being already in possession of them as well by the Pope's privileges as by the practice of 300 years; while the Prelates alleged that they were usurped, and claimed restitution." The learned modern historian Hardwick seems, however, to give to the Parochial and Secular Clergy themselves almost a worse character than to the Regulars, in the matters of ignorance, sloth, and misconduct, where he deals with the period 1305 to 1520. Probably there were, in both departments, various degrees of discreditt. The wish for reform and better discipline had, however, appeared in the very region of the societies themselves. New associations were formed at this time: for instance, the Theatines, founded in 1524, not as a monkish house, but as an aristocratic seminary, with the rigid clerical duties of preaching, administration of the sacraments, and care of the sick; while among the Franciscans arose, in 1525, a real revival of selfdenial, or discipline, represented by the austere, devout, and courageous Capuchins. But later still had been discovered one of the most sagacious plans for attaining disciplinary sternness in the Church at large, which the world has seen. The soldierlike but visionary Loyola, so long a student in the severe school of his own asceticism, gradually thought out, and at last founded, the famous "Society of Jesus," which was fully sanctioned by the Church in 1543. The conventual idea, of filling up time with devotional exercises, was abandoned for the strict rule of the three virtues thought to be more essential: namely obedience, chastity, and poverty. The duties were chiefly those of preaching, confession, and education of youth. The organization was practical: an extreme obedience its distinguishing mark. There was, then, about this time, a decided movement towards discipline within the church, together even with some faint hint of the possibility of fresh light in matters of doctrine. This last was a delicate subject for so absolute and determined a power as the Latin Church. One of the most crucial doctrines which we find agitating the Protestants of the sixteenth century, that of Transubstantiation, had, along with the Apostolical succession of priests, been distinctly affirmed already, by the Fourth Lateran Council, which assembled in 1215. It must, however, have seemed desirable to ecclesiastics to confirm and extend doctrine by removing doubts, that now existed even * Historie of the Councell of Trent, pp. 161 and 167. + It must be remembered that (leaving out of account the drastic reformers Wycliffe and Huss) the Church during this period could boast of such men as Thomas a Kempis and Dean Colet. Probably many monasteries, and many parishes, showed real devotion. in the south; while the northern situation was very serious. Luther, excommunicated in 1520, had suffered in 1521 the Ban of the Empire. But Emperors, or their servants, do not always stick to one side in a religious quarrel. An army of adventurers soon after assembled in Italy. This force consisted of reckless Italians, together with Spanish and Lutheran soldiers, accustomed to war, to penury, and to pillage. In 1526-7, they sacked the Eternal City herself. Michelet says that the Emperor, though he disavowed, yet approved this event.* The league of Schmalkald in 1530 bound the evangelical or protestant districts of Germany into a new organization. The Swiss had shown a very independent attitude in matters of doctrine; and, representated by Zwingli, had even held a discussion with Luther, in 1529, on the vexed question of the Eucharist, in spite of the Lateran Council before mentioned. In France, counting perhaps on the support of the French King, if not even on that of advanced Italian thinkers, Bishop Briçonnet had at Meaux carried his zeal for reform beyond the usual measures of the prelacy at that time, and appointed to his readerships, about 1521, men of liberal learning. He checked the Franciscans or Cordeliers, used other disciplinary methods, and, soon after, opened the way for even doctrinal discussion, by permitting copies of the gospels in French to be circulated in his diocese: thus encouraging a new and uncalculated movement in France also. On the frontiers of that country the old community of the Vaudois had shewn a fresh activity, and, by successive conferences, a real desire for union with the German and Swiss dissenters. Again, though the days of Wycliffe were past, yet the English, (whose character was generally independent though conservative), were increasingly impatient of Roman interference. They were headed by a king, called Defender of the Faith, but wilful and wayward still, whose fancy or policy had led to a difference with Rome, and might make him a bitter enemy. This nation was also indignant at the supposed murder of Hunne in London, and was encouraged in reformatory ideas by students at Cambridge and at Oxford. Parliament had made inoperative the Roman licenses for pluralities which the clergy might purchase; and, in 1534, the Act of Supremacy contradicted the assumed jurisdiction of the Pope over Englishmen, by declaring the King head of the Church of England. * Gibbon declares that the ravages of the barbarous Goths, under Alaric, in 410, were less destructive than the hostilities exercised by the troops of this Catholic prince, Charles the Fifth, eleven centuries later. [See History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Edition 1828, Vol. IV, p. 118.] The Danish King, Frederick I, early adopted a really modern policy of toleration; while Gustavus Vasa, the liberator King of Sweden, boldly undertook, in 1527, to reorganize the Church in that country. Upon the doubtful ocean of European orthodoxy the cosmopolitan Erasmus, representative of shrewd learning, hung, like some undeclared ally, to windward of the two fleets. Death overtook him in 1536. It must not be thought that, in these early days of the Reformation, any fresh and detailed confession had been adopted by any Universal Body called "Protestants." Each nation may almost be said to have had its own school of reformers: some of them, perhaps, survivals of old attempts obscured to the modern world by the thick smoke of persecution. But the main grounds of protest against the alleged abuses of Rome were now everywhere nearly the same. They were: criticism of priestly conduct and claims, and study of the four Gospels. While well to do and educated people were increasingly inpatient of ignorance and pedantry, the poor and the simple felt a need of religious consolation, which the Clergy of that day could not, or would not, regard. The exact conclusions reached by persons far divided geographically and socially were various indeed. The Mass was attacked here, tolerated there; while the dogma of "Transubstantiation" was vigorously discussed by two divergent parties of ardent reformers, a via media "Consubstantiation" being suggested by one of them. The whole movement had to encounter difficulties of an extraordinary kind. No new religion was aimed at, but a restoration of primitive doctrine; and, in face of a priesthood whose remarkable historic career seemed to glorify the attitude of an existing tradesunion, the extreme sections of the reform party would have to use all their scholarship, all their zeal, and all their powers of conciliation among themselves, to reach any coherent exposition of doctrine. The "Protestant" princes of Germany undertook, in 1530, to put forth the most moderate statement of their views; and the Augsburg Confession, accordingly drawn up by Melancthon, was free enough from intolerant aggressiveness. This was, however, only a sign of a general effort, which aimed at a direct worship of God, and opposed the continued adoration of saints, use of images, number of sacraments, traffic in Masses, monastic vows, celibacy of the clergy, the detailed enumeration of sins to priests, indulgences, satisfaction by ceremonies or by works, and papal or episcopal power over kingdoms and laws. Many reformers, as above suggested, saw in the dogma of "Transubstantiation" an irreconcileable quarrel between the existing Church and themselves. And all kinds of Protestants were, whether each individual realized it or not, joining in a great revolt against the claims of the Sacerdotal corps, to Supernatural powers, Heavenly knowledge, and Terrestrial domination. A fine passage in Neander's "General History of the Christian Religion and Church,"* dealing with an earlier period, indicates the terrific social force of such engines as ecclesiastical Excommunication, Anathema, and Interdict. Is it not permissible, (or inevitable), to suppose that, throughout the Middle Ages, hundreds or thousands of even devoted Churchmen saw in such measures the "losses irreparable," which the later Benedictine Dom Toussaints du Plessist perceived in the startling tragedy of the Fourteen? Certainly the intellectual and moral movement of the sixteenth century would find multitudes of people, both devout and indifferent worshippers, who had no ardent love for the priesthood of that day; and the persistent incursion of ecclesiastics into legal, social, and political affairs, had created a terrible danger of even social and political revolution, when the nations should realize that fact. Luther's Reformation is sometimes regarded as the strenuous revival of sacred family life and happiness. It is not indeed surprising to find the Religious Reformation closely connected with mundane events, if we remember the pretentions of the Hierarchy. The Pope, then, would, under all these circumstances, be well advised to hold a Council, whether he personally wished it or not. Assured of adherence from friendly princes, he took a favourable occasion to call one himself, and the Council of Trent was opened in 1545, whose sessions extended over several years. There were various decrees for the ordering of Church ceremony and amendment of Church discipline. The protestant doctrine of "Justification" was by this Council rejected. Revelation was discussed; and it was settled that certain unwritten Tradition must be accepted as reverentially as Scripture. "Transubstantiation "Transubstantiation" was again affirmed. The doctrinal result of the Council was to thwart the new reliance on the Scriptures as complete authorities, and, by practically retaining in seven authorized Sacraments *Torrey's Translation 1889, Vol. VI, pp. 153, 154. See also Hallam's Middle Ages, Chapter VII. +Histoire de l'Eglise de Meaux, 1731. Tome I, p. 348. Though the seven Sacraments were already recognized as early as the ninth century, when the custom of priestly unction was definitely sanctioned, yet the name had been applied to other religious usages that were excluded later. (See Neander, Vol. VI, p. 146.) a strong control of the hierarchy over the life of man, to assist the uncertain discipline of the churches. If an ordinary observer of mankind be asked what would probably happen under the conditions which preceded this tardy Council, will he not suggest that the growing disciplinary vigour would seek to exercise itself, in some form or other, upon the doctrinal dissidents? Such in fact was the case. The guardians of discipline, with all their wish to support their orders, to do their official work, to restore strict observance of religious duties, or to keep their own places, properties, and influence, found themselves face to face, not merely with careless incumbents and ill-behaved friars, but also with the many extreme advocates of reform for both hierarchy and doctrine. These might possibly, on their side, not have gone so far in their doctrinal dissent, had the Church's disciplinary reformation shown more reality, with less bigotry and desperation. Indeed, in England and Germany, where the Reformation succeeded more easily than in the South of Europe, the Churches so re-cast seem less bitterly hostile to Latin opinion, than were the dissenters of France and the South. The protestants generally were so zealous, however, for what they considered vital doctrines, and so frequent in their attacks on the abuses of the priesthood, that the Roman Church, weakened as she was, found her disciplinary powers needed to crush these people. This, in an age which little regarded human suffering, easily led to her employment of the Inquisition, her punitive alliance with the still jealous Civil Power, and the nett results of torture and death to the protestants. Ages before the time we are particularly concerned with, the Church had used means for enquiring into heresies, and punishment of heretics. The system took definite form in the establishment of the Dominican Inquisition in the 13th century. That institution had fallen into decay, though protestants against the clergy and their teachings still suffered from time to time, and a supreme tribunal for Spain had been established. After the abortive termination of the Ratisbon Conference, Cardinal Caraffa, to solve the difficulty, had spoken for a searching Inquisition. He was supported by Toledo of Burgos. The policy adopted was: to suppress and uproot “errors,” and let no vestige of them remain. The plan was a supreme tribunal of Inquisition at Rome, on which the others should depend. Loyola supported the proposition. The bull was The bull was published in 1542. published in 1542. Ranke says: a fearful state of things, and then more especially so, when |