Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 9.djvu/415

 LOUXB

374

unm

tenn r^oZtf WM applied to that right by which the king upon the death of a bishop, drew the revenues of the see and made appointments to benefices imtil the new bishop had registered his oath in the Court of Excheq- uer (Chambre des comptes), Louis XIV claimed, in 1673 and again in 1675, that the ri^ht of r^ale was his in all the bishoprics of the kingdom. Pavilion, Bishop of Alet, ana Caulct, Bishop of Pamiers, refused to submit. These prelates, both Jansenists, alleged that the Jesuits had stretched the right of r^ale so as to increase the number of benefices in the collation of which Pdre La Chaise, the king's confessor, might exert his influence. In 1677, Caulet, having refused to give the cure of souls within his diOcese to priests whom the king had nominated in virtue of the r^aie, was deprived of his temporalities. Three Briefs of In- nocent XI ^arch, 1678, and January and December, 1679) sustained Caulet and threatened Louis with the pains of conscience before God's tribunal and the ru- mour was current that the king was about to be ex- communicated.

In Jul^, 1680, the assembly of the clergv, in a letter to the king, identified themselves with the king and threatened the pope. Upon the death of Caulet, the Diocese of Pamiers was contested between the vicar capitular nominated by the chapter, who was hostile to the r^alCf and another vicar capitular, nominated by Uie Archbishop of Toulouse and installed by the roysd officers. The former of these two vicars was re- moved by the king's order, the latter was excommuni- cated by the pope. A third vicar capitular, nomi- nated by the chapter, remained in hiding while he administered the diocese, was condenmed to death, and was executed in effi^ by the king's command. A rupture between Louis and the Holy See appeared to be imminent; the king, in convoking the assembly of the cler^ for November, 1681, threw out some mnts of a schism. This was an attempt to frighten the pope. In fact, neither side wished for any schism. Louis made the concession that priests provided by him in virtue of his right of rigale should be obliged to first receive canonical mission, and this concession was offset by the passage of the Declaration of the Four Articles, which showed the "wish to humilate Rome". The very animated correspondence between the pope and the assemblv was a disouieting circumstance, but Louis prorogued the assembly on 29 June, 1682 (see Bossuet; Assemblies of the French Clebgt). In this way he made his escape from the advisers who, to use his own words, would nave liked to "invite him to don the turban ". He had, in the words of the Jesuit Avrigny, "a foundation of religion which would not allow him to face these di\'isions without emotion ".

Again, when Innocent XI steadfastly rcfuse<l to ac- cept bishops, who, as priests, had participated in the assembly of 1C82, Louis went through a series of ma- noeuvres which had the appearance ofacts of contrition. Innocent remained insensible to all this and, on the other lumd, refused to maintain the right of asylum and the franchises which the ambassador of France claimed at Home. Tliis new incident made an im- mense stir in Europe; there was talk of the conquest of Avignon and Civitavecchia by France; the Bull of 12 May, 1G87, excommimicatin^ the ambassador and his accomplices, was pronounced abominable by the par- lementaires of Pans, who had in \iew the assembling of a nation^ council and declared that the pope, by rea- son of his infirmities, could no longer support the weight of the papacy. Alexander VIII (1089-91), dunn^ his short pontificate, induced Louis to surren- der his claim in the matter of the franchises and also published a Bull, until then reserved, by which Inno- cent XI had condemned the Declaration of 1082. In- nocent XII (1691-1700) made but one concession to Louis XIV: he declared his readiness to grant Bulls without delay to all bishops nominated by the king, provided they had taken no part in the assembly of

1682, and provided that th^ made a profession of faith before the nimcio. Louis, on 14 September, 1603, declared that, to show his veneration for the pope, he ordered the declaration of 1682 to be held without effect in regard to religious policy. The Gal- ileans in France and the I^testants abroad pointed to this decision of the king as a desertion of his principles.

The good understanding between Louis and the papacy, while they fought side by side against Jan- senism (see below), was ag^n momentarily clouded during the War of the Spanish Succession. In a very long and very cordial Brief dated 6 February, 1701, Clement XI had recognised Philip V as Kin^ of Spain. Political conditions, threats made against him by the Emperor Joseph I, brought the pope to recognise Charles III as king, lO October, 1709. The diploma- tic representatives of Louis XIV and Philip V at Rome had done everything to prevent this; the extremehr reserved tone and the laconic style of the Brief aa- drcssed to Charles III did not sufiiciently console them and Cardinal de la Tr^mouille, on 13 October, 1709, protested in the name of Louis XIV against the public recognition of Charles III, which was to take pliu^ in Consistory on the next day.

Louis XIV AND THE HERESIES. — His care to main- tain a certain orthodoxy, and the conception which he had formed of the religious unity of his kingdom, ex- pressed themselves in nis policy towards the Jansen- ists, the Quietists, and the Protestants.

A. Louis XIV and «/an«ent9m.— Since the days of Mazarin Louis had felt *Hhat the Jansenists were not well-disposed towards him and the State''. A certain niunber of them had been implicated in the I^tmde: they wished to obtain, in spite of Mazarin, the recall of Cardinal de Retz, Archbishop of Paris, who had es- caped from his prison at Nantes and gone to Rome; some of them applauded the triumphs over Louis's armies won by Cond^, who was in alliance with the Spaniards. Louis, in September, 1660, caused the mission, and the book was burned. His desire, ex- pressed in December, 1660, to the president ot the assembly of the cleigy, induced that body to draw up, in February, 1661, a formula condemning "the doc- trine of the'nve propositions of Jansenius contained in the '' Augustinus", which formula was to be signed by all ecclesiastics; and the superiors of the two monas- teries of Port-Royal received orders to dismiss their pupils and their novices. Mazarin, on his death-bed, m March, 1661, told the king that he must not "toler- ate either the sect of the Jansenists or even so much as t heir name' ' . The vicars-general, who govamed the Dio- cese of Paris in the absence of de Retz, explained, in a charge published in May, 1661, that the signature re- quired was compatible with reserves on the question of fact — i. e., the question whether the five propositions were in fact contained in the ' ' Augustinus' . Tiie royal council and the pope condemned this chaigc, and in 1664, Archbishop Hardouin dcP^r^fbce made two visits to Port-Royal (9 June and 21 August) and demanded of the religious their signatures without reserve. The religious of Port-Royal refused, and thereupon, on 26 Au^t, the police expelled those of Port-Royal de Paris, and, in November, those of Port-Royal des Champs. Later, in 1665, lest they might have a dis- turbing effect on the various convents in which they had found shelter, they were all coUected in the des Champs convent and placed under a police guard.
 * 'Provinciales" of Pascal to be examined hy a com-

The concern felt by Louis on the subject of Jansen- ism was so px^at that, in 1665, he appealed to Pope Alexander VII to break down the opposition of Pavil- ion, Bishop of Alet, w^ho did not recognise the right of assembly of the clergy to legislate for the Qiurch, and was carrying on a campaign against the formula drawn up by that assembly and against the obligation to sign it. France was presented with the speetacle of a joint effort of the pope and the king; the royal ooim*