity of a Boileau or a Niebuhr to extricate them from the dark chaos of an unphilosophical and fragmentary nar- rative. Moreover, the constitution of the Roman Church is too artificial, too presumptive in its character, to admit of being brougiit within the range of speculative criticism. It is an anomaly in its very existence, and yet a splendidly consistent one. Its history must be documentary, not meta- physical. It is to a long series of martyrologies, acts, and annals, that we must appeal, if we would form the smallest conception of Romanism, not to the broad principles upon which the rest of the world's history is traced. In review- ing the history of the Roman Church, we must not consider mankind as a free agent, yet living under the dispensation of God ; but as fettered in their enjoyment of that dispensation by trustees, whom they have preferred to the Divine Author of the covenant itself. And such a condition of a Church must of necessity influence its writers to an extent of which we can scarcely form an adequate notion. A claim of infallibility presup- poses the necessity of denying whatever may tend to invali- date that claim ; and an assumed credibility is thus too often supported at the expense of a positive falsehood. Again, the assumption of a perfect consistency, even in a creed that has modelled its articles to suit the differences of contending, but faithful adherents, gives occasion for many clumsy sub- terfuges in explaining away or suppressing facts or principles which militate against that consistency. In a word, the axiom that " the Church cannot err" becomes the cause of her going astray, the quicksand upon which the best hopes of her followers are wrecked and wasted. PREFACE. IX Another difficulty with which we have to contend is the mixture of temporal with spiritual matters, the subservience of the gifts of the Church as means of worldly aggrandize- ment and profit, and the under-current of secular influence which runs through almost every detail of Roman Catholic history. Not that I would deny the existence of the same evil in our own Church. Far from it — it must be deplored as one of the evils which are the necessary consequences of an artificial scheme of society; but in the history of the Roman Church it assumes a far greater and more dangerous position. What is, in our Church, the excess of an excep- tion, is, in Romanism, only a partial realization of the grand axiom of infallibility, the supremacy of the Roman pontiff. Thus, writers on a subject like the Council of Trent are almost inevitably reduced to two classes, — opponents and apologists. At least, to one or other of these classes contem- porary writings must belong ; and the truth, perhaps hanging equally balanced between the accuser and the apologist, is thus left to the judgment of some third party, who has com- paratively nothing to gain by abuse or panegyric. And yet it is difficult to find any writer capable, or, if capable, willing to exercise impartiality. We are too much influenced by what we read to be perfectly fair in our conclusions. Even the style of an author may bias our judgment as to the value of his facts, and a specious cleverness may become little else than an attractive screen for untruth or exaggeration. Still, the road to a true history must lie between the aggressive and the defensive. The leading writers on the history of the Council of Trent present a contrast of this description, winch can scarcely be surpassed; and. often as the subject has been discussed by more able critics than myself, it seems almost necessary to state briefly the results to which my own reading of these historians has led. X PREFACE. A recent author a complains that, both in Father Paul and Pallavicino, " we find diffuseness and dryness ; no plan, no philosophy ; an absence, in fine, of all that is now looked for in an historian." This is a bold criticism — indeed, too bold to be correct. Both writers possess excellences which will always be worthy of imitation ; both present faults which detract not only from their interest, but their value. Father Paul Sarpi was a man whose mind was consider- ably in advance of the age he lived in.b His inquiring spirit, which led him to penetrate deeply into the mysteries of natural science, if not to anticipate many subsequent dis- coveries, had no small influence upon his religious views. Although he seems to have always lived in communion with the Church of Rome, his sympathies were directed elsewhere. This is not the place to enter into an account of his life, or it might be shown that the history written by this great man was the clear reflection of his own thoughts. A long habit of dissecting the system of Romanism had laid open to his searching eye all those minute seeds of corruption, which had gradually infected the whole body. Deep learning — though often desultory — had given him a right to decide on points concerning the origin and progress of error ; worldly tact and an unrivalled skill in tracing acts to their motives, taught him to look with a suspicious eye upon the partisans of the scheme whose fallacies he had detected. He had, in short, probed the wounds of the Church, knew the malady by its symptoms, and traced that malady to its right origin. But Father Paul was no reformer. He looked upon Romanism as a surgeon regards the corpse he has been dis- secting. It was not as a living patient, diseased, yet capable a M. Bungener, preface to his History of the Council of Trent. b " II ne pouvait se borner aux Etudes scolastiques de son convent ; le Grec, l'Hebreu, les mathe'matiques, il voulut tout savoir."— Bibl. Univ. v. xl. p. 426. PREFACE. XI of cure, that he contemplated the erring body of the Church ; but with the bitterness of one who had abandoned hope and lost faith in its power to rally. He was not a constructive satirist ; he cared little for partial schemes of reform, but struck at the whole head and front of offence. In this respect he resembled Luther; but his sympathy with the Protestants was insufficient to rank him among their numbers. In every page of his history, this desire for the overthrow of the papal court — if not of the whole scheme of Romanism — is prominently set forth. c Yet he never degenerates into abuse ; and if his censure is more than usually pointed, it is generally given as the opinion of others, rather than his own. His talent for innuendo is surprising ; even the juxtaposi- tion of facts is frequently contrived to assist the under cur- rent of satire ; and, how animated soever his description may be, however bold and picturesque his language, it is impos- sible not to perceive the sneering tone of one, who has little sympathy with the subjects of his narrative. Perhaps, if we knew more of his private life and that of his contem- poraries, we should perceive not a little sly reference to affairs transpiring at the very time he was engaged in the work. Many attempts have been made to rescue our author from the charge of unfairness ; but although willing to accept his defence, as far as general authenticity goes, and although myself generally coinciding with his views, I cannot deceive myself as to the fact that Father Paul is always a satirist, and that he was nearly incapable of telling a story without, c " On convient que ce livre est e'crit avec beaucoup d'art : l'auteur, evitant avec soin d'exposer ses propres sentiments, se borne le plus souvent a citer les passages ou les paroles de ceux qui ont combattu les decrets qui ne lui plaisent pas ; raais il s'y prend de maniere, qu'a Ten croire, les Protestants ont toujours eu raison, et les papes toujours tort." — Biog. Univ. p. 433. Xll PREFACE. at the same time, letting people know what he thought of every one and every thing concerned. When Mr. Hallam says, " Sarpi is not a fair, but he is, for those times, a tolerably exact historian," he does full justice both to the excellences and the defects of our historian. But there is a more serious charge brought against this writer, namely, wholesale inaccuracy in historical details. Cardinal Pallavicino, whose history will presently claim our attention, has collected an " ater index " of alleged errors and falsifications in Father Paul's history, which, at a first view, would seem to leave it scarcely any claims to credibility. But, on a careful examination, these errors are substantially diminished in number.d While it must be admitted that Father Paul's arrangement is unconnected and careless, that he repeatedly mistakes the dates, and misplaces the dis- d The following criticism is valuable, both on account of the writer from whom it proceeds and the honesty by which it is dictated : — " Ora ritornando al Pallavicino e alia Storia del Concilio di Trento, egli nell' atto medesimo che forma la Storia di quel gran Concilio, ribatte il Sarpi, ove il trova contrario a cib ch' ei vede fondato in autentici documenti, e ove gli sembra che egli combatte le opinioni de' piu accreditati teologi, o i dogmi della Chiesa Cattolica. Con qual forza e con qual evidenza il faccia, nol pu5 conoscere se non chi prende a confrontare 1' uno coll' altro storico. Io dire solo che il Pallavicino ha confutato il Sarpi, e finora non e stato confutato da alcuno ; per ciocche per confutazione io non intendo qualche declamazione contro di esso scritta, e contro le dottrine da lui o insegnate, o difese ; ma intendo un' opera in cui si prenda a mostrare che il Pallavicino a torto ha confutato il Sarpi nella maggior parte de' passi in cui lo combatte, e che i piu autentici monumenti son a favore del Sarpi, e non del Pallavicino. Lo stile di questo scrittore e grave, elegante, e fiorito, e talvolta forse piti ancor del dovere ; per- ciocche meglio piacerebbe per avventura, se fosse piu facile e men sen- tenzioso." — Tiraboschi, Storia della Letteratura Italiana, v. viii. pt. i. p. 138. Another writer, Beccheti, Istoria degli Ultimi Quattro Secoli della Chiesa, vol. x. p. 79, is very bitter upon Father Paul ; but, from the general style of his history, he seems to be merely echoing the abuse of Pallavicino. Among older writings on the subject, the reader may compare the two following : — " Scipionis Henrici in Messanensi Aca- demia Doctoris Theologi censura theologica et histories adversus Petri Soave Polani de Concilio Tridentino Pseudo-historiam," Dilugse, in typ. Acad, mdcliv. ; and " De tribus Historicis Concilii Tridentini, auctore Cassare Aquilinio," Amst. cioioclxii. PREFACE. Xlll cussions, of the different congregations, it is equally certain that his good faith, if we consider his history as a whole, stands acquitted. Numberless instances, in which his state- ments have been taxed with unfairness, have received a corroboration from contemporary documents ; which proves that, however the works of the two Tridentine historians vary in detail, they agree in all substantial points. e I shall return to this subject, when I speak of the letters of Vargas, and the Acta of Paleotto. If the Roman court had a bitter and a clever enemy in the Venetian historian, it was fortunate in finding a defender in Cardinal Pallavicino — such a defender at least, as, however unconvincing to those, who had abandoned it as undeserving of confidence, was possessed of too deep a knowledge of every item in the scheme of Romanism, to fail in pleasing the taste of Roman Catholics. Born of a noble family, and enjoying high honours and influence, Conservatism was evidently the course marked out for him ; and his history is accordingly not merely a chronical of events, but a con- tinued commentary on every point in which a word can be said in favour of Rome. But he is not only passively con- servative, but actively aggressive. His work is a grand Philippic against Protestantism, coupled with a running commentary on the alleged misstatements of his predecessor. If Father Paul is at times uncharitable to particular persons, or harsh in his views of proceedings, Pallavicino is never the reverse. Utterly destitute of the power of appreci- ating anything founded on high and generous principles, he measures everything by its relation to the fortunes of the Vatican. He is a sort of ecclesiastical court jour- e The author of the life of Pallavicino, in the Biographie Universelle, v. xxxii. p. 451, observes: — "II s'opposa a celle de Fra Paolo, avec lequel il est pourtant d'accord dans l'essentiel des faits ; inais il en tire des consequences diame"tralement opposees." XIV PREFACE. nalist, and seldom betrays the bad taste to acknowledge honour or uprightness in an opponent. His history is far inferior in style to that of Father Paul ; his narrative is prosy and tedious; his descriptive powers limited, and his observations on men and things savour more of scholastic rhetoric than natural eloquence or readiness of percep- tion/ To counterbalance these disadvantages, he certainly brings a minute acquaintance with documents, and an equally minute accuracy in chronological arrangement, which is often the means of calling his predecessor to order. His materials were undoubtedly better ; but it may be doubted whether he was capable of using them fairly ; whilst, as regards the tone of his writings, if Bossuet's remark be true on the one hand, that "Sarpi nest partant 1'historien que l'ennemi declare? du concile de Trent," Pallavicino has sunk the historian in the apologist ; has suppressed, if not falsified, matters making against his own views. He is as essentially a party-writer as his antagonist ; but he has none of his honest desire for reformation, none of his generous sympathies with the struggles of men seeking the path from dogmatism to conviction. The discrepancy between the writings of these historians has been diligently and, for the most part, fairly sifted by the Abbe le Courayer, who, in his translation of Father Paul, f This is never so well seen as when we compare him with the lively and acute Paleotto, when both are writing on the same subject. Take, for example, their respective accounts of the death of Seripando. His character of Luther, given in bk. v. ch. 7, of my own history, may be quoted as an example of strained attempt at eloquence, in which false antithesis and misapplied metaphor are the leading features. % Mr. Hallam seems fully of this opinion. "Much," he observes, " has been disputed about the religious tenets of Father Paul ; it appears to me quite out of doubt, both by the tenor of his history, and still more unequivocally, if possible, by some of his letters, that he was entirely hostile to the Church, in the usual sense, as well as to the court of Rome, sympathizing in affection, and concurring generally in opinion, with the reformed denomination." — Literature of Europe, v. iii. p. 43. PREFACE. XV has noticed eveiy variation of importance, and has shown that Sarpi too often has the best of the evidence in his favour. At the same time, by his careful examination of every document and history he coidd meet with, he has furnished a valuable stock of materials, and greatly lightened the labours of succeeding historians of the council. But the researches of Mendhani and Ranke, as well as the massive collection of documents published by Le Plat, have brought forward so much that is new and valuable, that the means of information, upon which the present little work has been based, are largely increased. Tn mentioning the labours of the Rev. Joseph Mendham, I have the pleasing task of acknowledging the great kindness I have received from so honoured a veteran in the study of a kindred subject. For his advice, and for the liberal presents of his own publications on the History of the Council — kindnesses the more to be esteemed as they were conferred upon a personal stranger — I must ever feel myself gratefully indebted. Without trenching on the minute and satisfactory account of his invaluable documents, given in the preface to his own history,11 I will merely observe, that, as they are all from the pens of persons contemporary with, and personally engaged in, the transactions of the council, they furnish an insight into its inward policy, and into the feelings which directed and swayed its various movements, of which their learned and judicious collector has amply availed himself. My own obligations to the work of Mr. Mendhani will be as readily perceived by my readers, as they have been, and must be, on all occasions freely acknowledged by myself. But there is another work which we also owe to the h 8vo. London, mdcccxxxiy. Mr. Mendham's library is well known for its remarkable completeness in literature appertaining to these sub- jects. The greater portion of the MSS. referred to in his preface were purchased at Mr. Thorpe's sale in 1S32. They were originally in the possession of the earl of Guilford. XVI PREFACE. diligence of this well-known author, — I allude to his edition of the Acta of Paleotto, the deputy-secretary and auditor of the council. Of these Pallavicino and Raynaldus had made frequent use; but, as he observes, and, it is to be feared, with too good reason, " the selected extracts from his Acts by the apologist and by the annalist, are indisputably to be ascribed to the necessity, under which they both felt themselves placed by the history of Paolo Sarpi, of fabricating a coun- teractor, not in the usual style of straightforward and palpable falsification, but with as much verisimilitude, and therefore with as much authentic and honest statement of fact, as their cause could afford, and turn to its own benefit. Unsupported opposition or point-blank denial would hardly prosper, even with the most prejudiced of their own com- munion ; and positive dishonesty, which could never be secure against detection, would be stark impolicy — an in- discretion not likely to be incurred by, or chargeable upon, anything papal."1 A minute comparison of this work with those of the two great historians, seems to me fully to justify what I have above asserted, respecting the excellence of Pallavicino in details and minute matters appertaining to the progress of the debates, and his inferiority as to a general insight into the broad principles of history. Every now and then, we feel surprised at the freedom of Paleotto's expressions. As far as the external history of the council is concerned, he gives us the highest idea both of Father Paul's truthfulness, and of his own impartial honesty. His abstracts of the debates — too long to receive adequate justice in a work of such dimensions as the present — are well deserving the attention of those who would go more deeply into the subject. Indeed, 1 Mendham, Preface, p. xiii. to his Acta Concilii Tridentini, a Gabriele Cardinale Paleotto deacripta. Lond. MDCCCXLH. 8vo. PREFACE, XV11 as regards the latter sessions (to which his memoirs are, un- fortunately, confined), his work is a better historical study than the massive volumes of Pallavicino can furnish. I have made so much use of the clear-headed and laborious researches of Ranke, that he fairly claims a leading place in my preface; and I am the more anxious to place his estimate of the two rival historians before my readers, as my own views, throughout my labour of compilation, have been much influenced by his opinions. " It has been asserted that the ti*uth may be distinctly gathered from these two works combined. This may perhaps be the case in a very large and general sense ; it is by no means so in particulars. " They both swerve from the truth, which certainly lies in the midst between them ; but it cannot be come at by con- jecture : truth is positive, original, and is not to be conceived by any accommodation of partial statements, but by a direct review of facts. "As we have seen, Sarpi says that a treaty had been con- cluded at Bologna ; Pallavicino denies this ; no conjecture in the world could hit upon the fact that the treaty was not made by word of mouth, but by writing, a fact which really reconciles the discrepancy. '•' They both distort Contarini's instruction ; there is no harmonizing their contradictions ; it is only when we refer to the original, that the truth strikes us. " Their minds were of the most opposite cast. Sarpi is keen, penetrating, caustic ; his arrangement is eminently skilful ; his style pure and unaffected, and although the Crusca will not admit him into the list of classic authors, probably on account of some provincialisms he exhibits, his work is really refreshing after all the pompous array of words through which we are forced to toil in other authors. His b XV111 PREFACE. style coincides with his subject ; in point of graphic power he is certainly second among the modern historians of Italy : I rank him immediately after Machiavelli. "Nor is Pallavicino void of talent ; he draws many pointed and forcible parallels, and he often displays no little skill as the pleader for a party. But his talent is somewhat of a heavy and cumbrous cast : it is one that chiefly delights in turning phrases and devising subterfuges ; his style is over- loaded with words. ' Sarpi is clear and transparent to the very bottom ; Pallavicino is not wanting in continuous flow, but he is muddy, diffuse, and shallow. " Both are heart-and-soul partisans ; both lack the true spirit of the historian, that grasps its object in its full truth, and sets it in the broad light of day. Sarpi had certainly the talent requisite for this, but he will be an accuser and nothing- more ; Pallavicino had it in a vastly lower degree, but he will be, by all means, the apologist of his party. " Neither can we obtain a full view of the substance of the case from the works of those two writers combined. It is a very remarkable circumstance, that Sarpi contains much that Pallavicino was never able to hunt out, many as were the archives thrown open to him. I will only mention a memoir of the nuncio Chieregato, concerning the consulta- tions at the court of Adrian VI., which is very important, and against which Pallavicino makes objection of no moment. Pallavicino also overlooks many things from a sort of inca- pacity. He cannot discover them to be of much consequence, and so he neglects them. On the other hand, Sarpi lacked a multitude of documents which Pallavicino possessed; the former saw but a small part of the correspondence of the Roman court with the legates. His errors spring for the most part from the want of original documents. " But in many cases they both are ignorant of important records. A little report by Cardinal Morone, who executed PREFACE. XIX the decisive embassy to Ferdinand I., is of the highest moment as regards the history of the whole latter part of the council. Neither of them has made use of it."k The power and spirit which distinguish the views and the language of this author throughout his great work on the popes, render it an invaluable addition to our stock of political information ; whilst the stores of his learning, alike diffuse and recherche, compel the present writer to confess, that, had Professor Eanke devoted anything like an adequate volume to the subject, he must have contented himself with the task of translator. He may, however, claim the lesser merit of having been the first1 to combine Ranke's remarks on the progress of this council with something like a regular history. To return once more to Pallavicino. Dr. Waterworth, a writer well known in the field of Roman Catholic theology, has appended to his translation of the " Decrees and Canons" two " Essays on the Internal and External History of the Council of Trent." In these he avowedly professes to forsake " the skilful but unfair history of Era Paolo," and to make " continued use of the noble work of Pallavicino." His work is, in fact, little else than an abridgment of Pallavicino, and k Ranke's Popes, pt. iii. p. 377. At p. 370, sqq., we have a masterly review, pointing out individual points of error in both authors, the result of which, as far as intentional suppression and dishonesty are concerned, is very unfavourable to Pallavicino, although Father Paul does not escape without censure. It must be recollected that Ranke's great acquaintance with the documents found in continental libraries gave him opportunities of sifting the truth, for which others must seek in vain. 1 M. Bungener — a translation of whose work was announced soon after I had made known my own intention of publishing an historical sketch of the council — takes little notice of Ranke's researches. Indeed, his whole performance does not seem to supply any of the deficiencies which I particularly had in view in the present volume. He seems totally unacquainted with the researches of Mendham, and his work is rather a series of querulous declamations against Popery than a history of the Council of Trent. b'2 XX PREFACE. combines all that writer's accuracy in respect to dates, and the proceedings of the sessions, with an elegance of style and a brevity not to be found in the original. As a clever and lucid epitornizer, especially in his capabilities for disentangling the real heads of a debate from a mass of verbiage, I have con- stantly found him an useful guide. But the very fact that his information is confessedly derived from one source, and that source an apologetical writer, with whom Protestants can have little sympathy, prevents his otherwise judicious labours from being useful to those, who would hear more than one side of a question. In making this statement, I do not deny his acquaintance with other writers on the subject. I merely lament the bias which has hindered him from giving greater breadth to the principles, greater impartial utility to the details of his historical essays. Nor have his natural predilections allowed him to be always a fair representative of the author he avowedly follows. Many intrigues and side- practices, to which Pallavicino confesses, are passed by or glossed over ; and it may be doubted whether the cardinal aud his English representative, viewed proportionately to the dimensions of their works, are not equally deserving of censure on this head. Dr. "Waterworth writes as a zealous Catholic ; his essays must be admired by every good Ro- manist— must dissatisfy those who do not look upon the interests of Rome and the whole well-being of mankind as identical. Such writers as Heidigger, Jurieu, and a host of others of still less note, have not been altogether neglected by me, although I have, with a few exceptions, derived little advan- tage from any of them. Grounded wholly upon Sarpi, and indiscriminately copying his inaccuracies and defects, with- out being able to imitate his vigorous thoughts or his elegance of expression, they bear about the same relation to the great original, as Eutropius or Paul Diaconus do to Livy. PREFACE. XXI Heidisrser is sometimes sensible and shrewd ; but he is utterly uncritical, and unable to appreciate the finer qualities in the character of those whom he unsparingly abuses. Of Massarelli, Servanzio, and several other fragmentary diarists, together with the writers of epistles, pamphlets, pas- quinades, and other minor works connected with the council and its history, I have made use, more or less, throughout the whole work ; but a special notice of each would be beyond the reasonable limits of a preface. With the writings of Henke and Wessenberg I became acquainted at too late a period to make much use of them ; but as they appear to be based upon materials previously known, this is perhaps less to be regretted. The Italian history of Botta copies Palla- vicino almost exclusively, and the same remark applies to the voluminous work of Angelico Becchetti. I have said so much on the letters of Vargas in the proper place, that it is only necessary to state that their importance both in corroborating Father Paul's statements as to the conduct of the legates, and in proving the dependence of the council upon the papal will and pleasure, places them amongst the best materials which an historian could expect to obtain.m m I may, however, be excused for inserting the following remarks of a writer whose style and judgment are always welcome : — " Our knowledge of the proceedings of this assembly is derived from three different authors. Father Paul, of Venice, wrote his Hi.>t >ry of the Council of Trent while the memory of what had passed there was recent, and some who had been members of it were still alive. He has exposed the intrigues and artifices l>y which it was conducted, with a freedom and severity which have given a deep wound to the credit and reputation of the council. He has described its deliberations, and explained its decrees, with such perspicuity and depth of thought, with such various erudition and such force of reason, as have justly entitled his work to be placed among the most admired historical compositions. About half a century thereafter, the Jesuit Pallavicino published his history of the council, in opposition to that of Father Paul, and by employing all the force of an acute and refining genius to invalidate the credit, or to confute the reasonings of his antagonist, he labours to prove, by artful apologies for the proceedings of the council, and subtile XX11 PREFACE. Having spoken thus far of my predecessors in the task, I will add a few words in respect to the plan which I have myself attempted to realize. My main purpose has been to follow Pallavicino in the history of the proceedings at each session, more especially when his narrative was corroborated by Paleotto. At the same time, I have freely introduced passages and reports of speeches from Father Paul,n and have at all times noticed such discrepancies as seemed of real import to the reader. In the notes I have briefly touched upon certain leading errors, which appeared to derive their origin, or receive cor- roboration, from the verdict of the Tridentine fathers; and in this task I have preferred using the words of standard Church of England divines to my own. But as regards the external history — for be it remembered that the history of the Council of Trent is almost the history of Europe during the time of its convocation — I have derived far more assist- interpretation of its decrees, that it deliberated with impartiality and decided with judgment as well as candour. Vargas, a Spanish doctor of laws, who was appointed to attend the imperial ambassadors at Trent, sent the bishop of Arras a regular account of the transactions there, explaining all the arts which the legates employed to influence and over- awe the council. His letters have been published, in which he inveighs against the papal court with that asperity of judgment which was natural to a man whose situation enabled him to observe its arts thoroughly, and who was obliged to exert all his attention and talents in order to disappoint them. "But," continues the same writer, " whichsoever of these writers an intelligent person takes for his guide, in forming a judgment concerning the spirit of the council, he must discover so much ambition as well as artifice among some of the members, so much ignorance and corruption among others, he must observe such a large infusion of human policy and passions, but such a scanty portion of that simplicity of heart, sanctity of manner, and love of truth, which alone qualify men to deter- mine what doctrines are worthy of God, and what worship is acceptable to him, that he will find it no eas}" matter to believe that any extraor- dinary influence of the Holy Ghost hovered over this assembly and dic- tated its decrees." — Robertson, Life of Charles V. vol. iii. p. 247, sqq. n I have chiefly used Brent's quaint translation, but with many alterations. The Italian edition I quote is that of London, mdcxix.. when chapters are specified, Le Courayer's French edition is intended. PREFACE. XX111 ance from Father Paul, to say nothing of writers like Bur- net, Mosheim, Ranke, Roscoe, and various authors connected with the life of Luther, and of the ecclesiastical history of the period. And here I must apologize for a difficulty, of which Father Paul was fully aware, viz., the obscurity which arises from blending the proceedings of the council with the narrative of contemporary events. I am sensible, even now, that the connection of parts will not always be immediately recognised, and I must crave some indulgence, especially from the necessary brevity of my work. Throughout the volume I have freely expressed my own opinions; but I earnestly deprecate the intention to give offence to the upright and honest of any creed soever. If my language has been at times bold in its censure, I feel better prepared to meet a like tone in the reply of an oppo- nent, than to court the qualified praise sought by those who can neither heartily agree nor differ. If I have unhesi- tatingly condemned the Council of Trent as a whole, I feel conscious of having oftentimes sought to do justice to the fair fame of individuals. Many were there among the members of this assembly, who, while unable to avoid the errors incidental to man's assumption of infallibility, were too far removed from the rest, both in the grandeur of the part they played in the theatre of this world, and in the integrity with which they sustained the character, not to claim their position among the archives of good and great men. As it is my intention to publish a translation of the Con- fession of Augsburg, accompanied by an historical sketch of that assembly, and, should the scheme succeed, to give editions of various Protestant documents of a like character, I trust to have better opportunities of doing justice to the early Reformers than have presented themselves during the course of the present work. XXIV PREFACE. In conclusion, I must briefly but most thankfully acknow- ledge my obligations to a few of the friends who have aided me, in various ways, through this task, and more especially to Kenneth R. H. Mackenzie, Esq., and the Rev. John Wood, M.A., of Merton College, to whose patient industry in transcribing and verifying quotations I have before been indebted. Theodore Alois Buckley, Christ Church. CONTENTS. PART THE FIRST. Chap. I. — Indulgences first suggested by Papal Extra- vagance . . . . . . . . Pag': 1 Chap. II. — The Abuse of Indulgences by Tetzel . . 4 Chap. III. — Luther impugns the System of Indulgences 6 Chap. IV. — Conduct of Pope Leo X. Luther assails the Papal Supremacy . . . . . . 10 Chap. V. — Luther cited to appear .. .. 12 Chap. VI. — Luther appears at Augsburg . . 13 Chap. VII. — Leo X. issues a Bull respecting Indulgences 14 Chap. VIII. — Miltitz is sent to the Elector . . . . 15 Chap. IX. — Disgrace and Death of Tetzel 17 Chap. X. — The Dispute between Luther and Eck . . 18 Chap. XI. — Zwingle stirs up Reform in Switzerland . 21 Chap. XII. — Leo X. fulminates a Bull against Luther . . 22 Chap. XIII.— Luther burns the Papal Bull 23 Chap. XIV. — Aleander is despatched as Xuncio. Conduct of Erasmus . . . . . . . . . . 25 Chap. XV. — Opposition to and Progress of the Reformation L'7 Chap. XVI. — Luther summoned to the Diet of Worms 28 (hap. XVII. — He appears before the Diet . . . . . . 30 Chap. XVIII. — Luther is dismissed from Worms. His Seizure and Captivity . . . . . . 32 Chap. XIX. — Luther is placed under the Imperial Ban . . 34 Chap. XX. — Death of Leo, who is succeeded by Adrian VI. 35 Chap. XXI. — Clement VII. succeeds to the Papal Throne 37 Chap. XXII. — Increased Ill-feeling between Clement and Charles 40 Chap. XXIII. — They again coalesce .. .. 41 Chap. XXIV.— Second Diet of Spires 42 Chap. XXV. — Controversy between Luther and Zwingle . . 45 Chap. XXVI.— Confession of Augsburg .. 4-; Chap. XXVII.— General Dissatisfaction at the Edict of Augsburg . . . . . . 51 Chap. XXVIII. — Protestant League at Smalcald 53 Chap. XXIX. — Terras of Peace between the Emperor and the Protestants . . . . . . 54 Chap. XXX. — Meeting of Charles and the Pontiff . 55 Chap. XXXI. — Unprosperous Conclusion of Clement VII. 's Reign 57 Chap. XXXIL— Paul III. ascends the Papal Throne. Ver- gerius sent into Germany . . . . 59 XXVI CONTENTS. Chap. XXXIII. — Meeting of Vergerius and Luther . . . . 60 Chap. XXXIV.— New Protest of Smalcald 61 Chap. XXXV. — The Seat of the Council transferred to Vicenza 63 Chap. XXXVI. — Further Suspension of the Council .. .. 67 Chap. XXXVII. — Various Attempts to effect a Reconciliation 68 Chap. XXXVIII. — The Conventions at Hagenau and Worms. Meeting convened at Ratisbon . . . . 70 Chap. XXXIX. — Discussion at Ratisbon . . . . . . 73 Chap. XL. — Meeting of the Emperor and the Pope at Lucca . . . . . . . . 77 Chap. XLL— The Council of Trent indicted at the Diet of Spires . . . . . . . . . . ib. Chap. XLII. — Mutual Criminations of the Emperor and Francis I. of France . . . . . . 78 Chap. XLIIL— The Legates sent to Trent 80 Chap. XLIV. — Granvel and Mendoza at Trent. The Council prorogued . . . . . . ... 81 Chap. XLV. — Meeting of the Emperor and the Pope . . 82 Chap. XLVL— The Diet of Spires 84 Chap. XLVII. — Peace concluded between Charles and Francis 86 Chap. XL VIII. — The Legates sent to Trent. Various Delays 88 PART THE SECOND. Chap. I. — Opening Ceremonials of the Council. First Session . . . . 97 Chap. II. — Strictures on the Oration of the Bishop of Bitonto. Further particulars touching the First Session . . . . . . 98 Chap. III.- — Preparations for the Second Session . . 100 Chap. IV. — Preparatory Congregations for the Third Session 103 Chap. V.— The Third Session 106 Chap. VI. — Dissatisfaction at Rome . . . . . . 108 Chap. VII. — Reformation in Germany. Death of Luther ib. Chap. VIII. — War meditated against the Protestants . . Ill Chap. IX. — Preliminary Congregations to the Fourth Session .. .. .. .. ..112 Chap. X. — Continuation of the Congregations. State of the Scriptures after Translation .. .. 117 Chap. XI. — The Bishop of Bitonto cited to Rome . . 119 Chap. XII. — Arrival of Don Francis of Toledo and Cita- tion of Vergerius . . . . . . . . ib. Chap. XIII. — On the Formation of the Decree respecting the Reception of Scripture and Traditions 121 Chap. XIV. — Dispute respecting the Anathema against the Violation of Scripture and Tradition. The Vulgate 122 Chap. XV. — Dispute on the Reception and Authority of the Vul CHAPTER XVI. Luther summoned to the Diet of Worms. The influence of the elector had prevented the diet, already assembled at Worms,2 from proceeding to pronounce s P. 183. y Apud DAubigne, ibid. Aleander was not idle in the mean time, having procured another bull to be published on the 3rd Jan. 1521, not only condemning Luther's writings but proclaiming himself a heretic without any limitations whatsoever. See Pallav. i. 25, who pursues the subject at great length. 1 Convened at the request of the elector, who " employed his credit with Charles to prevent the publication of any unjust edict against this reformer, and to have his cause tried by the canons of the Germanic COUNCIL OF TRENT. 29 a final sentence against Luther ; while Frederick, unwilling to disoblige either party, had promised a safe-conduct for Luther, with the view of procuring his appearance at Worms. The violence of Aleander, who argued bitterly against the idea of Luther being suffered to present himself before the assembly, fell without effect upon the cool impartiality or indifference of his hearers. In vain did he urge the revival by Luther of the past heresies of "Wickliffe and Huss ; in vain did he, in strong and eloquent terms, dwell upon the oft-broken promises of Luther to return to the faith of the Church ; all his appliances of energy and eloquence, aided by gold from the papal treasury, and the most attractive promises, were spent in vain. Pallavicino candidly confesses that his efforts to sway the wavering minds of the assembly proved fruitless. Charles was determined to give Luther a fair hearing, ostensibly upon the representation of the elector, that the works attributed to Luther, and condemned in the papal bull, could not be from his pen. Luther accordingly set out, protected by a safe-conduct from the emperor, and with a mind made up to brave the worst consequences that might result from the rancour of his opponents.* Accompanied by Church and the laws of the empire. This request was so much the more likely to be granted, that Charles was under much greater obligations to Frederick than to any other of the German princes, as it was chiefly by his zealous and important services that he had been raised to the empire in opposition to the pretensions of such a formidable rival as Francis I., king of France. The emperor was sensible of his obligations to the worthy elector, and was entirely disposed to satisfy his demands. That, however, he might do this without displeasing the Roman pontiff, he resolved that Luther should be called before the council that was to be assembled at Worms in the year 1521, and that his cause should be there publicly heard, before any final sentence should be pronounced .against him. It may, perhaps, appear strange, and even inconsistent with the laws of the Church, that a cause of a religious nature should be examined and decided in the public diet ; hut it must be considered that these diets, in which the archbishops, bishops, and even certain abbots had their places, as well as the princes of the empire, were not only political assemblies, but also provincial councils for Germany, to whose jurisdiction, by the ancient canon law, such causes as that of Luther properly belonged." — Mosheim, p. 15, /. c. a Some touching passages, illustrative of Luther's feelings and of the apprehensions of his friends, will be found in D'Aubigne, ch. iv. to vi. Waterworth simply says : — " Luther seems to have been delighted at the opportunity of professing his faith, or of obtaining further notoriety! " 30 THE HISTORY OF THE an efficient guard, and by a few chosen friends, whose enthu- siasm made them fitting companions of his journey, he set out, and having, on his way, preached at Weimar in defence of his doctrines respecting justification by faith, he reached Worms on the 16th of April. A cavalcade of nobles and gentlemen rode out to give him escort into the city, and the streets were filled with people, some attracted by regard, all by curiosity. b On alighting from his chariot, he exclaimed, " God will stand up for me." If, as there is unhappily reason to believe, some remnants of vanity yet lurked in the mind of Martin, the reception he experienced at Worms would not have been favourable towards repressing it. Crowds surrounded his hotel, and the visits of the great scarcely allowed him time to repose from the fatigues of Iris journey. Various were their opinions : some thought him divinely inspired, others believed him possessed by a devil. c CHAPTER XVII He appears before the Diet. On the following day, 17th of April, 1521, Luther con- fronted his opponents. " Never had man stood before so august an assembly. The emperor Charles, whose kingdom extended over the old and the new worlds ; Iris brother, the archduke Ferdinand ; six electors of the empire, whose descendants now almost all wear kingly crowns ; eighty dukes, most of them reigning over countries of greater or less extent, and amongst whom were some whose names were destined by-and-by to become formidable to the Reformation ; the duke of Alva and his two sons ; eighty margraves, thirty archbishops, bishops, or prelates, seven ambassadors, among them those of the kings of France and England ; the deputies of ten free cities, a great number of princes, and sovereign counts, and barons ; lastly, the pope's nuncios, in all, two b Pallav. i. 26, p. 173: "Alcuni per affezione, tutti per curiosita." Throughout this portion of Luther's history Father Paul is remarkably meagre in his account ; Pallavicino diffuse and animated. c Pallav. p. 174. COUNCIL OF TRENT. 31 hundred and four personages, constituted the imposing court before which Martin Luther appeared." d John von Eck,e a friend of Aleander's, and chancellor to the archbishop of Triers, put two questions to Luther, first in Latin, and then in German, " whether the books pro- duced, copies of which had been procured by the diligence of Aleander/ were his; and whether he still maintained the opinions professed therein ?" To the first question, after the titles bad been read,s he promptly answered in the affirmative ; to the second, however, he demurred, alleging that it was a difficult matter, and one in winch the word of God and the salvation of souls were concerned, and required time to deliberate. This request surprised and annoyed many of those present, who expected a more decisive answer to so important a question ; he was, however, permitted to delay his reply until the following day. In defending the tenets advocated in his books, he ob- served that they were not all of one kind ; that one class of them embraced the doctrine of faith and piety, while another class rebuked the dogmas of the pontiffs, a third being directed against the defenders of the opposite doctrine. That if he were to retract the books of the first kind, he would not be acting like a Christian, or even as an upright man, seeing that, although the bull of Leo had condemned them all, it had not judged them all impious. As to the books of the second class, it was but too well known, that all the provinces of the Christian world, but Germany in par- ticular, were miserably harassed and pillaged, and groaned ivnder the yoke of servitude : to abjure these, then, would be the same as rooting that tyranny more deeply. Touching the third class, he confessed that he had been more bitter and vehement than was fitting, but that lie had not set up a profession of holiness, nor had undertaken to defend his life and morals, but his doctrine only, of which he should be willing to render an account. He added that he was, of all men, least disposed to be obstinate, and that if any one d DAubigne, p. 203. e Not the theologian of that name. f Pallav. ibid. s At the instance of his counsel, Jerome Schurff. — D'Aub. p. 201. 32 THE HISTORY OF THE could confute and convince him by the testimony of Scrip- ture, he would be the first to cast his own writings into the flames.11 On being asked whether, if his opinions were shown to have been condemned by the councils of the Church, and especially by the Council of Constance, he would revoke them, he answered in the negative. " Since your most serene majesty," replied he, " and your high mightinesses, demand •a simple, clear, and explicit answer of me, I will give it :* I cannot submit my faith either to pope or councils, since it is as clear as the day that they have often fallen into error, and even into great contradictions with themselves. If, then, I am not convinced by testimonies from Scripture, or by evident reasons, if I am not persuaded by the very pas- sages I have cited, and if my conscience be not then made captive by the word of God, I can and will retract nothing; for it is not safe for the Christian to speak against his con- science." He then added the brief, but emphatic ejacula- tion : " Here I stand : I can no otherwise ; God help me ! Amen." Upon this, the assembly broke up.k CHAPTER XVIII. Luther is dismissed from Worms. His Seizure and Captivity. It is a painful thing to find that religious bigotry can in- fluence men's minds in cases where common honesty is the only rule of conduct. Thus it was with Luther's enemies. It had been fully determined that Luther should be com- manded to leave the imperial dominions within the space of twenty days, provided, however, according to promise, with h For this synopsis I am indebted to Sarpi, p. 11 (Latin ed.). The oration is given rather fully in D'Aubigne, p. 205, sq. This latter writer, however, seems to exaggerate the dangers of Luther's position, although in the main agreeing with the similar ideas of Schlegel (apud Mosheim, p. 112, sq. v. iii. ed. Soames), relative to the journey to Worms. Luther had good reason to rely on the protection of the elector, besides perceiving that the popularity of his must violent enemies was but doubtful. 1 The Latin is very quaint : " Dabo illud neque dentatum, neque cornutum." — A pud D'Aub. p. 206. k Compare Michelet, p. 1 7, whose matter is, however, almost common with that of D Aubigne. COUNCIL OF TRENT. 33 a safe-conduct, on condition of his offering no acts of aggres- sion to the doctrines and practices of the Romish church, while on his journey. But the elector of Brandenburg, and several ecclesiastical princes, quoted the doctrine of the Council of Constance, which made it lawful to break faith with a heretic.1 Whatever may have been the feelings of the young emperor 1U on the subject, the honest indignation of the German princes, even of George, duke of Saxony, warmly resented the idea of such treachery; public feeling- was aroused, and Luther quitted Worms, it might almost be said, in triumph. On reaching Friedberg, he dismissed the officer of the emperor, by whom he had been accompanied, placing in his hands the safe- conduct ; in order that no direct violence might seem to be offered to the imperial authority in the seizure of his person which had been planned by the elector.11 This took place on the third of May, when he had set out for Wittemberg, accompanied only by a few attendants. His carriage was attacked with some show of violence, his attendants dispersed, and himself placed on a led horse, and carried away to the fortress of Wartzburg, belonging to the elector of Saxony ; it haying been arranged that Frederick should not be informed into which of Iris castles Luther had been conveyed, in order that he might be able to deny all knowledge of the place of his concealment.0 1 Sleidan apud Courayer, t. i. p. 33. The French author has well refuted Pallavicino's attempts to invalidate the statement of Father Paul. m See a curious passage from Sandoval, in D'Aubigne, p. 208. n Mosheim, c. xvii. Michelet, p. 18. Pallav. i. 18. The account given by D'Aubigne, p. 215, sq. is rhetorical and unsatisfactory. Nor can I agree with Michelet, in supposing that Luther " did not clearly know to whom he was to attribute the mild and honourable captivity in which he was detained." It is difficult to understand how he could have remained in ignorance, even supposing the whole matter was not preconcerted. J Pallav. 1. c. p. 180. 34: THE HISTORY OF THE CHAPTER XIX. Luther is placed under (lie Imperial Ban. Meantime, Aleander had not been idle, and having ob- tained the signature of Charles, he published the following- decree against Luther and his party :P — " We, Charles the Fifth, to all electors, p>rinces, prelates, and others whom it may concern. " The Almighty having confided to us, for the defence of his holy faith, more kingdoms, and more power than have ever been given to any of our predecessors, we are resolved to exert all our powers to hinder any heresy from polluting our holy empire. " The Augustiman monk Martin Luther, though ex- horted by us, has flung himself like a frantic man upon the holy Church, and sought to stifle it by books full of blas- phemies : he has sullied in a shameful manner the inde- structible law of holy marriage ; he has laboured to excite laymen to lave their hands in the blood of priests, and casting off all obedience, he has not ceased to excite to revolt, dissension, war, niurder, rapine, and fire, and to toil for the complete ruin of the faith of Christians In a word, not to mention so many other wickednesses, this creature, who is not a man, but Satan himself under the form of a man, and covered with the cowl of a monk, has gathered into one fetid slough all the most guilty heresies of past times, and has, moreover, added to them new ones of his own. " We have therefore dismissed from before our face this Luther, whom all pious and right-thinking men regard as a madman, or as one possessed by the devil; and it is our intention, that, after the expiration of his safe-conduct, instant and efficacious measures be taken to check Ins raging- frenzy. " Therefore, under pain of incurring the punishment due to crimes of lese-majesty, we forbid you to harbour the said Luther from the time the fatal term shall have expired, to p I follow the version given in D'Aubigne', p. 214. Madame, in his edition of Mosheim, part ii. cent. xvi. £ xviii. note, has some temperate and just remarks on the impolitic and unsatisfactory conduct of Charles in promulgating this decree. COUNCIL OF TRENT. 35 succour him, to give him food and drink, and by word or deed publicly or privately to lend him any manner of aid. We enjoin you, moreover, to seize him, or to cause him to be seized, wherever you shall see him, and to bring him before us without delay, or to keep him in all safety, till you shall have learned from us how you are to act with regard to him, and have received the retributions due to your j:>ains in so holy a work. " As for his adherents, you shall seize them, put them down, and confiscate their goods. " As for his writings, if the very best nutriment becomes a bane to all men from the moment a drop of poison is mixed with it, how much more should such books, in which is found a mortal poison for the soul, be not only rejected, but even annihilated. You shall burn them, therefore, or wholly destroy them in some other manner. " As for authors, poets, j^mters, painters, sellers or pur- chasers of placards, writings or paintings against the pope or the Church, you shall seize their goods and persons, and deal with them according to your good pleasure. " And if any one, whatever be his dignity, should dare to act in contravention to the decree of our imperial majesty, we command that he be placed under the ban of the empire. " Let every one comport himself in conformity herewith." CHAPTER XX.i Death of Leo, who is succeeded ly A drian VI. But this ban was rendered ineffectual by the departure of Charles to Spain, and the delegating of his authority to the elector of Saxony and other parties favourable to Luther. Leo X. died soon after, and was succeeded, on Jan. 9th, 1522, by Adrian VI., a pontiff whose character and accomplish- ments gave great hopes to the supporters of the old system of religion. Simple and unpretending in his habits, he sought to reform the extravagances and luxury of the Romish court, and especially to set aright the maladministration of i It is not my intention to enter into the particulars of Luther's con- finement, as they in no way bear upon the present subject. DAubigne and Michelet will furnish enough to satisfy the reader. d2 3<6 THE HISTORY OF THE indulgences.1- Hoping that his influence might be rendered greater from his being a native of Utrecht, he sent Cherigato as his nuncio to the emperor of Germany, who had been his pupil, instructing him to spare no means of bringing back the dissenting party to the Church of Rome, and complaining that the ban, under which Luther was placed, was rendered of no avail by the interference of his friends, and that not only among the common people, but among the nobles like- wise, who were, moreover, seizing upon the goods of the Church in all directions, as though these were the chief in- centive to their apostasy. He at the same time allowed that the troubled state of the times was a just punishment from God for the sins of the clergy and people, and pro- fessed his willingness to remedy abuses, the existence of which it was no longer of any use to deny. These instructions were communicated to the diet assem- bled at Nuremberg, together with some severe complaints against many of the priests throughout Germany, who had led secular lives, and even married, contrary to the law of the Church. But although the conscientiousness of Adrian's confession might have aroused some hopes of having justice done, and matters of religion placed on a more moderate and equitable footing — the princes of Germany had been too vividly enlightened as to the incompatibility of Reform and Romanism, to rest satisfied with general promises. Accord- ingly, while congratulating the new pope on his succession in terms at once friendly, courteous, and submissive, they at the same time declare their unwillingness to interfere harshly with Luther, suggesting a general council as the best means of settling all religious disturbances, and naming several towns as places well calculated for the assembling thereof. At the same time they mentioned numerous abuses, espe- cially in the exactions made by the Church, and the misap- propriation of her funds. The nuncio found himself at a loss, and withdrew. s Soon after the nuncio had departed, a piece was published r In which, however, he seems to have betrayed no small indecision and uncertainty. See Sarpi, p. 16, sqq. Pallavicino, ii. 5, 6, has devoted considerable space to impugning Father Paul's notions on the subject of indulgences. s See Sarpi, p. 21-23. COUNCIL OF TRENT. 37 by the secular leaders of the diet, entitled TJie Centum Gra- vamina, in which the various injuries inflicted upon the German nation by the papal power were earnestly and bit- terly set forth. The leading subjects of complaint were the immense sums they were continually compelled to expend under the form of dispensations, absolutions, and indul- gences ; the processes summoned from Germany to Rome ; the reservations in commendam and of annates ; the exemp- tion of ecclesiastical offenders from the courts of justice ; the excommunications and unjust interdicts ; the causes of the laity brought into the ecclesiastical court under various pre- texts ; the immense sums spent on the consecrations of churches and cemeteries, and the expense attendant on the receiving of the sacraments, and the burial of the dead.1 Whether this sincere and upright pontiff (whose honesty was but ill appreciated by the Roman Catholics) would have effected a union of the dismembered body of the Church, we cannot tell ; but all hopes on the subject were destroyed by his death, which took place on the 14th September, 1523, after he had occupied the pontifical throne little more than a year.u CHAPTER XXI. Clement VII. succeeds to the Papal Throne. Julio de" Medici, cousin of Leo X., who had retained con- siderable influence during the reign of the two last popes, 4 Sarpi, p. 23. Pallavicino is bitter against Adrian for his candour in confessing the errors of which the clergy had been guilty, and which had brought on the work of reformation at the hands of Luther. Dr. Waterworth, who seems to have little admiration for candour, echoes his original (p. 37). Courayer, with better feeling and judgment, ob- serves : " Le Cardinal Pallavicino, qui connoissoit mieux les maximes d'une politique mondaine que celles de levangile, trouve qu'Adrien se conduisit en cela avec beaucoup plus de zele que de prudence Ceux qui connoissent mieux les devoirs d'un Eveque que les artifices d'une politique mondaine, ne sauroient qu'admirer la droiture d'Adrien, dont la Coiir de Rome n'etoit pas digne." — T. i. p. 54. See also Jortin, Life of Erasmus, v. i. p. 324. u There is some reason to suspect that his death took place under cir- cumstances of foul play. "So gratifying to the Romish populace was his decease, that the night after it took place, the front door of his prin- cipal physician was decorated with a wreath of flowers, surmounted with the inscription, for the deliverer of his country." — Schlegel apud Mosh. p. 115, ed. Soames. 38 THE HISTORY OF THE now became pontiff, under the name of Clement VII. Deep and varied erudition, tact and penetration seldom wanting, and matured experience, were qualifications from which the happiest results might have been expected. But he had entered upon his office at an unfavourable season, as will hereafter be made apparent. Clement seems to have been little favourable to the con- vocation of a council, foreseeing that the discontented party would not be likely to yield to its dictates, especially after the open renunciation of all authority but that of Scripture, on the part of Luther. Perceiving, however, that The Cen- tum Gravamina, which were now published,7 contained many demands for reform in matters not directly affecting the Roman court, he thought that if the Germans could be satis- fied on some points more immediately concerning themselves, they would be less likely to meddle with matters appertain- ing to Rome. By this reformation, therefore, of the German Church, he hoped to evade the calling of a council,"' fearing that " the attempt to heal one disorder might only create a greater." x Campeggio, a prelate of undoubted prudence and reputa- tion, was despatched by him to Nuremberg, where he urged the assembled princes, both on religious and political grounds, not to desert the religion of their ancestors, and declared the pope's intention of reforming the abuses of the German Church. But although many reformations were made among the weak and uninnuential members of the Church, the greater offenders and monopolists remained secure ; and the Germans were too wise not to perceive that what had been already done had been the result of a desire to flatter them into tranquillity, not to promote the real work of religious reform. Moreover, despite the complaints of Campeggio, the evident disinclination of the pontiff to a general council made the princes of Germany more urgent in insisting thereon. Although, at a small assembly y held at Ratisbon, the v They will be found in Le Plat's Collectio Monumentorum ad Concil. Trid. v. ii. p. 164, sqq. w Sarpi, p. 24. * Waterworth, p. 38. v Sarpi, p. 26. There were present the Archduke Ferdinand, the dukes of Bavaria, the archbishop ofSaltzburg, the bishops of Trent and Ratisbon, and the legates of nine other bishops. COUNCIL OF TBEXT. 39 legate had procured a confirmation of the edict passed by the Diet of Worms in condemnation of Luther ; still this only- excited indignation on the part of the absent majority; who argued that " in that attempt at reformation, things of the greatest moment had been neglected, while all their thoughts had been directed to the correction of matters most unim- portant ; that the German people certainly suffered much from the lowest class of the clergy ; much more from bishops and prelates holding what was not their due ; but most of all from the oppressions of the court of Rome ; and that of these matters, as to any correction of them either according to the example of the primitive Church, or on a still better principle, not even the slightest mention had been made." a Charles Y. was incensed at the slight offered to his dignity by the Nuremberg assembly, in decreeing matters of such importance without his knowledge, and expressed particular annoyance at their having insisted on the convocation of a council, alleging that the matter belonged rather to himself and the pontiff to consider, than to them. Adhering to the pontiff, he endeavoured to enforce the observance of the decree passed at Worms. But various circumstances13 tended first to shake his fidelity, and subsequently to arouse his enmity against Clement. At length, so completely was all good-will between the pope and the emperor forgotten, that the latter abandoned his design of insisting on the observance of the edict of Worms, and sacrificed old associations to secure credit with the Lutherans, in order to make head against the strong combination0 arising in the opposite direc- a Sarpi, p. 27. Courayer, p. 68, sq. has some judicious observations, calculated to silence the trifling excuses which Pallavicino has attempted to put forth in defence of the " do-nothing" style of reformation which the legate had attempted. b My limits only permit me to refer to Sarpi, p. 71-80, ed. Courayer ; Pallav. ii. 13 ; Ranke, c. iii. p. 28, sqq. ; and the original correspondence, &c. published in Le Plat's second volume. c "Implicitum tamen tenuit foedus a multis principibus contra eum initum, et de rege captivo Galliarum [i. e. Francis the First] liberando capta consilia. Pontifex etiam, quod Italiam indefensam, ministroruni Caesaris imperio arbitrioque permissam conspicabatur, Caesaremque adeo praepotentem, ut pontificatum haberet sibi obnoxium, cogitare ccepit de consociandis sibi regibua ac principibus, qui ab imperatoris, si quando alienior esset, injuriis ipsum protegerent. " — Sarpi, p. 28. Com- pare Mosheim, § xxiii. sq. p. 123, sq. v. iii. ed. Soames. 40 THE HISTORY OF THE tion. Accordingly, in the Diet of Spires, opened in June, 152G, lie contented himself with requiring that matters should be left in their present state, until he should be able to treat personally with the pontiff respecting the holding of a general council. d CHAPTER XXII. Increased Ill-feeling between Clement and Charles. Each party was now arranging itself against the other ; distrust had begotten an enmity that ill promised to admit of a satisfactory adjustment; and Clement, dreading the pro- bable usurpation of power in Italy at the hands of the emperor, entered into a treaty with the king of France, now liberated from captivity, and with the Venetians. He also complained in bitter terms of the ingratitude and coldness which the emperor had latterly displayed towards him, and a correspondence between them, which fully shows the political j)ower to which the j>rinciples of reform had attained, was published in various parts of Germany, Spain, and Italy.e But the great blow was struck by the noble family of Colonnaf (whose hatred to the pope arose chiefly from his illegitimacy, and from doubts as to the means by which he had attained to the pontifical see), who laid siege to Rome, and pillaged the decorations of the Vatican and the church of St. Peter with reckless cupidity. A truce was agreed upon, but the pope having excommunicated and cursed the Colonna family, the Neapolitan regent was urged by them to send his troops against Pome to avenge this breach of treaty. Charles of Bourbon, moreover, at the instigation of George Frundsberg, an old Lutheran general,? led the portion of the imperial troops then under his command, on a plundering excursion, and having passed the Po, d Sarpi, p. 28. e Id. p. 32. f See Sarpi, p. 29-32. " Cardinalis enim [i. c. Pompeius Colonna]. homo audax et fastuosus, pontificeni ambitus palam ineusabat, quasi viis parum licitis ad eum dignitatis gradum ascendisset ; et familiam Colomnensem hoc in primis nomine magni faciebat, quod fa tali in illegi- timos, et in earn sedem malis artibus intrudentes pontitices odio, tyran- nidem eorum virtute sua compressisseiit." B Frundsberg bad died of apoplexy, on failing to meet with the usual obedience, while attempting to quell a disturbance among his troops. COUNCIL OF TRENT. 41 marched on to Rome. Despite a truce which was made, on conditions little befitting the pontifical dignity,11 the Bourbon, on the 6th of May, 1-527, laid siege to Rome, stormed the castle of St. Angelo, and shut up Clement as a prisoner. " Thus did the pope, who had sought the liberation of Italy, see himself beleaguered in the castle of St. Angelo, and as it were a prisoner. It may be asserted, that by this great blow, the preponderance of the Spanish power in Italy was irrevocably established.'1 Of equal importance, as attest- ing the gradual falling off of the papal power, w^as the simultaneous revolt at Florence, the pope's native city, by which the Medici were expelled from power by their enemies. CHAPTER XXIII. They again coalesce. Under these circumstances, the pope, oppressed by a com- plication of misfortunes, many of which were the accumulated result of his predecessors' mistaken policy, was compelled to have recourse to the aid of the very parties, who had thus outraged his dignity. The emperor professed great regret at what had taken place, but few could have believed him sincere. It was, however, in vain for the pope to resist the adverse current of events ; and even the proffered aid of the adherents, whose support had deprived him of the emperor's friendship, failed to re-assure him. " With amazement,"' says Ranke, "men beheld him again connecting himself with the Spaniards, after enduring such deep indignities at their hands. His motive was, that he saw in Spanish aid the only means of b On condition of a cessation of arms for the space of eight months, the Colonna family were to be freed from the ban of excommunication, Pompeio Colonna to be restored to the senatorial rank from which he had been degraded, while a large sum of money was to be paid by the pontiff. — Sarpi, p. 34. 1 Ranke, p. 31. I may here take an opportunity of mentioning that Henry VIII. of England assisted the pope considerably during his besieged state ; but that the matters connected with his divorce from Catherine broke the friendship thus established, and were followed by a gradual but definite abjuration of the papal power by that monarch. It is foreign to my purpose to enter into the particulai-s of that oft-told and well-known history ; but for a calm and dispassionate examination of the conduct of Henry, and the motives by which he was probably actuated, I cannot do better than refer my readers to Blunt's " Reform* tion in England," ch. vii. p. Ill, sqq. 42 THE HISTORY OF THE reinstating his kindred and party in Florence. It seemed to him better to endure the domination of the emperor than the refractory conduct of the rebels. The worse the fortune of the French, the nearer did he draw to the Spaniards. When at last the former were completely defeated, he concluded with the latter the treaty of Barcelona. So wholly did he change his policy, that he now himself made use of the same army that had taken Rome before his eyes, and kept himself so long besieged, that he made use of this, only recruited and improved, to subjugate his native city." k CHAPTER XXIV. Second Diet of Spires. In March, 1529, another diet was convened at Spires, in which Giovanni Mirandolo, the pope's deputy, besides urging the arrangement of measures to oppose the inroads of the Turks, and a reconciliation between the emperor and the king k Ranke, p. 31. The result of these disagreements, in their influence in advancing the cause of the reformed religion, is well stated by Mosheim : " Several princes, whom the fear of persecution and punish- ment had hitherto prevented from lending a hand to the good work, being delivered now from their restraint, renounced publicly the super- stition of Rome, and introduced among their subjects the same forms of religious worship, and the same system of doctrine, that had been received in Saxony. Others, though placed in such circumstances as discouraged them from acting in an open manner against the interests of the Roman pontiffs, were, however, far from discovering the smallest opposition to those who withdrew the people from his despotic yoke, nor did they molest the private assemblies of such as had separated them- selves from the Church of Rome. And, in general, all the Germans, who, before these resolutions of the Diet of Spires, had rejected the papal discipline and doctrine, were now, in consequence of the liberty they enjoyed by these resolutions, wholly employed in bringing these schemes and plans to a certain degree of consistence, and in adding vigour and firmness to the glorious cause in which they were engaged. Id the mean time, Luther and his fellow-labourers — particularly those who were with him at Wittemberg — by their writings, their instructions, their admonitions and counsels, inspired the timorous with fortitude, dispelled the doubts of the ignorant, fixed the principles and resolution of the flagging and irresistant, and animated all the friends of genuine Christianity with a spirit suitable to the grandeur of the undertaking." — § xxv. p. 20, ed. Maclaine. See, also, on the visitations instituted during this period, an important note in Soame's edition, v. iii. p. 125. COUNCIL OF TBEHT. 43 of France, exhorted tliem, above all. to compose the religious nsions with which the Christian world was harassed. Although the Anabaptist sects were not represented at tins meeting, the rival parties of Zwingle and Luther were more mindful of their interests, and the popish power had reason to derive some hopes from their differences respecting the Lord's Supper. The landgrave of Hesse made a vain attempt to persuade both these parties that their differences were less important than they seemed ; and the emperor, represented by his brother Ferdinand, was desirous to return back to his former policy, and enforce the almost obsolete edict of Worms. He complained that the late edict of Spires had been taken advantage of as a pretext for in- troducing innovations of the most absurd, discordant, and dangerous character, and claimed for himself, by virtue of his absolute power, the right to abrogate that edict. But the elector of Saxony and his party were equally anxious for its continuance ; and Charles, whose previous inconsistency must have shaken the undoubted influence which his position would otherwise have secured for him, was compelled to compromise the matter. A commission having been instituted, it was resolved, upon their repre- sentation, that where the edict of Worms had been received, it should continue in force till a general council should be held ; where the ancient religion had kept its ground, it was not to be disturbed ; and where the new one possessed such influence as to render it dangerous to interfere with it, it should be left unmolested until the said council should be assembled. Furthermore, the sacrifice of the mass was to be retained, even where the opposite party prevailed ; the Ana- baptists were to be punished with the utmost severity ; and the Scriptures were to be interpreted in accordance with the expositions handed down by the fathers, and ratified by the approval of the Church. This (jualified concession was, however, ill calculated to satisfy those whom it was intended to keep quiet. They xu'ged that it was unjust to depart from the decree of the previous diet, by which each man was permitted the free use of his own religion until the council should be held, especially as what had been clone with the common consent of all, ought not to be rescinded without a like universality of agreement. 44 THE HISTORY OF THE They also complained of the fraitlessness of the attempts at reform which had been ostensibly made, and again repeated their belief, that a council was the only expeditious way of removing controversies. As to the restoration of the mass in its complete state, that was but the revival of an old abuse ; while the question of the interpreting of Scripture involved another, as to what was the true Church. They therefore declined giving assent to sanctioning so obscure a document, as being likely to open a way for fresh tumults and discussions, but professed their willingness to render an account of their reasons for dissenting.1 On the 12th of April, twenty-one of the free cities ex- pressed their assent to the proposed resolutions, but fourteen resolutely held out. On the 18th, it was resolved that the dissentient party should not be allowed another hearing, and on the 19th, they were called upon to give in an uncon- ditional assent. Hereupon, six princes, and the deputies of fourteen cities111 of the empire, protested against the decision of this diet ; and, upon their opposition being disregarded, they, on the following day, presented a written protest, declaring that the resolutions of the diet were opposed to the spirit of the Gospel, and appealed to a future council. This protest was the origin of the word Protestant.11 Accord- 1 Sarpi, p. 37. m The princes and states which joined in this protest were the elector John of Saxony, the margrave George of Brandenburg, Anszbach and Culmbach, the dukes Ernest and Francis of Liineburg, the landgrave Philip of Hesse, Wolfgang, prince of Anhalt ; and fourteen imperial cities, viz. Strasburg, Ulm, Nuremberg, Constance, Eeuttingen, Winel- sheim, Menneingen, Lindau, Kempten, Heilbron, Lang, Weissenberg, Nordlingen, and St. Gall. They appealed to the emperor, to a future, general, or free council of the German nation, and, lastly, to every im- partial judge ; for they believed that a majority of votes in a diet could decide a secular question, but not a spiritual or religious question. They appealed to the emperor, not as recognising him as their judge in a matter of religion, but merely that he might allow their appeal to a council to be valid. And they subjoined the appeal to a council, be- cause, according to the ecclesiastical law of Germany, religious contro- versies are not to be decided by decrees of a diet, but by a national council. We may also here remark, that this was not the first protest, but that in the year 1523, at the Diet of Nuremberg, the elector of Saxony, and the evangelical dukes, and imperial cities, protested against the decree of the diet. — Mosheim, ed. Soames, p. 126, note. " " A name which, according to the principles of the Fathers and the COUNCIL OF TRENT. 4-5 ing to Waterworth, the edict to which this protest referred, finally passed the diet on the 23rd of April, but was not published till May Gth. CHAPTER XXV. Controversy between Luther and Zwinyle. But firm and manly as was the opposition maintained by those who had seceded from the Church of Rome, they were deficient in that unity which alone could consolidate their resources, and give a healthful and convincing colour to their proceedings. After Luther's return to Wittemberg.0 Carl- stadt, Zwingle, the Zwichau prophets, Manzer, and the Ana- baptist party, had given way to a taste for violent and per- sonal controversy, grossly at variance with the spirit of tolerance which had been the avowed motive for their seces- sion, and sadly tending to shake the cause of reform in the eyes of the world at large. But the fiercest struggle was between Luther and Zwingle, respecting the nature of our Lord's presence in the Eucha- rist. Philip, landgrave of Hesse, appointed a conference be- tween these celebrated reformers at Maspurg, with the hope of reconciling them with each other. Both parties, after some hesitation and difficulties, met, Oct. 1st, and an animated dispute ensued, which lasted four days, Luther being for the most part pitted against (Ecolampadius, and Zwingle against Melancthon. When, however, the two chiefs of the con- troversy met personally, their language sadly lost temper. The searching irony of Zwingle, and the incontinent bitter- ness of Luther, gave little hopes of reconciliation. Nor was the conduct of Luther defensible on the score of consistency with his previous opinions. If he did not advocate transub- stantiation in its full extent, he was not far off from doing so, while Zwingle seemed to form too low an estimate of the Church, especially of those who settled the Arian and similar contro- versies, is of itself decisive of the heretical or schismatical character of the sects which bear it !" — Waterworth, p. 93. " Dall' accennata protesta fattasi nel Convento di Spira derivb in Germania il celebre nome di Protest ant i, die con vocabolo meno invidi- oso vuol dire in effetto : Ribelli at Papa ed a Cesarc." — Pallav. ii. 18. 0 After three years' confinement, spent in writing and commenting on the Scriptures. — Cf. Blunt, Reformation, p. 101. 4G THE HISTORY OF THE sacramental import of the Eucharist. Both parties claimed the victory, which perhaps rather belongs to Zwingle than Luther ; but, although anything like an agreement on this subject was vainly sought for, and the repulsive conduct of Luther displayed little charity or forbearance towards those who had dissented from his opinions, the landgrave succeeded in procuring a declaration of luiiformity touching other material points of faith, and an avowal of political friendship — an unity which the intemperate zeal of Luther had threatened to sever. P CHAPTER XXYI. Confession of A ugsbwg. Meanwhile the emperor went to Bologna to receive his coronation from the hands of the pontiff, who was unwilling that the ceremony should be celebrated at Borne, in the presence of those who had so audaciously pillaged the papal capital. i They spent four months together, dwelling in the same palace, and the pope spared no pains to confirm the emperor in his adherence to the edict of Worms, and in dis- couraging him from the project of convoking a general council. But Charles, although bigoted to his old views, foresaw too clearly the dangers arising from the Protestant leagues which were forming, and was, moreover, persuaded of the legal impossibility of condemning, and making war upon inoffensive citizens, without first granting them a hearing. Even the pope was at length so far convinced of the progress of public opinion, that he yielded a consent to the convoking of a council, but only on condition that it should be deemed necessary for the extirpation of the Lutheran heresy.1 A general diet had been summoned at Augsburg, almost all p See Sarpi, p. 33 ; Pallav. iii. 1 ; D'Aubigne, pt. iv. ch. vii. The celebrated Bucer was also largely interested in this controversy. Some important passages from Luther's works, in which he unsparingly condemns the rationalistic class of theologians, who were fast acquiring influence, will be found in Michelet, p. 41, ch. iv. i So Sarpi. But both Guicciardini and Sleidan give more probable reasons, viz. the convenience of the emperor while on his journey, and the desire to avoid expense. See Courayer, v. i. p. i'4. r See the authorities quoted by Courayer, p. 95, note 67. COUNCIL OF TRENT. 47 the princes being more prompt in their attendance than the emperor, who, however, arrived on the 15th June, 1530. The Protestant princes declined appearing at mass; and the legate, vexed at this insult offered to the pontiff, persuaded Charles to call upon the elector of Saxony, in virtue of his office, to act as swordbearer before him when he went to mass eight days after, at which time the beginning of the convention was fixed. The elector was placed in a delicate position : either he must act inconsistently with the faith he had taken, or he must forfeit his family dignity. In this difficulty, he appealed to his professor of theology, who asserted that he might be present as officiating at a civil, not a religious ceremony, justifying this distinction by the example of Elijah.5 Some cutting remarks from Vicentio Pimpinelli, the nun- cio, chiefly intended to incite the Germans to give up reli- gious differences, and make common cause against the Turks, were delivered on occasion of this mass. Hitherto, as Mosheim remarks, " there was not extant any tangible exposition of the religion professed by Luther and his friends, from which might be learned clearly what were their views on doctrinal subjects, and what the grounds of their opposition to the Roman pontiffs ;"* and as the approaching investigation, under circumstances so imposing, and involving responsibilities so serious, rendered such a document absolutely necessary, John, the elector of Saxony, directed Luther, Jonas, Melancthon, and Pomeranus, to draw up a set of articles of faith in time for the approaching diet. On the basis of the seventeen articles agreed upon at Swabach, in the year 1529, which had been approved by the elector at Torgau,11 Melancthon, with considerable toil and anxiety, harmonized the opinions of his friends into a brief digest, and on the 11th May it was completed, and received the approbation of Luther. Many changes, however, were subsequently made by the councillors and theologians of the s 2 Kings v. 29. Pallavicino has gone out of the way to abuse Sarpi, as if the historian were answerable for the doctrines or views of the people about whom he writes. See Courayer, p. 100. 1 Section xxviii. p. 128. B And thence called the Articles of Torgau. 48 THE HISTORY OF THE elector.-1' In its complete state it consisted of twenty-one articles, and seven chapters touching the abuses of the Romish church. w This confession, subscribed with the names of the elector and four princes of the empire, viz. George, margrave of Brandenburg ; Ernest, duke of Llineberg ; Philip, landgrave of Hesse ; and Wolfgang, prince of Anhalt, was, after being publicly read in German by Christian Bayer, the chancellor of Saxony, delivered to the emperor, in proof of their agreement with the sentiments therein expressed. But it happened unfortunately for the unity of Protest- antism, that the articles of the Augsburg Confession touch- ing the sacraments, although worded in the manner least calculated to give offence, yet went so far in asserting the doctrine of at least consubstantiation, that the Zwinglian party were utterly averse from receiving them as the expo- nent of their own ideas on the subject. Hence the imperial cities of Strasburg, Constance, Lindau, and Meinningen, put forth another document, called " The Confession of the Four Cities." x It agreed substantially with that of Augsburg, ex- cept as regards the manner of the presence of Christ's body in the eucharist, which they held to be spiritual, not phy- sical, y Although these differences were suffered to amal- v Waterworth, p. xliv. w I shall not enter into details respecting the history or tenets of the Confession (or apology, as it was called) of Augsburg, as it will interfere with the materials reserved for the commentary on that confession. Much that is useful will be found in DAubigne, book xiv. The con- fession itself will be found in Le Plat, v. ii. p. 332, sqq. or in the Corpus et Syntagma Confessionum Fidei, 4to. Genev. m.dc.liv. pt. ii. p. 9, sqq. A neat analysis is given in Soame's notes on Mosheim, v. iii. p. 138, sqq. x Confessio Tetrapolitana. See Le Plat, v. ii. p. 441, sqq. ; Corpus et Syntagma Confess, pt. i. p. 174, sqq. ; Augusta Corpus Librorum Symbolicorum, p. 327, sqq. 8vo. Elberfeld, 1827. y " They say : ' All that the Evangelists, Paul, and the holy Fathers have written respecting the venerable sacrament of the body and blood of Christ, our preachers teach, recommend, and inculcate with the greatest fidelity. Hence, with singular earnestness, they constantly proclaim that goodness of Christ towards his followers, whereby, no less now than at his Last Supper, to all his sincere disciples, as oft as they respect this supper, he condescends to give by the sacraments his real body and his real blood, to be truly eaten and drunken as the food and drink of their souls, by which they are nourished to eternal life, so that COUNCIL OF TRENT. 49 gamate at a subsequent period, yet we cannot but regret that less hostility and confusion had accompanied the eager and well-meant advocates of reform. But it too frequently happens that men, who have anticipated the progress of the times, are hurried on by the stream of their own success, and are forced to act abruptly, where they expected opportunity for deliberation, while new difficulties spring up before they have had time to prepare for them. Much of the intemperate conduct displayed by the early reformers may be traced to the fact, that their success on the one hand, and the sluggish or persecuting spirit of their opponents on the other, com- pelled them to go to greater lengths than they had ever contemplated. ]S~or was the work of reform unattended by the temptations which success, publicity, and the privilege of swaying the minds of a large body of the world, must ever bring with them. The diet itself was opened on the 20th June, when the emperor treated of the war with the Turks, and again re- curred to the edict of Worms, condemning the inefficacy of those passed subsequently, and declaring his intention of considering the complaints and statements of all parties, pro- vided they were delivered in writing. Two days' notice was given to the Protestants to present their confession, which they accordingly did at the next session, on the 24th of June. On the following day it was read ; and the emperor, with the view of checking any further attempts at innovation, ordered the princes, whose signatures it bore, to be asked whether they had any other objections or complaints against the doc- he lives and abides in them and they in him.' This confession they presented to the emperor in Latin and German ; but he would not allow it to be read in public. Yet, when the popish priests had made out a confutation of it, he called them before him to hear that confutation read ; and then, without allowing discussion, or permitting them to have a copy of the confutation, demanded of them submission to the Church of Rome. They refused. This confession of the four cities, which was drawn up by Martin Bucer, and had been adopted by the senate and people of Augsburg, was the confession of that city for a number of years. But afterwards, the four cities, feeling the necessity of a union with the Lutherans, lest their popish enemies should swallow them up, brought themselves to believe that the Lutherans and they differed more in words than in reality ; and therefore they subscribed to the Augsburg Confession, and became a part of the Lutheran Church." — Soames on Mosh. p. 140. E 50 THE HISTORY OF THE trines and practice of the Catholic Church. After some deliberation, they answered in the negative.2 The day after the reading of the confession, it was resolved, in a meeting of the Catholic members of the diet, and chiefly at the suggestion of the legate Campeggio, that a confutation of the Augsburg Confession should be drawn up, and read in council, but not published. a The drawing up of this docu- ment was intrusted chiefly to Faber, Eck, and Cochlseus. Melancthon and his party, however, seemed disposed to waive many of their objections, and the elector was persuaded to reduce their demands to two points, viz. the administration of the eucharist under both kinds, and the removal of the celibacy of the clergy. In fact, Melancthon's conduct, as displayed in his letters, betrays a wavering good-nature, rather than the stern and consistent spirit of a resolute and determined reformer. h Anxious to procure uniformity, with a view to successfully opposing the Turks, Charles made trial of a commission, at first composed of seven, afterwards of three members of each party, but without any satisfactory result. On the 3rd of August,0 the reply prepared by the Catholic theologians was read in public diet, and accepted by the emperor. With a strange want of policy, as well as of common justice, the Protestants were refused a copy of this document, and when z Pallav. iii. 3. Waterworth's objections to the preamble of this confession will be noticed hereafter. a " Legendam pariter ejus doctrinae confutationem, sed cujus ex- emplaria nulla sparguntur in vulgus, ne fenestra aperiatur disputa- tionibus." — Sarpi, p. 42. b See Waterworth, p. xlviii., from whom I extract the following amusing note : "Luther, be it observed, had married the nun Catharine of Bora. Besides Luther, the other leaders of the Reformation, Me- lancthon, Zwingle, Spalatin, Capito, and CEcolampadius, were married. The practice, in fact, was becoming general amongst the renegade friars and monks. The remarks of Erasmus to his friend Adrianu* are well known : ' CEcolampadius has lately taken a wife, rather an elegant girl. Doubtless he intends to mortify the flesh. Some call this Lutheran business a tragedy ; but, for my part, I think it partakes much more of the character of a comedy ; for I observe that all its plots and counterplots end in one invariable catastrophe — a wedding." *' c It was ready at an earlier period, but was ordered to be abridged . and made milder in its tone. COUNCIL OF TRENT. 51 Melancthon attempted to answer it/1 lie was forced to con- tent himself with the notes taken at the public reading. Meanwhile the Confession of the Four Cities, drawn up by Bucer and Capito, was presented ; and Zwingle, much to the vexation and disgust of Melancthon, forwarded to Charles another confession, of his own composing, in which neither Catholics nor Lutherans were spared. On the 22nd of September, the diet again assembled, when time was given the Protestants till the 15th of April following, to retract such errors as they had not yet declared against, and to consider whether they would return to the faith and practice of Catholicism, at least until the meeting of a general council, which, the emperor said, the pontiff should convoke within the term of six months, or a year at farthest. Mean- while the most stringent edicts were put forth in favour of the old system ; the publication of religious works by Pro- testants was forbidden ; and the Anabaptists and Zwinglians ordered to be banished from the states of the empire. With the exception of the latter clause, this edict was unanimously opposed by the Protestant princes, who resolved not to aid the pontiff and the emperor in the war against the Turks. On the 22nd, this decree, obsolete in purpose, and violent in its whole tendency, was published, and the breach was widened to an alarming extent. CHAPTER XXVII. General Dissatisfaction at the Edict of Augsburg. While the late edict had given dangerous dissatisfaction to the Protestant party, the pope himself was ill satisfied with the part which the emperor had taken in the transaction. As far as the threats against the Lutheran party were con- cerned, the pontiff was perfectly contented ; but he com- plained bitterly that the emperor had taken upon himself the arbitration and decision of religious questions, instead of referring to a papal decree. Furthermore, he felt vexed that certain points connected with matters of faith should have d In an apology presented to the emperor on the 22nd of September, which he refused to receive. — Mosheim, p. 141. 52 THE HISTORY OF THE been agreed upon, and certain ceremonies abolished, without himself, or even his legate, being consulted on the subject. But the saddest grievance of all was, that the emperor should have not only promised the council, but fixed a defi- nite time for its convocation, thereby interfering with the prerogative which the pope claimed for himself, and con- ceding only a second-rate authority to the papal see. Find- ing, however, that opposition was useless, he attempted to take credit to himself for desiring a council to be held, in order to conceal the vexation which this blow to his preten- sions had aroused. e In fact, the convocation of the Council of Trent grew out of Protestant opposition, and, so far from being an arbitrary act of the so-called head of the Church, it was rather forced upon himf by stress of circumstances. As far at least as Clement was concerned, the desire of reforming abuses was far from being the motive of calling it together, and the con- scientiousness of the emperor becomes but doubtful, if we consider Iris bigoted persistance in the tenets of the edict of Worms, and his cool and independent treatment of the pon- tiff throughout. Perhaps it was rather a tentative measure on both sides, each party trusting to events that might arise, rather than clearly discerning any definite plan of action. e Sarpi, p. 44, sq. f On the various evasions made by the respective pontiffs in reference to the convocation of this council, see the important notes of Heidigger, p. 14, sqq. in " Concilii Tridentini Anatome Historico-Theologica," Tiguri^MDCLXXii. The author of " Considerations on the Council of Trent (the title says by E. H.), 4to. London, MDdxxxvn., has the following remarks : " Called then this council was by the pope, but not without the consent of the emperor, and the most of Christian princes ; nay (if we may believe Soave), not without their great solicitation and importunity, necessitating him to call it against his own inclinations ; as if he much dreaded some effect thereof prejudicial to his present greatness. Especially for the latter part of it, held under Pius, and con- firming all the rest that had gone before, Soave saith, ' that the actions of this council were then in a greater expectation than in the former times, in regard all princes had in demanding it, and sent ambassadors to it ; and also, that the number of prelates then assembled were four times as many as before.' Called, also, by him it was, but after the Protestant princes had declared a great necessity thereof ; and after that both Luther himself and his followers had often, from the justice of the present church governors, appealed to it." COUNCIL OF TRENT. 53 CHAPTER XXVIII. Protestant League at Smalcald. On the 22nd of December, 1530, the elector and his asso- ciates assembled at Smalcald, and a provisional treaty for their mutual defence was drawn up, and formally signed Jan. 4th, 1531. In this treaty a portion of the Zwinglian party were included, despite the objections of Luther. In fact, Luther seems hitherto to have hung back from the idea of anything like a warlike confederacy in the cause of reli- gion; but now, whether tempted by the probability of its success,? or really persuaded by the advice of the jurists,11 he lent hearty encouragement to the scheme, both by writing and preaching. The confederate princes next sent copies of an apology for the conduct they had pursued (with the view of counteracting the attacks made upon them by the pontiff1) to the kings of England, Denmark, and France, entreating their support. The answers were favourable and courteous, but indefinite and evasive, promising nothing in the shape of active assist- ance. Things were beginning to assume a threatening aspect, when, by the intervention of the electors of Mainz and the s Waterworth, p. liii. says : "To this step they were forcibly impelled by the writings of Luther, who, whilst his party was too weak for suc- cessful opposition, had obtained the credit and merit of preaching up the duty of obeying, and the sinfulness of resisting by force of arms, the decrees of the civil authorities ; but now that there was some chance of success, under the flimsy pretext of yielding to the jurists, he pro- claimed a contrary doctrine, and by sermons and writings urged his followers to resistance." h They informed him that the constitution of the empire allowed the states to combine together, and probably also to declare war against the emperor ; for by virtue of the compact between the emperor and the states, the emperor engaged not to infringe upon the laws of the empire, and the rights and liberties of the Germanic Church. This compact the emperor had violated ; and therefore the states had a right to combine together against him. Luther replied that he had not been aware of this, and that if it was so, he had no objections to make, for the Gospel was not opposed to civil government ; yet he could not approve of an offensive war." — Schlegel, in Soames's Mosheim, p. 143. 1 iSarpi, p. 45. 54: THE HISTORY OF THE Palatinate, a treaty was agreed upon between the emperor and the Protestant party. In a letter to the pope, Charles urged that eveiy other means had been tried without success, and that the Turk was threatening hourly. He therefore called upon him to hold a council under such regulations as that the Protestants might be able and willing to attend thereat. The pontiff perceived that it was of no use to re- fuse, but resolved to grant the matter in such a way as he well knew would not be accepted.' Accordingly, he named Bologna, Parma, or Piacenza, as fit places for the holding of such a council, asserting that his respect either for Italy or the papal see would not allow of his convening it in Germany, and adding many remarks still calculated to depreciate the value or expediency of the measure,k and to limit the liberty of speech, which alone could render it of any avail to the parties whom it most intimately concerned. CHAPTER XXIX. Terras of Peace letvjeen the Emperor and the Protestants. On the 23rd of July, 1532, peace was formally declared be- tween the emperor and the Protestants, until a general, free, and Christian council should be held ; and under conditions that no war should be undertaken, and no one made prisoner, or deprived of property, for religion's sake, and that the princes and cities of Germany should render assistance to the utmost of their power against the Turk. Thus the Lutheran party were removed from fear, and gained an advantage, which they were careful to improve. Whatever might be the feelings of the Romish party, the policy of Charles's con- duct can hardly be questioned. He preferred waiving a few unsettled differences, and making common cause against a common enemy, to opposing a foreign foe with the chance of leaving a domestic enemy behind, whom his own intolerance had irritated. He had all along sacrificed the pope to cir- cumstances, and the pope had found him an useful but un- certain ally. Each feared an open rupture, and each knew the value of the other's friendship too well to trust it. Each had repeatedly broken his word, and circumstances alone J Sarpi, p. 47 ; Heidigger, I. c. p. 15. k See Pall.iv. Hi. 5. COUNCIL OF TRENT. 55 rendered the faithless pair necessary to each other. The connection of Charles and Clement was a strange coalition, in which each sought to deceive the other, although both advo- cating one end. Too selfish to concede any personal dignity or advantage, each laboured to accomplish his end at the expense of the other, and to lay the onus of unpopularity, or the contempt attendant upon inconsistency, upon the shoul- ders of his neighbour. The whole story is a splendid illus- tration of human selfishness, even where similarity of motives would lead us to expect unanimity. CHAPTER XXX. Meeting of Charles and the Pontiff. However, when Solyman had retired from Austria, Charles set out to Italy, and had a personal interview -with the pontiff. Although neither party could feel satisfied with the other, a kind of treaty was renewed between them. Charles urged the convocation of a council to remedy the ills of Germany ; at the same time suggesting that no such assembly could answer any purpose, except the Protestants were repre- sented therein. The pontiff, still wishing to evade the matter, agreed to it on condition that some place within Italy should be chosen for the holding of the council, and that none should vote in it except those who were legally empowered, according to the ecclesiastical law. Charles, willing to obey the pontiff, but knowing that these terms would not be acceptable to the Protestants, proposed that the pope should send his nuncio, while he himself sent his legate into Germany, to discover some means of meeting the exist- ing difficulties, promising that Ins legate should do all things according to the will and pleasure of the nuncio. The pontiff, although ill pleased with the project, consented, calculating upon an alliance with the king of France, through the medium of his nioco (who was now marriageable), as the best means of restraining the progress of the dangerous demand for a council.1 1 " Francis I. had often already proposed to Clement an alliance to be cemented by ties of blood, which the latter had always declined. In his present need, the pope himself recurred to this. It is expressly affirmed, that the special ground on which Clement again lent an ear to 5Q THE HISTORY OF THE In pursuance of this resolution, the pontiff, on the 20th of February, 1533, despatched two nuncios ; one, his private secretary, Ugo Eangone, bishop of Rhegium, to the German princes ; the other, Ubaldo Ubaldini, to the kings of France and England. The purport of their message was that the council should be free and general, such as their ancestors had been wont to celebrate ; that they should pledge themselves to abide by its decrees ; and, if unable to be present, they should certify to that eifect by deputies, while no changes should take place in matters until the council was held. As to the place, the nuncio was directed to give the Ger- mans choice of Piacenza, Bologna, or Mantua. But if any one of the princes should decline coming to the council, or send- ing deputies, or should refuse to obey the decrees of the council, it would be the duty of the other princes to consult the interest of the Church. In conclusion, it was stated, that if the Germans were willing to agree to this proposal, the council should be indicted within the space of six months, a further delay of a twelvemonth being granted to allow of the necessary preparations for the journey. At the request of the emperor, a meeting of the Pro- testants took place at Smalcald, for the purpose of considering what answer should be given to these conditions. Their reply teemed with indignation against the abuses of the Romish church, and they demanded a council, in which, not the opinion of the pontiff, nor the dogmas of the schoolmen, but the written word of God should be the standard by which their creed should be judged. In strong terms they avowed their belief, that as long as the council was presided over by the pope, as supreme head of the Church, its freedom would be a mere matter of words, especially as the manner of holding councils, unlike that observed in the earlier ages of the Church, had shown a tendency to substitute human traditions instead of the Scriptures.111 the king of France was the demand made for a council." — Ranke, p. 3C>,. on the authority of Soriano. m See Sarpi, p. 51, sq. COUNCIL OF TRENT. 57 CHAPTER XXXI. Unprosperous Conclusion of Clement VII.'s Reign. Meanwhile, the proposed alliance with the king of France- had been brought to a successful issue in his interview with that monarch at Marseilles, and the crafty pontiff kept inventing excuses, to account for the delay in holding the council. In fact, the king of France seems to have persuaded the pope that he had sufficient interest with the Protestant princes to prevent their forwarding the much-dreaded coun- cil. But it was in vain that Francis argued with the land- grave of Hesse ; he could not even persuade him to consent to its being held in Italy. Francis proposed Genoa to the pontiff as a place likely to content all jDarties, but Clement tacitly negatived the suggestion as absurd. The restoration of the duke of Wiirtemberg to his here- ditary rights, by the joint aid of Francis and the elector of Hesse, aud the peace concluded at Kadan, were events which had a strong tendency to increase the strength of the Protestant cause. " I know not," says one of the best reviewers of these times,11 " that any other single occurrence ever operated so decisively as this enterprise of Philip of Hesse's, for the preponderance of the Protestant name in Germany. That direction to the imperial chamber involves a judicial security for the new party of extraordinary impor- tance. Nor were its effects long delayed. We may, I think, regard the peace of Kadan as the second grand epoch of the rise of a Protestant power in Germany. After it had for a long period made a feeble progress, it began anew to spread in the most triumphant manner. Wiirtemberg, which had been taken, was reformed forthwith. The German provinces of Denmark, Pomerania, the March of Brandenburg, the second branch of Saxony, one branch of Brunswick, and the Palatinate, followed shortly after. Within a few years, the reformation of the Church spread over the whole of lower Germany, and obtained firm and permanent footing in upper Germany. " And Pope Clement had been privy to an enterprise which n Eanke, p. 35. -58 THE HISTORY OF THE led to this result, which so immeasurably augmented the desertion from the Church's ranks — nay, he had perhaps approved of it." Nor was this the only vexation that harassed the last days of Clement VII. The contempt of the papal power had spread to England ; and Henry VIII., once the "defender of the faith," had openly condemned the doctrine of allegiance to the See of Rome throughout his dominions ; and he who had once befriended the pope when beleaguered in the castle of St. Angelo, had followed up a continued series of attacks upon the court of Rome by a decisive blow, from the consequences of which Rome has never recovered. Into the history of Henry VIII., his divorce, and his subsequent outbreak against Rome, I shall not enter, as the subject has been discussed by so many well-known writers, and I am unwilling merely to offer a weak dilution of what is accessible to all in a more complete and satisfactory form. But there is little doubt that this and other vexations, coupled with family dissensions, and the pressing urgency for a general council, with which the emperor continued to ply the pontiff, conspired to wear out a frame already exhausted by long sickness and anxiety.0 Clement VII. died without the satisfactory reflection that the papal credit had " lasted Ins time," and without the reputation of having acted wisely in behalf of its preservation. Clinging doggedly to the temporal interests of the Romish church, oscillating between political cabals and religious dogmatism, ever relying on hoped-for probabilities rather than on inferences drawn from previous experience — or, with a Whig-like policy, shunning active measures in the hope of something arising that might dispense with the necessity for doing anything — this pontiff, the victim of misfortunes, which he had neither tact to oppose, nor resignation to yield to, closed a life of few vices,P but equally unmarked by the development of better traits, with the peevish and embittered reflections ever attendant upon disappointed cunning, and the consciousness that life has been a purposeless mistake. 0 Ranke, p. 35-6, note from Soriano. The remarks of Archbishop Bramhall (Works, v.i. p. 117) on the antipapal enactments of Henry VIII. are useful. p Simony, however, was among the number. — See Ranke, p. 32. COUNCIL OF TRENT. .>9 His ambition had reared an ideal edifice of papal greatness ; his sad experience had beheld the real ancestral one, which he had sought to exalt, gradually tottering, and, in its fast seceding tenants, beariug witness to his own misfortune and inefficiency. CHAPTER XXXII. Paul III. succeeds to the Papal Throne. Vergerius sent into Germany. Alexander Farnese, the dean of the Sacred College, who had been recommended by the deceased pontiff as his suc- cessor, was unanimously chosen pope, under the name of Paul III. Born in 1468, he was tutored in the brilliant school of Pomponius Lsetus, at Rome, as well as in the garden of Lorenzo Medici, at Florence. Deeply imbued with the taste for elegant literature and refined pursuits, to the che- rishing of which those times were so favourable, he did not_, however, escape the contagion of its vices. i But these were not sufficient to be a hinderance to preferment in those days, and he found his way to the dignity of a cardinal com- ]3aratively early in life. During this period, he laid the foundation of the Farnese palace, still the admiration of tourists, and built a delightful villa on his hereditary estate at Bolsena, to which Leo X. used sometimes to resort. But he had ever kept in mind the papal dignity as the ultimate object of his ambition; and his favourable intentions to the convocation of a general council, although springing from a conviction of its necessity, rather than from real interest in the cause/ probably contributed to further his election. s Although events, hereafter to be detailed, con- tributed to hinder the prompt execution of this design, he nevertheless, in the first consistoiy, held on the 13th of November, 153 V n°t only avowed himself favourable to the i " He acknowledged a natural son and daughter ; but, for all that, he was advanced to the rank of cardinal in rather early life ; for in those days little offence was taken at such matters." — Ranke, book iii. p. 62. The statements of Heidigger, I. c. p. 20, place him in a still more un- amiable light, perhaps with some tincture of exaggeration. r Ranke, book iii. p. 62. s Waterworth, p. lviii. Heidigger, however (p. 16), shows that Paul partook, to no small extent, of the vacillation of his predecessor in this respect. 1 Pallav. iii. 17. He had also mentioned the matter, with some 60 THE HISTORY OF THE convocation of a council, but also suggested tliat the cardinals should begin the work of reform themselves.11 In the January of the following year, he was still more urgent, and sent for Vergerius, who had been confidentially employed by the last pontiff/' to sound the dispositions of the German princes as to the place and manner of holding the council, and to use every appliance of flattery or kindness to wdn over Luther. Vergerius conversed first with Ferdinand, and then with the rest of the German princes, proposing Mantua as a fit and convenient place for the celebration of a council, and pointing out the difficulties which would result if it were held in Germany, where the madness of the Anabaptists and Sacramentarians was raining with a violence, calculated to do serious mischief to the whole cause of reform. George of Brandenburg, however, was the only one of the Protestant princes who was satisfied with Mantua as a locality for the meeting. The Catholic princes were unanimous in its favour. CHAPTER XXXIII. Meeting of Vergerius and Luther. On his road through the dominions of the elector of Saxony, "Vergerius experienced the kindest and most hospita- ble treatment from that prince, being waited upon by him at his own table. Luther was introduced to the nuncio, whose letters prove that he formed a by no means favourable opinion of the reformer's talents or disposition. w After various strictures on Luther's manners, he concludes, by saying, " to give my opinion from his countenance, habit, gestures, words, apparent earnestness, in a meeting of cardinals held before bis inaugura- tion.— Sarpi, p. 56. u Nevertheless, he rather inconsistently promoted two of his nephews to the cardinalate at the respective ages of fourteen and sixteen years. Pallavicino's defence of the pontiff's nepotism is well met by Courayer, p. 136, sq. About the same time he promoted Fisher, bishop of Ro- chester, who had been imprisoned by Henry VIII., to the same dignity — a dignity which perhaps conduced not a little to his untimely end. Sarpi, p. 57. v See Sarpi, p. 52. w See the extracts in Pallav. iii. 18, p. 330. COUNCIL OF TRE\T. Gl whether he be a man of taleut or no, he is arrogance, malig- nity, and imprudence itself.'" x Although Vergerius behaved with the most polite urbanity and inoffensiveness, the German princes were ill-satisfied with the place named for the council, or with the avoidance of mentioning the plan to be pursued in holding it, plainly foreseeing, that the whole matter would still be left in the power of the pontiff — a state of things totally at variance with their determined disavowal of the papal supre- macy. They were strengthened in their opposition by the legates of the kings of England and France. In fact, the new pope was in no small difficulty between "the urgent necessity of a reform, and the undesirable circumscription with which it threatened the papal power." >' CHAPTER XXXIY. New Protest of Smalcald. The Protestant princes assembled at Smalcald continued vehemently opposed to the holding of the council at Mantua, as well as to the pope holding it, or presiding therein. In this opposition they were confirmed by the ambassadors sent by the kings of France and England, the former of whom was calculating the probable success of a war in Italy, while the latter, having by his marriage cast off all allegiance to Rome, was desirous of strengthening the cause of her opponents. Early in the year 1536, Vergerius returned to the pontiff, with the news of his indifferent success, and of the state of parties in Germany. The emperor was then at Rome, having returned from a recent expedition. After some lengthened discussions in private, the pope proposed, in a consistory held on the 8th of April, 153G,X that a council x " Et a dime presto il mio parere tratto della faccia, dall' abito, dai gesti, e dalle parole, b sia Bpiritato, 6 no, egli a 1' arroganza istessa, la malignita, e 1' imprudenza." Father Paul's account is, on the whole, more probable and coherent than Pallavicino's (cf. Courayer, p. 138, sqq.), although it is likely that Luther was betrayed into his too frequent violence of temper. The true narrative probably lies between those of the two historians. v Kanke, p. 03. 1 So Pallav. iii. 19, p. 334. Sarpi appears to be inaccurate in some of his dates. G2 THE HISTORY OF THE should straightway be convened at Mantua. Seven of the cardinals, assisted by Aleander and Vergerius,a being in- trusted with the arrangement of preliminaries, the latter bishop was of opinion, that the council should not be defi- nitely fixed at Mantua until they had first received the approbation of the German princes, still hoping that such a show of respect might facilitate the execution of the design, and that in the bull convoking the council, the clause, " ac- cording to the form of preceding councils," should be omitted, as it would only serve to increase the complaints of their adversaries, and it had been omitted in the bulls convoking the previous councils of Constance and Basle. The latter, but not the first, part of his advice was followed, as they now despaired of obtaining the consent of the Protestants to a council assembled according to the previous customs of the Church. Moreover, Mantua being indirectly under the power of the emperor, the Germans could not reasonably object to it.b The Protestant princes, however, renewed their opposition in another meeting held at Smalcald, and caused a new sum- mary of their faith to be drawn up by Luther, under the title of the " Articles of Smalcald," c in which they assumed a a Who had been rewarded for his services by receiving the bishopric of Capo d'Istria. — Sarpi, p. 60. See Courayer, p. 144. b Pallav. p. 335. c "The Articles of Smalcald were drawn up by Luther in his own acrimonious style. The Augsburg Confession was intended to soften prejudice against the Lutherans, and to conciliate the good-will of the Eoman Catholics. Of course, the gentle Melancthon was employed to write it. The Articles of Smalcald, on the contrary, were a preparative for a campaign against an enemy with whom no compromise was deemed possible, and in which victory or death was the only alternative. Of course, all delicacy towards the Catholics was dispensed with, and Luther's fiery style was chosen, and allowed full scope. In words, the Articles flatly contradict the Confession, in some instances, though in sense they remain the same. Thus the Confession (article xxiv. - ' We are unjustly charged with having abolished the mass. For it is manifest that, without boasting, we may say, the mass is observed by us with greater devotion and earnestness than by our opposers.' But in the Articles of Smalcald (part ii. art. ii.), it is said ' that the popish nuisa is the greatest and most horrid abomination, as militating directly and violently against these articles ; and yet it has become the chief and most splendid of all the popish idolatries.' In the Confession. the\ applied the name of the mass to the Lutheran form of the Eucharist . COUNCIL OF TREXT. G3 tone of more violent opposition than had been adopted in the Confession of Augsburg. Nor was Henry VIII. of Eng- land less earnest in his protestations against the power he had cast off; declaring that the right to summon councils appertained to princes, and that the pope's claim was a usurpation. CHAPTER XXXV. The Seat of the Council transferred to Viccnza. But an untoward event was destined to shift the projected council from its intended place of assemblage. Frederick, the prince of Mantua, who had granted the use of that city under a firm belief that it would never be required,*1 no sooner found that the council was indicted for the 23rd of May, 1536, than he began to tremble for the safety of his city, and sent to request the pontiff to furnish pay for a guard of soldiers during the time of the council. The pope replied that the assembly would be composed of ecclesiastics and literary men, not of armed soldiers, and that such a company might be very well kept in order by a single magistrate, But in these articles they confine that term to its proper import, the ordinary public service among the Catholics. The Articles of Smalcald cover twenty-eight folio pages, and are preceded by a preface, and fol- lowed by a treatise on the power and supremacy of the pope. The first part contains four precise articles, respecting God, the Trinity, and the incarnation, passion, and ascension of Christ, in accordance with the Apostles' and Athanasian creeds. On these articles the Protestants proposed to agree altogether with the Papists. The second part also contains four articles of fundamental importance, in which the Pro- testants and Papists are declared to be totally and irreconcilably at variance. They relate to the nature and grounds of justification, the mass and saint-worship, ecclesiastical and monkish establishments, and the claims of the pope. The third part contains fifteen articles, which the Protestants considered as relating to very important subjects, but on which the Papists laid little stress. The subjects are sin, the law, repentance, the Gospel, baptism, the sacrament of the altar, the keys (or spiritual power), co,> ft* ion, eaxxmmwucatUm, ordination, celibacy of the clergy, good works, monastic vows, and hwnam satisfaction for si a. When the Protestants subscribed these articles, Melancthon annexed a reservation to his signature, purporting that he could admit of a pope, provided he would allow the Gospel to be preached in its purity, and would give up his pretensions to a divine right to rule, and would found his claims wholly on expediency and human compact." — Soames or. Mosheim, vol. iii. p. 146, note. d Sarpi, p. 63. 64 THE HISTORY OF THE whom lie would himself appoint to take cognizance of offences. Furthermore, he urged that the presence of an armed force would cause universal suspicion, and would be little suited to the peaceable appearance which the seat of •a council should present. Again, if an armed force really were necessary, it would be most unjust that it should be under the control of any one but the council, or its head, the pope. Frederick gave a flat denial to the latter part of the pon- tiff's demand, and persisted in requesting sustinence for an adequate guard, to be under his own control. Paul III. finding no arguments avail, and being unwilling to accede to terms so disadvantageous, and involving so evident a com- promise of papal dignity,e promulgated another bull, in which, throwing the blame of delay on the duke of Mantua, he prorogued the council until the month of November, but without having settled upon any new place for the holding thereof. f It is probable that Frederick's fears had the emperor, rather than the pontiff, for their object ; but, however this might be, it was an ill omen at starting — a stumbling on the threshold that was distinctly significant of subsequent failure. The fact was, the blow struck by the denial of the papal supremacy was too decided — the selfishness of princes too much interested in pursuing the advantage they had already gained — and the compact which held the pope and his adherents too temporalizing in its character, to leave room to hope for a restoration of matters on their old footing. Many princes doubtless hung back, and avoided taking any decided step in one direction or the other, until they saw more clearly the progress of the reform party : numbers of men, whose practical indifference was at variance with their e In a subsequent bull he says : "At the very first, contrary to all our hope and expectation, the city of Mantua was refused us, unless we would submit to certain conditions, which we have described in other letters of ours, utterly alien from the institutes of our ancestors, the state of the times, our own dignity and liberty, that of this holy see, and of the ecclesiastical name." — Decrees and Canons, p. 3 of my -edition. 1 Onuphrius says : " Sed mox ducis, qui imperatoris vires timebat, rogatu locum mutavit." — Apud Courayer, p. 151, whose note well deserves attention. COCXCIL OF TRENT. 65 * real feelings, held back, and watched the gradual tottering of the old religion, without making one substantial effort to sustain it, yet without even giving the push of a finger to promote its downfall. Various difficulties, as the pope himself acknowledges, interfered to prevent the immediate convocation of the council; but at length Paul, having obtained permission from the Venetian republic to assemble,? indicted a council to be held at Vicenza on the 1st of May, of the ensuing year 1538, designating as his legates Lorenzo Campeggio, who had occupied the same post in Germany under Clement VII., Jacopo Simonetta, and Hieronynio Aleandro. who had been lately created cardinal.11 But Ferdinand, king of the Romans, had previously recommended the city of Trent, as being less likely to displease the German Protestant princes.1 Henry VIII. showed the same hostility to a convocation at Vicenza, that he had previously displayed towards the whole scheme. J But Paul did not suffer matters to stand still. Despite the adverse circumstance which beset him on all sides, and notwithstanding a natural leaning to superstition,k which s I do not wish to repeat the history of the difficulties which inter- fered with the settlement of a place for the council, as they are fully detailed in the bull for the indiction of the Council of Trent, given in "Decrees and Canons," p. 3, sqq. of my edition. h Sarpi, p. 66. 1 "Accordingly, as we no longer had the city of Vicenza, and were desirous in our own choice of a new place for holding the council, to have regard both to the common welfare of Chrstians, and also to the troubles of the German nation ; and seeing, upon several places being proposed, that they wished for the city of Trent, we — although we deemed that everything might be transacted more conveniently in Italy — nevertheless yielded up our will with paternal charity to their de- mands. Accordingly, we have chosen the city of Trent as that wherein an oecumenical council should be held on the ensuing calends of No- vember ; fixing upon that place as a suitable one whereat the bishops and prelates can assemble very easily indeed from Germany, ami from the other nations bordering on Germany, and without difficulty from France, Spain, and the other remoter provinces.'' — Bull of Pope Paul III. " Decrees and Canons/' p. S, so. J See Sarpi, p. 64, so. ; Heidigger, I. c. p. 20. k Cf. Ranke, p. b"4, who observes : " It was not inconsistent with the habits of a mind so constituted, of such far and searching forethought, such a tending to look warily around in every direction, and to ponder its purposes in secret, that it should have taken into the scope of its reflections powers above, as well as upon the earth. The influence of F 66 THE HISTORY OF THE the many anxieties of his position would tend to foster, his activity wax unceasing. Not only did he desj)atch legates to Vicenza to make preparations for the council, thereby assuring the world of the reality of his intentions, but he instituted a commission to inquire into the abuses of the Roinish church, probably with a view of being better enabled to meet objections, or to make concessions which might produce a feeling of content, while the framework and main structure of the papal power remained untouched. Four cardinals and five bishops, four of whom were subsequently raised to the cardinalate, formed the board of inquiry, and a list of corrupt practices, chiefly connected with the covet- ousness and vanity of the Romish church, were drawn up. The cardinals could not, however, come to an agreement on the subject, and the matter shared the fate of previous attempts of a similar character.1 A more delicate task remained for the pontiff, namely, the reconciliation of the emperor and the king of France, who had renewed hostilities, and whose mutual good-will was of serious consequence to the success of the council. Having previously despatched nuncios to solicit the attendance of the contending monarchs, Paul hastened to meet them at Nice, solely, as he professed, with the view of peace-making, but, as others supposed, with a view to personal interests"1 likewise. His success was not complete, but, during a month's stay at Nice, his unremitting attention and earnest- the constellations over the results of human actions was little ques- tioned in those days. Paul III. held no important sitting of the con- sistory, nor made any journey without having first consulted the stars on the choice of the fitting days. An alliance with France was broken off merely because there was no conformity between the nativities of the king and the pope. This pope, it is plain, felt himself in the midst of a thousand conflicting agencies, not only of the powers of the earth below, but of the configuration of the stars above ; his plan was to give due attention alike to the one class and to the other, to mitigate their unpropitious influences, turn their favours to account, and dexterously to steer home his bark between the rocks that threatened him on every side." l Sarpi, p. 65, sq. m " Ad Ducatum Mediolanensem familiae suae coniparandum.*' The advantages which accrued to this pope from the congress at Nice are well stated and reviewed by Eanke, p. 64, sq. Courayer, p. 156, quotes authorities which seem to place Sarpi's statements beyond the reach of doubt. COUNCIL OF TRENT. 07 uees persuaded them to agree to a truce for ten years, which accident subsequently ripened into a friendly intercourse.11 While the pontiff was at Nice he received news that as yet, when there wanted but five days to the opening of the council, not a single bishop had arrived at "Vicenza. Here- upon he determined to accede to the wish of the two princes, and prorogue the council till the Easter following. In this resolution he was influenced by the promise of the princes to send ambassadors to Rome, in order to treat of matters necessary for the establishment of peace, they urging, that, " peace once established, the council itself would then be much more useful and salutary to the Christian commonwealth."0 Ferdinand, king of the Romans, expressed the same opinion. CHAPTER XXXVI. Furthrr Suspension of the Council. And now, when matters seemed favourable, and when the pontiff had reason to believe that fortune was disposed to crown his exertions with success, he was again* doomed to experience the instability of his best ally and supporter. Charles V., who had been the most urgent promoter of the council, now began to dread the growing power of the Lutherans, and, foreseeing that the whole spirit of its design was opposed to their wishes, and that hostility would only be increased by the partial measures taken by the Catholic party, he began to urge the propriety of delaying the council, at the same time entreating the pope to make another attempt to conciliate the minds of the Germans by .sending Aleandro to them as his legate. Finding that the second meeting convened at Vicenza had been as ill attended as the first, the pontiff, tired of using the word "prorogue," which hud n Bull of Pope Paul apud "Decrees and Canons," p. 6, of my edition. Ranke, p. 64, remarks : "The Venetian ambassador, who was present, cannot find words sufficiently to extol the zeal and patience exhibited on that occasion by the pope. It was only by means of the utmost assiduity, and but at the last moment, when lie was already threatening to depart, that he at last succeeded in bringing about a truce. He effected a good understanding between the two sovereigns, which very soon afterwards seemed to pass into something like friendship." 0 L. c. p. 7- F 2 00 THE HISTORY OF THE been so often repeated in vain, determined to suspend the holding of the council until his own pleasured Accordingly, letters announcing its suspension were despatched to the different princes on the 10th of June, 1539. The position of the pontiff was doubtless a painful one. Claiming the authority to indict a council, and yet lacking the power to enforce attendance thereat — egged on and harassed to pro- mote a measure in which he had little personal sympathy, and at the same time deserted by those who had literally worried him into such conduct, immediately any difficulties appeared to threaten its success — Pope Paul III. was now a painful example of the incapability of great personal talents to contend with the growing influence of public opinion, where men's spiritual liberties and interests are concerned ; and in the supine negligence of the Romish clergy, in the empty benches of the convocation at Yicenza, we can perceive how forced and artificial, how little redolent of a sincere and Catholic spirit of reform, were the whole of the early trans- actions of this council. It remains for us yet to see whether, unpromising as was its commencement, its subsequent proceedings involved any serious and satisfactory changes, whether its supporters had learnt the lesson which the neg- ligence of their own adherents, not less than the persevering opposition of the Protestant party, might have taught them. CHAPTER XXXVII. Various Attempts to effect a Reconciliation. About the beginning of the year 1539, a convention was held at Frankfort, where, by consent of the emperor's legate, the proceedings were adjourned, after a sharp dispute, till the 1st of August, at Nuremberg, with the view of holding a friendly and tranquil consultation touching religious sub- jects. The Catholic party wished some special deputy to have been sent thither by the pope ; but the Protestants urging that such a step would be contrary to the very object of the meeting, they yielded. The pontiff was much annoyed to find that the emperor was meddling in matters of religion without consulting the p Decrees and Canons, I. c. p. 7 ; cf. Waterworth, ch. xii. p. lxv. sq. COUNCIL OF TRENT. GO papal authority, and looked upon the conventions in Germany as an insult to the credit of the projected council. He accordingly despatched Giovanni Ricci, afterwards bishop of Montepulcino,^ to persuade the emperor to contravene the decrees of that assembly/ But the reply of the emperor was by no means satisfactory ; and it was not easy to discern whether he intended to favour the approaching meeting at Nuremberg, or not. The sedition of the Gantois, who had been excited to revolt by the oppressive taxation imposed to meet the expenses of the emperor's wars, diverted his attention from the affairs of Germany, and the year 1539 passed away without any movement in favour of Catholicism being brought to an issue. In the following year, while the emperor was in Belgium, endeavouring to quiet the seditions which had arisen, Ferdi- nand came thither from Austria, and the at tention of both princes naturally turned to the state of religious dissension, and the best means of allaying it. Cardinal Farnese, a youth of scarcely twenty years of age, wlio had accompanied the emperor from Paris, as the pope's legate, set himself strongly against any deli- berations on the subject, urging that all the attempts at agree- ment with the Protestants, especially at the Augsburg confer- ence, had proved a failure ; that, even if a plan of argument were agreed upon, it would be of no avail with a set of men who changed their opinions daily, followed no certain principles, had departed from the very doctrine they had promulgated at Augsburg, and were as slippery as eels. He furthermore urged, that they had at first wished that the pontificate should be amended, but that they now required its destruc- tion, the extirpation of the Apostolic See, and the abrogation of all apostolic jurisdiction. Again, if they had been so insolent when affairs were tranquil, what would they now do, when peace was not yet agreed upon with the king of France, and the Turk was threatening Pannonia P In vehe- i He was not admitted to the episcopal office till four years after this, under the reign of Pius IV. — Pallav. iv. 9. Sarpi is wrong. r Father Paul is again wrong in placing this event before the issuing of the bull of suspension. Cf. Courayer, p. 163. On the business of the envoy, see Sarpi, p. 6S, sq. s Sarpi, p. 59. The whole speech betrays the animated zeal of an impetuous youth, which is perhaps the best internal evidence of its authenticity. 70 THE HISTORY OF THE merit language he then proceeded to deny the right of private assemblies to deliberate on religious subjects, to assert the pontifical authority, and to denounce the Protestants as greater enemies to Christ than the Turks themselves. In conclusion, he demanded that a council should be convoked, that it should be begun that very year ; that the disputations on religion in the German conventions should be put an end to, but that the Catholic alliance should be augmented, and peace made with the king of France. These proposals, how- ever, were thrown away upon the emperor, who, unknown to the young cardinal, determined upon holding a convention in some part of Germany, which should be convenient to Ferdinand. Farnese departed in disgust, and on his journey persuaded the king of France to promulgate a most stringent and cruel edict against heretics and Lutherans, which was afterwards put in execution throughout his dominions with the utmost severity.* CHAPTER XXXVIII. The Conventions at Hayenau and Worms. Xeio Meeting convened at Ratisbon. At the request of Ferdinand, Hagenau was the place appointed for the meeting; Contarini and the Catholic party wished to revive the Recess which had been agreed upon at the Augsburg convention ; but the Protestants, perceiving that that form would be ruinous to their present position, required a new one. Various proposals on the subject of making re- stitution to the Church for what had been wrongfully usurped by either party, came to an equally unsatisfactory result ; and Ferdinand determined upon another assembly at "Worms, to be held on the 28th of October, unless the emperor should disapprove thereof. It was also agreed, that the pontiff should be permitted to send his legates thither, if he wished; but the Protestants denied either to himself or his nuncios any authority. The emperor expressed his consent to these 1 Sarpi, p. 59. Compare Courayer, p. 166, sq. An important pas- sage of the bull above quoted, as illustrating the state of affairs de- scribed in this chapter, will be found p. 7 of my edition of the " Decrees and Canons." COUNCIL OF TRENT. 71 arrangements, and despatched Granvel11 as his legate, accom- panied by some other Spanish theologians. A few days after Thomas Oampeggio, bishop of Feltri, the pope's legate, came thither also ; for Paul, as Sarpi well observes/' " foresaw that, whatever mischief might accrue to his own concerns from a disputation in Germany respecting religious subjects, yet, now that all his efforts to prevent it had failed, he thought it would be productive of less harm if done with his own consent, than without it." Abland and conciliatory speech from the nuncio, well calculated to put the Protestants in a good humour with the projected scheme of a council, and some more indirect influence exerted by Vergerius,w ostensibly as the ambassador of the king of France, seemed likely to produce some effect. But the emperor, vexed at the slow progress made in the convention at Worms, and harassed either by the difficulties represented to him by Granvel, or by the fear that a denial of his own power was implicated in the refusal of submission to the pontiff, or for other reasons, recalled Ins legate, broke up the meeting just as the conference agreed upon between Melancthon and Eck had commenced, and transferred it to Patisbon. The convention began about the 5th of April,x 1541, the emperor being himself present, and entertaining great expec- tations of putting an end to the dissensions which had given occasion to its convocation. Upon his suggestion to the pope, with a view of putting a determinate end to the disputes, without having constant reference to the Romish see in every question of difficulty, the pope had consented to send a person intrusted with full power to define such things as he should judge conducive to the good of the Church. The person chosen by the pontiff to fulfil this important mission, was Cardinal Caspar Contarini, a man of consummate learn- ing and probity, whose earnest and conscientious desire for u The 25th of the November following. — Sleidan, xiii. p. 208, apud Courayer. * p. 72. w This is denied by Pallavicino, hut asserted by Sleidan. See Cou- rayer, p. 169. s Thi3 is probably the date of the first session. It was called, and perhaps opened, on the 1st, or during the latter end of March. See Courayer, page 170, note 12. i'Z THE HISTORY OF THE reformation in the Romish church, or, as Ranke says, for " the attempt to found a rational papacy," >" made him the fittest person to undertake a negotiation so important. If the choice of such men as cardinals at the commencement of his reign, was a sign of Paul's good taste and appreciation of merit, his selection of an envoy in the present instance did no less credit to his tact and discrimination. y Ranke's character of Contarini is a masterly piece of biography. Compare p. 40, sqq. The following remarks on the subject of reform are well calculated to show the spirit in which this enlightened and upright man viewed the existing state of the Church: '-'There are extant some short pieces by Gaspar Contarini, in which he waged the most vehement war on abuses, especially those abuses which were pro- fitable to the curia. The custom of compositions, that is, the taking of money even for the bestowal of religious favours, he pronounces simony, which may be regarded as a species of heresy. It was taken amiss that he inculpated former popes. ' What ! ' he exclaimed, ' shall we concern ourselves so much about the fame of three or four popes, and not rather amend what is deformed, and win ourselves a good name ? It would, indeed, be a trying task to defend all the acts of all the popes.' He attacks the abuse of dispensations most earnestly and effectively. He considers it idolatrous to say, as was actually maintained, that the pope was bound by no rule but that of his own will in confirming or suspend- ing the positive law. It is worth while to hear his remarks on this subject. ' The law of Christ,' he says, ' is a law of liberty, and forbids such gross servitude, which the Lutherans were perfectly justified in likening to the Babylonish captivity. But, furthermore, can that be indeed called a government, the rule whereof is the will of a man by nature prone to evil, and of innumerable affections ? No ; all true domi- nion is a dominion of reason. It has for its end to lead those who are sub- ject to it by the right means to their great end, happiness. The authority of the pope is likewise a dominion of reason ; God has bestowed it on St. Peter and his successors, to guide the flocks confided to them to ever- lasting blessedness. A pope must know that they are free men over whom he exercises it. He must not command, or forbid, or dispense according to his own good pleasure, but in obedience to the rule of reason, of God's commands, and of love, a rule that refers everything to God, and to the greatest common good. For the positive law is not arbitrarily imposed, but in unison with natural rights, the command- ments of God, and circumstances only in accordance with the same laws and the same things can it be altered. Be it the care of your holi- ness,' he says, to Paul III., ' not to depart from this rule ; turn not to the impotence of the will which chooses evil, to the servitude which ministers to sin. Then wilt thou be mighty, then wilt thou be free,— then will the life of the Christian commonwealth be sustained in thee.' " COUNCIL OF TRENT. i 6 CHAPTER XXXIX. Discussion at Ratisbon. It is difficult to do full justice to the good sense, moderation, and equanimity displayed by Contarini in this transaction,2 but it is most interesting to contrast the really conciliating measures pursued by this great man with the harsh and rugged policy of his predecessors. Disappointed as he was in the result of his exertions, it has still been truly said, that " in his person moderate Catholicism had assumed a grand position." a The pope had been unwilling to bestow the full powers which the emperor had wished for, and Contarini was bound to oppose any concessions to the Protestants that seemed to be attended with danger to the Itoniish see, and was intrusted with a like request to the emperor. But the pope, in his in- structions, evinced no desire utterly to exclude negotiations with the adverse party. " "We must first see/' said he, " whether the Protestants, and they who have deserted the bosom of the Church, agree with us on first principles, for example, the supremacy of this Holy See, as having been instituted by God and our Saviour, the sacrament, and certain other matters of the holy Church, which have been hitherto observed and approved as well by the authority of the sacred writings as by the constant observance of the universal Church — for by these being forthwith admitted, all agreement touching other controversial points must be tested." !j This vagueness of expression, while it conceded nothing that was at variance with the doctrine of papal supremacy, at the same time left Contarini a free agent to a considerable extent, and perhaps the pontiff may have felt some curiosity in finding whether the known talents of his emissary might not hit upon some lucky point of agreement, which might serve to heal no small part of the ill-feeling z I know not whether Dr. Waterworth'.s silence is to be attributed to his want of sympathy with the temperate desire of reformation shown by this truly great man, or to the brevity of his history. a ftanke, p. 45. b Instructio data Revmo. Cli. Contareno in Germaniam legato, MS. apud Ranke, p. 43, note. 74 THE HISTORY OF THE which stood in the way of anything like accommodation between the contending parties. The emperor, anxious to promote peace — especially as the Turk had already penetrated into the interior of Germany, had made choice of John Gropper, Julius Flug, and John Eck to sustain the Catholic side of the dispute, while Melancthon, Martin Bucer, and John Pistorius were to support the Protestant. Frederick, prince of the Palatinate, and Granvel, were to preside over the assembly ; the latter of whom proposed a book of articles to be read and con- sidered by those present, by way of furnishing subject- matter for the dispute ; so that what was approved by all should be confirmed and established ; what was disapproved, corrected ; and what was matter of uncertainty, reconciled as far as they were able. Out of the twenty-two articles thus propounded, some were approved, others amended by common consent ; but they disagreed respecting those on the power of the Church, the sacrament of penance, the hierarchy, the articles determined by the Church, and likewise on the subject of celibacy.0 Contarini had foreseen that the topic of the papal supre- macy would be especially disagreeable to the party whom it was his object to conciliate ; and he therefore wisely permitted this question to be placed last in the list proposed for discussion. He himself took a conspicuous part in the debate, and " his secretary assures us that nothing was resolved on by the Catholic theologians, nor even a single variation proposed, until his opinion had been previously consulted."' d The chief difficulty arose on the part of Luther's old antagonist, Eck ; but even he was brought to an agreement, and the delicate and important articles of the state of human nature, original sin, redemption, and justification, were agreed to unanimously. Contarini agreed to the main doctrine ad- c Sarpi, p. 74. These were not, however, by any means, the only points on which disagreement was expressed. See Courayer, p. 174, who quotes the following from Beaucaire, xxii. note 50 : " Inter collocu- tores convenit ; de prsecipuis non convenit, nempe de Ecclesia ej usque potestate, de corporis et sanguinis Christi sacramento, quam Eucharistiam vocamus, de Satisfaction, de Unitate et Ordine sacrorum Ministrorum, de Sanctis, de sacra Liturgia quam Missam vocant, de usu integro Sacramenti, id est, quod sit unus integer sub una specie, de Ccelibatu." (l Beccatelli, apud Ranke, p. 43. " * COUNCIL OF TREXT. 75 vanced by Luther, that man's justification is through faith only, and not through merit, adding, however, that such faith must be lively and active — a doctrine which Melancthon e claimed as the precise creed of the Protestants. So pleased was Bucer, that he declared that in the articles thus admitted was contained " everything necessary towards a godly, righ- teous, and holy life, in the eyes of God and men,'" and the opposite party seemed equally well satisfied. But Contarini was not destined to meet with the success which seemed to promise itself. The bishops were opposed to the new articles, and wished peremptorily to reject them; but the Catholic princes who were anxious for peace, were of a different opinion. On the emperor referring it to Contarini, he gave an ambiguous reply, expressing a hope, that by the blessing of God, the differences which still remained might be brought to an agreement, and that the whole affair had best be referred to the pontiff, who, by means of a public council, or some other proper medium, would shortly deter- mine what might seem best suited to the welfare of the Christian world, and especially of Germany.*' But here was the old difficulty at work again ! While Francis I. complained of the concessions made at Batisbon, the pope felt uneasy at the probability that, if matters were referred to a general council, the emperor would claim the right of convoking it, and that the very concession of the points already advanced would only embolden the Protestant party to venture upon greater inroads. Contarini was placed in a most awkward position. It seemed as though the emperor wished to pledge him to the principles avowed in e See his own statement, Eanke, p. 43, note. The following letter of Cardinal Pole to his friend Contarini i< extremely interesting : li When I observed this unity of sentiment, I experienced a feeling of pleasure such as no harmony of tones could have afforded me ; not alone, because I foresee the coming of peace and union, but also because these articles are the foundations of the Christian faith. They seem, indeed, to treat of a variety of matters — of faith, works, and justification : on this latter, however, justification, repose all the rest : and I wish you joy, and I thank God that the theologians of both parties are agreed thereon. We hope that he who has begun so mercifully will also complete what he has begun." — Apud Ranke, p. 44. f Sarpi, p. 74. The remarks of fianke, however (p. 43, aqq.), are much more important, and their sources more original and authentic. They will form the basis of what follows on this subject. / b THE HISTORY OF THE the articles, while he felt that, in softening the irritation attendant on the doctrine of supremacy, he had somewhat swerved from the precepts enjoined by his master. While his own judgment, or at least his most anxious wishes, had led him to hope that the work of conciliation might have been more directly his own, he felt himself crippled from taking the only measures which could have made it so. " The pope soon announced it to his legate as his decided will, that he would neither in his public nor his private capacity sanction any resolution, in which the Catholic opinions were expressed in other words than such as ad- mitted of no ambiguity. The formulae in which Contarini had thought to reconcile the various opinions as to the pope's supremacy, and the power of councils, were uncon- ditionally rejected at Home, and the legate was constrained to abide by explanations, that even seemed in contradiction with his own previous language." = The emperor had wished that both parties would for the present abide by the articles to which they had mutually assented, and extend toleration to the several opinions in which they disagreed, until the matter could be referred to a general council. Neither Luther, however, on the one side, nor the pope and the cardinals on the other, would consent to any such concessions. Finding all attempts in vain, the emperor closed the debate on the 27 th of July, pledging himself to obtain from the pontiff either a general or a provincial council ; and that if he failed to obtain one or the other within a given space of time, he would announce a national assembly to arrange religious affairs, and would take care that a legate should be sent thither by the pope. £ Ranke, p. 45, who further remarks : "He was forced to return to Italy, to endure the slanders that were spread from Rome over the whole country touching his conduct, and the reported concessions he had made to the Protestants. He had loftiness of soul to feel still more keenly the ill success of designs of such enlarged utility." Cf. Sarpi, p. 77, who states that he nevertheless succeeded in satisfying the mind of the pontiff, being warmly supported by Cardinal Fregoso. COUNCIL OF TRENT. 77 CHAPTER XL. Meeting of the Emperor and the Pope at Lucca. The emperor and the pontiff met at Lucca towards the end of the year 1541, to discuss the matters connected with the council, and the war against the Turks. It was agreed that the pope should send a nuncio to Spires in the early part of the year, to debate respecting both matters, but that in the meanwhile the council should be indicted to be hoi den at Vicenza, as before. But the Venetian senate, who had lately made peace with the Turks, dreaded the discussion in their own city of a war with that people, and had some misgivings as to the safety of a large influx of strangers. Thus was Paul III. thrown into another difficulty, and the council again shifted from its intended locality, in a manner that fully proved either the apathy of the supporters of the Roman court, or the little confidence they had in the sin- cerity of its intentions. CHAPTER XLI. The Council of Trent indicted at the Diet of Spires. In the beginning of the following year, the pope sent Giovanni Morone to the diet assembled at Spires, at which Ferdinand presided in the absence of the emperor. He stated that the pontiff, finding all hopes of concord vain, had determined to expedite the convocation of a council as soon as possible, as he had only delayed it out of complaisance to the emperor, with a view of giving opportunity for religious agreement. He alleged that the aged years of the pontiff, the length of the journey, and the changes of climate, rendered it impossible for him to be present, if the council were held in Germany, and that the same objection would apply to many others. After naming Ferrara, Bologna, or Piacenza, as places both suitable and preferred by himself, he named Trent as a final concession,11 a city which, being situated in the Tyrol, on the confines of Germany, and sub- h See note \ p. 65. 78 THE HISTORY OF THE ject to the king of the Romans, could not be objected to by those who were really desirous of terminating the present unsatisfactory dissensions. Ferdinand and the Catholic members of the diet were satisfied with this proposal, but the Protestants rejected both the place and the council pro- posed by the pontiff; demanding a legitimate and free council, that is, one that should be exempt from the pre- scriptions and the authority of the pontiff. » Paul, nevertheless, proceeded to fulfil his pledge, and in a consistory held on the 22nd of May, 1.542, a bull was drawn up, and published, indicting the council for the first of November, being the festival of All Saints.k CHAPTER XLIT. Mutual Criminations of the Emperor and Francis I. of France. Meanwhile, the bull of the pope, in which the king of France was named as equally a friend of the Roman see with himself,1 had given great offence to Charles, especially as Francis had just declared war against him, and had attacked his dominions in five different places. In bitter terms, he urged that while he had been the constant advo- cate of a general council, the king of France had availed himself of every opportunity to hinder it being put into effect, accused the pope of cherishing discord between both, by making separate offers of friendship to each through the medium of his legates, and declared that if the pontiff had any views for the public good, or the convocation of a coun- cil, it would be his duty to declare Francis I. an enemy to the pontifical see. But Francis was not willing to be outdone either in tact or treachery; and, in the true spirit of a time-server, he proceeded to put in force a most severe edict against the Lutherans. 1 Mosheim, b. iii. p. 150, ed. Soames. k See the bull published at the commencement of my edition of the "Decrees and Canons." "Our most beloved sons in Christ, Charles ever august, the empe- ror of the Romans, and Francis, the most Christian king, the two main supports and defences of the Christian name." — Bull, ibid. p. 4. COUNCIL OF TRENT. 79 By this bill heavy penalties were denounced against all who should be detected keeping books suspected of heretical doc- trine, or condemned as such by the Romish church ; who should secretly frequent conventicles held in private houses ; who should despise or neglect the commands of the Church, refuse to acknowledge different kinds of diet on fast days, and use any other language for prayer than the Latin. Having thus sought to gain favour with the pontiff, he next pro- ceeded to retaliate the charges laid against him by the emperor, taunting him with the capture and pillage of Rome, and with having mocked the pontiff by offering up a supplication in Spain for his liberation, while he himself was the cause of Ms detention in custody. He concluded by professing entire good-will towards the proposed council, and unchanging fidelity towards the Church of Rome, alleging his late violent edicts against the Protestants as proof of his sincerity.111 The pontiff, who probably felt secretly amused at the bad faith of those whom he had so recently been the means of reconciling, but who must have been sensibly annoyed at the hinderance to his measures which would result from their disagreement, resolved to send Contarini to the emperor, Sadolet to the king of France, as peace-makers ; beseeching them to sacrifice their private complaints to the public good. But Contai'ini dying, he substituted Cardinal Visco, who was so unpopular with the emperor, that the pontiff was compelled to recall hini.n m Sarpi, p. 79, sq. n See Courayer, p. 184. 80 THE HISTORY OF THE CHAPTER XLIII. The Legates sent to Trent. At the same time Paul sent three legates to Trent ; Morone, lately raised to the dignity of the sacred college, Peter Paul Parisis, and Reginald Pole, the latter of whom was renowned for theological learning, and venerable for the sanctity of his habits, the splendour of his ancestry, and the glory of the exile and persecution which he had undergone in defence of the papal power.0 They received their com- mission on the 16th of October, being thereby empowered to notify to the Christian princes their arrival at Trent ; to affix to the doors of the cathedral the usual placard, requiring the presence of those who, by right or custom, ought to assist at general councils. They were not, how- ever, to open the council until after the arrival of the prin- cipal prelates from Italy, Germany, France, and Spain ; and then not without giving information to, and awaiting the further commission of the pontiff. The legates had received the cross on the 20th of October, but were unable to reach Trent by the day fixed for the opening of the council. On the 22nd of November they arrived there, having been preceded by Giantommaso di San Felice, bishop of Cava, who had been deputed, with the cardinal bishop of Trent, to receive the prelates as they arrived, and to make the necessary, preparations for the council. But whether the renewed war between the em- peror and Francis I. had rendered the journey unsafe, or for other reasons P less easy to conjecture, the attendance of 0 Pallav. v. i. p. 432. "L' altro il Polo ben addottrinato nellaTeolo- gia, e venerabile per la santita de' costumi, per gli splendori del sangue, e per la gloria dell' esilio e delle persecuzioni sofferte a difesa del Vati- cano." These are better reasons than Sarpi's : — " Ut ostenderet, Rege licet Anglias ab Ecclesise Romanae obedientia alienato, ejus tamen regno primariura esse aliquem in concilio locum." p Sarpi, p. 80, asserts, that the pope had not only sent bishops whom he could best trust, but that he had ordered them to lag on their journey purposely. Although he has the authority of Adriani (see Courayer, p. 185) for this assertion, it scarcely seems probable. Palla- vicino, v. 5, has an unsparing attack upon Sarpi on this subject, and, in a previous chapter, he reviews most of the previous historians of the Council of Trent in a vigorous but too depreciating manner. COUNCIL OF TRENT. 81 bishops was so small, that no measures could he entered upon at present. So slow were they in coming, that Car- dinal Farnese was compelled to urge the nuncios at the different courts to take all possible means of expediting the attendance of the prelates of the respective countries. CHAPTER XLTV. Granvcl and Mendoza at Trent. The Council prorogued. The emperor, now finding that the business of the council had gone too far to be stopped, sent Granvel and Mendoza as his ambassadors to Trent, whither they arrived on the 8th of January, 1543. On meeting with the pope's legates, they demanded that the council should straightway be opened, and business commenced. But the legates thought that the number as yet assembled was too small to be suited to the dignity of the council, or to the discussion of matters so important as those agitated by the Lutherans. Palla- vicino, however, says that Granvel's conduct had gone far to show that the emperor's anxiety for a council was at an end, especially as the chancellor had been heard to express some opinions in favour of a meeting in Germany. ' and, whether from pope's conduct appear forced and unsatisfactory. I know not whether Pallavicino is always right in his objections to them, but I prefer omitting particulars, where there seems fair room of exception. x Vol. ii.p.105. Brent. Pallavicino is ill pleased with this latter remark. >' That some foul play was concerned in the delays concerning the opening of this council cannot well be doubted. I insert the following curious passage of Father Paul, rather as illustrative of the surmises entertained respecting the conduct of the pope and his legates, than as wishing to vouch for its strict accuracy. Pallavicino is warm but not satisfactory in his denial : — "The legates not knowing which way to treat, made demonstration COUNCIL OF TRENT. 89 lack of interest in the proceeding, or because some secret and unaccountable influence withheld, what the authorities of the Romish church professed 'to put forward, the scene of the council was still comparatively a desert. The old objection was again raised, that the small number of prelates present rendered it inexpedient to open the council on the day winch had been appointed, especially as Mendoza alleged that the Spanish bishops would speedily set out for Trent, and the bishops within the jurisdiction of the pope had been commanded by him to hasten thither without delay. More- over, the legates felt anxious to learn the proceedings of the diet then assembled at Worms, and also to see what would be the result of the letter issued by Pietro Toletano, the viceroy of Naples, requiring the bishops of that kingdom not to leave their dioceses, but to be satisfied with four proxies, whom he promised to depute to act in their name. Bitterly annoyed, and much surprised at this prohibition. the pontiff ordered the legates to suspend the opening of the council, and then issued a bull, forbidding, under the severest penalties, any bishop to appear at the council by proxy, and enjoining all to present themselves in person. Although the pontiff well knew that this ride could not be universally followed, and would have been willing to have made excep- tion under circumstances that rendered it necessary, still he resolved to adhere to it until he had compelled the viceroy to withdraw the prohibition. Pole was still absent : but the other two legates having communicated with the pope, he gave orders to open the council on May 3rd, being the festival of the Finding of the to proceed jointly with the ambassadors and prelates, and to commu- nicate to them their most inward thought.- : whereupon, when letters came from Rome or Germany, they assembled all to read them. But perceiving that Don Diego equalized himself to them, and the bishops presumed more than they were wont to do at Rome, and fearing sonie inconvenience would arise when their number did increase, they sent advice to Rome, that always one of the letters should be written to be showed, and the secret things apart ; becau.-e letters which they re- ceived until then they had made no u.-« of but by their wit. The"; de- manded also a cipher, to communicate the matters of greater moment. All which particularities, with many more that shall be spoken of, having taken out of the register of letters of the cardinal of Monte, I have not been willing to conceal them, because they serve to pene- trate the depth of the treaties." — Sarpi, Brent's translation, p. 90 THE HISTORY OF THE Holy Cross. To implore a blessing on the undertaking, as well as to give importance to the solemnity, he had intended to celebrate mass publicly himself in the Vatican church on that day ; but a letter which he received from the legates the day preceding, although not absolutely giving proof of a change of intention on their part, was yet sufficiently dis- couraging to make him desist from so doing.2 The opening of the council was still delayed, the legates feeling doubtful how to act under existing circumstances. On the one hand, the paucity of members as yet present, on the other, the uncertain state of the emperor's feelings, pre- sented difficulties which seemed to admit of no easy solution. In fact, the more we consider the waywardness and listless conduct, the fickle and time-serving principles which seem to have actuated most of those engaged in the transaction, the more does the Council of Trent appear to us in the light of a measure originated by opposition, and carried on rather by force of circumstances, than by any heartfelt interest on the part of one side or the other. ^Nevertheless, far be it from me (especially when I am speaking of the manly and enterprising characters of men like Paul III. or Contarini) to deny what an admirable write* of our own time has asserted, viz. that, even " reading the proceedings of this council in the pages of that able, but not very lenient historian,a to whom we have generally recourse, an adversary as decided as any that could have come from the reformed churches, we find proofs of much ability, con- sidering the embarrassments with which they had to struggle, and of an honest desire of reformation, among a large body, as to those matters, which, in their judgment, ought to be reformed."13 To judge fairly of the amount of sincerity in a man's actions, we must also make some allowance for what he has at stake in the question at issue. It is too much the fault with Protestant writers to forget that the intemperate violence of the Anabaptists, and of other sects of Reformers, whose zeal far outstripped their discretion, and whose rabid z This communication, which is important in reference to the secret policy of the contending parties, is unfortunately too long for insertion. It will be found in Pallav. v. 10. a /. c. Fra Paoli Sarpi. b Hallam, Lit. of the Middle Ages, v. i. p. 370, note. COUNCIL OF TRENT. 91 passion for mere alteration led to criminal and terrific ex- cesses, made the Romanist party cling more firmly to a specious conservatism, which, while it stood firmly and sternly in the way of every attempt at substantial and scriptural reform, still defended the sacredness of old institutions, while it upheld temporal interests. Both the sincerely and the selfishly religious had no small reasons for clinging to a principle, which made the Vatican the centre of appeal, where men might intrust their souls and their purses to one custody. Furthermore, great as may have been the interest con- scientiously felt at times in the convocation of a council — even admitting, upon a by no means unfair supposition, that the pope and the emperor may have on certain occasions felt a real desire, and felt persuaded of the necessity of such a medium for the suppression of religious discord — still there was enough in the history of previous times to prove that such a council (as the event afterwards showed) would fail in its main object — that of conciliating the Protestants. Nor was this the only discouragement. War and dissension between princes, who at one period appeared to be mutually dependent, and upon whose support the Roman See could calculate only as a matter of speculation — plotting and counterplotting between parties, whose veiy existence seemed to hang upon mutual well-being, even at the moment they were striving to outwit one another — quarrels and recon- ciliations, alliances and defections the most sudden and unexpected — all these were difficulties enough for Chris- tendom itself, much more for the pope, to contend with, A late politician once denied that there was such a thing as consistency in the world. The Council of Trent presents but too many instances of the truth of that doctrine in something more than secular matters. To return from this digression — the main fear both of the pontiff and the legates resulted from the uncertain conduct of the German princes and the emperor — the latter of whom was evidently compelled to conciliate the Protestants — while they were equally opposed to the council, fearing that its commencement would be the termination of the conge which had been accorded to religious freedom until the opening of the synod. To Cardinal Farnese, legate of the emperor, it 02 THE HISTORY OF THE was therefore intrusted to allow the legates to open the council, without receiving direct orders from Rome, as soon as circumstances should appear favourable. The viceroy of Naples felt compelled to make at all events a show of sub- mission to the papal bull, and " nominally to leave his prelates to act according to their own judgment and sense of duty : sending, however, only the four whom he himself had chosen, though without the odious name of proxies."0 Poverty, privation, absence from their wonted residences, and from the administration of customary duties, made this long delay most irksome to a large party of those assembled at Trent. To appease this grievance, the legates voted a subsidy to those whose circumstances rendered it necessary, and wrote to the pontiff, suggesting the necessity of making some further provision to meet such exigences.d As a further means of quieting the dissatisfaction, and preventing the prelates leaving Trent, the legates employed them daily in forwarding various matters more or less directly connected with the council, and thereby gained two objects, not only quieting the discontented, but gaining a daily accession to their numbers. Still, the delay had an undoubted tendency to weaken the cause, and the legates frequently came in for blame that was more justly deserved by the emperor.0 At length, in a consistory held on the 16th of November, 1545, it was resolved that the council should be opened on the 13th of the following month; and a bull was expedited, wherein Paul declared, " that he had intimated a council to heal the wounds of the Church, caused by impious heretics. Therefore he exhorted every one to assist the fathers assem- bled therein with their prayers to God ; which to do effec- tually and fruitfully, they ought to confess themselves, and fast three days, and during that time to go in processions, and then to receive the most blessed sacrament, granting pardon of all his sins to whosoever did so."f c Waterworth, p. lxx. It is almost unnecessary to say. that both Sarpi and PaHavicino contain much of the interior history of this period which is well worth knowing, but which is at the same time too copious to be transferred to these pages. a Sarpi, p. 97. e " Ea res legatos vehementer offendit : quod diversum a vero mentem ipsis amngeret, et concilii dilationem, qua) imperatori esse: ascribenda, ipsis imputaret." — Sarpi. p. 96. f Sarpi, p. 123, Brent's translation. COUNCIL OF TRENT. 93 Instructions were also given to the legates relative to the manner of proceeding in the council. They were to treat of the articles of religious doctrine at once, notwithstanding any opposition that might arise : they were to regard opinions only, and not their authors. But in the condemna- tion thereof they were not to enter into trials and proofs of the facts, not only to prevent unnecessary delay, but to give the accused the opportunity of exculpating themselves ; they were not to content themselves with general proscrip- tions of errors, but to enter carefully into details touching those doctrines which were propagated either by word of mouth or by writing, and on which the new heresies built their support. The subject of reformation, as being but the secondary cause of assembling the council, was to be deferred till after questions of doctrine had been settled. They were not. how- ever, to give way to such delay as was likely to occasion a disbelief that it was either being shuffled out of the way, or postponed till the end of the council. They were to listen carefully to such objections as might be brought against the court of Rome, not, however, with a view of taking any steps in the matter themselves, but of furnishing the pontiff with the information necessaiy to enable him to determine the right course to be pursued. All letters and documents expedited in the name of the council were to be attested by the signatures of the three legates, as presidents, and of the pope, whose person they represented, so that he might appear not merely as the author of the convocation of the council, but likewise as the head and ruler of it when assembled. When no hinderance prevented, expedition was to be used in despatching the whole business of the council, both with the view of avoiding the waste of time, and of silencing the objections to which it gave rise. Finally, they were empowered to grant a certain number of indulgences, but not in the name of the council — such a concession not belonging to an assembly of that descrip- tions I am not going to enter into the Bophistry in which Palla- vicino has unsparingly indulged with the view of proving e Pallav. v. 16, § 2. 94 THE HISTORY OF THE that the pope was exempt from views to his own personal aggrandizement in framing these directions. 1> or will I detain the reader with his discussion on the word " politics," as his defence of those of Paul III. will not prove the amount of religious sincerity he would wish to infer. But it may be well to point out a few features in these directions, which serve to show that the council was, as regarded the only purpose for which the reformists could have desired it, wholly useless. In the first place, the pope had the full power of putting in an objection, or of negativing any measure proposed ; the abuses of the Church of Home were to be treated of as secondary, whereas they had been the primary cause that led to its convocation. Rome had lived on in errors that were increasing from day to day, and yet, on the present occa- sion, she appeared in state to try her own offences, and to test those of her opponents by a jury to which they had unanimously objected. It was a case in which the authority of the pope was the contested point, with the pope as su- preme judge in his own cause, and with a foredoomed verdict in his own favour. Now, there is no doubt, that to admit any power of decision on the part of a general council, in matters where the pontifical authority was likely to suffer, was, however agreeable to the practice of earlier Christian councils, now most thoroughly improbable ; and no one can read the direc- tions given to the legates without perceiving, that the inde- pendence of the council was limited to the privilege of con- demning heretics, establishing and ratifying old errors, and just intermingling such measures of reform as might leave the whole real power of the Church, as before, in the hands of the pope. The maxim was, "Freedom of speech; but don't touch my supremacy." But a still better evidence of the manner in which this council was subservient to the wishes and tastes of the pon- tiff, is to be found in a statement of Pallavicino, to the effect that Paul had previously announced to the legates, that he intended shortly to hold an election of new cardinals, both with the view of raising a friend of the emperor to that dignity, and of doing away with an impression on the minds COUNCIL OF TRENT. 05 of the people, little suited to the pontifical authority, namely, that the pontiff had not the power of bestowing the purple while a council was sitting.11 This fact is interesting, as showing not only that the pon- tifical dignity was losing credit even amongst its own adherents, and that some ideas touching a limit to its assumptions had been entertained among the greater mass even of Roman Catholics. If direct language to that effect were wanting, surely this measure, and the reason that prompted it, were good grounds for proving the pope's deter- mination to hold a general council as possessing a secondary authority only, and a power in no way calculated to restrain his own proceedings. Nor can I omit dwelling upon another fact — upon which some political reasoners will perhaps set little value, but which is nevertheless curious, if only as an historical coinci- dence— the empowering of the council to grant indulgences. It will hereafter be seen, that conciliation of the Protes- tant party was anything but the spirit which guided this council ; but it nevertheless seems strange that the deputies of an assembly, avowedly called together for the purpose of appeasing disturbances and pacifying the tumults which had sundered the unity of Christendom, should have been endued with a power to exercise that very privilege claimed by the Church, which had been the primary ocassion of Luther's seces- sion. Surely it was a beforehand declaration of a determi- nation to persist in the points at issue, even in the very teeth of the opposition they were about to encounter. Was there not a kind of authoritative recklessness in this act, better becoming a party who, as hereafter will be shown, rather meditated personal aggression, than men who had a sincere interest in gaining over the hearts and wills of their fellows, or in honestly probing the truth, apart from the draperies with which increasing superstitions had shadowed it 1 In the power of indulgences granted to the legates of this council, we seem to read the war-challenge to Protes- h Pallav. v. 16, § 1 : — "Si per distruggera una popolare credenza poco onorevole all' autorita pontificia, che in tempo di concilio non fosse lecita al papa la distribuzion delle porpore." This fact is omitted by Water- worth, for reasons perhaps not difficult to discover. 96 THE HISTORY OF THE tantism, and the haughty determination of the pontiff even 10 go out of his way ' to assert his power. Even now, when no difficulties seemed to interfere with the progress of the council, an unexpected order was sent by the king of France, commanding the four bishops of Aix, Clermont, Agde, and Eennes, to return. Guillaume Duprat, bishop of Clermont, immediately obeyed the royal mandate, and the rest, despite the earnest remonstrances of the legates, the cardinal of Trent, and the Spanish prelates, seemed dis- posed to follow him. At length, however, it was agreed that the bishop of Rennes should return to the king, the bishop of Agde linger in the neighbourhood of Trent, and the archbishop of Aix remain. The opposition of the king proved but temporary, and he even expressed his appro- bation of the conduct of the two bishops who had remained behind. On the 7th of November, the legates received final in- structions to open the council on the 13th of the December following, and a breve to that effect reached Trent on the 11th of that month. On the day following a solemn fast was held, and public prayers offered, to crave a blessing on the forthcoming convocation. On the same day, moreover, a general congregation of the prelates was held, when the bishop of JaenJ wished that the breve appointing and em- powering the legates, should be read on the following day, when the bull indicting the council would be read as usual. This was, however, considered superfluous. Having now completed this historical sketch as far as the first session of the council, I think it advisable to close the first part, as the necessary notices of doctrinal, as well as historical matters, will render some difference in treatment requisite during the remaining portion of the work. 5 Be it remembered that this power had been granted them, " che awertissero di non lasciar mai che queste si dispensassero a nome del concilio, a cui non s' appartenena un tal atto." — Pallav. I. c. p. 498. Some persons may regard this measure merely as a popular one, likely to attract favour with princes concerned in the council ; but it seems to me to suggest designs more deeply connected with the maintenance of the papal supremacy. J Sarpi says Asturia. He is very inaccurate in many of these parti- culars, and I have therefore fallowed Pallavicino. PART THE SECOND. CHAPTER I. Opening Ceremonials of the Council. First Session. On the 13th of December, 1545, the legates, accompanied by the bishops arrayed in their pontifical robes, and by a large throng of doctors of divinity, clergy, and laymen, pro- ceeded in solemn procession from the church of the Holy Trinity to the cathedral dedicated to St. Vigilius. On their arrival, Cardinal del Monte, as first legate, celebrated high mass j at the conclusion of which he bestowed, in the name of the pope, a plenary indulgence on all present, exhorting them to make earnest and constant prayers to Almighty God for the peace of the Church, and the suppression of heresy and dissension. A Latin sermon was then delivered by Fra Cornelio Musso, bishop of Bitonto, which was followed by the prayers customary on such occasions.a After the bull of November 19th, 1544, removing the suspension of the council, and the breve of the 22nd of February, 1545, nomi- nating the legates, had been read, a brief exhortation was delivered by the first legate. When the bishops had taken their seats, the president, Cardinal del Monte, asked them whether it pleased them, "unto the praise and glory of the holy and undivided Trinity, for the increase and exaltation of the Christian faith and religion, for the extirpation of heresies, for the peace and honour of the Church, for the reformation of the Christian clergy and people, for the depression and extinction of the a See Sarpi, p. 102. Pallav. v. 17, ia profuse in charging Father Paul -with inaccuracies in his descrip:;nn of the ceremonies at the opening of the council. H 98 THE HISTORY OF THE eneinie.s of the Christian name, to decree and declare that the sacred and general Council of Trent hath begun."'0 This having been unanimously agreed to by the form " placet," it was next proposed, that " whereas the celebra- tion of the nativity of our Lord Jesus Christ was near at hand, and other festivals of the concluding and commencing year followed thereupon, the first ensuing session should be held on the Thursday after the Epiphany, being the 7 th of January, lo46."' This having met with a like approval, Her- cola Severola, as promoter of the council, ordered the public notary to take a proper and authentic account of the pro- ceedings. The " Te Deum" was then chanted, and the fathers having laid aside their pontifical robes, and assumed their ordinary costume, accompanied the legates to their own dwellings, preceded by the legatine cross. These rites were observed at each succeeding session. CHAPTER II. Strictures on the Oration of the Bishop of Bitonto. Further Particulars touching the Fimt Session. The Germans and Italians, who had eagerly awaited to hear intelligence of the proceedings of the council, were soon gratified by the appearance in print of the charge given through the legates, and the speech delivered by the bishop of Bitonto. This latter document excited great dissatisfac- tion ; nor will the elaborate defence of Pallavicino satisfy any one either of its soundness of argument or excellence of style. "Flimsy rhetoric, clumsy platitudes, and paltry comparisons are bestrewed throughout with little discrimination ; and many of the exaggerated statements respecting the power and infallible judgment of general councils become almost amusing, from the distorted figures of speech, and the total misconception of the meaning of scriptural texts, by which they are distinguished. While the admonition addressed by the legates was re- ceived by all as pious, moderate, and Christian-like, the opinions respecting the bishop's oration were very different "All charged him with vanity, and a showing on" of do- Decrees and Canons, p. 12 cf my translation. COUNCIL OF TRENT. 99 quence ; while those skilled in the matter found, on com- paring the words of the legates with those of the bishop, that they were utterly repugnant, and that the one party had ex- pressed a pious, the other an impious opinion. The legates truly and candidly allowed, that it was vain to invoke the Holy Spirit, unless the mind were first cleansed by a sincere acknowledgment of sins committed. The bishoj), on the con- trary, held that the Holy Spirit would open the mouth of those in whose very heart the Spirit dwelt not. Moreover, they thought that arrogance had impelled him to assert that if some few bishops went astray, the whole Church erred ; a.s if councils composed of seven hundred bishops had not erred, whose doctrines had nevertheless been rejected by the Church. Nor were there wanting those who denied that this was suited to the doctrine of the Church, which conceded infalli- bility to the pope only, and to councils only by virtue of his confirmation of their decrees."0 Nor were these the only objections urged against an oration, which is only rendered worse by the attempts made in its defence/1 Pallavicino states, that three legates, four archbishops, twenty bishops, five generals of religious orders, and the ambassadors of Kins Ferdinand, formed the council. e But c Sarpi, p. 103, sq. d Cf. Courayer, p. 236, sq. n. 52. e Le Plat says, four archbishops and twenty-two bishop.-.. Sarpi simply says, twenty-five bishops. The following remarks of Waterworth (although they totally lose sight of the fact that the pope had reserved to himself a power of interference that rendered the proceedings of the council wholly subservient to his own pleasure) are somewhat important, as showing Roman Catholic views on the subject of the independence of the council : — "'"It has been not unfrequently represented that, of the prelates present, the majority were under the direct territorial influence of the pontifF, when so far was this from being the case, that in re not one in five of the bishops who assisted at the council but was com- pletely independent of that influence, and under the innnediate control of some one or other of the great prince- in Christendom, as the very slightest inspection of the list of bishops present and of the countries from which they came, will at once evince. The history, too, of almost every session of the council proves the complete independence of the bishop- on the pontiff " (p. lxxv. ). Compare the following very opposite remarks of Bishop Burnet : — "'The intrigues at Trent, as they are set out even by Cardinal Pallavicino, were more subtile, but not le>s apparent no: less scandalous. Nothing was trusted to a session till it was first cam in congregations, which were what a committee of the whole house is in 100 THE HISTORY OF THE although the council had formally commenced, neither the prelates nor the legates knew what plan of action was to be pursued as to the manner of conducting the assembly, nor were the requisite officers appointed. They accordingly com- municated with the pontiff on the subject ; and, after some deliberation with the cardinals and other leading men of the Roman court, he appointed Achilles de' Grassi advocate of the council; Ugo Buoncompagni was deputed to draw up the official documents ; and Angelo Massarello was intrusted with the office of secretary, at first only for a time, although his abilities and assiduity ultimately secured him the permanent appointment. The legates having also wished to ascertain whether the votes in the council should be given by nations, or by individuals, the pontiff gave his opinion in favour of the latter system, observing that the other was of but recent growth, having been introduced at the Council of Constance, and subsequently adopted at Basle, while the old system, which had been used in the Council of Lateran. was both the best, the most suit- able, and the least likely to give offence. CHAPTER III. Preparations for the Second Session. It cannot fail to strike the reader, that the first session of - the Council of Trent was little else than a display of cere- monials, warranted doubtless by the prescript of long-stand- ing usage, but insufficient in itself to compensate for the unsatisfactory state of the other proceedings. Everything was in an unfinished and incomplete condition, and Paul himself, by the delays which he had caused, seemed to throw a damp over the commencement of this council, which augured ill for its idtimate success. However, preparations for the next session began to be our parliament, and then every man's vote was known, so that there was hereby great occasion given for practice. This alone, if there had been no more, showed plainly that they themselves knew they were not guided by the Spirit of God, or by infallibility ; >ince a session was not thought safe to he ventured on bnt after a long previous canvassing." — On the Articles, p. 202. COUNCIL OF TRENT. 101 carried on with greater activity, and the question as to whether any persons but bishops should be permitted to give their vote on matters of doctrine was settled in the folio wing manner. The privilege of voting was to be allowed to the generals of the religious orders; but the three abbots of the Cistercians were to have but one vote, as representing one order. Such prelates as might be let by some lawful hin- derance, but who sent proxies, were to depend upon the decision of the pope as to their right of voting. This fact, which has been slurred over by writers on the subject, is of more importance than it appeal's, showing, as it does, the un- willingness of the pope to yield any concessions calculated to increase the independence of the bishops, even though to the advantage of the council. Another matter, which, although arranged for a time, never was, nay, up to the present moment, never has been settled, was the title to be given to the council, at the beginning of the decrees in each session. One party, not satisfied with the terms "general and oecumenical," wished to add the words, '-'representing the universal church," as used at the councils of Basle and Constance. But the legates, who feared to give authority to councils, which (especially that of Basle) had been instrumental to what the Church of Home denounced as schismatical, and who perhaps thought that they might increase the bad feeling on the part of the Protestant party, succeeded in negativing tins proposals On the 7th of January, 1546, the second session assembled with the customary ceremonies, the mass being celebrated by Giovanni Fonseca, bishop of Castell-a-mare, and the sermon preached by Coriolano Martirano, bishop of San Marco. The assembly consisted of more than thirty theologians of great eminence, besides four cardinals, four archbishops, twenty-eight bishops, four generals of orders, and three abbots. Two of the archbishops were titular only, never having seen the churches whence they derived their titles ; one being the celebrated antiquarian Olaus Magnus, brother of John, bishop of Upsal, who had been driven out of his 1 Pallav. vi. 2. Sarpi. p. 108. Courayer's notes, p. 247, sq. are im- portant. 102 THE HISTORY OF THE see at the time of the Reformation being introduced into Sweden; and Vaucop, bishop of Armagh, who had been a confidential emissary of the papal court in Germany, France, and elsewhere.? The bishop of Castell-a-mare then read a breve, bearing date December 4th, 154.3, by which the 13th of December had been appointed for the opening of the council, as well as the bull prohibiting votes by proxy. Next came the decree " touching the manner of living, and other matters to be observed, during the council." In this document, besides various precepts encouraging devotional and abste- mious habits during the holding of the council, the members of it are exhorted to give all the", results of their learning, and to apply all their powers of thought to determine the questions at issue, and to observe the precepts of the Council of Toledo respecting avoiding disturbances in the assembly, violence of speech, and captious disputation. Two disputes arose during this session. William du Prat, bishop of Clermont, demanded that, in the prayers appointed to be said during the sessions of this council, the name of the king of France should be coupled with that of the emperor in the suffrages ; a request to which the Cardinal Santacruz made no objection, save that it would lead to a similar desire on the part of other princes. This proposal, which had been already agitated in a previous congregation,11 was negatived. The second dispute was respecting the addition of the words " representing the universal church," which was negatived for the present ; but, as will be seen in our next chapter, was still regarded as an open and unsettled question. In other respects the " placet " was unanimous. ■ See Sarpi, p. 109, and Courayer, p. 248, -q. h Sarpi, I. c. COUNCIL OF TRENT. 03 CHAPTER IV. Preparatory Congregations for the Third Session. On the 13th of January, a congregation was held, in which the legates made great complaints respecting the con- duct of those who had opposed themselves to the title of the decree in the last session. They alleged that it was most indecorous to display different and varying opinions in so public a place, and that congregations had been therefore instituted, to the end that each man might be able to give Ms opinion in private, so that, when they came to give decision in the council itself, all might unanimously agree. Moreover, nothing was so likely to terrify heretics, and confirm the Catholic party in a firm and unshaken adherence to their faith, than the appearance of unanimity. They concluded by nrging the adoption of the title " oecumenical and general," as used in the pontiff's bull, and without any further addition. This dispute, while it serves to show the unwillingness of the Church of Rome to acknowledge the fallibility which the councils of Constance and Basle had satisfactorily esta- blished, at the same time proves how little real confidence a large portion of the Romanists felt in their whole pro- ceedings. I have already quoted Bishop Burnet's severe but just criticism on the tendency of these previous assem- blies to render the sessions of the council little else than confirmations of the measures which had been agreed upon by private intrigue. In fact, the whole freedom of the coimcil must have been crippled by the certain unpopularity with which the voice of a reformer would have been received, and the obvious desire to stifle free public discussion, while cal- culated to give a specious appearance of unity to the decrees of the council, was oftentimes not the heartfelt, well-under- stood determination of temperate and upright counsel, but the curbed and clipped resolve of a packed committee. In the meetings which followed, a more important ques- tion arose, touching the manner of proceeding with the future sessions, and long and animated discussions .ensued. The emperor and his party' were of opinion that no good 1 Especially Cardinal Madrucci. See Courayer, p. 254. 104 THE HISTORY OF THE could accrue from treating of doctrines, until the errors of the clergy, the cause of so many evils, were properly re- formed. Another party were for commencing with the heads of faith, alleging, that to proceed otherwise would be contrary to the whole spirit of Christianity, and wishing the extirpatiou of heresies to take the first place in the pro- ceedings of the council, as it had done in the papal bull. A third party were for uniting both subjects, observing that, as every doctrine of faith was acconrpanied by some abuse, and that every abuse arose from the misinterpretation or misuse of some doctrine, they ought to be treated of simultaneously. The remaining party, especially some of the French bishops, wished the establishment of peace to be first considered, and that the princes of Christendom should be called upon to do all in their power to abstain from mutual hostilities, in order to promote the safety and tranquil con- tinuance of the council. Thev also thought that the Lu- therans should be urged to attend the council, and called upon to testify their agreement with the rest of the Christian world. k The pontiff had required of the legates that faith alone should be first treated of j but they, finding the impossibility of proceeding in the face of a strong opposition, informed Paul of the difficulty in which they were placed, and re- quested further instructions. They also urged the expe- diency of either removing some of the poorer bishops from the council, or of relieving them with supplies of money, observing that it was a mistake to suppose that they could live with the same frugality and poverty at Trent as at Home ; for that at Rome, being of no position or authority, they could endure an humble mode of life, but that their seat in the council gave them greater ambition, and made them expect more competent means of supporting the im- portance they had thereby obtained.1 In a congregation held on the 22nd, the dispute was k My chief authority throughout this chapter is Sarpi, p. 110. sq. 1 Sarpi, p. 112, who attributes the previous neglect of the pontiff, respecting the matters urged by the legates, to his mind being occupied -with the design of a war against the Protestants. Courayer, p. 256, assigns less important, but perhaps more probable, reasons for Paul's conduct. COUNCIL OF TRENT. 10-5 again renewed, and the legates found themselves met by a firmer opposition than ever; and it was at length determined that the advice of Canipeggio, bishop of Feltro, should be followed, and that both faith and discipline should be treated of simultaneously. As a practical example to the rest, the first legate, Car- dinal del Monte, after returning thanks to God, and eulogizing the desire shown by the prelates to reform whatever abuses existed among their order, avowed his determination at once to renounce his bishopric of Pavia, reduce his establishment and expenditure, and do his utmost to carry out the princi- ples of a healthy and becoming reform. His conduct was- followed by the cardinals Cervini, Pacheco, and Pole, who admonished the fathers " that the reformation ought to commence with themselves, and extend to whatsoever and wheresoever abuses existed unworthy of the purity and per- fection of the Christian character."111 Such a determination, while it doubtless delighted the conscientious churchman, whose principles were really interested in the reformation of abuse, must have alarmed and disgusted the larger mass, whose splendid manner of living, whose cupidity in the search after wealth and position, and whose abuse of both, rendered them the first persons upon whom the amendment would operate. Many there were, who, while urging the necessity of reform, had, with an unfortunate obliviousness of their own character, forgotten that its work would pro- bably begin with themselves. Having communicated these resolutions to the pope, the legates proposed two matters for consideration in the mean time : first, whether, at the next session, a decree should be set forth commanding that both faith and discipline be treated of simultaneously ; and secondly, what system should be observed in selecting, handling, and examining matters connected therewith. A trivial dispute respecting the form and design of the seal to be used in signing the letters of the council ensued ; but it was agreed that they should at present content them- selves with the seal of the chief legate. In another congregation it was determined that no decree m Water-worth, p. l\.\x. 10G THE HISTORY OF THE should be passed, formally binding the council to treat of faith and doctrine in conjunction, but that it should be understood, that such a method of proceeding should be the one pursued, although the change was not to be made in the next session, but in the one following. It had also been arranged, with the view of securing expedition and quiet during the debates, that the prelates should be divided into three congregations, one of which met at the residence of each of the legates. The result of their debates was to be communicated to a general congre- gation ; and there examined and decided upon, after which. it was to be ratified in the public session. Time was now approaching for the session, and the legates, having as yet received no advices from the pontiff, were in doubt how to act. Finding, however, that many bishops were on their journey to Trent, it was thought ad- visable to postpone all further decisions until they arrived. Cardinal Pole proposed that, in the interim, the creed of the Romish Church should be proposed publicly in the following session, after the manner of the creeds propounded for acceptation at previous councils. It was finally agreed, that the decree should be drawn up with the old heading, and that mention should be made both of doctrine and refor- mation, but in terms so general as to be capable of being adapted to every occasion ; that the creed should also be recited and published ; that another decree should be made, referring the consideration of other matters till the session following, and postpone that session till the furthest period possible, provided it did not extend beyond Easter.11 CHAPTER V. Tae TJtird Session. On the 4th of February, 154G, the session was opened with the accustomed solemnities. Pietro Tagliavia. arch- bishop of Palermo, celebrated mass, and the sermon was preached by Ambrosio Politio. The former prelate then read the decree, declaring the symbol of faith.0 as follows : — " Sarpi, p. 114. ° This will be found in my edition of the " Decrees and Canons," COUNCIL OF BRENT, 107 " I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all tilings visible and invisible ; and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God, and born of the Father of all ages ; God of God, light of light, very God of very God ; begotten, not made, of one substance with the Father : by whom all things were made : who for us men, and for our salvation, came down from the heavens, and was incarnate of the Virgin Mary by the Holy Ghost, and was made man : crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate, he suffered and was buried ; and he rose again on the third day, according to the Scriptures ; and he ascended into heaven, sitteth at the right hand of the Father ; and again will come with glory to judge the living and the dead; of whose kingdom there shall be no end : and in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and giver of life, who proceedeth from the Father and Son ; who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified ; who spake by the prophets : and one Catholic and Apostolic Church. I confess one baptism for the remission of sins ; and I look for the resur- rection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amem' Against this lirst decree only three dissentients pro- tested, and their objections were unimportant, being directed not against the creed, but against the omission of the clause " representing the universal Church."' The bishops of Capaccio and Badajoz also protested against the omission of a decree binding the council to treat simultaneously of doc- trine and reformation.!1 By the second decree, also read by the archbishop of Palermo, the next session was post- poned till the 8th of April. Besides the legate^, these were present the cardinals of Trent and of Jaefi, twenty-seven bishops, three abbots, five generals of orders, and Father le Jay. proctor of the cardinal bishop of Augsburg. p. 15. I have thought fit to insert the creed from the same volume, as it will be useful to compare it with that of Pope Pius IV. p Courayer, p. 262, sq. 108 THE HISTORY OF THE CHAPTER VI. Dissatisfaction at Borne. Neither the pontiff, nor any of the party closely interested in the welfare of the Roinan court, felt satisfied with the conduct of the legates. So carefully had Paul endeavoured to render the council merely subservient to the support of his own dignity, that the idea of uniting reformation with doctrinal questions was highly distasteful. Nevertheless, even the pontiff was forced to succumb to a principle which was slowly, but surely, working the downfall of the "ipse- dixit" of papal power. Moreover, it could but be perceived that the real business transacted at Trent at present lay in a nutshell. Nothing had been done — delays had been grasped at upon every ima- ginable excuse ; ceremonies, serving as prefaces to nothing — discussions, ending in the same ; — excuses, explanations, and apologies — these were the doings of the early sessions. Modern times have witnessed the possibility of a House of Commons doing nothing throughout an entire session : the Council of Trent, in its earlier sittings, was not one whit behind the most talkative inactivity that even the head of a cabinet could contrive. It was but natural that a number of men, many of them pre-eminent for the highest attainments, and endued with all the mental energy to which the recent revival of learning had given an impulse, should have felt disgusted with the listless trifling which seemed to be a mere excuse for keeping them away from the exercise of their ordinary duties. Much vexation existed at Trent. The pontiff appeared to have no decisive intentions, and Ins legates were proportionably deficient in instructions. The want of some material point for discussion was sensibly felt, and the most earnest entrea- ties were made by the legates to the pontiff, to decide upon some definite plan and order of proceeding. CHAPTEPv VII. Reformation in Germany. Death of Luther. Meanwhile the work of reform was proceeding with rapid strides in Germany. At the beginning of the year 1546, COUNCIL OF TRENT. 109 the elector Palatinate had permitted the use of the cup to the laity, as well as public prayer in the vulgar tongue, the marriage of priests, and various other points of religious reform. Furthermore, the assembly which the emperor had convened at Ratisbon proved a failure — a result to which the conduct of both parties probably contributed. The Protestants were ill satisfied by the conditions to which the ■emperor wished the conference to be subject, and were suspicious of the character of the deputies whom he had sent thither ; while the Catholics were naturally averse to assemblies, which were rendered unavailing by their obstinate determination to make no concessions, except in matters of little consequence. Q On the 18th of February died Martin Luther. His latter days had been principally disturbed by the ill success of his attempts to reconcile the two Counts von Mansfeld,1' while his physical powers had been worn out by the anxieties of a life of controversy, acting upon a system originally debilitated by disease. Marvels were narrated to account for the death of a man aged sixty-three years, and the miraculous power of God's vengeance was called in to account for what had happened in the course of the ordinary working of his will. It is against the plan of my work to enter into the con- tradictory stories connected with the last days of this great man's life — still more so to declaim in apologies for his many mistakes and errors, or to expatiate, on the other hand, in rhetorical panegyrics, on abilities that can duly be measured by their influence on the whole subsequent state of Christendom. As a specimen, however, of the manner in which his name has been dealt with by Roman Catholics, i I have adopted Courayer's views, p. 263, ». 100. He adds : " II faut avouer, cependant, que lea Protestans furent les premiers qui rom- pirent les conferences, en se retirant secrettenient pour suivre les ordres de l'Electeur de Saxe, qui, mal satisfait des conditions auxquelles l'eni- pereur voulait que se tint le colloque, en rappella ses theologiens, qui furent bientot suivis des autres. A cet egard, if est certain, qu'ils furent ceux qui rompirent le colloque. Mais on ne pent gueres desavouer que les Catholiques n'y eussent donne lieu par les differens avantages qu'ils voulurent prendre, soit de ce que l'empereur et les presidens leur etoient favorables, soit en refusant aux Protestans quelques conditions assez equitables que ceux-ci demandoient." r Michelet, p. 82. 110 THE HISTORY OF THE I will quote the following view of his character by Pallavicino : — "Luther was possessed of a fertile imagination, but of such a nature, that, whilst he gave utterance to abundant bitter- ness, he never gave vent to anything mature. His medita- tions, one and all, fail to satisfy the mind of the reader, and resemble an abortive giant, rather than a perfect offspring. His mind was vigorous, but befitting a destroyer rather than a builder ; and thus we find that the Catholic religion was overthrown by him in many places, whilst his own doctrine was founded in a narrow region. He possessed considerable learning, but it resembled a heap of indigested materials, or a treasury filled with copper coins, rather than a well- arranged wardrobe or casket. And this very flow of erudi- tion he used like the whirlwind of a summer storm, which, while it tears up the ground in all directions, bestows no refreshing and nutritious shower. No subject requiring varied erudition or extensive reading ever received illustration at his hands. He was eloquent both in tongue and pen, but like a whirlwind which blinds the eyes by upraising a cloud of dust, not like a placid fountain pouring forth clear water to refresh them ; for the reader will not find a single period throughout his many works, which does not convey an air of roughness and want of finish. He showed temerity rather than courage — ever valiant to plunge into the beginning of a quarrel, and afterwards persist in it, either fearing contempt, or despairing of pardon. No one was more petulant in treading, by dint of insults rather than satires, on the verv sceptres of rulers, so long as he was out of their reach : no one more timid, when danger was nigh at hand. He often- times professed regret at having proceeded so far against the pontiff, but he still fought on, believing that the bridge was now cut away from his feet. Repeatedly had he proffered silence, if his adversaries would only do the same ; thereby evincing that it was zeal for the praise of men, and not love of the Almighty, that actuated his motives. He perverted Christianity rather to the ruin of others than to his own profit, in which he was followed by princes, who sought their own aggrandizement, and not his advantage ; and thence he lived in continual poverty, the more disagreeable as his pride was excessive. He retained a lasting remembrance in the COUNCIL OF TRENT, 111 minds of men, but of infamy rather than renown, seeing that far greater is the number of those who detest the man as the beginner of a heresy, than of those who venerate him as a prophet."3 Much of the character of Luther must for ever remain open to the speculations of those who have too few points in common to be ever likely to convince one another. The in- ward feelings and motives of those men who play the leading parts in the scene of human life are subject to so many varying influences, that it must be left to a higher intelligence than ours to probe their real nature. At the same time, such characters are grand studies as well for the ethical theorist as for the political practitioner. The very uncer- tainty which at times invests their most prominent acts is instructive, and the doubtful nature of many of the impulses which prompted them is — while it draws largely upon our powers of impartial judgment — the most painful illustration of our incapability to form a proper estimate of the real value of our own. CHAPTER YIII. War meditated against the Protestants. Mosheim broadly asserts, that " the destruction of those who should oppose the Council of Trent had been agreed on between the emperor and the pontiff; and the opening of the council was to be the signal for taking up arms."*- From the writings of the historians on both sides, it is certainly evident that the decision of the points at issue had become a matter for arms, not arguments. The Council of Trent, with its pertinacious adherence to the claims of a papal authority, which, by negativing any measures calculated to work reform in the most serious points at issue, rendered it utterly inadequate to the task of calming the dissensions which it was its avowed object to compose,11 was but a stand- point for Romanist aggression — a station from whence the strong hand of the secular power might demand its credentials to act. Despite previous intrigues, and specious attempts at 8 Pallav. vi. 10. * V. iii. ch. iv. p. 151. u See this point excellently argued by Bramhall, " Schism guarded," serni. iv. p. 624, sqq. v. ii. (Oxford edition). 112 THE HISTORY OF THE conciliation, " in the end the masks were removed, and the provisions for war could no longer be hid."x Rapid prepara- tions were being made by the emperor, the result of which will be shown hereafter. CHAPTER IX. Preliminary Congregations to the Fourth Session. " The divines," observes Sarpi, " had until now served in the council only to make sermons on holy days, in exaltation of the council and the pope, and to make light skirmishes with the Lutherans ; but now that controverted doctrines were to be decided, and the abuses of learned men rather than of others to be reformed, their worth began to appear." y The work of the council might certainly be now said to have commenced, and it is from hence that its proceedings and decrees become an important commentary on the fundamental principles of Roman Catholicism, no less in developing the intrinsic character, than in pointing out their differences from the tenets of the reformed Churches. It was now that x Sarpi, p. 140, Brent's translation. •v Sarpi, p. 141. He adds the following remarks, which will be useful .as showing against what Lutheran doctrines the proceedings of the session were directed : — The articles necessary for matter of doctrine drawn out of the Lutherans' books were — 1. That the necessary docti'ine of Christian faith is wholly contained in the holy Scriptures, and that it is a human invention to add unto them unwritten traditions as left unto the holy Church by Christ and his apostles, derived unto us by means of the continual succession of bishops, and that it is sacrilege to defend that they are of equal authority with the Old and Xew Testament. 2. That amongst the books of the Old Testament none should be reckoned but those that have been received by the Jews ; or in the Xew. the six epistles, that is, under the name of St. Paul to the Hebrews, that of St. James, the second of St. Peter, the second and third of St. John, one of St. Jude, and the Apocalypse. 3. That to understand the Scripture well, or to aDege the prope words, it is necessary to have recourse to the texts of the original tongue in which it is written, and to reprove the Latin translation as full of errors. 4. That the divine Scripture is most easy and perspicuous, and that to understand it neither gloss nor comment is necessary, but only to have the spirit of a sheep of Christ's pasture. 5. Whether canons with anathematisms adjoined should be framed against all these articles. COUNCIL OF TRENT. 113 doctrinal antagonism to the principles of Luther and other reformers, was to pave the way to the more active measures of aggression that were to widen the breach, and sever the combatants for ever. In the first preliminary congregation, held on the 8th of February, 1546/ some further disputes took place respecting the " representing" clause, and on the omission, in the last session, of a decree binding the assembly to proceed jointly with matters of faith and reformation, the legate, Del Monte, urging that there was no objection in the council " omitting in word, what it had done in effect," and declaring his inten- tion to have introduced other clauses besides those stated in the pontiff's bull, had he not been otherwise advised by men of the highest authority. He next propounded the canon of Holy Scripture as the subject to be examined, with a view to the ensuing session. As this involved the settlement of the first outlines of religious belief, and as many books of Scrip- ture had been impugned by the reformist party, it obtained a ready assent, and the three following questions were placed before the next congregation. 1. Were all the books of both testaments to be approved and received? 2. Was this approval to be given after a fresh examination of the evidence proving them canonical ? 3. Would it be expedient to divide the Holy Scriptures into two classes ; one containing such books as were to be read for instruction in morals, such as the Proverbs and Books of Wisdom, not yet received as canonical ; the other, such as were to be used for proving the doctrines of belief? This latter proposal, urged by Bertan and Seripando, found few supporters, and was dropped without hesitation ; but the first question met with a unanimous assent ; the purpose of which was expressed in a speech by Cardinal CVrvini, who set forth the authority of the last canon of the apostles, by the councils of Trullo, Laodicea, Florence, and the third Council of Carthage, as well as by St. Athanasras and Gregory of Nazianzum, and by the popes Innocent IV. and Gelasius. * I have followed Pallavicino, vi. 11, in describing the proceedings of this session. Sarpi is too lax and uncircumstantial, bv.t many of his remarks will be noticed subsequently. 1 114 THE HISTORY OF THE But the second question was less satisfactory ; and even the legates differed one with another. Del Monte was opposed to any fresh examinations, and was supported in his opinion by Pacheco. But Cervini and Pole, together with the car- dinal-bishop of Trent, were anxious that the labour should be undertaken, not with a view of impugning the resolution to which previous councils had come, but to be provided with still more satisfactory proofs for confuting the objections of heretics. But the other party urged, that there would be an impropriety in even examining into what had been once settled as a matter of faith by councils approved by the Church, and that even the tacit sanction of the Church, ratifying the decision of previous prelates, ought not to be disturbed by a new scrutiny. As to the objections of heretics, they had been amply refuted by such scholars as Cochlasus, Pigheri, and Eck. In the private congregation, at which Cardinal Cervini presided, the second opinion prevailed • but in the general one, which was held on the 12th of February, no decision was arrived at. while in that held the following day the confusion and difference of opinion became so great, that it was necessary to take the votes of each separately and by name. The result of the scrutiny was a perfect unanimity in receiving as canonical the books of Scripture usually found in the sacred volume ; but Madrucci, with fourteen bishops, was opposed to the insertion of a clause denouncing anathema against those, who should refuse to receive the deutero-canonical writings, while Pacheco, the legate, and upwards of twenty of the fathers, were in favour of the anathema. A compromise was, however, effected in regard to the renewed examination proposed respecting the canonical authority of the books of Scripture, it being determined that a private examination should take place, but that the result of their investigations should not transpire among the public acts of the council. In other words, a packed assem- bly might give as many reasons for the existing belief as they could find ; but the papal authority refused to recognise even their right to give a public and independent proof of their researches, even when in its own favour. Clear inves- tigation and accurate scholarship were not wanting ; but the COUNCIL OF TRENT. 115 impartial spirit and the freedom of judgment, which can alone give validity to the decisions even of the most learned, were crippled and stunted in their growth and development by the ex cathedra, assumptions of the self- styled successor of St. Peter. Some activity, however, was displayed in the arrangements which were formed on the 18th of February. Each of the three private congregations was to be provided with two of the fathers, one learned in theology, the other in the canon law, to whom was committed the task of drawing up the de- cisions formed respecting Scripture and tradition. Salvador, archbishop of Sassari, the archbishops of Matera and Ar- magh, and the bishops of Badajoz, of Belcastro, and of Fel- tro, were the prelates nominated to this office. Moreover, the numerous theologians and professors of the canon law, who numbered in their ranks some of the most celebrated scholars of the time, were employed as advisers to the assembled prelates. " They were to be presided over by the legates, with a recommendation to the bishops to assist at their delibera- tions, but not to take any part whatever in then proceedings. The various questions placed before the three congregations of prelates were also to be submitted to these classes of theologians, and the result of their examination was to be referred to the congregation of bishops, to be by them con- sidered, prior to the general congregation and sessions." a Again, eleven of the fathers were deputed to treat on such abuses as might have crept into the use of Scripture or of tradition ; thus uniting the principle of reformation with that of doctrine. The subject of tradition, as might reasonably have been expected, was not concluded so easily. It was impossible that, even in a Romamst assembly, unanimity should exist upon an unscriptural theory, however convenient to the maintenance of existing abuses and corruptions. All agreed as to the existence of traditions ; but while one party wished that the traditions to be received should be distinctly spe- cified, others were equally urgent that they should be ap- proved of in general terms ; nay, they even wished to exclude a Waterworth, p. lxxxvii. His abridgment of Pallavicino m the description of the proceedings of the sessions is far more clear and satisfactory than in the earlier part of his history. i2 116 THE HISTORY OF THE the term " apostolic" as an epithet, lest they should seem to reject all the others touching rites and ceremonies, which even themselves confessed to be unapostolic in their origin. Nothing could better serve to prove the conservative spirit, even in the case of the most flagrant absurdities, which distin- guished the spirit of this council. So far from reforming the excrescences which had deformed the fair body of the gospel, this council, in equalizing tradition with. Scripture, ratified the decree of the Council of Florence, and declared itself the patron of many opinions as ill-founded, even in the prescript of antiquity, as in the authority of God's word revealed. It was objected by the bishop of Chioggia, that the decree of Florence was dated February 4th, 1441, whereas that council actually terminated in 1439. Del Monte, probably at the instigation of Cervini, replied that it was true that the Greeks had left the council at the period mentioned by the prelate, at the close of the seventh session ; but that the council continued open for three years more. He added, that there could be no doubts as to the authenticity of the decree in question, since it was preserved in the castle of St. Angelo, at Rome, signed by the name of the fathers then assembled, and authenticated by the Pope's seal.1' Speaking of the arrangement of the canon of Scripture, Sarpi observes, that "the book of Baruch troubled them most, which is not put in the number of canonical books, neither by the Laodiceans, nor by those of Carthage, nor by the pope,c and therefore should be left out, as well for this reason, as because the beginning of it cannot be found. But because it was read in the Church, the congregation (esteem- ing this a more potent reason) resolved, that it was by the b Pallav. vi. 8. A great many curious particulars, mentioned by Sarpi, denied by Pallavicino, and defended by Courayer, I have been obliged to omit for want of room. See Sarpi, p. 118, sqq. It is unfor- tunate that this writer has failed to mention his authorities, especially when they were of a recondite character. c 1. e. not inserted in the catalogue given by previous popes. " De libro Baruch controversia fuit et est turn quia non invenitur in Hebrais codicibus, turn etiam quia nee concilia antiqua neque pontifices neque patres .... qui catalogum librorum sacrorum tenuit hujus prophetae disertis verbis meminerunt." — Bellarm. quoted by Courayer, p. 272, 7i. 13. See Beverid