F. X. von (Franz Xaver) Funk.

A manual of church history (Volume 2) online

. (page 17 of 34)
Online LibraryF. X. von (Franz Xaver) FunkA manual of church history (Volume 2) → online text (page 17 of 34)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook


cardinal Campegio (c. 20), which received the force of law at
the Assembly of the princes at Ratisbon (1524), the number
of holidays was reduced to thirty-five, exclusive of the
Sundays, manual labour being allowed after Mass on all the
other festivals.! In France the Provincial Council of Bordeaux
(1.583, c. 7) also deemed it necessary to enact a reduction in the
number of festivals.^ Finally, Urban VIII intervened to settle
the matter. As many bishops had complained that the
numerous holidays prevented the poor from earning their
living, and that the people spent their time in idleness instead
of attending Divine worship, and as there was also a doubt as
to which festivals precisely were of obligation, the Pope issued
a Bull [Universa, 1642) in which the number of hoi days — apart
from the national festivals and patronal feasts of the church
and diocese — was fixed at thirty-two, and the introduction
of new church hoi days was forbidden.

Though these measures did not modify things to any great
extent — the primary object of Urban's Bull, for instance,
having been not so much to reduce the number of festivals
as to prevent their increase — more decisive legislation was soon
to follow. On the advice of his minister Colbert, Lewis XIV
recommended the bishops of the realm to abolish some of
the less necessary festivals. Sixteen were accordingly struck
off the list in 1666 by Harley, archbishop of Paris, whose
example was followed by many of his French colleagues.
More was to follow in the next century. In 1727 the Pro-
vincial Council of Tarragona addressed a petition to the Holy
See asking that, apart from the Sundays, Easter Monday, and
Whit Monday, the festivals to be strictly observed should
comprise only the feasts of our Lord (Christmas, Circum-
cision, Epiphany, Ascension, and Corpus Christi) ; of our
Lady (Candlemas, the Annunciation, Assumption, Nativit}^,
and Immaculate Conception) ; and those of a few Saints
(Saints Stephen, John the Baptist, Peter and Paul, James,

I Harduin, IX, 1915. 2 Ihid. X, 1341.



Fehronius 165

besides All-Hallows and the patron of the church), and that
on all other festivals previously kept the Faithful should,
after having attended Mass, be allowed to work.i The
request was granted by Benedict XIII (1728), and his suc-
cessors were obliged to make similar concessions to other
lands ; for instance to Austria, where the example of the
Spaniards was followed in 1753 - and the festivals reduced
by twenty-four. The introduction of half holidays proved
to be a half measure, and under Clement XIV it was found
necessary to convert the half holidays into whole workdays
by abolishing the obligation to hear Mass. To replace the
vigil-fasts of those festivals of the Apostles which now
ceased to be of obligation, it was enacted that a fast should
be observed on all the Wednesdays and Fridays in Advent.

II. To begin with, the fasting discipline remained the
same as at the end of the Middle Ages. With the progress
of time, however, indults grew more frequent. At the
government's demand Rome at last granted a far-reaching
dispensation to Austria. Meat was to be permitted during
the whole of Lent save in Holy Week, and on Wednesdaj's,
Fridays, and Saturdays {iyd>i).^



§184

Febronius and the Memorandum or * Punctation ' of Ems +

The relations between the German Church and Rome,
as they had been settled by the Concordat of Vienna, soon
proved unsatisfactory. At the commencement of the Re-
formation in the sixteenth century, we constantly hear of
the complaints of the German nation against the Roman
See. At the Diet of Nuremberg in 1522 the Gravamina
nationis Germanicae were embodied in a document, and
redress was demanded. As the demand was not granted,

1 Coll. Lac. I, 786.

" Arneth, Maria Theresia, IV, 56-61.

^ WoLFSGRUBER, Migazzi, 1890, p. 462.

" HuTH, KG. d. 18 Jahrh. II (1S09), 438 ff. ; O. Mejer, rebromus, end cd.
1885; Th. Qti. 1881, pp. 670-73 ; KiJNTZiGER, Febronius et le Fibrotiianismc,
iSgi {Memoires ds I'Acaddmie roy. de Belgigite, vol. 44) ; Stigloher, Die
Errichtujig der pdpstl. Nunitatur in Miinchen u. d. Emser Kongress, 1867.



i66 A Manual of Church History

the discontent remained, and again received public expression,
though with moderation, in a memorandum drawn up by
the bishops-elector in 1673.1 In the next century it was to
be voiced with much greater vehemence.

At the election of a new emperor in 1742, when the
Gravamina again came up for discussion, Nicolaus von Hont-
heim, bishop-auxiliary of Treves, took the resolution to
investigate more closely the relation of these grievances
with the general constitution of the Church, ultimately
committing his results to writing in a work, De stain ecclesiae,
&c., which he published in 1763 under the assumed name of
Justinus Febronius, He therein follows the lead of the
Galileans in reducing the Church to the state in which she
had existed in antiquity. The Pope is indeed acknowledged
as head of the Church, on whom it devolves to supervise the
observance of the canons, the preservation of the faith, and
the rightful administration of the sacraments. It is also
the Pope's duty to give judgment in cases of dispute
regarding matters of faith or morals, and his decision is
to be respected by all the faithful, provided the universal
Church or a General Council be not of the contrary opinion.
As for the other rights of the Pope, those, namely, which
originated later, and are founded on the authority of the
False Decretals, especially the right of confirming and of
deposing bishops, they must be restored to the episcopate, or, if
needs be, appropriated by the bishops.

The book caused a great commotion, A second and a
third edition w^ere soon called for (1765-70), and it was trans-
lated into German, French, Italian, Spanish, and Portuguese.
Special works were also devoted to its confutation (Ballerini,
1766-68 ; Zaccaria, 1767-73). At Rome it was promptly
placed on the Index (1764), and the German bishops were
summoned to take action against it, an order to which very
little attention was, however, paid. The work found many
admirers. Deputies of the bishops-elector assembled at
Coblence in 1769, under the presidency of Hontheim
himself, drew up a list of thirty grievances against Rome,

1 Printed in Gartner, Corpus iuris eccles. 1799, vol. II, 322 ff. ; partly
given by Buss, Urkundl. Gesch. d. Nat.- und Territorialkirchentums, 1S51,
p. 702.



Fehronhis 167

agreeing in their tenor with the principles of Febronius,
and though the matter went no further, the proceeding itself
throws a vivid light on the opinions then prevalent in
Germany. Feeling himself secure, Hontheim refused to recant ;
on the contrary, the attacks of his opponents led him to
continue his work, and though ultimately, when his own
archbishop had joined his appeal to that of Rome, he con-
sented to withdraw (1778), he steadfastly refused to abandon
his principles. In the commentary which he published
with his recantation (1781) he deplored indeed the aggressive
tone of his work ; the Galilean theory, however, he continued
to cherish.

A few years later the Febronian ideas again came to the
fore. On the occasion of the establishment of a papal
nunciature at Munich (1785) the German archbishops, com-
prising the elector of Mainz (Carl von Erthal), the elector
of Cologne (archduke Maximilian, brother of Joseph II),
the elector of Treves (prince Clement Wenceslaus of Saxony),
and the prince-bishop of Salzburg (Jerome, prince of Collo-
redo) again attempted to put into execution the plan of
making the German Church less dependent on Rome. To
this end they deputed delegates to attend at Ems and draw
up a note to be presented at Rome (1786). The matter,
however, never got beyond the preliminary stage. The
proposals which, after a while, were made to Rome were
peremptorily refused (1789), and the archbishops gradually
changed their attitude. Complaints were indeed again heard
when the time came to elect a new emperor (1790-92), but
the matter was soon thrown into the background by the
French invasion.

The most remarkable of the articles of the memorandum of Ems
are the following : Recourse to Rome, save through the immediate
superiors, is forbidden ; the exemption of monasteries and all depen-
dence on foreign superiors generally is abohshed (i). Quinquennial
faculties are suppressed ; the powers of dispensing in matters of
marriage, &c., conveyed by these faculties for a period of five years,
in reahty form a part of every bishop's jurisdiction, and dispensa-
tions obtained from abroad are invalid ; papal Bulls and Briefs
are not binding unless received by the bishops ; nuncios have no
jurisdiction (2-4). The decrees of Basel, having been accepted by
the Diet of Mainz (1439), form the rule governing the relations



i68 A Manual of Church History

between Germany and the Holy See, the Concordat of Vienna forms
the exception (7). Disputes regarding church matters are to be
settled by the diocesan or metropohtan courts, and when an appeal
is made in the third instance to Rome, the Pope may only decide by
means of Indices in partibus (22).



§ 185

The Reforms of Maria Theresia, Joseph II, and Leopold of

Tuscany 1

I. In her attempt to improve the whole system of govern-
ment, the empress Maria Theresia (1740-80) introduced
also a number of ecclesiastical reforms into the Austrian
lands. Many of the existing institutions seemed at variance
with the habits of mind which had recently become general,
whilst in other matters changes were necessary in the interests
of the State, and of the souls of the people. A limit was
accordingly put to the further increase of monasteries and
of the properties of the Church, the administration of the
latter being placed under the control of the government ;
it was also enacted that vows should not be taken before the
age of twenty-five, that the clergy should no longer be dis-
pensed from taxes, that the papal Briefs should have no
force until they had been accorded the imperial placet. The
education department was reorganised under the direction
of Gerhard van Swieten, physician to the empress, and of
abbot Rautenstrauch of Braunau, the Church's influence
being considerably diminished. As, owing to the vastness
of some of the older dioceses, a careful supervision was
out of the question, several new bishoprics were created ;
certain church holidays were abolished, &c. As far as
possible the consent of the Holy See was secured for these

' A. V. Arneth, M. Theresia, 10 vol. 1863-79 ; K. Ritter, K. Joseph II
u. s. kirchl. Reformen, 1867 ; J. Beidtel, Gesch. der osterreich. Staatsverwaltung,
1 740-1 848, 2 vol. 1896-98 ; S. Brunner, Die theolog. Dienerschaft am Hofe
Josephs II, 1868 ; Die Mysterien der Aufkldrung in Osi. 1869 ; Joseph II,
2nd ed. 1886 ; Wolfsgruber, Kurd. Migazzi, 1890 ; Rquh. 1894, I> 455-509 '>
7.scHOKKiE,Dielheol. Studien . . . in Osterr. i8g^] H.ScHt.nT'ER,DieRegierung
Josephs II in den ost. Niederlanden, I, 1900 ; Laenen, itude siir la sup-
pression des convents par Joseph II dans les Pays-Bas autrichiens (1783-94),
1905 (Extr. des Annales de V Academie roy. d'archeol. de Belgiqiie) ; F. Geier,
Die Durchfiihrung der k. Ref. Josephs II im vorderost. Breisgau, 1905.



The Austrian Reforms 169

measures, and the reforms were accordingly carried through
without any great disturbance.

II. The aspect of things was changed when, after his
mother's death, the reins of government were taken by
Joseph II (1765-90). Obedient to the counsels of prince
Kaunitz, he not only went further than Maria Theresia,
but also showed very little regard for the feelings of the other
party. In a series of edicts following each other in rapid
succession, he re-enacted the necessity of the -placet, which
he extended even to episcopal missives, abolished the special
legal status of the clergy, informed the bishops that they were,
in virtue of their own jurisdiction, and without seeking any
papal faculties, to dispense in cases of consanguinity in the
third and fourth degree, closed all the monasteries belonging
to purely contemplative rehgious Orders, i.e. of Carthusians
and Camaldulese monks, of Carmelite, Franciscan, and
Capuchin nuns, doing the same with a number of the houses
belonging to other congregations, especially with those of
the Mendicants, in all, some 600 convents and monasteries,
or about a third of the whole number in the Austrian
dominions, and dissolving all the religious brotherhoods.
The Protestants, or rather the Lutherans and Calvinists,
and the non-uniate Greeks were granted full civil rights
and the permission to practise their rehgion in private {i.e.
without the ringing of bells, &c.). The dioceses were again
reorganised so as to make them coterminous with the
civil administrative districts, and new parishes were established
out of the fortunes of the suppressed monasteries. Diocesan
seminaries were supplanted by great central seminaries
at Vienna, Buda-Pesth, Pavia, Freiburg, and Louvain, and
certain smaller ones at Gratz, Olmiitz, Prague, Innsbruck,
and Luxemburg, care being taken to appoint as professors only
such as were known to be favourable to the emperor's principles.
Rules were even laid down for the details of public worship.

It would be idle to deny that Joseph in his ecclesiastical
as well as in his political reforms was animated by the noblest
intentions. Some of his measures, too, could not fail to win
approval ; for instance, the increase in the number of parishes.
Others, however, involved serious encroachments on the
rights of the Church. It is, therefore, no wonder that the



170 A Manual of Church History

reforms, though accepted by a portion of the episcopate,
encountered strong opposition. The archbishops of Vienna
and Gran, cardinals Migazzi and Bathyani, frankly expressed
their mind, whilst Pius VI undertook a journey to Vienna to
endeavour to restrain the emperor's reforming zeal (1782).
Still more energetic was the protest of the bishops of Belgium,
headed by cardinal Frankenberg, archbishop of Mechlin,
the whole province ultimately rising in revolt. The reforms
were accordingly withdrawn so far as Belgium was concerned
by Leopold II (1790-92). In the rest of the Empire, the
central seminaries and certain limitations which had been
laid on Divine worship were abolished. So far as all other
matters were concerned, Joseph's reforms remained in force. 1

III. Maria Theresia's zeal for the reform of the Church was
inherited by her second as well as by her eldest son. Though the
grand-duke Leopold of Tuscany (1765-90) was at first content with
following his mother's example, he afterwards entered into the path
chosen by his brother. Not only did he refrain from consulting
Rome, but he allowed his activity to outstep the politico-ecclesiastical
sphere, and to interfere in purely ecclesiastical matters. His end
was to thoroughly reform the Church in his dominions. This he
proposed to commence by diocesan synods, and to complete by
a national council. Unfortunately, of the eighteen bishops be-
longing to the grand-duchy, only three were at all favourable to
his plans, the most zealous of these being Scipio Ricci of Pistoja-
Prato. The synod of Pistoja in 1786 passed a number of decrees
according to Leopold's mind. In particular it accepted the four
Galhcan articles, and recommended the writings of Ouesnel. The
other bishops, on the contrary, more or less vigorously declined to
have anything to do with the reforms which the grand-duke had
recommended as necessary in a letter addressed to them. To bring
the deadlock to an end, the bishops were summoned to a preparatory
conference at the capital (1787) . Perceiving that it would be useless
to expect any reforms from a provincial council, Leopold determined
to carry out the reforms himself, though this he was unable to do,
being called soon after to the imperial throne (1790). On the
prince's departure, the anger of his flock compelled Ricci to alter his
demeanour, and soon after to lay down his office (1791). Most of the
reforms were withdrawn, and eighty-five propositions of the synod
of Pistoja were censured by Pius VI in the I3ull Anctorem fidei (1794).
Cp. Potter, Vie et memoires de Scipion de Ricci, 4 vol. 1826 ; Gelli,
Memorie di So. de Ricci, 2 vol. 1865 ; Reumont, Gesch. Toskanas, II
(1877), 148 ff.

' Z.f. k. Th, 1880 ; Verhaegen, Le Card, de Frankenhevg, iSgo.



Religious Orders 171



§ 186

Religious Orders in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth
Century

A, New Religious Associations

Like the religious Orders of the sixteenth century, those
of the two following centuries are mostly remarkable for
their practical character.

Among the new congregations devoted to nursing the
sick, to teaching children, and to the care of the female sex,
were :

(i) The Sisters of Charity, Filles de la charite, divided
into two branches, the more numerous being that founded
at Paris in 1633 by St. Vincent of Paul ^ with the assistance
of a pious widow Le Gras. The smaller branch is that of the
Sisters of St. Charles Borromeo, established at Nancy in 1652.

(2) The Brothers of the Christian Schools, Freres
des ecoles chretiennes, founded in 1680 at Rheims by one of
the canons, J. B. de la Salle.^

(3) The Visitandines, or nuns of the Visitation, founded
by St. Francis of Sales and St. J. Frances de Chantal at
Annecy (1610). (Eiivres de St. Frangois de S. 14 vol. Paris,
1892-1906. Bg. of St. Francis by Hamon, 1866 ; Strowski,
1898 ; of St. Frances, by Bougaud, 1861.

(4) The English Ladies, who arose out of the remains
of a Society of Jesuitesses, founded by Mary Ward at
S'l. Omer for the education of girls (1609). The societj'
was dissolved for certain irregularities (1631), but a few of
its members, having obtained permission to fulfil their simple
vows in the world under the supervision of the diocesan,
again united themselves into a community. KL. IV, 572-80;
Coleridge, Mary Ward, 1882 ; Life of Mary Ward compiled
from various sources, ed. Gasquet, 1909.

(5) The Sisters of Refuge, founded by P. Eudes at

' Bg. by Stolberg, 1S19 ; Mayn.^rd, 4 vol. i860; Bougaud, 2 voL
1S89 ; Jeannin, 1889 ; E. de Margerie, La societd de St. V. d. P. 2 vol. 1874.

- Mg. by F. J. Knecht, 1S79 ; J. B. Blain, 1887; J. Guibert, 1900;
J. V. Bainvel, 1901 ; B. Duxinger, 190O.



172 A Manual of Church History

Caen for the reclaiming of fallen women (1644). D. Boulay,
Vie du ven. J. Elides, I, 1905.

Among the Orders established for mission work and the
education of the clergy were :

(i) The Lazarists, or Priests of the Mission, founded in
1624 by St. Vincent of Paul, and called after the college of
St. Lazare at Paris, which was bestowed on them soon after.

(2) The Redemptorists, or Congregation of the most
holy Redeemer [sanctissimi Redemptoris) , founded by St.
Alphonsus of Liguori at Scala near Amalfi (1732).^

(3) The Oratory of France, founded at Paris in 1611 by Pierre
de Berulle, KL. II, 485-92.

(4) The Passionists, or Clerks of the Holy Cross and Passion of
our Lord, founded at Orbitello in the kingdom of Naples (1737) by
St. Paul of the Cross.

Two congregations of secular priests were also formed for the
education of the clergy. Of these one, the society of the Bartholo-
mites, owed its origin to Bartholomew Holzhauser of Salzburg (1640).
Mg. by Gaduel, 1861 ; St. Bened. 1902. The other was founded
at Paris by J. J. Olier, and called after the church and seminary of
St. Sulpice (1641). Mg. by G. Letourneau, 1906.

Two religious associations were especially conspicuous for their
devotion to learning ; the Congregation of St. Maur, established in
1618, with a view to reforming the French Benedictine monasteries, as
those of Lorraine and Alsace had been shortly before by the Con-
gregations of St. Vannes and St. Hidulphe established by Didier de
la Cour. Dom d'Achery (1648) was mainly responsible for the love
of learning which was to make this monastery famous [Th. Qu.
1833-34). The Order of the Mechitarists, after having been
established at the beginning of the eighteenth century by the
Armenian Mechitar in Morea, was, owing to the persecution of the
Turks, removed to the island of San Lazzaro, near Venice (1715).

Lastly, in the Order of the Trappists we find a revival of the spirit
of mediaeval monasticism. It began when J. Bouthillier de Ranee
re-established in his Cistercian Abbey of La Trappe in Normandy
the old rule in all its severity, adding, moreover, to it the Carthusian
practice of perpetual abstinence and of constant silence (1662).
Learned work was not only discouraged, but declared incompatible
with the true monastic spirit {Traite de la saintete et des devoirs de la
vie monastique, 1683), an opinion which Mabillon was at pains to
confute {Traite des etudes monastiques, 1691). Pfannenschmidt.
Gesch. d. Tr. 1873 ; B. Schmid, Bouthillier de R. 1897.

' Bg. by DiLGSKRON, 2 vol. 1887 ; Capecelatro, 2 vol. 1895 ; Saintrain-
ScHEPERS, 2nd ed., ed. Krebs, 1898 ; Berthe, 2 vol. 1900.



Suppression of the Jesuits 173

B. The Suppression of the Jesuits 1

As we have already had occasion to see (§§ 178-80), the
Society of Jesus had done great service in the cause of the Church.
In the course of time, however, when nearly all the schools
of the CathoHc world had come under its control, and when
its members were everywhere in demand as confessors and
confidential advisers to the princes, it attained a position not
devoid of danger. The Society soon acquired a strong spirit of
independence, which it did not hesitate to display even towards
the Holy See. In effect, the determination with which the
Jesuits adhered to their rites and usages in Malabar and China,
in spite of their condemnation by Rome, "^can only with diffi-
culty be reconciled with their vow of obedience, even though
all allowances be made for their being convinced of the
necessity of their methods. Their conduct was repeatedly
made a subject of complaint by Benedict XIV. In his Bull
Immensa pastor um (December 20, 1741), he was compelled
to recall to the Jesuits and to other Orders the precepts
of Christian charity, and to forbid them to hinder the progress
of the Gospel among the Indians by trading in slaves and
by other inhuman practices. In this matter he was indeed
obeyed, but in other directions the proceedings of the Society
remained open to criticism. The great influence which the
Jesuits had obtained by assuming the direction of the
consciences of those in power had made them many enemies,
and little by little the antipathy to the Society took possession
even of the rulers, becoming so strong in the latter half of the
eighteenth century that in many countries a regular war of
extermination was proclaimed against the Jesuits. It cannot
be said that the Society had deserved this fate, especially
as the character of its opponents was not such as to excite
our confidence, whilst sovereigns such as those of Prussia

' [Le Bret] Sammlung der merkwiirdigsten Schri/len die Aufhebung des Jes.-
Ordens betr. 4 vol. 1773; A. Theiner, Gesch. d. Ponlifxhates Klemens XIV,
2 vol. 1S52 ; [Reinerding] Klemens XI V und die Aufhebung der Gesellscha i J .
1854 (a critique of Theiner); CRi;TiNEAU-JoLY, Le pape Clement XIV,
1862; GiNZEL, Kirchenhist. Schri/ten, II (1872), 205-82; Dollinger, Bcitrdge,
III (1882), 1-74 (on the work of the Jesuit T. Cordara, 1740-73) ; M.xssoN,
Le card de Bernis, 1884; Crousaz-Cr^tet, L'eglise et I'ctat auXVIII' siecle,
1893 ; Z. f. k. Th. 1898, pp. 432-54, 689-708 ; Duhr, Jesuiten-Fabcln, 4tli
ed. 1904; Th. Qu. 1891, pp. O27-37; 1901, pp. 374-8S (decision of Penedict XIV).



174 A Manual of Church History

and Russia would certainly not have taken the Order
under their protection had it been guilty of outrageous
crimes. On the other hand, wc can perfectly well understand
how the storm arose, A position of power, such as the Order
had obtained in Catholic countries, was not one to be long
borne with.

Hostilities began in Portugal.^ As the Jesuits were
unfriendly to his interests and his politics, the minister
Pombal had recourse to measures against them. The
opposition raised against the new rulers by the inhabitants
of the seven reductions of Paraguay, which Spain had ex-
changed with Portugal in return for the colony of San
Sagramento (1750), furnished him with an occasion to forbid
the Jesuits to visit the court and to complain to Benedict
XIV. In consequence of this complaint, Saldanha, patriarch
of Lisbon, was appointed visitor to the Order, and suspended



Online LibraryF. X. von (Franz Xaver) FunkA manual of church history (Volume 2) → online text (page 17 of 34)