Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 15.djvu/59

 TRENT

33

TRENT

brought up for flcbate one of the fundament.il ques- tions which hail lo be discussed with reference to the heretics of the sixteenth century, and which in itself presented great difficulties. The imperial inirty sought to block the discussion of the entire matter, some of the fathers were anxious on account of the approaching war of Charles V against the Protestant princes, and there was fresh dissension between the emperor and the pope. However, the debates on the question were prosecuted with the greatest zeal; ani- mated, at times even stormy, discussions took place; the debate of the next general session had to be postponed. No less than sixty-one general con- gregations and forty-four other congregations were held for the debate of the important subjects of justifieation and the obligation of residence, before the matters were ready for the final decision. At the sixth regular sessi(m on 1.3 January, 1.547, was pro- mulgated the ma.sterly decree on justification (dejusti- ^cn(io;«'), which consisted of a proa-mium or preface and sixi,een chapters with thirty-t hree canons in con- demnation of the opposing heresies. The decree on reform of this session was one in five chapters respect- ing the obligation of residence of bishops and of the occupants of ecclesiastical benefices or offices. These decrees make the sixth session one of the most im- portant and decisive of the entire council.

The legates proposed to the general congregation as the subject-matter for the following session, the doctrine of the Church as to the sacraments, and for the disciplinary question a series of ordinances respecting both the appointment and offici.al activi- ties of bishops, and on ecclesiast ical benefices. \\'hen the questions had been debated, in the seventh ses- sion {'.i March, l.")47), a dogmatic decree with suitable canons was pronudgatcd on the sacraments in general (thirteen canons), on baptism (fom-teen canons), and on confirmation (three canons) ; a decree on reform (in fifteen chapter.s) was also enacted in regard to bishops and ecclesi.astieal benefices, in particular as to plural- ities, visitations, and exemptions, concerning the founding of infirmaries, and as to the legal affairs of the clergy. Before this session was held the ques- tion of the prorogation of the coimcil or its transfer to another city h.ad been discussed. The relations between pope and emperor had grown even more strained; the Smalkaldic War had begun in Germany; and now an infectious disease broke out in Trent, carrying off the general of the Franciscans and others. The cardinal legates, therefore, in the eighth session (11 March, l.")47) proposed the transfer of the council to another city, supporting themselves in this action by a Brief which had been given them by the pope some time before. The majority of the fathers voted to transfer the council to Bologna, and on the following d-ay (12 March) the legates went there. By the ninth .session the number of participants had risen to four cardinals, nine archbishops, forty-nine bishops, two proxies, two abbots, three generals of orders, and fifty theologians.

B. Period III Bologna. — The majority of the fathers of the council went with the cardinal legates from Trent to Bologna; but fourteen bishops who belonged to the party of Charles V remained at Trent and would not recognize the tran.sfer. The sudden change of place without any special con.sultation beforehand with the pope did not please Paul III, who probably foresaw that this would lead to further severe difficul- ties between him.self and the em|)eror. As a matter of fact Charles V w.os very indignant at the change, and through his ambassador Vaga protested against it, vigorously urging a return to Trent. The em- peror's defeat of the Smalkaldic League increased his power. Influential cardinals .sought to mediate be- tween the emperor and the pope, but the negotiations failed. The emperor protested formally against the transferto Bologna, and, refusing to permit the Spanish XV.— 3

bishops who had remained at Trent to leave that city, began negotiations again with the German Protestants on his own responsibihty. Consequently at the ninth session of the council held at Bologna on 21 April, 1547, the only decree issued was one proroguing the session. The same action was all that was taken in the tenth session on 2 June, 1547, although there had been exhaustive debates on various subjects in con- gregations. The tension between the emperor and the pope had increased despite the efforts of Cardinals Sfondrato and Madruzzo. All negotiations were fruitless. The bishops who had remained at Trent had held no sessions, but when the pope called to Rome four of the bishops at Bologna and four of those at Trent, the latter said in excuse that they could not obey the call. Paul III had now to expect extreme opposition from the emperor. Therefore, on 13 Sep- tember, he proclaimed the suspension of the council and commanded the cardinal legate del Monte to dis- miss the members of the council assembled at Bologna; this was done on 17 September. The bishops were called to Rome, where they were to prepare decrees for disciplinary reforms. This closed the first period of the council. On 10 Nov., 1.549, the pope died.

C. Secoml Period at Trent. — The successor of Paul III was Juhus III (15.50-.55), Giovanni del Monte, first cardinal legate of the coimcil. He at once be- gan negotiations with the emperor to reopen the coun- cil. On 14 Nov., 15.50, he issued the Bull "Quum ad tollenda", in which the rea.ssembling at Trent was arranged. As iiresidents he appointed Cardinal Mar- cellus Crescentius, Archbishop Sebastian Pighinus of Siponto, and Bishop Aloysius Liijomanni of Verona. The cardin.al legate reached Trent on 29 .^iiril, 1551, where, besides the bishop of the city, fourteen bishops from the countries ruled by the em])eror were in at- tendance; several bishops came from Rome, where they had been staying, and on 1 May, 1.551, the elev- enth session was held. In this the resumption of the council was decreed, and 1 September was appointed as the date of the next session. The Sacrament of the Eucharist and drafts of further disciplinary de- crees were discu.ssed in the congregations of the theo- logians and also in several general congregations. Among the theologians were Lainez and Sahneron, who had been sent by the pope, and Johannes Arza, who represented the emperor. Ambassadors of the em- peror, King Ferdinand, and Henry II of France were present. The King of France, however, was unwilling to allow any French bishop to go to the coimcil. In the twelfth session (1 Sept., 1551) the only decision was the prorogation until 11 October. This was due to the expectation of the arrival of other German bishops, besides the Archbishops of Mainz and Trier who were already in attendance. The thirteenth session was held on 11 Oct., 1.551; it promulgated a comprehensive decree on the Sacrament of the Eucharist (in eight chapters and eleven canons) and also a decree on reform (in eight chapters) in regard to the supervision to be exercised by bishops, and on episcopal jurisdiction. Another decree deferred until the next session the discussion of four articles con- cerning the Eucharist, namely, Communion under the two species of bread and wine and the Communion of children; a safe-conduct was also issued for Protes- tants who desired to come to the council. An am- bassador of Joachim II of Brandenburg had already reached Trent.

The presidents laid before the general congregation of 15 October drafts of definitions of the Sacraments of Penance and Extreme Unction for discussion. These .subjects occupied the congregations of theo- logians, among whom Groppcr, Nausea, Tapper, and Hessels were especially prominent, and also the gen- eral congregations during the months of October and November. At the fourteenth session, held on 25 November, the dogmatic decree promulgated con-