CRISTO RAUL.ORG

READING HALL

THE DOORS OF WISDOM

CHAPTER XXI.

The Protestant Revolt in Scandinavia and Switzerland. —Heretical Movements among the Latin Races.

The separation of the Scandinavian kingdoms from the centre of Christian unity had a close affinity with the same movement in England. In the former case as in the latter the momentous change originated with and was accomplished by the despotic authority of the Crown. One feature, however, differentiated the two; while Henry VIII was an opponent of the teaching of Luther, the latter was encouraged by all the means in their power by Frederick I of Denmark and Gustavus Wasa of Sweden.

That the overthrow of the ancient Church among the vigorous peoples of the Scandinavian kingdoms was carried out in a comparatively short space of time is more easily understood if we reflect that Christianity was of late growth in those regions and that, lying at the furthermost bounds of the sphere of Papal authority, they felt but feebly the influence of the Holy See. Other circumstances leading up to an apostasy and making it easier were the secular lives of so many of the clergy, the great riches of the Church exciting the covetousness of needy kings, and last, but not least, the deep implication of the episcopate in political affairs.

In order to ward off the dangers threatening the Catholic religion, the bishops of Denmark had inserted in the capitulation on the election of the new King, formerly Duke Frederick of Holstein, not merely a promise to protect “Holy Church and her servants,” but also the express stipulation never to permit a “heretic, whether a follower of Luther or others, to spread his teaching privately or publicly” in his kingdom. The capitulation of the 3rd of August 1523 established further that only Danish nobles were to be appointed to bishoprics, only Danish subjects to benefices, and that no foreigner—thus not even the Pope—should dare take proceedings against Danish prelates, or pronounce any decision in Rome in connection with the Danish episcopate on any ecclesiastical matter. These decrees can only be partially explained and excused on the ground of the abuses in the Roman Curia, but they shot far beyond the mark; indeed, they opened the road to a Danish National Church on the lines of the Gallican, and that at a moment when it was of vital importance that the ties of Church unity should not be relaxed From this time onwards the spirituality were compelled, in their opposition to the Protestant teaching already permeating Denmark, to seek their only support in the nobles and the Crown. That no reliance could be placed on either was, only too quickly, to be shown.

As soon as King Frederick I felt himself secure on his throne, he began with great caution and shrewd calculation to take steps prejudicial to the Church. He broke his oath and gave assistance to the Protestant movement; on the 23rd of October 1526 he appointed as his chaplain Hans Tausen, a Knight Hospitaller who had broken his vows. At the Diet at Odense in November of the same year he demanded that the fees on presentation to livings paid to the Papal treasury, as well as the annates, should in future be spent on the defences of the kingdom. The Royal Council agreed, and, as it seems, the Bishops also, who hoped to save the main position by making concessions. Their endeavours to win over the nobility through a “questionable servility” to take part against Luther’s “unchristian teaching” also came to nothing, and all further compliance proved useless. The King extended his protection to the Protestants in an increasing degree, tolerated their violence towards Catholics, and filled vacant sees with creatures of his own, who were neither consecrated, nor acknowledged by the Pope. At the Diet at Copenhagen in 1530 upwards of one-and-twenty Lutheran preachers appeared and presented as their Confession of Faith forty-three articles containing passionate and injurious attacks on Catholics. The Catholic prelates, who were accompanied by their ablest theologians, in particular by the Carmelite Paulus Helia, a noted disputant, raised bitter complaints of their unjust treatment. They appealed to the election capitulation, and demanded the suppression of the Protestant movement. It was all in vain. Frederick I. came forward openly on the side of the Lutheran preachers and declared that throughout the kingdom “he who had grace” should have permission to teach.

Under cover of the King’s favours the Protestants in Copenhagen and other places took possession by force of churches and convents. A further impetus was given to the Lutheran cause by the unsuccessful attempt of Christian II, who had ostensibly become reconciled to the Church, to recover his kingdom. After the death of Frederick I (10th of April 1533) an interregnum ensued in the hands of the nobles and bishops, who deferred the election of a new king. While this lasted the majority in the Royal Council who were still Catholic tried to restore the Church to her ancient rights, but the attempt was a complete failure from the beginning, for the higher clergy thought more of power and property than of the old faith. Although the recess of the Diet in June 1533 afforded legitimate opportunity for strenuous action against the preachers, the bishops showed no energy. Therefore the Lutheran agitation, even if not quite openly, was able to pursue its course.

Almost at the same time as Denmark, Sweden was torn from the Catholic Church. Here also the decisive steps were taken by the Crown; Gustavus Wasa knew that the introduction of Lutheran teaching was the surest method of breaking down the power of the bishops and improving his scanty revenues from Church property. Although Clement VII. showed a very conciliatory spirit, and at the end of 1525 confirmed Johann Magni in the administration of the Archbishopric of Upsala until the affair of Trolle should be settled, the King gave powerful support to everyone who showed hostility to Catholicism; members of religious orders especially who were disloyal to their vows could be sure of his protection. At the same time, on the plea of the “revolutionary axiom that necessity knows no law, human or divine,” he set to work, by a system of open spoliation, to destroy the material foundations of the ancient Church.

It was a circumstance of great advantage to the King that five sees (Upsala, Strengnas, Vesteras, Skara, and Abo) were uncanonically occupied and that Bishop Ingemar of Vexjö was aged and compliant, so that the noted Bishop Johann Brask of Linkoping, “the cleverest and most learned Swede of his day and the truest friend of his country,” stood alone. Yet the majority of the nation, especially the country folk, held fast to their old faith. The brave and stubborn inhabitants of the province of Dalekarlien, with whose help Gustavus Wasa had once gained his victory over the Danes, were, in particular, roused to serious revolt Their uprising was fanned by former favourites of Gustavus who had quarrelled with him: the deposed Bishop Peter Sunnanvader of Vesteras and his capitular provost Knut. The poverty and suffering among the people was a punishment, they declared, for the conduct of the King, who although, on his election, he had sworn to defend the Church, was now despoiling churches and convents, priests and monks, and carrying off monstrances and chalices and shrines of saints.

Gustavus Wasa, however, knew well how to get the upper hand of the movement in Dalekarlien; judicious leniency and promises of money quelled the rebellion; Sunnanvader and Knut fled to Norway. Yet the King only displayed greater ruthlessness towards the property of the Church, and the truly catholic Johann Magni he got rid of by sending him on an embassy to Poland and Russia.

On the 19th of September 1526 Clement VII addressed the Bishops of Linkoping and Vesteras. He complained that the Swedish clergy took wives, changed the ritual of the Mass, gave Communion in both kinds, and neglected Extreme Unction; he ordered the bishops to invoke the aid of the secular arm, and adjured his beloved son Gustavus and the nobles of Sweden to take up the cause of the endangered faith. That the Pope even now continued to hope in Wasa shows strikingly how insufficiently they were informed at Rome as to the true state of things in the north. By the next year all illusions on the subject of the Swedish King’s position were at an end. The conflict between the Pope and Emperor had entered on its most acute phase when Gustavus broke away. On this occasion as on others he had grasped, with the intuition of genius, the appropriate moment to choose. With no less skill he knew how to turn opinion against Clement VII.

At this time the Swedish Catholics were completely cowed. Under letters of safe-conduct Gustavus had enticed into Sweden the two leaders of the Dalekarlian rising: first Knut and afterwards Sunnanvader as well. As soon as they were there he gave them over to the harshest insults and later ordered their execution. While the impression made by these vindictively penal measures against two great ecclesiastics was still fresh, the separation of Sweden from Rome ensued by means of the coup d’état of the Diet of Vesteras in June 1527. Before the assembly had yet opened the bishops drew up a protest against the threatened persecution of the Church ; but none had the courage to present it! In the Diet itself, the Bishop of Linkoping, Johann Brask, alone at first had the spirit to speak out against the proposals of the King ; without the Pope’s assent he could not agree to alterations in doctrine and the existing condition of the Church. After the leader of the nobles had spoken in the same sense, the King announced with tears that he must abdicate the crown and leave the country he had freed from Danish servitude to its fate. This “brilliant piece of acting” did not fail of its effect. As the Bishop-elect of Strengnas, Magnus Sommar, weakly counselled compliance, and the nobles saw a vision opening before them of a share in the plunder of the Church, the acceptance of the King’s demands was not withheld. Accordingly the Crown took free possession of the appointment to bishoprics, chapters, and convents, with the disposition of their revenues. “The pure word and Gospel of God” was also to be preached within the realm ; the nobility were empowered to demand back gifts made by their predecessors since 1454, and the bishops declared in a special decree that “they rejoiced to leave their riches or their poverty to the King’s will.” By a special enactment the Church in Sweden was thus at once made dependent in every respect on the will of the sovereign. The first step that followed was a great spoliation of churches and convents in which the victims were specially enjoined to submit to secularization “without making much fuss.” Bishop Brask went into exile, and on the 7th of November 1527 Gustavus instructed the Bishop-elect of Strengnas that, as the common people would not be contented with unconsecrated bishops, he might take steps for his early consecration, although the rite in itself was not necessary.[334] Thereupon the above-named, together with two others, had himself consecrated by Bishop Magni of Vesteras on the 5th of January 1528. Magni had given his consent to this schismatical act on receiving a written promise from the consecrandi that they would afterwards seek confirmation from Rome. Naturally the matter was never heard of again. In February 1529 a “National Council” held at Orebro agreed to the retention of many Catholic externals in order to deceive the people, the majority of whom were averse to a change of faith. Nevertheless, the people on the whole refused to be deceived. In many provinces, especially in Smaland, East and West Gothland, and also in Dalekarlien, risings occurred; but the King, by judicious kindness in some cases, by merciless severity in others, was able to overcome such troubles.

In 1531 Gustavus ordered the election to the Archbishopric of Upsala of Laurentius, younger brother of Olaus Petri. The Bishops of Vesteras and Strengnas, who at heart were still Catholics, drew up a protest against it. Indeed, even the Bishops of Skara and Vexjö declared that they only consented because otherwise they had nothing to expect but imprisonment and the ruin of their churches—a clear evidence that Lutheranism had not sunk deep into the Swedish clergy. Still, the opposition of the Catholic-minded clergy could only be expressed in private. For their overthrow the Swedish clergy were not free from responsibility. Weak-spirited servility and worldliness of life made it easy for a monarch gifted intellectually and possessed of all the resources of an effective monarchy, to destroy the ancient Church and from its wealth bestow on the Crown a solid basis of material power. In Sweden as in Denmark the monarchy had of course to surrender to the nobility a share of the plunder of the inheritance of the Church; for the great bulk of the people the social and political consequences of the change of religion were highly unfavourable.

The Swiss were more fortunate than the Swedes in their opposition to the introduction of the new teaching. The man who headed the Protestant movement in Switzerland, Ulrich Zwingli, had certainly come under Luther’s influence, but in many respects was entirely independent of him. There were points of essential difference in their doctrines. This man, who at the same time was flinging himself into schemes of vast scope and of grave danger to the existence of the Confederation, went far further than Luther, and in his antagonism to the Catholics was more uncompromising. The movement for the overthrow of the Catholic Church let loose in Zurich by Zwingli had spread itself very soon over a considerable portion of German Switzerland, yet Lucerne, Zug, and the three forest cantons Schwyz, Uri, and Unterwalden, the original nucleus of the Confederation, remained true to the Catholic faith. Clement VII. had already turned his attention to Swiss affairs in a Consistory held on the 14th of December 1523. The Swiss Nuncio Ennio Filonardi was recalled to Rome to make a report and receive fresh instructions. At the end of February 1524 Filonardi returned to his post, but he was obliged at first to remain at Constance, for the French envoys were working against him in the Catholic cantons; but in Zurich, now given over to the new teaching, the very mention of a Papal representative was scouted. Clement, on his part, made the payment of the outstanding arrears of pay to Zurich dependent on the fidelity of the canton to the Catholic religion.

The Catholic cantons, in view of the wide dissemination of the new doctrine, wished a learned theologian to be sent them who should make head against Zwingli and at the same time have full powers to provide for the reforms to be taken in hand for the remedy of ecclesiastical evils. To the latter request Clement gave an evasive answer, and in February 1525 once more delegated Filonardi, a man who. had proved himself a clever diplomatist in secular affairs but who, notwithstanding all his knowledge of the situation in Switzerland was wanting in the deeper understanding of the ecclesiastical question. No wonder that his mission was a failure. How little the real state of things was understood in Rome is shown by Clement’s action in sending in 1526 a summons to the Government of Zurich to send deputies to Rome to discuss the settlement of questions in dispute. The Curia was at that time so engrossed in high policy of state that it was impossible to bestow the necessary attention on the Church affairs of Switzerland. For this reason the success obtained by the Catholics in May 1526 at the Disputation of Baden was never adequately followed up; support from Rome was lacking; communication with the Holy See grew less and less, while the ecclesiastical revolution sped upon its way.

Even after the settlement of Italian affairs the Pope, irresolute and parsimonious, did not give sufficient support to the champions of the Catholic cause in Switzerland. Even when Zurich laid an embargo on the transport of provisions to the Catholic cantons, thus conjuring up the outbreak of the civil war, Clement confined his assistance to the despatch of briefs and recommendations. Things reached a climax when at last he forbade the transport of grain and salt, and tried to rouse the Catholic princes, especially the Emperor, to intervene with military force. Charles V, summing up the situation coolly, refused to be drawn in. Although the Catholic cantons were thus thrown on their own resources, the wager of battle was in their favour. On the nth of October 1531 the men of Zurich were defeated at Kappel, and Zwingli, who had taken part in the fight in full armour, was among the slain. The illusions already cherished by Clement VII regarding the Zurichers now acquired fresh strength; he hoped that the success just gained would bring to an end the Swiss revolt from Rome. “Now,” after the Catholic victory, wrote Loaysa from Rome on the 24th of October 1531, “Clement will persevere in trying to persuade them to return and retrace their steps”; only if the other cantons are determined on revenge, should help, in the Pope’s opinion, be given to the Catholic cantons.

When this proved to be the case, Clement at last, on the 29th of October 1531, sent 3000 ducats to the gallant defenders of the Catholic cause. In November, after long consultation, he gave orders for the enlistment of four thousand men, and appointed Filonardi Legate to the Swiss and Commissary-General of the Catholic forces. Further generous help would be raised by a tax on the Italian clergy in general; this plan, however, was frustrated by the opposition of Venice, and the Papal relief came too late, for by the 20th of November 1531 the five cantons had made peace with Zurich on very moderate conditions—so moderate that Luther deeply deplored that “they had left any room in their treaty for the continuance of Zwinglism, and had not even condemned that error, but allowed it to exist alongside of what they call their ancient, unquestioned faith.” Clement also regretted that the Catholics had not followed up their victory more completely, and expressed the hope that the unity of Switzerland might be restored by the return of the separated members to the Church. What took place in the latter respect was greatly exaggerated by Filonardi. His despatched to Rome show how his judgment on affairs was influenced by his optimism.

The Swiss Catholics also overestimated the success at first secured in a series of places by the restoration of Catholic order. Only gradually did the Nuncio, who had hoped to recall the rebellious to their obedience by means of friends and money, begin to realize the deeper significance of the movement of revolt. Once more despatched to Switzerland in July 1532, Filonardi’s reports dwelt no longer on the reconquest of the lapsed cantons by the Church; on the other hand, his presence in the country proved to be of even greater utility for the religious strengthening of those portions which remained true to the faith. Since he was the rallying-point for the true elements of the Catholic system, his recall, ordered from Marseilles on the 17th of October 1533, out of considera­tion for Francis I, was a measure bound to do harm to the interests of that system in Switzerland.

If the Swiss Catholics did not make as good a use of their victory as they might have done, this was due, in great part, to the envoys of Francis I, who, in pursuit of their master’s policy of conquest, encouraged the religious dissensions of Switzerland as well as those of Germany. In his own country, in which Luther’s followers had already begun to be active, although at first only within a narrow circle, the King’s attitude from the beginning had been an undecided one. As a man “in whom an insatiable love of pleasure was joined with a thoroughly Gallic frivolity,” Francis was entirely wanting in that genuine catholicity of feeling which animated his rival Charles V. The King’s sister, Marguerite of Angouleme, was in open sympathy with the reformers. The French Catholics had strong support in the Parliament and the Sorbonne; the latter had immediately declared against Luther, and, notwithstanding an attitude by no means friendly to the Papacy, was stoutly opposed to the Protestant doctrine. Also the Chancellor Du Prat, since 1525 Archbishop of Sens, and the Grand Master of France, Anne de Montmorency, stood firm for Catholic interests. The captivity of Francis I. appeared to earnest Catholics to be a punishment for his previous negligence regarding the heretics. The Queen Regent now associated herself with the Pope in taking penal measures, and the Parliament took several steps against the reformers, two of whom were executed. In December 1527 the clergy demanded, in return for their financial support of the King, among other things, the “destruction of the Lutheran sect,” to which Francis had to agree. In several provincial synods, to the satisfaction of Clement VII, measures were taken for the reform of ecclesiastical evils and the punishment of the new teachers. The latter injured their cause seriously by seizing, on a night in May 1528, in Paris, a picture of Our Lady and the Infant Christ, and throwing it in the mud. The Catholic feeling of the populace was aroused by this impiety to such a degree that even Francis I found it advisable to take part in the procession of reparation which followed. As the total defeat of the French army in Naples in August 1528 forced the King to seek the friendship of the Pope, the Government completely threw over the Protestant party. The Lutheran, Louis de Becquin, who had on two occasions been protected by Francis (1523 and 1526), was now condemned and executed (April 1529).

That Francis I, in questions of religion, was governed by motives of political expediency only, is proved by his alliance in 1531 with the German Protestants, whose support seemed to him valuable since they were a source of weakness in the Emperor’s dominions. It is worth noting in this connection that immediately after his meeting with the Head of the Church at Marseilles, Francis engaged in a conference with the most enterprising of all the leaders of Protestantism in Germany, Philip of Hesse.

On his way back from Marseilles, where Clement VII. had issued a Bull against the French Lutherans, he sent written instructions to the Archbishop of Paris to take proceedings against heresy in the capital. But six months later the King’s Councillor, Guillaume du Bellay, was opening up negotiations with Melanchthon to bring about an agreement on the religious question. Du Bellay gave the German Protestants to understand that Francis was inclined to approve of the Lutheran doctrine and prepared to enter into an alliance for the protection of that sect from the attacks of the Emperor.

Such was the position of things in the spring of 1534, when Clement VII, who with an eye to the spread of heresy in France had sharply prohibited preaching without episcopal permission, died. The attitude of the French King was more than doubtful, while the Sorbonne continued as before to maintain a strongly Catholic position. At this juncture two circumstances combined to the advantage of the Catholic cause; the Church, bound up with the greatest traditions of the French nation, was dear to the bulk of the population; an opposition between the people and the clergy, such as was to be found in many places in Germany, did not exist. Another factor of not less importance was the absence, owing to the Concordat, of any temptation for the Crown to lay hands on Church property ; on the contrary, it was to the advantage of the monarchy that the status quo should be maintained in France.

Like France, Italy did not escape the impact of the new teaching; but in the latter country there were almost insuperable impediments to a widespread diffusion of the Protestant doctrine. In the first place, throughout the length and breadth of the Italian people there existed, in spite of all ecclesiastical abuses, a great body of traditional religious feeling of a genuine Catholic character. This raised a barrier against any defection on a large scale from the Church of the past ages. In no other country in Europe, with the exception of Spain, had the Catholic faith struck deeper roots and knit itself more completely into the fibres of national life. The manifold development of Christian beneficence and, not less, the magnificent creations of art, bore witness to the living energy of this Catholic force. The genuine Catholic instinct, resident in all classes of the Italian people, taught them to distinguish, with precision, between persons and things. Therefore the dangerous feeling of hostility to the secularized Papacy was kept within strict limits and in all matters of importance was limited to the middle and higher ranks of society. Yet the latter were influenced by material and national points of view which made any idea of a breach with the Holy See abortive. The Italian saw with pride that Italy comprised the central point of Christendom together with the highest civilization in art and learning, and thus acquired the sure position of leader among all the countries of the West. Again, there were the countless but very tangible advantages, especially to the middle and higher classes, accruing from the fact that the “magisterium” of the Church was wielded on Italian soil. Granted that indignation at the secularization of the Papacy was sometimes acute, a sober consideration of actual facts brought men back to the conviction that the general interest lay not in the destruction but in the maintenance of the Holy See. Again, the Pope and the deeply Catholic-minded Emperor possessed a political power in Italy which made any support of Lutheranism by the minor principalities of the peninsula a sheer impossibility. Lastly, it was a point of vital importance that Clement VII was thoroughly informed on Italian affairs and was therefore in a position to intervene in them with success.

The first intrusion of Lutheran views began, naturally enough, in upper Italy, where communication with Germany and Switzerland was always active. A constant stream of travellers, drawn mainly from the mercantile and student classes, passed to and fro and very early brought Lutheran notions and Lutheran writings into these localities. As early as 1519 and up to 1520 Luther’s writings were sold not only in Venice but also in Pavia and even in Bologna, and in the spring of 1520 a monk named Andrea da Ferrara, who followed Luther’s doctrine, preached sermons in Venice; a similar preacher in Milan was mentioned in despatches in the following year. Leo X, as well as the Patriarch of Venice, was not slow in taking preventive measures corresponding to the occasion. Nor was Clement VII deficient in vigilance; on the 24th of January 1524 he urged on the Nuncios at Venice and Naples that the decrees of the Lateran Council concern­ing preachers and printers should be observed. At the same time the Pope took measures against those who were suspected of heresy in Mirandola, Padua, and Naples.

Not merely Luther’s views but the far more advanced tenets of Zwingli found early acceptance in Italy. Letters of the Augustinian Egidio della Porta of Como prove that he and some of his associates were prepared in 1525 to quit Italy and throw in their lot with Zwingli.5 In November 1526 Clement VII instructed the Chapter of Sitten, and in January 1527 the Minorite, Tommaso Illyrico, to take proceedings against the Lutherans in Savoy. A Papal Bull of July 1528 ordered the Bishop and Inquisitor of Brescia to support the gratifying activity of the citizens of that city against Lutheranism, and in particular to pronounce judgment on the Carmelite Giambattista Pallavicini, who in the preceding Lent had proclaimed Lutheran doctrines from the pulpit. In Bergamo the excellent Bishop Pietro Lippomano had been busy since 1527 in preventing the spread of Lutheran writings smuggled in from Switzerland. On the 27th of August 1528 Clement addressed from Viterbo a circular letter to the bishops of Italy exhorting them as good pastors of the flock of Christ to suppress the heresy now beginning to penetrate the fold; the penitent were to be treated graciously, but the obstinate punished severely with the help of the secular power.

The decree sent by Clement VII from Bologna on the 15th of January 1530 to the General of the Dominicans, Paolo Butigella, inquisitor in Modena and Ferrara, had also a general character. In it the Pope dwelt on the spread of Lutheran error among clergy and laity in various parts of Italy, so that some by speeches, some even by sermons in church, were trying to turn away the faithful in Christ from their obedience to the Church. The Arian heresy, at first merely a spark, had, because unsuppressed, become a conflagration embracing the whole world; he wished therefore to take measures in time. Butigella and all inquisitors of his order were therefore exhorted to act vigorously against Luther’s adherents; at the same time full powers were given for the reconciliation of the penitent as well as spiritual graces for the associations founded by the inquisitors for the prevention of erroneous teaching. Besides these general directions special orders were also sent in individual instances, and these especially concerned the Duchy of Savoy and the Venetian Republic.

The propagation of Lutheran views in the Duchy of Savoy was another outcome of the proximity of Switzerland. Clement VII called on the inquisitors, the bishops, the Nuncio, and before all the Duke Charles III, to take measures. Charles viewed the whole situation from a purely political point of view. The outbreak of Protestant tendencies in Geneva was very advantageous to him, as he was now able to invest his long-standing dispute with that city with a religious character. His reports to Clement of the state of things in Geneva were so bad that the Pope, in his increased anxiety, placed at his disposal a portion of the Church revenues for the subjection of the city. Clement was not aware that Charles had greatly exaggerated the danger to Catholicism in Geneva, nor had he perceived that the Duke, working only in his own interest, was rendering a sorry service to the Church by mixing up the political question of Genevan independence with that of the religious innovations. The Pope only saw in the Duchy of Savoy a strong bulwark against the intrusion of Protestantism into Italy, and therefore issued exhortations in all directions to give support to Charles III.

While Clement VII was alarmed at the introduction of Protestant views into the west of upper Italy, their influence had already become firmly established in the east. Notwithstanding the repeated burning of heretical books and the sermons of Dominican preachers, Luther’s followers had increased to such an extent that at Easter 1528 he was able to give public expression to his delight. In March 1530 the Council of Ten expressly refused to take action, as the Republic of Venice was a free state. The purveyors of Lutheran teaching were, in the main, members of religious orders who had broken their vows. The activity of such Protestant “brothers” was not con­fined to Venice; they were busy in many other places as well. The attitude of the Venetian Government made the position of the Nuncio and his sympathetic predecessor Gian Pietro Carafa by no means an easy one. The latter, in October 1532, had sent the Pope a memorial which made the dangers of the situation clear as day. Herein Carafa, in the plainest terms, drew the Pope’s attention to the half-hearted fidelity of the Venetians to the ancient faith shown in their neglect of fasts and the confessional, and in their toleration of heretical teaching and heretical books. The leaders of the movement were members of religious orders, many of whom had broken their vows and were roaming about. Carafa named some of them, disciples of a deceased Franciscan. He announced that the Franciscans Girolamo Galateo and Alessandro of Pieve di Sacco were in confinement, while their associate and sympathizer Bartolomeo Fonzio had fled to Augsburg. The latter had powerful friends in the Curia who had procured for him a Papal Brief; to this Carafa opposed earnest remonstrances. “A heretic,” he said, “must be treated as such; the Pope lowers himself if he writes to him and flatters him or even allows graces to be procured for him; it is, indeed, possible that in this or that instance some good result may follow, but as a rule the recipients of such favours are only made more obdurate and gain fresh adherents.” He then urged the Pope to hold the reins more tightly on his officials and to be less generous in the matter of apostolic Briefs. In the cause of God’s honour and his own responsible office he must apply himself to measures of opposition; in times of danger such as the present, it is inadmissible to remain in the old grooves. Ori the outbreak of a war every day some new preparations for defence are called for, so also in the spiritual contest in which the Church is now engaged the Pope must be ever on the alert. His Holiness should provide an able inquisitor, such as was Martino da Treviso, and despatch a special Papal Legate to Venice. Since heresy, in most cases, is the product of erroneous writings and preaching or of evil living, the attack should be made in that direction. Owing to the apathy of the bishops and heads of religious orders the Pope should insist strongly on the faculties for preaching and hearing confessions being exclusively confined to priests of blameless character. Moreover, it is absolutely necessary that an end should be made to the monstrous prevalence of vagrant monks—“the apostates,” as Carafa calls them. The Penitentiary should abstain henceforth from dispensing permissions to leave the cloister; for these “apostates,” to the incalculable scandal of religion, had unfortunately become masters within a wide circle of the cure of souls and only too often were the servants of heresy and men of evil life. The Pope therefore would do well to reserve to himself the permission to leave the cloister, and only grant such permission in cases of pressing necessity; but to the “ apostates ” no pastoral charge should be given. Carafa, in addition, drew up a formal programme of reform of the secular and regular clergy, of which further mention will be made later on.

As a fountain-head of heresy Carafa noted the dissemination of heretical writings which were sold in Venice without any attempt at concealment, were bought by many persons, clerical and lay, by whom they were read, sometimes in contempt of the ecclesiastical censures thereby incurred, and sometimes on appeal to the possession of the necessary permission. Such licences must in future be granted very rarely, while those already issued should be recalled.

Clement VII was not the man to carry out such stringent precautions; in single instances, e.g. with regard to the sale of heretical writings, he certainly directed his Nuncio to take steps, and also renewed some earlier ordinances against itinerant monks. But the comprehensive regulations for reform called for by Carafa, especially in the case of the regular and secular clergy, came to nothing. Since in this way the sources of heresy were not dammed up, repressive measures, such as the appointment of the Augustinian Callisto da Piacenza as Inquisitor-General for the whole of Italy, gave only a superficial help. Although Carafa in his struggle with heresy was warmly supported by Aleander, sent as Nuncio  to Venice in March 1533, the situation continued to be dangerous.

Aleander’s reports as Nuncio contain many complaints both of the corruption of the clergy and of the growth of heresy, now making its way in Venice even among the lower classes. Among the preachers of Lutheran opinions there was a carpenter who, on being brought to trial at the instance of Aleander, defended himself by quoting sentences from the Bible. In October 1533 Aleander set in motion a Papal prohibition against the misuse of the Pauline epistles as commented upon from the pulpit in Italian by some illiterate members of the mendicant Orders. The ferment in the city was increased by the preaching of the Florentine, Fra Zaccaria, who publicly depicted in glowing colours the corruption in the Curia, and even spoke of the Pope in insulting terms. The Signoria, then on strained relations with Clement VII, took no steps against the offender, and in the matter of heresy Aleander repeatedly had to complain of their indifference. Not until an improvement took place in the Pope’s relations with Venice, consequent on the change in his political and ecclesiastical position, did an alteration begin. The trial of the Lutheran carpenter, who had found many protectors, now came to a close after having dragged on through a whole year, and ended in the condemnation of the accused to perpetual imprisonment. The same punishment befell Pietro Buonavita of Padua, who held Lutheran views. While Aleander was occupied in contending with other promoters of Lutheranism, among them being a French glovemaker, he received the news in June 1534 of the appearance of the new doctrines in Istria. In Venice itself the announcement of the success of the Protestants in Würtemberg reacted on the Government and their zeal against the Protestants slackened

Outside Venetian territory, in the closing days of Clement VII, only isolated followers of the German teachers were to be found in Italy, although writings by Luther and Melanchthon, in Italian translations, were scattered about among the people, sometimes under false names.