Chapter IV: The Counter-Reformation (12)

§ 116.1. =Two National Saints.=--=John of Nepomuk=, of
Pomuk in Bohemia, was from A.D. 1380 pastor, then canon,
archiepiscopal secretary, and vicar-general of Prague. King
Wenzel had him seized, cruelly tortured, and flung over the
bridge into the Moldau, because, so runs the legend, he as
confessor of the queen sturdily refused to betray the secrets
of the confessional, but really because he had roused the king’s
anger to the uttermost in a violent controversy between the
king’s archbishop, John of Jenzenstein, and the chapter over
their election and consecration of an abbot. The confession
legend appears first in an Austrian writer of A.D. 1451,
who gives it distinctly as a tradition. It is evidently
connected with the Taborite rejection of the Catholic doctrine
of auricular confession (§ 119, 7). If it be accepted as true,
then, seeing that all the older chroniclers ascribe the cruel
treatment of this prelate to the share he took in the abbot’s
election, it will be necessary to assume two victims of the
king’s wrath instead of one. The John Nepomuk of the legend,
and the confessor of the queen, was tortured by the king’s
command in A.D. 1383; the other, who figures in the old
chronicles as archiepiscopal vicar-general, and is simply
called John, was tortured in A.D. 1393, and then thrown over
the bridge into the Moldau. This latter story appears first
in a Bohemian chronicle of A.D. 1541. In the 17th century the
Jesuits, in order to deprive the heretical national saint and
martyr John Huss of his supremacy by bringing forward another
genuine Bohemian, but also a thoroughly Catholic saint, gave
currency to the legend, adorned with many additional stories
of miracles. Benedict XIII. (§ 164, 1) was just the pope
to aid such a device by sanctioning, as he did in A.D. 1729,
the canonization of a purely fictitious saint-confessor John
Nepomuk. He is patron saint of bridges, whose image in Bohemia,
and other strictly Catholic lands, is met with at almost
every bridge, and is reverenced as the protector from unjust
accusations, as well as the dispenser of rain in seasons
of great drought. Although no mention is made of the story
about the confessional in the letter of complaint to Rome
by Archbishop Jenzenstein, Catholic historians still insist
that the confessor’s steadfastness was the real cause, the
election of the abbot the ostensible cause, of the martyrdom
of A.D. 1393.[345] The need of strengthening the position
of the Romish church, in face of the progress of the Swiss
Reformation of the 16th century, led also to the elevation
of the recluse, =Nicolaus [Nicolas] of Flüe= upon the pedestal
of a Swiss national saint. Esteemed even before his birth a
saint by reason of signs and wonders, “Brother Claus,” after
a long, active life in the world, in his 50th year, the father
of ten children, forsook house and home, with the approval
of his wife, abstained from all nourishment save that of the
sacrament, and died, after spending nineteen years in the
wilderness, in A.D. 1487. During this period he was the trusted
adviser of all classes upon public and private affairs. He
is specially famous as having saved Switzerland, by appearing
personally at the Diet of Stanz, in A.D. 1481, stopping
the conflict between cities and provinces, which threatened
to break up the confederation and bring about civil war, and
suggesting the peaceable compromise of the “Agreement of Stanz.”
That Brother Claus did assist in securing harmony is a well
established fact, but it is also demonstrable that he was not
personally present at Stanz. He was beatified by Clement X.
in A.D. 1671, but notwithstanding repeated endeavours by his
admirers, he has not yet been canonized.

§ 116.2. =The Maid of Orleans, A.D. 1428-1431.=--Joan of Arc
was the daughter of a peasant in the village of Domremy, in
Champagne. Even in her thirteenth year she thought she saw
a peculiar brightness and heard a heavenly voice exhorting
her to chastity and piety. She now bound herself by a vow to
perpetual virginity. Afterwards the heavenly voices became more
frequent, and the brightness took the shape of the archangel
Michael, St. Catharine, and other saints, who saluted her as
saviour of her fatherland. France was, under the imbecile king
Charles VI., and still more after his death, rent by the rival
parties of the Armagnacs and Burgundians. The former fought for
the rights of the dauphin Charles VII.; the latter supported his
mother Isabella and the English king Henry V., who was succeeded
in A.D. 1422 by his son Henry VI., then only nine months old.
Joan was the enthusiastic supporter of the dauphin. He found
himself in A.D. 1428 in the greatest straits. The last bulwark
of his might, the city of Orleans, was besieged by the English,
and seemed near its fall. Then her voices commanded Joan to
relieve Orleans, and to accompany the dauphin to his coronation
at Rheims. She now published her call, which had been hitherto
kept secret, overcame all difficulties, was recognised as
a messenger of heaven, assumed the male attire of a soldier,
and placed herself at the head of an enthusiastic crowd. Great
success attended the movements of this girl of seventeen years.
In the latter campaigns of the war she became the prisoner of
Burgundy, who delivered her over to the English. At Rouen she
was subjected to an ecclesiastical tribunal, which after four
months’ investigation condemned her to the stake as a heretic
and sorceress. In view of the fire, her courage failed. Yielding
to the persuasion of her confessor, she acknowledged her guilt,
and had her sentence commuted to that of imprisonment for life.
But eight days later she was led forth to the stake. Her rude
keepers had taken away her female attire, and forced her to wear
again male garments, and this act to which she was compelled was
made a charge against her. She died courageously and piously in
A.D. 1431. At the demand of her family, which had been ennobled,
a revision of the process against her was made in A.D. 1450, when
she was pronounced innocent, and the charges against her false.
The endeavour of Dupanloup, Bishop of Orleans, in A.D. 1876,
in the name of Catholic France, to have her canonized, was not
responded to by the papal curia. The infallible church, that
had burnt her as a witch in A.D. 1431, could scarcely give her
a place among its saints, even after 450 years had gone.

§ 116.3. =Lollards, Flagellants, and Dancers.=--During a plague
at Antwerp in A.D. 1300 the =Lollards= made their appearance,
nursing the sick and burying the dead. They spread rapidly
over the Netherlands and the bordering German provinces. Like
the Beghards however, and for the same reasons, they soon fell
under suspicion of heresy, and were subjected to the persecution
of the Inquisition, until Gregory XI., in A.D. 1347, again
granted them toleration. But the name Lollard still continued
to be associated with heresy or hypocrisy (§ 119, 1).[346]
The =Flagellant= fraternities, which had sprung up in the
12th century (§ 106, 4), greatly increased during this period,
and reached their height during the 14th century. Their
influence was greatest during the visitation of the Black
Death, A.D. 1348-1350, which cost Europe many millions of
lives. Issuing from Hungary, rushing forth with the force of
an avalanche, and massing in great numbers on the upper Rhine,
they spread over all Germany, Belgium and Holland, Switzerland,
England, and Sweden. Entrance into France was refused them
at the bidding of the Avignon pope Clement VI. In long rows
of penitents, with uncovered head, screaming forth their
penitential songs, and with tears streaming down their cheeks,
they rushed about lashing their bare backs. They also from
city to city and from village to village read aloud a letter
of warning, said to have been written by Christ, and brought
to the Patriarch of Jerusalem by an angel. This paroxysm
lasted for three years. In Lombardy, in A.D. 1399, when famine,
pestilence, the Turkish war, and expectation of the end of the
world inclined men to such extravagances, the Flagellants made
their appearance again, dressed in white robes, and so called
_Bianchi_, _Albati_. Princes, scholars, and popes, universities
and councils sought to check this silly fanaticism, but were
not able to suppress it. Many Flagellants were also heretical
in their views, spoke of the hierarchy as antichrist, withdrew
from the worship of the church, declared the bloody baptism of
the scourge the only true sacrament, and died at the stake of
the Inquisition.--The =Dancers=, _Chorisantes_, were a sect
closely related to the Flagellants, but their fanaticism seemed
more of a pathological than of a religious order. Half naked
and crowned with leaves they rushed along the streets and into
houses, dancing in a wild, tumultuous manner. They made a great
noise in the Rhine Provinces in A.D. 1374 and in A.D. 1418. They
were regarded as demoniacs and cured by calling upon St. Vitus.

§ 116.4. =The Friends of God.=--During the 14th century many
detachments of mystic sects spread through all Southern Germany,
and even from the Netherlands to Hungary and Italy. A powerful
religious awakening, with an undertone of contemplative mysticism,
was now experienced in the castles of the knights, in the shops
of artisans, and in the stalls of traders, as well as in the
Beguine houses, the monasteries, and nunneries of the Dominicans
and other monkish orders. A great free association was then
called forth under the name of “Friends of God” (John xv. 15),
whose members maintained personal and epistolary correspondence
with one another. The headquarters of this movement were
Cologne, Strassburg, and Basel. Its preachers and supporters
were mostly Dominicans. They drew their intellectual and
spiritual nourishment from the writings of the German mystics.
They repudiated all sectarian intentions, carefully observed
the rites and ceremonies and attended on the worship of the
church, and accepted all its dogmas. But all the greater on
this account was their sorrow over the deep decay of religious
and moral life, and their lamentations over the corruption
of the clergy and hierarchy. Fantastic visionary conceptions,
however, derived from the domain of mysticism, were by no means
rare among them.

§ 116.5. =Pantheistic Libertine Societies.=--A demoniacally
inspired counterpart to the fraternity of the “Friends of God” is
found in the sect of the Brothers and Sisters of the Free Spirit.
This sect, derived for the most part from the artisan class,
may be regarded as carrying out to a consistent development the
views of Amalrich of Bena (§ 108, 4). We meet with these in the
beginning of the 14th century wandering about, missionarising
and agitating in all parts of Southern Germany as well as in
Switzerland, while they were particularly numerous in the Rhine
Provinces, where Cologne and Strassburg were their main resorts.
Often associating with strolling Beghards (§ 98, 12) they
are frequently confounded with these. They were communistic
libertine pantheists. Every pious man is a Christ, in whom God
becomes man. Whatever is done in love is pure. The perfect are
free from the law, and cannot sin. The church with her sacraments
and institutions is a thorough cheat; purgatory, heaven, and
hell are mere figments, the marriage bond contrary to nature,
all property is common good, and theft of it allowable. Their
secret services ended with immoral orgies. The Inquisition
exterminated the sect by sword and stake.--The Adamites in
Austria in A.D. 1312 and the Turlupines in the Isle of France
showed similar tendencies. In the beginning of the 15th century
they reappeared as _Homines intelligentiæ_ at Brussels. In
A.D. 1421 the Hussite leader Ziska rooted out the Bohemian
Adamites or Picards, who went naked after the pattern of
paradise, and had a community of wives. Picard is just a
modification of the heretical designation Beghard. They gained
a footing in several villages, and built an establishment on a
small island in a tributary of the Moldau, from which they made
excursions into the surrounding districts, until Ziska put an
end to them by conquering the island in A.D. 1421.

§ 117. CHURCH DISCIPLINE.

The reckless and shameless sale of indulgences often made the exercise of church discipline impossible, and the discreditable conduct of the mendicant monks destroyed all respect for the confessional. The scandalous misuse of the ban and interdict had shorn these of much of their terror. Frightful curses were pronounced at Rome every Maundy Thursday against heretics by the solemn reading of the bull _In Cœna Domini_. The Inquisition was still abundantly occupied with persecuting and burning numerous heretics, and at the end of our period Innocent VIII. carried to the utmost extreme the persecution and burning of witches.

§ 117.1. =Indulgences.=--The scholastic theory of indulgences
(§ 106, 2) was authoritatively proclaimed by Clement VI. in
A.D. 1343. The reforming councils of the 15th century wished
only to prevent them being misused, for the purpose of filling
the papal treasury. Sixtus IV., in A.D. 1477, declared that
it was allowable to take money for indulgences for the dead,
and that their souls might be freed from purgatory. The pert
question, why the pope would not rather free all souls at
once by the exercise of his sovereign power, was answered
by the assertion that the church, in accordance with Divine
righteousness, could dispense its grace only _discrete et cum
moderamine_. The institution of the jubilee gave a great impulse
to the sale of indulgences. In A.D. 1300 Boniface VIII., at the
bidding of an old man, proclaimed a complete indulgence for one
hundred years to all Christians who would do penance for fifteen
days in the churches of the apostles at Rome, and by this means
gathered from day to day 200,000 pilgrims within the walls of
the Holy City. Later popes made a jubilee every fiftieth year,
then every thirty-third, and finally every twenty-fifth. Instead
of appearing personally at Rome, it was enough to pay the cost
of such a journey. The nepotism and extravagance of the popes
had left an empty exchequer, which this sale of indulgences
was intended to fill. The war with the Turks and the building
of St. Peter’s gave occasion to repeated indulgence crusades.
Traffickers in indulgences in the most barefaced way cried
up the quality of their wares; the conditions of repentance
and purpose of reformation were scarcely so much as named.
Indulgences were even granted beforehand for sins that were
contemplated.

§ 117.2. =The Inquisition=, since A.D. 1232 under the direction
of the Dominicans (§ 109, 2), spread through all European
countries during the 14th century. While the papal court resided
at Avignon the Inquisition was at its height in =France=, where
Waldensians and Albigensians, Beghards and Lollards, Fraticelli
and Fanatical Spiritualists, were brought in crowds to the stake
and subjected to the most cruel tortures. Bernard Delicieux, a
Franciscan, raised his voice, A.D. 1300-1320, against the inhuman
cruelty of the inquisitors, and with noble independence and
heroic bravery appealed to king and pope against the merciless
sacrifice of so many victims. He was shut up for life in a
dark dungeon, and fed on bread and water.--In =Germany=, where,
from the murder of Conrad of Marburg in A.D. 1233 (§ 109, 3),
for almost a century and a half we find no trace of a regularly
constituted Inquisition, it made its appearance again in
A.D. 1368. During that year Urban V. issued a bull, by which
he required that the civil and ecclesiastical authorities of
Germany should support with their counsel and influence the two
inquisitors who were searching out the heretical Beghards and
Beguines (§ 116, 5), and place their prisons at the disposal
of the Holy Office, which had still no prison of its own. His
successor, Gregory XI., in A.D. 1372 increased the number of
inquisitors in Germany to five, one in each of the archdioceses
of Mainz, Cologne, Salzburg, Magdeburg, and Bremen; while his
successor, Boniface IX., in A.D. 1399 added a sixth for North
Germany. But these papal bulls would probably, owing to the
disinclination of the Germans to the Inquisition, like the
attempts of Gregory IX., never have been put in force, had not
Charles IV. (§ 110, 4, 5) taken up the matter with an ardent
zeal that even went beyond the intentions of Urban and Gregory.
During his second journey to Rome, in A.D. 1369, he issued
from Lucca four imperial decrees, and in A.D. 1378 from Treves
a fifth, by which he granted to the Inquisition throughout
Germany all the rights, powers, and privileges which it had
anywhere, and required that all civil and ecclesiastical
authorities, under pain of severest penalties and confiscation
of all their goods, should support the Inquisition in its search
for heretics and in its discovery and burning of all religious
writings in the vulgar tongue composed and circulated by laymen
or semi-laymen.--The =Spanish Inquisition= was re-established
under Ferdinand and Isabella in A.D. 1480, and thoroughly
organized by the grand-inquisitor Torquemada, A.D. 1483-1499.
One of the first inquisitors appointed by him in A.D. 1484 was
an Augustinian, Pedro Arbires, who amid the most unrelenting
cruelties performed the duties of his office with such zeal,
that in sixteen months many hundreds had perished at the stake;
but his fanatical career was ended by his murder at the altar
in A.D. 1485. Not only the two who did the deed, but also all
their relatives and friends, to the number of two hundred,
suspected of complicity in a plot, were burned, while the
“martyr” himself was beatified by Alexander VII. in A.D. 1661,
and canonized by Pius IX. in A.D. 1867. This terrible tribunal
further undertook the persecution of the hated Moors and Jews
who had been baptized under compulsion (§ 95, 2, 3), which
through numerous confiscations greatly enriched the national
exchequer of Spain. This institution reached its highest
point under the grand-inquisitor the Cardinal Francis Ximenes,
A.D. 1507-1517, under whom 2,536 persons were burnt alive
and 1,368 in effigy. The _auto da fès_, which ended at the
stake, were conducted with a horrible pomp. Even those who were
acquitted of the charge of heresy were compelled for a long
time to wear the _san benito_, an armless robe with a red cross
marked on it before and behind. According to Llorente, who had
been general secretary of the Inquisition at Madrid, the Spanish
inquisition, down to its suppression by Joseph Buonaparte in
A.D. 1808, had executed in person 31,912, burned in effigy
17,659, and subjected to severe punishments 291,456.[347]

§ 117.3. =The Bull “_In Cœna Domini_.”=--It was customary
to repeat from time to time the more important decrees of
excommunication, to show that they were still valid. In this
way the famous bull _In Cœna Domini_ was gradually constructed.
The earliest sketch of it was given by Urban V., who died in
A.D. 1370, and it was published in its final form by Urban VIII.
in A.D. 1627. It contains a summary of all the rights of the
Roman hierarchy, with anathemas against all opposing claims,
not only on the part of secular princes and laymen, but also of
antipapal councils, and concludes with a solemn excommunication
of all heretics, to which Paul V. in A.D. 1610 added Lutherans,
Zwinglians, and Calvinists, together with all their sympathisers.
Pius V., in A.D. 1567, in a new redaction insisted that it should
be read yearly in the Catholic churches of all lands, but could
not get this carried out, especially in France and Germany. In
A.D. 1770 Clement XIV. forbade its being read.

§ 117.4. =Prosecution of Witches.=--Down to the beginning of
the 13th century many churchmen had spoken against the popular
superstition regarding sorcery, witchcraft, and compacts with the
devil, and a whole series of provincial councils had pronounced
such belief to be heathenish, sinful, and heretical. Even in
Gratian’s decretal (§ 99, 5) there was a canon which required
the clergy to teach the people that witchcraft was a delusion,
and belief in it incompatible with the Christian faith. But
upon the establishment of the Inquisition in the beginning of
the 13th century witchcraft came more and more to occupy the
attention of the ecclesiastical authorities. Heresy and sorcery
were now regarded as correlates, like two agencies resting on
and serviceable to the demoniacal powers, and were therefore
treated in the same way as offences to be punished with
torture and the stake. The Dominicans, as administrators of
the Inquisition, were the most zealous defenders of the belief
in witchcraft, whereas the Franciscans generally spoke of it
simply as foolish, heathenish, and heretical. Thomas Aquinas
included it in his theological system, and Eymerich in his
_Directorium Inquisitorium_ (§ 109, 2). Yet witch prosecutions
were only occasional incidents during the 14th and 15th centuries,
especially in Germany, where clergy and people were adverse
to them. But it was quite otherwise after Innocent VIII., on
3rd December, 1484, by his bull _Summis desiderantes affectibus_,
complaining of previous laxity, called attention to the spread
of witchcraft in the country, and appointed two inquisitors,
Sprenger and Institor, to secure its extermination. These
administered their office with such zeal and success, that
in A.D. 1489 at Cologne they were able, as the result of their
experiences, to publish under the title _Malleus maleficarum_
a complete code for witch prosecutions. From the confessions
wrung from their victims by torture and suggestive questions,
they obtained a full, dogmatic system of compacts and intrigues
with the devil, of _Succubis_ and _Incubis_, of witch ointment,
broomsticks, and ovenforks, of witches’ sabbaths, Walpurgis
nights, and flights up chimneys. Soon this illusion spread
like an epidemic, and thousands throughout Germany and all
other Catholic countries, mostly old women, but also some young
maidens, were subjected to the most horrible tortures, and after
confession had been extorted, to death by fire. The _Malleus_
accounted for the fact that women and very rarely men were found
engaged in such proceedings, by this statement: _Dicitur enim
femina a feret minus, quia semper minorem habet et servat fidem,
et hoc ex natura._--The Reformation of the 16th century made
no change in these horrible proceedings, which rather rose to
a height during the 17th century. Theologians of all confessions
believed in the possibility and reality of compacts with the
devil, and regarded this to be as essential to an orthodox creed
as belief in the devil’s existence. The jurists and civil judges
in Protestant and Catholic countries were no less narrow-minded
and superstitious than the theologians. Among Catholics the
most celebrated defenders of the witch prosecutions were Jean
Bodin (§ 148, 3), Peter Binsfeld, and the Jesuit Mart. Delrio
(§ 149, 11). Among Protestant vindicators of these prosecutions
may be named the Heidelberg physician Thomas Erastus (§ 144, 1),
James I. of England, and the famous criminal lawyer Carpzov of
Leipzig. Noble men however were not wanting on both sides who
were shrewd and sensible enough to oppose such crude conceptions.
In the 16th century we have the physician Weier, who wrote his
_De præstigiis dæmonorum_ in A.D. 1563, and in the 17th the
Jesuits Tanner and Spee (§ 149, 11; 156, 3), and the Dutch
Protestant Bekker (§ 160, 5). The writings of the Halle jurist
Thomasius in A.D. 1701, 1704, were the first to tell powerfully
in favour of liberal views. In A.D. 1749 a nun of seventy
years old was burnt at Würzburg as a witch. In A.D. 1754 a
girl of thirteen and in A.D. 1756 one of fourteen years were
put to death at Landshut as suspected of witchcraft. In German
Switzerland a servant girl at Glarus in A.D. 1782 was the last
victim. In bigoted Catholic countries the delusion lasted longer,
but prosecutions were seldomer carried the length of judicial
murder. In Mexico however, the Alcade Ignacio Castello of
San Jacobo on 20th August, 1877, “with consent of the whole
population,” burnt five witches alive. Altogether since the
issue of the bull of Innocent there have been certainly no less
than 300,000 women brought to the stake as witches.

IV. Attempts at Reformation.

§ 118. ATTEMPTED REFORMS IN CHURCH POLITY.

The struggle between imperialism and hierarchism, which is present through the whole course of the Middle Ages, rose to a height in the times of Louis the Bavarian, A.D. 1314-1347 (§ 110, 3, 4), and is of special interest here because of the literary war waged against one another by the rival supporters of the emperor and the pope. It concerns itself first of all only with the questions in debate between the imperial and the sacerdotal parties; but soon on the imperialist side there appeared a reforming tendency, which could not be given effect to without carrying the discussion into a multitude of other departments where reformation was also needed. Of quite another kind was the “reformation of head and members” desired by the great councils of the 15th century. The contention here was based, not so much upon any superiority claimed by the emperor over the pope and by the State over the church, but rather upon the subordination of the pope to the supreme authority of the universal church represented by the œcumenical councils. Yet both agreed in this, that with like energy they attacked the corruption of the papacy, in the one case in the interest of the State, in the other in the interest of the church.

§ 118.1. =The Literary War between Imperialists and Curialists in
the 14th Century.=--The literary controversy over the debatable
land between church and State was conducted with special vigour
in the earlier part of our period, on account of the conflict
between Boniface VIII. and Philip the Fair of France (§ 110, 1).
The ablest vindicators of the independence of the State were the
advocate =Peter Dubois= and the Dominican theologian =John of
Paris=. Among their scholars were the men who twenty years later
sought refuge from the wrath of Pope John XXII. at the court of
Louis the Bavarian at Munich. Of these the most important was the
Italian =Marsilius of Padua=. As teacher of theology, philosophy,
and medicine at Paris, in A.D. 1324, when the dispute between
emperor and pope had reached its height, he composed jointly with
his colleague =John of Jandun= in Champagne a _Defensor pacis_,
a civil and ecclesiastical memoir, which, with an insight and
clearness very remarkable for that age, developed the evangelical
mean of the superiority of the State over the church, and of
the empire over the papacy, historically, exegetically, and
dogmatically; and for this end established theories of Scripture
and tradition, of the tasks and place of the church in the State,
of excommunication and persecution of heretics, of liberty of
faith and conscience, etc., which even transcend the principles
laid down on these points by the Reformation of the 16th century.
Both authors accompanied Louis to Italy in A.D. 1326, and there
John of Jandun died in A.D. 1328. Marsilius continued with the
emperor as his physician, counsellor, and literary defender, and
died at Munich between A.D. 1341-1343. In A.D. 1327 John XXII.
condemned the _Defensor pacis_, and Clement VI. pronounced its
author the worst heretic of all ages. The book, often reprinted
during the 16th century, was first printed at Basel in A.D. 1522.

§ 118.2. Alongside of Marsilius there also stood a goodly array
of schismatical Franciscans, with their general, Michael of
Cesena, at their head (§ 112, 2), who were like himself refugees
at the court of Munich. They persistently contested the heresies
of John XXII. in regard to the vision of God (§ 110, 3) and his
lax theory of poverty. Their polemic also extended to the whole
papal system, and the corruption of church and clergy connected
therewith. The most celebrated of them in respect of scientific
attainments was =William Occam= (§ 113, 3). His earlier treatises
dealt with the pope’s heresies, and only after the Diet of
Rhense (§ 110, 4) did he take up the burning questions about
church and State. In the comprehensive _Dialogus_ he rejects
the infallibility of the pope as decidedly as his temporal
sovereignty, and denies the Divine institution of the primacy.
Also a German prelate, =Leopold of Bebenburg=, Canon of Würzburg,
and from A.D. 1353 Bishop of Bamberg, inspired by genuinely
German patriotism, made his appearance in A.D. 1338 as a brave
and prudent defender of imperial rights against the assumptions
of the papacy.--The ablest of all Marsilius’ opponents was the
Spanish Franciscan =Alvarus Pelagius=, who wrote in A.D. 1330 the
treatise _De planctu ecclesiæ_, in which, while sadly complaining
of the corruption of the church and clergy, he yet ascribes
to the pope as the vicar of Christ unlimited authority over
all earthly principalities and powers, and regards him as the
fountain of all privileges and laws. A still more thoroughgoing
deification of the papacy had appeared a few years earlier
in the _Summa de potestate ecclesiæ ad Johannem Papam_ by
the Augustinian =Augustinus Triumphus= of Ancona. But neither
he nor Pelagius, in view of the manifest contradictions of the
pope’s doctrines of poverty (§ 112, 2), dared go the length of
maintaining papal infallibility. A German canon of Regensburg,
=Conrad of Megensburg=, also took part in the controversy,
seeking to vindicate and glorify the papacy.

§ 118.3. =Reforming Councils of the 15th Century.=--The
longing for reform during this period found most distinct
expression in the councils of Pisa, Constance, and Basel
(§ 110, 7-9). The fruitlessness of these endeavours, though
they had the sympathy of the people generally, shows that there
was something essentially defective in them. The movement had
kept itself aloof from all sectaries and separatists, wishing to
hold by and reform the presently existing church. But its fault
was this, that it insisted only upon a reformation in the head
and members, not in the spirit, that it aimed at lopping off
the wild growths of the tree, without getting rid of the corrupt
sap from which the very same growths would again proceed. Only
that which was manifestly unchristian in the pretensions of
the hierarchy, the covetousness and greed of the pope, the
immorality of the clergy, the depravity and ignorance of
the monks, etc.--in short, only abuses in hierarchical
constitution and discipline--were dealt with. There was no
word about doctrine. The Romish system, in spite of all its
perversions, was allowed to stand. The current forms of worship,
notwithstanding the introduction of many unevangelical elements
and pagan superstitions, were left untouched. It was not seen
that what was most important of all was the revival of the
preaching of repentance and of justification through Him who
is the justifier of the ungodly. And so it happened that at
Constance Huss, who had pointed out and followed this way, was
sent to the stake, and at Basel the doctrine of the immaculate
conception (§ 112, 4) was admitted as a doctrine of the church.
It was not merely the election of a new pope opposed to the
Reformation that rendered the negotiations at Pisa and Constance
utter failures, the wrong principle upon which they proceeded
insured a disappointing result.

§ 118.4. =Friends of Reform in France during the 15th Century.=

1. =Peter d’Ailly=, professor and chancellor of the University
of Paris, Bishop of Cambray in A.D. 1397 and cardinal in
A.D. 1411, was one of the ablest members of the councils of
Pisa and Constance. He died in A.D. 1425 as cardinal-legate
in Germany. His chief dogmatic treatise, the _Quæstiones_
on the Sentences of the Lombard, occupies the standpoint
of Occam. In many of his other works he falls back upon
the position of the mystics of St. Victor (§ 102, 4),
and recommends with much warmth the diligent study of the
Scriptures. His ideas about church reform are centred in
the affirmation of the Gallican Liberties, which he had
to maintain as a French bishop, but are expressed with the
moderation becoming a Roman cardinal. In opposition to Occam
and the Spirituals, he founds the temporal sovereignty of
the pope on the _Donatio Constantini_. He also holds by
the primacy of the Roman bishop, as firmly established by
Scripture. But the πέτρα of Matthew xvi. 18 he understands
not of Peter, but of Christ. In this passage therefore no
pre-eminence is given to Peter over the other apostles in
the _potestas ordinis_, but by the injunction of John xx.,
“Feed My sheep,” such pre-eminence is given in the _potestas
regiminis_. The œcumenical council, as representative of the
whole church, stands superior to the pope as administrative
head.

2. d’Ailly’s successor as professor and chancellor was the
celebrated =Jean Charlier=, better known from the name of
his birthplace near Rheims as =Gerson=. Having denounced the
Duke of Burgundy’s murder of the Duke of Orleans, and having
thus incurred that prince’s hatred, he withdrew after the
Council of Constance into Bavaria. Soon after the duke’s
death, in A.D. 1419, he returned to France, and settled
at Lyons, where he died in A.D. 1429. Like d’Ailly, Gerson
was a decided nominalist, and sought to give new life
to scholasticism by combining with it Scripture study
and mysticism. He, too, was powerfully influenced by the
Victorine mystics, and yet more by Bonaventura He had
no appreciation of the speculative element in German
mysticism. Gerson was the first French theologian who
employed the language of the people, particularly in his
smaller practical tracts. He was mainly instrumental in
bringing about the Council of Pisa. In the Council of
Constance he was one of the most conspicuous figures.
Restrained by no personal or official relationship with
the curia, he could by speech and writing express himself
much more freely than d’Ailly. The principle and means
of the reform of the church, in its head and members, was
recognised by Gerson in his statement that the highest
authority of the church is to be sought not in the pope,
but in the œcumenical council. He held however in every
point to the Romish system of doctrine. He did indeed
unweariedly proclaim the Bible the one norm and source
of all Christian knowledge, but he would not allow the
reading of it in the vernacular, and regarded all as
heretics who did not in the interpretation of it submit
unconditionally to the judgment of the church.

3. Nicholas of Clemanges was in A.D. 1393 rector of the
University of Paris, but afterwards retired into solitude.
He had the profoundest insight into the corruption of the
church, and acknowledged Holy Scripture to be the only
source of saving truth. From this standpoint he demanded
a thorough reform in theological study and the whole
constitution of the church.

4. Louis d’Aleman, cardinal and Archbishop of Arles, who died
in A.D. 1450, was the most powerful and most eloquent of the
anti-papal party at Basel. He was therefore excommunicated
by Eugenius IV. At last submitting to the pope, he was
restored by Nicholas V. and in A.D. 1527 beatified by
Clement VII.

§ 118.5. =Friends of Reform in Germany.=

1. Even before the appearance of the Parisian friends of
reform, a German, =Henry of Langenstein=, at Marburg had
insisted upon the princes and prelates calling an œcumenical
council for putting an end to schism and reforming the
church. In a treatise published in A.D. 1381 he gave a sad
but only too true picture of the desolate condition of the
church. The cloisters he designated _prostibula meretricium_,
cathedral churches _speluncæ raptorum et latronum_, etc.
From A.D. 1363 he taught in Paris, from A.D. 1390 in Vienna,
where in A.D. 1397 he died as rector of the university.

2. =Theodorich or Dietrich of Niem= in Westphalia
accompanied Gregory XI. from France to Rome as his
secretary in A.D. 1377. From A.D. 1395-1399 he was Bishop
of Verdun, was probably present at the Council of Pisa,
and certainly at that of Constance. He died in this latter
place in A.D. 1417. His writings are of great value for
the history of the schism and of the councils of Pisa and
Constance. His language is simple, strong, and faithful.

3. =Gregory of Heimburg= was present at the Basel Council,
in terms of close friendship with Æneas Sylvius, who was
then also on the side of reform. He became in A.D. 1433
syndicus at Nuremberg, went to the council at Mantua
in A.D. 1459 as envoy of Duke Sigismund of Austria, was
banished in A.D. 1460 by his old friend, now Pius II.,
afterwards led a changeful life, never free from the
papal persecutions, and died at Dresden in A.D. 1472. His
principal writings on civil and ecclesiastical polity,
powerful indictments against the Roman curia inspired by
love for his German fatherland, appeared at Frankfort in
A.D. 1608 under the title _Scripta nervosa justitiæque
plena_.

4. =Jacob of Jüterboyk [Jüterbock]=, who died in A.D. 1465,
was first a Cistercian monk in Poland and teacher of
theology at Cracow, then Carthusian at Erfurt, and to the
end of his life a zealous defender of the positions of the
Council of Basel, at which he was present in A.D. 1441. His
writings leave untouched the doctrines of the church, but
vigorously denounce the political and moral corruption of
the papacy and monasticism, the greedy misuse of the sale
of indulgences, and insist upon the subordinating of the
pope under general councils, and their right even to depose
the pontiff. Whoever contests this latter position teaches
that Christ has given over the church to a sinful man, like
a bridegroom who surrenders his bride to the unrestrained
will of a soldier. All possession of property on the part
of those in sacred offices is with him an abomination, and
unhesitatingly he calls upon the civil power to put an end
to this evil.

5. The =Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa= (§ 113, 6) also for a long
time was one of the most zealous friends of reform in the
Basel Council.

6. =Felix Hemmerlin=, canon at Zürich, was to the end of
his life an ardent supporter of the reform measures of the
Council of Basel, at which he had been present. As he gave
effect to his views in his =official= position, he incurred
the hatred and persecution of the inmates of his convent
to such an extent, that they laid a plot to murder him in
A.D. 1439. His whole life was an almost unbroken series of
sufferings and persecutions. These in great part he brought
on himself by his zealous support of the reactionary party
of the nobles that sided with Austria in opposition to the
patriotic revolutionary party that struggled for freedom.
Deprived of his revenues and deposed from office, he was
imprisoned in A.D. 1454, and died between A.D. 1457-1464
in the prison of the monastery of the Minorites at Lucerne,
martyr as much to his political conservatism as to his
ecclesiastical reformatory principles. His writings were
placed in the _Index prohibitorum_ by the Council of Trent.

7. To this place also belongs the work written in the Swabian
dialect, “=The Reformation of the Emperor Sigismund=,”
which demands a thoroughgoing and radical reform of
the clergy and the secular priests, insisting upon the
renunciation of all personal property on the part of the
latter, enforcing against prelates, abbots, monasteries,
and monks all the reforms of the Basel Council, and making
proposals for their execution in the spirit of the Taborites
and Hussites. The author is styled in the MSS. Frederick
of Landscron, and describes himself as a councillor of
Sigismund. The tract was therefore regarded during the
15th and 16th centuries as a work composed under the
direction of the emperor, setting forth the principles
of reformation attempted at the Basel or Constance Council.
According to Böhm its author was the Taborite Reiser
(§ 119, 9), who, under the powerful reforming impulse
of the Basel Council of A.D. 1435-1437, composed it in
A.D. 1438.

§ 118.6. =An Italian Apostate from the Basel Liberal
Party.=--=Æneas Sylvius Piccolomini=, born at Siena in A.D. 1405,
appeared at Basel, first as secretary of a bishop, then of a
cardinal, and finally of the Basel anti-pope Felix V., as a most
decided opponent of Eugenius IV., and wrote in A.D. 1439 from
this point of view his history of the council. In A.D. 1442 he
entered the service of the then neutral Emperor Frederick III.,
was made _Poeta laureatus_ and imperial councillor, and as such
still fought for the independence of the German church. But in
A.D. 1445, with all the diplomatic arts which were so abundantly
at his disposal, he wrought to secure the subjection of the
emperor and German princes under the pope (§ 110, 10). Made
bishop of Siena in A.D. 1450, he was raised to the cardinalate
by Calixtus III. in A.D. 1456, and two years later ascended the
papal throne as Pius II. The lasciviousness of his earlier life
is mirrored in his poems, novels, dialogues, dramas, and letters.
But as pope, old and weak, he maintained an honourable life, and
in a bull of retractation addressed to the University of Cologne
exhorted Christendom _Æneam rejicite, Pium recipite_!

§ 118.7. =Reforms in Church Policy in Spain.=--Notwithstanding
the church feeling awakened by the struggle with the Moors, a
vigorous opposition to papal pretensions was shown during the
14th century by the Spanish princes, and after the outbreak
of the great schism the anti-pope Clement VII., in A.D. 1381,
purchased the obedience of the Spanish church by large
concessions in regard to appointment to its bishoprics and
the removal of the abuses of papal indulgences. The popes,
indeed, sought not unsuccessfully to enlist Spain in their
favour against the reformatory tendencies of the councils
of the 15th century, until =Ferdinand= of Aragon [Arragon],
A.D. 1479-1516, and =Isabella= of Castille [Castile],
A.D. 1474-1504, who had on account of their zeal for the
Catholic cause been entitled by the pontiff himself “their
Catholic majesties,” entered so vigorous a protest against
papal usurpations, that toward the end of the 15th century the
royal supremacy over the Spanish church had won a recognition
never accorded to it before. They consistently refused to
acknowledge any bishop appointed by the pope, and forced from
Sixtus IV. the concession that only Spaniards nominated by
the Crown should be eligible for the highest ecclesiastical
offices. All papal rescripts were subject to the royal approval,
ecclesiastical tribunals were carefully supervised, and appeals
from them were allowed to the royal judicatures. The church had
also to give ordinary and extraordinary tithes of its goods and
revenues for State purposes. The Spanish inquisition (§ 117, 2),
thoroughly recognised in A.D. 1483, was more of a civil than
an ecclesiastical institution. As the bishops and inquisitors
were appointed by the royal edict, the orders of knights
(§ 98, 13), by the transference of the grand-mastership to
the king, were placed in complete subjection to the Crown;
and whether he would or not Alexander VI. was obliged to accord
to the royal commission for church and cloister visitation
and reform the most absolute authority. But in everything
else these rulers were worthy of the name of “Catholics,”
for they tolerated in their church only the purely mediæval
type of strict orthodoxy. The most distinguished promoter
of their reforms in church polity was a Franciscan monk,
=Francis Ximenes=, from A.D. 1492 confessor to Isabella,
afterwards raised by her to the archbishopric of Toledo,
made a Roman cardinal by Alexander VI., and grand-inquisitor
of Spain in A.D. 1507. He died in A.D. 1517.

§ 119. EVANGELICAL EFFORTS AT REFORM.

Alongside of the Parisian reformers, but far in advance of them, stand those of the English and Bohemian churches represented by Wiclif and Huss. The reformation aimed at by these two was essentially of the same kind, Wiclif being the more original, while Huss was largely dependent upon his great English precursor. For in personal endowment, speculative power, rich and varied learning, acuteness and wealth of thought, originality and productivity of intellect, the Englishman was head and shoulders above the Bohemian. On the other hand, Huss was far more a man for the people, and he conducted his contention in a sensible, popular, and practical manner. There were also powerful representatives of the reform movement in the Netherlands during this period, who pointed to Scripture and faith in the crucified Saviour as the only radical cure for the corruptions of the church. While Wiclif and Huss attached themselves to the Augustinian theology, the Dutchmen gave themselves to quiet, calm contemplation and the acquirement of practical religious knowledge. In Italy too a reformer appeared of a strongly evangelical spirit, who did not however show the practical sense of those of the Netherlands.

§ 119.1. =Wiclif and the Wiclifites.=--In England the kings and
the Parliament had for a long time withstood the oppressive yoke
of the papal hierarchy. Men too like John of Salisbury, Robert
Grosseteste, Roger Bacon, and Thomas Bradwardine had raised their
voices against the inner corruption of the church. =John Wiclif=,
a scholar of Bradwardine, was born about A.D. 1320. As fellow of
the University of Oxford, he supported in A.D. 1366 the English
Crown against the payment of tribute to the papal court then at
Avignon, admitted by John Lackland (§ 96, 18), of which payment
had now for a long time been refused. This secured him court
favour, the title of doctor, and a professorship of theology at
Oxford; and in A.D. 1374 he was chosen as member of a commission
which was to discuss at Brügge in the Netherlands with the papal
envoys the differences that had arisen about the appointing
to ecclesiastical offices. After his return he openly spoke
and wrote against the papal “antichrist” and his doctrines.
Gregory XI. now, in A.D. 1377, condemned nineteen propositions
from his writings, but the English court protected him from the
strict inquiry and punishment threatened. Meanwhile Wiclif was
ever becoming bolder. Under his influence religious societies
were formed which sent out travelling preachers of the gospel
among the people. By their opponents they were called Lollards
(§ 116, 3), a name to which the stigma of heresy was already
attached. Wiclif translated for them the Scriptures from
the Vulgate into English. The bitterness of his enemies now
reached its height. Just then, in A.D. 1381, a rebellion of
the oppressed peasants that deluged all England with blood
broke out. Its origin has been quite gratuitously assigned to
the religious movement. When he had directly repudiated the
doctrine of transubstantiation, a synod at London, in A.D. 1382,
condemned his writings and his doctrine as heretical, and the
university also cast him out. Court and Parliament could only
protect his person. He now retired to his rectory at Lutterworth
in Leicestershire, where he died on 31st December, 1384.--For
five centuries his able writings were left unprinted, to moulder
away in the obscurity of libraries. His English works have
now been edited by Matthews, London, 1880. Lechler of Leipzig
edited Wiclif’s most complete and comprehensive work, the
“_Trialogus_” (Oxford, 1869), in which his whole theological
system is developed. Buddensieg of Dresden published the keen
antipapal controversial tract, “_De Christo et suo adversario
Antichristo_” (Leipzig, 1880). The Wiclif Society, instituted
at the fifth centenary of Wiclif’s death for the purpose of
issuing critical editions of his most important works, sent
forth as their first performance Buddensieg’s edition of
“twenty-six Latin controversial tracts of Wiclif’s from MSS.
previously unprinted,” in 2 vols., London, 1883. Among Wiclif’s
systematic treatises we are promised editions of the _Summa
theologiæ_, _De incarnatione Verbi_, _De veritate s. Scr._,
_De dominio divino_, _De ecclesia_, _De actibus animæ_, etc.,
some by English, some by German editors.--As the principle of
all theology and reformation Wiclif consistently affirms the
sole authority of Divine revelation in the Holy Scriptures. He
has hence been called _doctor evangelicus_. Anything that cannot
be proved from it is a corrupting human invention. Consistently
carrying out this principle, he denounced the worship of saints,
relics, and images, the use of Latin in public worship, elaborate
priestly choir singing, the multiplication of festivals, private
masses, extreme unction, and generally all ceremonialism. The
Catholic doctrine of indulgence and the sale of indulgences,
as well as the ban and the interdict, he pronounced blasphemous;
auricular confession he regarded as a forcing of conscience; the
power of the keys he explained as conditional, its binding and
loosing powerless, except when in accordance with the judgment
of Christ. He denied the real presence of the body and blood
of Christ in the Lord’s Supper, and affirmed, like Berengar,
a spiritual communication thereof, which however he makes
dependent, not only on the faith of the receiver, but also
on the worthiness of the officiating priest. The doctrine of
purgatory he completely rejected, and supported Augustine’s
predestinationism against the prevalent semipelagianism. The
papacy was antichrist; the pope has his power only from the
emperor, not from God. The hierarchical system should be
replaced by the apostolic presbyterial constitution. Ordination
confers no indelible character; a priest who has fallen into
mortal sin cannot dispense the sacrament. Every believer is as
such a priest. The State is a representation of Christ, as the
God-Man ruler of the universe; the clergy represent only the
poor and suffering life of His humanity. Monkery is contrary
to nature, etc.--Wiclif’s supporters, many of them belonging
to the noblest and most cultured orders, were after his death
subjected to violent persecution, which reached its height when
the House of Lancaster in the person of Henry IV. ascended the
English throne in A.D. 1399. An act of parliament was passed in
A.D. 1400 which made death by fire the punishment of the heresy
of the Lollards. Among the martyrs which this law brought to
the stake was the noble Sir John Oldcastle, who in A.D. 1418
was hung up between two beams in iron chains over a fire and
there slowly burnt. The Council of Constance in A.D. 1415
condemned forty-five propositions from Wiclif’s writings, and
ordered his bones to be exhumed and scattered abroad. Many
germs sown by him continued until the Reformation came.[348]

§ 119.2. =Precursors of the Hussite Movement.=--Owing to its
Greek origin (§ 79, 2, 3), the Bohemian church had a certain
character of its own and barely tolerated the Roman constitution
and ritual. In Bohemia too the Waldensians had numerous
supporters during the 13th century. And even before the
appearance of Huss three distinguished clergymen in and around
Prague by earnest preaching and pastoral work had awakened in
many a consciousness of crying abuses in the church.

1. =Conrad of Waldhausen= was a famous preacher when called
by Charles IV. to Prague, where after fifteen years’ labour
he died in A.D. 1369. Preaching in German, he inveighed
against the cupidity, hypocrisy, and immorality of the
clergy and monks, against the frauds connected with the
worship of images and relics and shrines, and threw back
upon his accusers the charge of heresy in his still extant
_Apologia_.

2. More influential than Conrad as a preacher of repentance
in Prague was =John Milicz of Cremsier= in Moravia, who
died in A.D. 1374. Believing the end of the world near
and antichrist already come, he went to Rome in A.D. 1367
to place before Urban V. his scheme of apocalyptic
interpretation. Escaping with difficulty from the
Inquisition, he returned to Prague, and there applied
himself with renewed zeal to the preaching of repentance.
His preaching led to the conversion of 200 fallen women,
for whom he erected an institution which he called Jerusalem.
But the begging friars accused him before Gregory XI. as a
heretic. Milicz fearlessly went for examination to Avignon
in A.D. 1374, where he soon died before judgment had been
passed. The most important of his works is _De Antichristo_.

3. =Matthias of Janow=, of noble Bohemian descent, died in
A.D. 1374, after fourteen years’ work as a preacher and
pastor in Prague. His sermons, composed in Bohemian, lashed
unsparingly the vices of the clergy and monks, as well
as the immorality of the laity, and denounced the worship
of images and relics. None of his sermons are extant,
but we have various theological treatises of his on the
distinguishing of the true faith from the false and the
frequent observance of the communion. At a Prague synod of
A.D. 1389 he was obliged to retract several of his positions,
and especially to grant the propriety of confessing and
communicating half-yearly. Janow however, like Conrad and
Milicz, did not seriously contest any fundamental point of
the doctrine of the church.