XIII. History of the Papacy during the Reformation

(Dublin Review, 1887.)

VOL. m.

PROFESSOR CREIGHTON'S work is the fairest and most solid history of the Mediaeval Church that we have yet seen from any hand that is not Catholic. We make this reserve, hecause, in the commendation that we may give, it is always necessary to bear in mind that a Catholic hand would not have written many things that are contained in it. Nevertheless, it fulfils in a remarkable degree the profession which the author makes in the preface to his third volume, where he writes as follows: "If the writers of the Middle Ages are to be reduced to the scientific view of historical progress which we now adopt, the same treatment ought in all fairness to be applied to the literary men of the Renaissance. The credulity displayed in the gossip of the one has to be appraised as carefully as the credulity of the miraculous records of the others. I have attempted to found a sober view of the time on a sober criticism of its authorities." The author has been faithful to this engagement; and the book is marked by research of original documents, by accuracy in dealing with ecclesiastical matters, and by a calm, judicial discernment.

The title given to the book is narrower than its contents; for it begins as early as the great "Western Schism, before as yet the Reformation, as commonly understood, had arisen. Nevertheless, it is true that long before that period a clamour for reformation in " head and members " had long been heard. The title may, therefore, be justified in this sense. It is certain that the Councils of Pisa, Constance, and Basle were the forerunners of the Council of Trent, down to-which Professor Creighton intends to continue his work; and also that the Renaissance, and all the flood of intellectual and moral evil which deluged Italy and infected Rome, was the prelude of the Lutheran Reformation. In this sense, therefore, the title may be justified, for it contains the twofold Reformation, legitimate and illegitimate, Catholic and anti-Catholic, Constructive and Destructive, the one which was wrought by the Church, reforming itself from within, the other, which, in attempting to reform the Church from without, has ended in confusion. No doubt the learned author when he treats of the Council of Trent will not fail to observe that of almost every session of the Council, twenty-five in number, a large part is headed " De Reformatione;" nor will he fail to appreciate the profound and world-wide reformation which the Council of Trent has wrought in the last three centuries. In the preface to the first volume, the author says: "I have taken the history of the Papacy as the central point for my investigation, because it gives the largest opportunity for a survey of European affairs as a whole." This mode of procedure shows a true discernment; for, as Donoso Cortes affirmed:

" The history of civilisation is the history of Christianity, and the history of Christianity is the history of the Catholic Church, and the history of the Catholic Church is the history of the Pontiffs, the greatest law givers and rulers of the Christian world." In the introduction to the first volume, the author treats of •the rise of the Papal power, and in his mode of treatment follows the same line as Mr. Bryce in his book -on the Holy Roman Empire. Both these learned authors occupy themselves with tracing out the ex ternal, secondary, and human events which led to the formation of the Papal power and the Holy Roman Empire. But in neither is there a recognition of the primary and vital force from which these two creations sprang. The Papacy and the Holy Roman Empire, apart from the Divine institution of the Catholic Church, would he merely external and human organisa tions. No human intelligence or power can adequately.account for them. They were both living systems: the Church having life in itself, and the Empire having life from and of the Church, and enduring so long as it was faithful to the principle from which it sprang. •Omne vivum a vivo, and nothing is sustained but by the principle from which it springs. Professor Creighton seems at least to recognise these primary laws. He says: "The theory of the Papal monarchy over the Church was not the result merely of grasping ambition and intrigue on the part of individual Popes; it corre sponded rather to the deep-seated belief of Western Christendom " (vol. i. page 12). It is not without.surprise, therefore, that we read that the Forged

Decretals " form the legal basis of the Papal mon archy;" and " the importance of the forgery lay in the fact that it represented the ideal of the future as a fact of the past, and displayed the Papal Primacy as an original institution of the Church of Christ." Nevertheless, he adds: " The Papacy did not originate this forgery; but it made haste to use it." But how should the forgery have deceived anybody, if it had not in the main closely corresponded with the facts before the eyes of men? A bank-note may be forged, but it proves the existing currency of bank-notes, and could deceive nobody if it did not minutely correspond with the genuine bank-note. The truth is, that the Forged Decretals, except in subordinate details of ecclesiastical procedure, truly reflect the Divine primacy which was the deep-seated belief of Western Christendom — that is, of the Catholic world. After Tertullian had become Montanist, he assailed the Bishop of Rome as "Pontifex Maximus, issuing peremptory decrees;" but these words would have had neither point nor meaning if the visible primacy of the Bishop of Rome had not corresponded with them.

The divisions of the whole work, as far as it has yet advanced, would appear to be as follows: First, the Great Schism; from the year 1378 to 1414. Before this period the unity of the Empire of Charlemagne had been broken up into separate States, and the spirit of nationalism had profoundly divided the Cardinals and the local Churches. Nothing can more clearly demonstrate the Divine unity of the Church than its survival and its restoration of itself out of the conflict of national schisms. The impotence of individuals to break up the unity of the Church had been long ago demonstrated, and now the impotence even of nations was conspicuously demonstrated in this period of the Great Schism. The unity of the Church reasserted itself in the Council of Constance; and nearly five cen turies have passed in which the union of the Church with its head have been more than ever luminously manifested. The second period reaches from the Council of Constance in the year 1444 to 1464, which the author calls the Papal Restoration. During this period Constantinople fell under the power of the Turks. From that date the influx of Greeks and of Greek literature into Italy gave rise to the literary movement of the Renaissance. In treating of this subject the judicial fairness of the author is conspicuous, and affords a contrast with the learned but prejudiced volumes of Mr. Symonds. It must, however, in justice to Mr. Symonds, be said that he has faithfully and fully exhibited the inflated vainglory, the morbid self-love, the childish petulance, the boundless licentiousness, and the virulent foulness of tongue of the Humanists. Professor Creighton gives a calm and tame description of the literary quarrel between Poggio and Valla. He says: " Not content with repelling Poggio's attacks, or attacking his literary character, he cast aspersions on his private life. Poggio retorted by opening the floodgates of abuse on Valla. Every scandalous story was raked up. Every possible villainy was laid to his charge; nay, even a picture was drawn of the final judgment of the great day, and Valla was remorselessly condemned to perdition The contest was carried on by clothing the lowest scurrility with classical language." Poggio and Valla are fair samples of these literary duellists. Mr. Symonds' hook is still more ahuudant in these literary quarrels; and his whole narrative shows that the effect, if not the aim, of the Humanists was to restore classical tastes, classical standards of thought and action, classical morality — in a word, pure paganism, to the derision and extinction of Christianity.

Mr. Symonds gives examples of their language as follows: God was Jupiter Optimus Maximus; Providence, Fatum; the Saints, Diri; their statues, Simulacra Dei Sanctorum; Our Lady of Loreto, Dca Laurctana; SS. Peter and Paul, Dii tutelares llomcei; the souls of the just, Manes pii; the Pope's excommunication, dirae; his tiara, Infula Romulea; the Seven Churches, Septem Sacrasancta Divitm pulrinaria. Bembo advised Sadoleto to avoid the Epistles of S. Paul lest the barbarous Latinity should spoil his style.

Although Mr. Symonds describes so profusely the profound immorality of the Humanists, and affirms that the genius of the Renaissance followed the first Medicean Pope from Florence into Rome, nevertheless he fastens upon Rome and the Papacy the profuse immoralities which he describes, as if they were the up-growth of the Holy See, instead of the leprosy of the Renaissance itself. And yet he says that " the intrusion of the Humanists into the Papal Curia was a victory of the purely secular spirit." Professor Creightou is discerning enough to perceive that the infidelity and the immorality of the Humanists invaded Home from without, and involved the Papacy from Sixtus IV. to Leo X. in every kind of accusation and dishonour. Mr. Symonds says that " bullying and fawning tainted the sources of history," and that " licentiousness became a special branch of Humanistic literature. Under the thin mask of humane refinement leered the untamed savage." The profound corruption of manners springing from this restored paganism pervaded the whole mind of Italy with the foulest imaginations and darkest suspicions of all public personages, both men and women. There is no kind of domestic or private crime, from incest to poisonings, which was not imputed to them. The whole literary atmosphere was black with malevolent accusa tions. We can almost believe that we are reading the description of Eome in the sixth satire of Juvenal. One single example may be given — namely, Lucrezia Borgia. Mr. Symonds, with the full swing of Lord Macaulay's style, describes her as if she were Messalina. Professor Creighton, with the cautious judgment of an historian, shows his mistrust at such alleged enormities. Mr. Koscoe long ago pointed out that the first traces of these accusations appeared in the writings of certain Neapolitan poets, who were exasperated by the policy of Alexander VI. He says that they would scarcely have deserved a serious reply if Guicciardini had not reproduced them as " rumours." From that time Catholic writers have repeated them, and Protestant controversialists have revelled in them. But, as Mr. Roscoe has pointed out, they are not only incredible from their enormity, but Lucrezia Borgia was received by marriage into the illustrious family of Este as Duchess of Ferrara, an event morally impossible if her life had been so deeply stained and so publicly infamous. Contemporaneous writers such as Giraldi, Libanori, Caviceo, and many others, describe her as of uncommon excellence, virtuous, and modest. And the unanimous testimony of history is that for twenty years her life as Duchess of Ferrara was conspicuous in blameless dignity. It may be well here to remember two examples in our own history. Protestant writers have described Anne Boleyn as a paragon of virtue and religion; Catholic writers have laid to her charge crimes too black to repeat. Her latest biographer, Paul Friedmann, with all these contradictions before him, and with the advantage of later and more authentic documents, does not, indeed, clear her fame, but rejects the darkest imputations under which she died. Again, if we are to believe Scottish historians, Mary Queen of Scots was guilty of profligacy and complicity in the murder of her husband. Every successive historian of later date, with the continual accession of new documents and of fuller evidence, has cleared her name, not, perhaps, of all early levity, but of these foulest charges. We have reason, there fore, to believe that when the history of the Papacy before the Lutheran revolt shall be rewritten, in the growing light of additional documents and fuller evidence, much that even Professor Creighton has allowed to stand in his pages will be cleared away. Certain it is that the succession of Pontiffs described by Ranke stands in such abrupt and singular contrast with those that went immediately before them as to render much that we read of the Popes in the fifteenth century improbable, if not incredible. It was the fashion of Protestant controversialists to hold up a list of more than thirty Popes whom they would have the world believe to be heretics or of unsound doctrine. As time went on one after another disappeared from this list, until it was reduced to two only, Liberius and Honorius. Against Liberius no heterodoxy can be alleged. Against Honorius no allegation was made until forty years after his death, in the beginnings of the Greek Schism. We have reason, therefore, to believe that the course of history in the future will cleanse many a great name. Nevertheless, in the meantime, it is enough for us to remember that Caiphas was high priest and that Judas was an apostle.

A third period, according to Professor Creighton, dates from the pontificate of Sixtus IV., at which time the Papacy engaged itself, by diplomacy and by war, in the politics of Italy. In his judgment Sixtus IV. began the secularisation of the Papacy. " From that time onward," he says, "the Pontiffs became Italian princes, and by the enrichment of their kinsmen be came the founders of the Papal families which exist to this day." The fourth volume closes with the pontificate of Leo X. and the Lateran Council of 1520.

Professor Creighton laid down for himself the duty of founding a sober view of the credulity and gossip of those ages on a sober criticism of authorities, a duty of absolute obligation for any historian who desires to-

•ascertain the truth rather than to indulge his prejudices. There has heen no great personality in any age of the Church of whom two characters have not heen recorded by contemporary writers. The Divine Head of the Church prepared all His Vicars upon earth to expect such treatment, when He said, " The disciple is not ahove his Master." He was denounced as a deceiver, a pretender, and a demoniac. His Vicars have heen baptised with His baptism.

If we are to believe the narrative of Ferretus, we should believe Boniface VIII. to be what Dante was deceived into believing, but Muratori has proved its mendacity; nevertheless, Sismondi reproduces it. In the tenth century Luitprand so blackens his adversaries, including the Pontiffs, that his calumnies would have passed undetected if Flodoard had not written at the same time. We may take as illustration two modern examples: the character of S. Thomas of Canterbury as defaced by Mr. Froude and as drawn by Mr. Free man; and, again, the character of Henry VIII. in Mr. Froude's History of England, and the Henry VIII. presented by Paul Friedmann in his History of Anne Boleyn. These examples are enough to put us on our guard against the studied accusations of partisans, and the credulous gossip of the world. Professor Creighton has weighed in the balance the conflicting evidence of such pontificates as those of Innocent VIII., Alexander VI., and Leo X., observing carefully the rule he prescribed for himself, " a rumour gains nothing in credibility by repetition; the question must always be, what is the evidence of it?" The following passage is a sample of his candour:

" Spain was aggrieved at the reception into the Papal States of the refugee Jews or Moors, who were driven from Spain by the stringency of the Inquisition. Spaniards, in the assertion of their nationality, were desirous to rid themselves of all foreign elements, and employed the Inquisition for that purpose. The crowds of luckless Marram, as they were called, awakened the compassion of the Italians, who saw them arrive on their coasts, and many of them came to Rome, where they were subjected to no persecution. A crowd encamped outside the Appian Gate, and were the means of bringing an outbreak of plague into the city. The Papal tolerance was displeasing to the Spanish rulers, and the ambassador expressed his wonder that the Pope, who was the head of the Christian faith, should receive into his city those who had been driven from Spain as the enemies of the Christian faith. We do not find that Alexander VI. paid much heed to these remonstrances; the Papacy in its spirit of tolerance was far in advance of public opinion."

To this passage is added the following note:

" Writers who themselves regard toleration as a virtue sneer at the Papal treatment of Prince Djem and the Marrani as proofs of Papal indifference to religion, following in this Infessura. I do not consider this fair, as the Papacy in the Middle Ages always showed a tolerant spirit in matters of opinion."

The following words describe the death of S. Catha rine of Siena:

" The legend goes on to say that some of those who called on Catharine of Siena were miraculously released. It was the last miracle wrought by Catharine in the flesh, as she died on April 29, 1380. In the dismal history of these gloomy times she presents a picture of purity, devotion, and self-sacrifice to which we turn with feelings of relief. In her intense and passionate desire for personal communion with Jesus, Catharine resembles the fervent nature of S. Francis,of Assisi; but her lot was cast in times when zeal had grown cold in high places, and she spent her energy in agonised attempts to heal the breaches of the Papal system. A simple maiden of Siena, she ventured in her Master's name to try and redress the evils which were so open and avowed. She saw Italy widowed of its Pope; she saw the Church venal and corrupt; and, though she was inspired by mystic enthusiasm, she worked with practical force and courage to restore the Papacy to Italy, and inaugurate an era of reform. In urgent tones she summoned the Popes from Avignon, and Urban V. answered to her call. She went from city to city pleading for peace, and in the discharge of her mission shrank neither from the fierce brawls of civic passion, nor the coarse brutality of the condottiere camp. Before her eyes floated the vision of a purified and reformed Church, of which the restoration of the Papacy to its original seat was to be at once the symbol and the beginning. Blinded by her enthusiasm, she hailed with delight the accession of Urban VI.; and by the side of the violent and vindictive Pope her pure and gentle spirit seems to stand as an angel of light. She did not long survive the disappointment of the Schism, and though she remained constant in her allegiance to Urban VI., his character and actions must have been a perpetual trial to her faith. She died at the age of thirty-three, and the removal of her influence for mercy is seen in the increased vindictiveuess of Urban's measures. Canonised by Pius II., Catharine of Siena has a claim upon our reverence higher than that of a saint of the Mediaeval Church. A low-born maiden, without education or culture, she gave the only possible expression in her age and generation to the aspiration for national unity and for the restoration of ecclesiastical purity (vol. i. pp. 70, 71)."

Every Catholic in reading this beautiful passage will desire that Professor Creighton may some day correct it with a Catholic hand.

The history traced in these four volumes shows with what relentless storm the gates of hell have ever beat against the rock of Peter. The prophecy is twofold: first, that they shall never prevail; but secondly, they shall never cease to storm against it. In the long history of the Church, from the day when Peter de scended from the guest-chamber to preach bis Master's name, a continuous and ever-cbanging warfare of every kind of human perversity and preternatural deceit has striven against the Vicar of Jesus Christ. Centuries of martyrdom, heresy, schism, barbarian hordes, Imperial tyranny, and, more dangerous, Imperial favour, the revolt of nations, the rising again of paganism, the flood of all refined and gross immorality, the pride and perversity of intellect, the gnosticism of private judgment, the revival of persecution unto blood, wars, captivities, revolutions, and the usurpation of Home itself, have never prevailed against the imperishable See of Peter. It is more majestic at this day in its world wide authority and its infallible voice, in the unity of the Episcopate in itself and with its Head, and in the loving obedience of the universal flock, than at any time since the Prince of the Apostles was crucified in the gardens of Nero.