CHAPTER IX
REFORMATION IN FRANCE
THE Reformation in France never developed into a
national movement. Though the Protestants under the stress of persecution
consolidated themselves into a powerful and well-organized party, they never
formed more than a minority of the nation. The majority, whose attachment to
the Catholic Church was stronger than their desire for her reformation,
detested the Reformers as schismatics and
separatists even more than as heretics. When the Protestant ranks were
recruited by the accession of numerous political malcontents, a more worldly
leaven pervaded the whole cause; the principle of passive resistance was
abandoned, and an appeal to armed force became inevitable. The result was a
succession of religious wars, which lasted, though not continuously, for more than
thirty years. It was not till the beginning of the seventeenth century that
France, once more at peace with herself, was able to work out on her own lines
a Counter-Reformation.
Yet at the beginning of the sixteenth century nearly
all enlightened men were agreed as to the necessity for Reform. The evils under
which the Church in France labored were those which prevailed elsewhere;
rapacity and worldliness among the Bishops and abbots, ignorance in the
inferior clergy, great relaxation of discipline, and, in some cases, positive
immorality in the monasteries and nunneries; and as the result an ever-widening
separation between religion and morality. The first of these evils was a
favorite topic with the popular preachers of Paris, the Franciscans, Michel Menot and Olivier Maillard,
and the Dominican, Guillaume Pépin. On the
other hand, the everyday story of the period has more to say about the
ignorance of the parish priests and the immorality of the friars. The
Franciscans seem to have been especially unpopular. All ranks of the Church
alike fell under the lash of Sebastian Brant’s Ship of Fools and
Erasmus’ Praise of Folly, both of which were translated into French
and widely read.
But Frenchmen can relish satire even of what they
love, and the people were none the less sincere in their attachment to the
Church because they applauded the sallies of the jester. This attachment was
all the stronger because it sprang as much from a national as from a religious
feeling. Ever since the days of Philip the Fair France had maintained an
independent attitude towards the Papacy. During the Avignon Captivity the Popes
had been her obedient servants. At the Council of Constance it was two
Frenchmen, Jean Gerson and Pierre d'Ailly, who were chiefly
instrumental in bringing about the declaration that Councils are superior to
Popes. The Pragmatic Sanction (1438), as has been related in the first volume,
gave definite shape to the liberties of the Gallican Church,
and, though during the reigns of Louis XI and Charles VIII it was more or less
in abeyance, the position of the French Church towards the Papacy remained
practically unaltered. Louis XII formally restored the Pragmatic; and in his
contest with Pope Julius II skillfully made use of the popular poet,
Pierre Gringore, to
influence public opinion. In his famous tetralogy of Le Jeu du Prince des Sots et Mère Sotte,
played at Paris on Shrove-Tuesday, 1511, the Pope was held up to open ridicule.
Thus in France there were no motives of personal interest at work to make a
revolt from Rome desirable. The effect of the Concordat, the substitution of
which for the Pragmatic (1516) was the only reform that the Fifth Lateran
Council gave to France, was to put the French Church under the authority, not
of the Pope, but of the King.
But the change in the method of appointing Bishops and
Abbots from canonical election to nomination by the Crown, which was the chief
feature of the Concordat, while it put an end to the noisier forms of scandal
in the elections, greatly increased what many regarded as the root of the whole
evil, the non-residence and worldly character of the superior clergy. For
Francis I found that the patronage of some six hundred bishoprics and abbeys
furnished him with a convenient and inexpensive method of providing for his
diplomatic service, and of rewarding literary merit. A large number of abbeys
were held by laymen, and even Bishops were not always in orders; pluralism in
an aggravated form was common; the case of Cardinal Jean of Lorraine has been
noticed in an earlier chapter; his brother Cardinal, Jean du Bellay, at one
time enjoyed the revenues of five sees and fourteen abbeys. Italians shared
largely in the royal patronage, and in 1560 it was estimated that they held
one-third of all the benefices in the kingdom. It was this new method of
patronage which more than anything paralyzed all attempts at reform. It was
idle to talk of reform at the bottom when at the top every personal interest
was bound up with the existing corruption.
An impulse to reform was clearly needed from without.
This was furnished by the Renaissance. For it was inevitable that the spirit of
free enquiry, which was the main characteristic of that movement, should also
invade the domain of religious dogma and Church institutions, and that,
penetrating here as elsewhere to the sources, it should apply itself to the
first-hand study of the book upon which dogma and institutions were ultimately
based. It was inevitable also that the spirit of individualism which was
another marked characteristic of the Renaissance should end in questioning the
right of the Church to be the sole interpreter of that book, and in asserting
boldly that the final test of all religion is its power to satisfy the needs of
the individual soul.
The connection between the two movements, the
Renaissance and the Reformation, was especially close in France. In both alike
the same man occupied an almost identical position, standing on a threshold
which he never actually crossed. This was Jacques Lefèvre, a native of Étaples in Picardy
(Faber Stapulensis).
After taking his degree in Arts in the University of Paris, he studied for some
time in Italy and then devoted himself to the teaching of Aristotle and
mathematics. He was also a busy writer and edited various works, including
Latin translations of most of Aristotle's works. Though his Latin was somewhat
barbarous and his knowledge of Greek imperfect, his services were warmly
recognized by younger scholars, many of whom were his pupils. In the year 1507,
when he was about fifty, he abandoned secular learning entirely for theology,
and in 1512 published a Latin translation of St Paul's Epistles, with a
commentary. The book was remarkable in two ways; first because a revised
version of the Vulgate was printed by the side of the traditional text, and
secondly because it anticipated two of the cardinal doctrines of the Lutheran
theology. Thus in the commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians
Lefèvre asserts that there is no merit in human works without the grace of God;
in that on the Epistle to the Hebrews he denies, though in somewhat less
precise language, the doctrine of Transubstantiation, while admitting the Real
Presence.
Lefèvre remained for some years after the publication
of this book in the seclusion of the abbey of St Germain-des-Près at Paris, where his
former pupil, Guillaume Briçonnet, was Abbot. His book, though it attracted the
attention of the learned, passed otherwise unnoticed. It was not till 1519 that
the spark which he had kindled was fanned into a flame by the dissemination of
Luther's Latin writings, which were read eagerly at Paris. But it was Briçonnet
who first put his hand to the practical work of reforming the Church in France.
Appointed to the see of Meaux in 1516 he had, after an absence of two years at
Rome on a special mission, returned full of zeal for the reformation of his
diocese. It was in the prosecution of this design that towards the close of the
year 1520 he summoned to Meaux his old tutor Lefèvre and certain of his friends
and pupils, all noted for their learning and piety, and all sharing more or
less in his theological views. Among them were François Vatable, eminent as an Hebrew scholar, Guillaume Farel, and Gérard Roussel. Another member of the group, Michel d'Arande, was already at Meaux.
They met with great favor from the Bishop, and throughout his diocese carried
on the work of “preaching Christ from the sources” with vigor and success. The
movement was watched with eager sympathy by the King’s sister, Margaret,
Duchess of Alençon, who had chosen the Bishop for her spiritual director and
was at this time carrying on with him a voluminous correspondence.
In June, 1523, Lefèvre published a revised French
translation of the four Gospels, the first installment of a new translation of
the whole Bible, which he had been urged to undertake by Margaret and her
mother. The rest of the New Testament followed before the end of the year.
Except in a few passages it was nothing more than a revision of Jean de Rély’s Bible, itself almost
an exact reproduction of the old thirteenth century translation; but its
publication did much to spread the knowledge of the New Testament. Though the
effect of Luther's writings in France was considerable, the French Reformers
showed almost from the first a tendency to base their theology rather on the
literary interpretation of the Scriptures than on the specially Lutheran
doctrine of Justification by Faith. Moreover, the geographical position of
France brought them naturally into closer relations with Bucer and Capito at
Strasburg, and with Oecolampadius at Basel, than with
Luther at Wittenberg.
1520-5] The Meaux preachers and the Sorbonne
For two and a half years the preaching at Meaux went
on without molestation and then the storm-clouds began to gather. Already on
April 15, 1521, the Faculty of Theology of the Paris University, commonly
called the Sorbonne, had formally condemned Luther’s writings, and on August 3
of the same year the Parliament of Paris had issued a proclamation that all
those who had any of these writings in their possession should deliver them up
under penalty of a fine or imprisonment. It was by virtue of this order that on
June 16, 1523, the books of Louis de Berquin, a gentleman of Picardy, noted for his
learning, were seized, examined, and censured as heretical. On October 15 the
Bishop of Meaux, whose sole desire was to reform the Church from within, and
who consequently had no sympathy with Luther's attitude of open revolt, issued
two synodal decrees : one against the
doctrines and books of Luther, and the other against certain heretical opinions
which had been preached in his diocese touching prayers for the dead and the
invocation of the Saints. The latter decree was probably aimed at Farel, whose fiery and logical
mind had carried him further than his companions, and who had left Meaux after
only a short sojourn to become the leader of an advanced section of the
movement which denied the Real Presence and showed generally an iconoclastic
and uncompromising spirit. The other preachers were still protected by the
Bishop in spite of the Paris Parliament. However, in March, 1525, an example
was made in the person of a wool-carder, named Jean Leclerc, who having
committed a fanatical outrage was whipped and branded, first at Paris and then
at Meaux. A few months later he was burnt at Metz for a similar offence.
While Francis was a prisoner at Madrid the
Queen-Mother, urged by her first minister, Cardinal Antoine Duprat, and by her own anxiety
to gain the support of the Pope, induced the Parliament to appoint a commission
for the trial of Lutherans. Many persons were imprisoned; Lefèvre’s translation of the New Testament was
condemned to be burned; and proceedings were instituted against the Meaux
preachers. They saved themselves by flight, finding a refuge at Strasburg in
the house of Capito (October, 1525). In January, 1526, Berquin was imprisoned, and on February 17 a
young bachelor of arts named Joubert was
burnt at Paris for holding Lutheran doctrines.
On March 17 Francis returned from captivity; and on
the very day of his arrival in France he sent an order for the Parliament to
suspend all action against Berquin,
who after considerable delay was set at liberty. Lefèvre, Roussel, and Arande,
who still called themselves members of the Catholic Church, were recalled from
exile, and Lefèvre was appointed tutor to the King's third son. In spite of the
execution of Jacques Pauvan,
one of the Meaux preachers against whom proceedings had been taken with the
full approval of the King (August 28, 1526), the hopes of the Reformers began
to rise; and, on the whole, up to the end of 1527 things seemed to be taking a
turn in their favor. But on December 16 of that year the King, being in straits
for money for the ransom of his sons, summoned an Assembly of Notables; and,
when the representatives of the clergy accompanied their vote of 1,300,000 livres with a request that he would take measures for
the repression of Lutheranism, he gave a ready assent.
An outrage on a statue of the Virgin at Paris (May 31,
1528) furnished him with an opportunity of proving his sincerity, and he took
part in a magnificent expiatory procession. Not long afterwards Berquin was again brought
to trial and found guilty of heresy. Francis left him to his fate, and he was
burnt on April 17, 1529. “He might have been the Luther of France”, says
Theodore Beza, “had Francis been a Frederick of
Saxony”. Meanwhile an important provincial synod, that of Sens, had been
sitting at Paris from February to October of 1528 under the presidency of
Cardinal Duprat, the
Archbishop of Sens, for the purpose of devising measures for the repression of
heresy. Similar synods were held for the provinces of Bourges and Lyons.
For two and a half years after Berquin’s death the King
showed no favor to the Reformers. But in the autumn of 1532 another change in
his religious policy began to make itself felt. The ever shifting course of his
diplomacy had now brought him into a close alliance with Henry VIII and into
relations with the Protestant Princes of Germany. It was perhaps significant of
this change that Jean du Bellay who, like his brother Guillaume, was in favor
of a moderate reform of the Church, was at this time appointed Bishop of Paris.
During the whole of Lent, 1533, Gérard Roussel,
at the instigation of Margaret, now Queen of Navarre, and of her husband,
preached daily in the Louvre to large congregations; and when Noel Beda and
some other doctors of the Sorbonne ventured to accuse the King and Queen of
heresy, and to stir up the people to sedition, Francis, on the matter being
reported to him, issued from Melun an
edict banishing the doctors from the city. The Queen of Navarre became in
consequence highly unpopular with the orthodox, and, in a comedy played by the
students of the College of Navarre on October 1, 1533, was with Roussel held up to ridicule under a thin disguise.
The desire of the King for the Pope’s friendship led
however to a fresh change of religious policy; and, as the result of the
conference with Clement at Marseilles (October 1-November 12, 1533), Francis,
while declining to join in a general crusade against the followers of Luther
and Zwingli, agreed to take steps for the suppression of heresy in his own
kingdom and received from the Pope a Bull for that purpose. An opportunity at
once occurred for putting it into force. On November 1 the new Rector of the
University of Paris, Nicolas Cop, in his customary Latin oration, enveloped in
unmistakable terms the doctrine of Justification by Faith. It soon became known
that this discourse had been written for him by a young scholar of Picardy,
named Jean Cauvin,
or, as he called himself, Calvin. The scandal was great; and the King on
hearing of it immediately wrote to the Parliament enjoining it to proceed
diligently against the “accursed heretic Lutheran sect”. Within a week fifty
Lutherans were in prison; and an edict was issued that anyone convicted by two
witnesses of being a Lutheran should be burned forthwith, “It will be like the
Spanish Inquisition” wrote Martin Bucer,
But the King’s Catholic fever quickly cooled down. On
January 24, 1534, he entered into a secret treaty with the German Protestant
Princes; and when he returned to Paris in the first week of February the
persecutions ceased. Evangelical doctrines were again preached in the Louvre.
“I see no one round me but old women”, was the complaint of a Sorbonne doctor
from his pulpit; “all the men go to the Louvre”. In the spring Guillaume du
Bellay was sent for the second time on a mission to Germany, with the object of
concerting with the German theologians some via media which
should effect a reconciliation between the two religious parties. Accordingly
he sent a request to Melanchthon to draw up a paper embodying suggestions which
might serve as the basis for an oral conference. Melanchthon complied, and du
Bellay returned to France with a paper, dated August 1, 1534, in which the
various points in dispute were separately discussed and means of arranging them
were suggested.
The Placards. [1534-5
But these hopes of reconciliation were suddenly
scattered to the winds by the rash act of some of the more fanatical Reformers.
On the morning of October 18, 1534, the inhabitants of Paris awoke to find the
walls of all the principal thoroughfares placarded with a broadside in which
the Mass and its celebrants were attacked in the coarsest and most offensive
terms. Copies were also pasted up in Orleans and other towns, and one was even
affixed to the door of the royal bedchamber at Amboise, where Francis was at
the time residing. The people of Paris were thoroughly roused and frightened by
what seemed to them a blasphemous outrage. The King was furious. A persecution
began in Paris which far exceeded all its predecessors in rigor.
By the middle of November two hundred heretics were
said to be in prison; before the end of the year this number was nearly
doubled. By Christmas eight persons had been burned. Early in the following
year (1535) the King returned to Paris, and on January 21 took part in a grand
expiatory procession. This was followed by a public banquet, at which he made a
long speech announcing once more his intention of exterminating heresy from his
kingdom. The day of expiation closed with the burning of six more heretics. On
January 25 seventy-three Lutherans, who had fled from Paris, were summoned by
the town crier to appear before the Courts, or in default to suffer attainder
and confiscation of their goods. Among these was the educational
reformer, Mathurin Cordier,
and the poet, Clément Marot. By May 5 there were nine more executions, making
in all twenty-three. But the King was beginning to relent. On the death of the
Chancellor, Cardinal Duprat (July
9), Francis appointed in his place Antoine du Bourg, who was favorable to the
Reformers. On July 16 he issued an Edict from Coucy announcing that there were to be no
further prosecutions except in the case of Sacramentarians and
relapsed persons, and that all fugitives who returned and abjured their errors
within six months should receive pardon. The reason for this milder attitude
was that Francis was still angling for an alliance with the German Protestant
Princes, and had renewed the negotiations with Melanchthon. By the direction of
Guillaume du Bellay, John Sturm, who held at this time a professorship at
Paris, wrote both to Melanchthon and Bucer urging them to come to France for the
purpose of a conference with the Paris theologians. Melanchthon consented; but
the Elector John Frederick of Saxony refused to let him go, and the proposed
conference had to be abandoned (August, 1535). At the same time the Sorbonne,
to whom Melanchthon's paper of the preceding year had been submitted, expressed
its entire disapproval of the project.
Bucer, however,
still worked indefatigably on behalf of a reconciliation; and at the close of
the year du Bellay was again in Germany, first assuring the diet of Protestant
Princes assembled at Schmalkalden that his
royal master had not burnt his Lutheran subjects from any dislike of their
religious opinions, and then holding interviews with Melanchthon, Sturm, and
others, in which he represented his master’s theological views as differing not
greatly from their own. It was all to no purpose. Princes and theologians alike
had ceased to believe in the French King’s sincerity.
Neither the Edict of Coucy, nor a similar Edict, somewhat more liberal,
which was issued in May, 1536, had much effect in bringing back the exiles to
France. The great majority preferred exile to abjuration. Thus while the cause
of Protestantism in France lost in this way many of its most ardent supporters,
on the other hand there fell away from it the timid and the interested, those
who had no wish “to be burned like red herrings”, and those who basked in the
sunshine of the royal favor. Moreover the sympathies of moderate men, of men
like Guillaume and Jean du Bellay, of Guillaume Budé and François Rabelais, were alienated by
the iconoclastic outbursts of the Reformers. They were favorable to a reform of
the Church by moderate means, but they were statesmen or humanists, and not
theologians. Rabelais’ Gargantua, which
he must have finished just before the affair of the placards, contains several
passages of a distinctly evangelical character. But in his later books we find
him “throwing stones into the Protestant garden”. Lastly, there was a small
group who followed the example of the Queen of Navarre and her ally
Gérard Roussel, now Bishop of Oloron, and, while still holding
the chief evangelical doctrines, continued members of the Catholic Church and
conformed to most of its ceremonial. Though this seemed to Calvin an unworthy
compromise, it fairly represented the half-practical, half-mystical character of
Margaret’s religion and her adherence to a certain phase of the Renaissance.
1536] The Christianae religionis institutio.
Thus the affair of the placards and the resulting
persecution had made too wide a breach between the two religious parties to admit
of its being healed. Partly from the timidity of the leaders and partly from
the rashness of the rank and file, the first or Evangelical phase of
Protestantism in France had failed to bring about a reform of the Church. In
the early part of the year 1536 the man, who had initiated the movement, the
aged Lefèvre d'Etaples,
died at Nérac. Almost simultaneously there
appeared a work which was to inaugurate the second or Calvinistic phase of
French Protestantism, Calvin’s Christianae religionis institutio (March,
1536). Though little more than a sketch as compared with the form which it
finally took, it was in essential points complete. It gave the French Reformers
what they so greatly needed, a definite theological system in place of
the undogmatic and mainly practical
teaching of Lefèvre and Roussel. It gave them a
profession of faith which might serve at once to unite their own forces and to
prove to their persecutors the righteousness of their cause.
It is true that French Protestantism, in thus becoming
Calvinistic, in a large measure abandoned the two leading principles of the
movement out of which it had sprung, the spirit of free enquiry, and the spirit
of individualism. But without this surrender it must in the long run have
yielded to persecution. It was only by cohesion that it could build up the
necessary strength for resistance. Thus the French Protestants hailed the
author of the Institutio as
their natural leader, as the organizer of their scattered forces. Little wonder
if during the next twenty-five years of their direst need they looked for
consolation and support to the free city among the Alps and to the strong man
who ruled it.
The new war with Charles V, which broke out in April,
1536, left the French King no leisure for the suppression of heresy. But after
the truce at Nice and the interview with the Emperor at Aiguës-Mortes (July 14,
1538) Francis began to address himself in earnest to his task. After two
partial Edicts, the first addressed to the Parliament of Toulouse (December 16,
1538), and the second to the Parliaments of Toulouse, Bordeaux, and Rouen (June
24, 1539), he issued from Fontainebleau on June 1, 1540, a general Edict of
great severity. It introduced a more efficient and rapid procedure for the
trial of heretics, which, with a slight modification made by the Edict of Paris
(July 23,1543), enlarging the powers of the ecclesiastical Courts, remained in
force for the next nine years. On August 29, 1542, another Edict was addressed
to the Parliament of Toulouse, followed on the next day by a mandamus to those
of Paris, Bordeaux, Dijon, Grenoble, and Rouen. The Parliament of Aix required
no such stimulus. Meanwhile the Sorbonne had been engaged in drawing up
twenty-six articles in which the true Catholic faith on all the disputed points
was set forth. It was their answer to the French translation of the Institutio which
Calvin had completed in 1541 from the second and greatly enlarged Latin
edition. The articles were ratified by a royal Ordinance of July 23, 1543. The
answer of the Parliament of Paris had been of a more material character. On
July 1, 1542, it issued a long Edict concerning the supervision of the press,
of which the first clause ordered all copies of the Institutio to be given up within
twenty-four hours. On February 14, 1544, these were solemnly burnt, with other
books, including several printed by Étienne Dolet. This was shortly followed by the publication
of the first Index Expurgatorius issued
by the Sorbonne, which was registered by the Parliament ten months later.
In this policy of repression the King had the active
support of four men; the Inquisitor-General, Matthieu Ory; the first President of the
Parliament of Paris, Pierre Lizet,
soon to become even more notorious as the President of the Chambre Ardente; the
Chancellor, Guillaume Poyet, who had succeeded
the moderate Antoine du Bourg on November 12, 1538; and foremost among them,
the Cardinal de Tournon,
now all powerful with the King, and practically his first minister. Though the
Cardinal was a liberal patron of learning and letters, he was a relentless and
untiring foe to the new religious doctrines. “He is worth to France an
Inquisition in himself”, said a contemporary. It is significant also that just
at this time Francis lost one of his ablest and most enlightened ministers, and
the French Reformers one of their best friends in Guillaume du Bellay, who died
in January, 1543.
With such a man in power as the Cardinal de Tournon there was not
likely to be any slackness in the execution of the Edicts. The earlier half of
the year 1541 was a period of special distress for the French Reformers; and
throughout the years 1540 to 1544 constant additions were made to the roll of
their martyrs. It is chiefly of isolated cases that we hear, at most of three
or four at a time; there were no autos-de-fé. The stress of persecution had compelled the
Reformers to practice prudence and secrecy, but each fresh execution added
strength to the cause. One martyr made many converts.
1544-5] The Massacre of the Waldenses
The Peace of Crépy,
September 18, 1544, with its vague provisions for the reunion of religion, and
“for the prevention of the extreme danger” which threatened it, boded evil to
the Reformers. The next year, 1545, memorable as the year in which the Council of
Trent held its first sitting, is also memorable for an act which has left a
dark stain on the history of France and the Church, the massacre of the
Waldenses of Provence. In 1530 these peaceful followers of Peter Waldo, who
dwelt in about thirty villages along the Durance, having heard of the religious
doctrines that were being preached in Germany and Switzerland, sent two envoys
to some of the leading Reformers to lay before them their own tenets, and to
submit to them forty-seven questions on which they were desirous of
instruction. They received long answers from Oecolampadius and Bucer, and in
consequence held in September, 1532, a conference of their ministers at Angrogne in Piedmont, at
which they drew up a confession of faith chiefly based on the replies of the
two Reformers. They also agreed to contribute five hundred gold crowns to the
printing of the new French translation of the Scriptures which was in
contemplation. This affiliation of their sect to the Lutheran heresy naturally
attracted the attention of the ecclesiastical authorities. Accordingly Jean de
Roma, the Inquisitor of the Faith for Provence, who had already begun to exhort
the Waldenses to abjure their heresy, set on foot a cruel persecution.
The unfortunate Waldenses appealed to the King, who
sent commissioners to investigate the matter. Roma was condemned, but escaped
punishment by flight to Avignon (1533); and the Waldenses, profiting by the
comparative favor that was shown to the Reformers at this time, considerably
increased in number. But in 1535 the Archbishop and Parliament of Aix renewed
the persecution, and on November 18, 1540, the Parliament issued an order,
afterwards known as the Arrêt de Mérindol, by which seventeen inhabitants of Merindol and the
neighborhood, who had been summoned before the bar of Parliament and had failed
to appear, were sentenced to be burned. Owing however to the action of the
First President the order was not put into immediate execution; and, the matter
having come to the King's ears, he ordered Guillaume du Bellay, his
Lieutenant-General in Piedmont, to make an enquiry into the character and
religious opinions of the Waldenses. As the result of this enquiry the King
granted a pardon to the condemned, provided that they abjured their errors
within three months (February 8,1541). The order was still suspended over their
heads when at the close of 1543 Jean Meynier, Seigneur d'Oppède, a man of brutal ferocity, succeeded to
the office of First President of the Parliament of Aix. The Waldenses again appealed
to the King and were again protected (1544). Accordingly the Parliament despatched a messenger to
the King with the false statement that the people of Mérindol were in open rebellion and were even threatening Marseilles. With the help of
the Cardinal de Tournon they
obtained upon this statement new letters-patent from the King revoking his
former letters, and ordering that all who were found guilty of the Waldensian heresy should be exterminated (January
1,1545) The decree was kept secret until an army had been collected; and then,
on April 12, Oppède,
who, in the absence of the Governor of Provence was acting as his deputy,
called together the Parliament, read the decree, and appointed four
commissioners to carry it into execution. Within a week Mérindol,
Cabrières, and other villages were in ashes; and at Cabrières alone eight
hundred persons, including women and children, are said to have been put to
death. The work of destruction continued for nearly two months, and in the end
it was computed that three thousand men, women, and children had been killed,
and twenty-two villages burned, while the flower of the men were sent to the
galleys. Many of the survivors fled the country to find a refuge in Switzerland.
If the execution of the “Fourteen of Meaux” falls far
short of the massacre of the Vaudois as
regards the number of its victims, its strictly
judicial character makes it more instructive as an example of the treatment of
heretics. In the year 1546 the Reformers of Meaux organized themselves into a
Church after the pattern of that set up by the French refugees at Strasburg
eight years before. They chose as their first pastor, a wool-carder, named
Pierre Leclerc, a brother of the man who was burnt at Metz. Their number
increased under his ministry, and the matter soon came to the ear of the
authorities. On September 8 a sudden descent was made on the congregation, and
sixty persons were arrested and sent to Paris to be tried by the Parliament.
Their greatest crime was that they had celebrated the Holy Communion. On
October 4 sentence was pronounced. Fourteen were sentenced to be tortured and
burned, five to be flogged and banished; ten, all women, were set free, while
the remainder were to undergo graduated forms of penance. The sentences were
carried out at Meaux on October 7. Etienne Mangin, in whose house the services had always been
held, and Leclerc, were carried to the stake on hurdles, the rest on tumbrils.
They had all previously undergone what was known as “extraordinary” torture,
and all had refused to reveal the names of other Reformers at Meaux. At the
stake six yielded so far as to confess to a priest, thereby escaping the
penalty of having their tongues cut out; the others who remained firm suffered
this additional barbarity, which it was the custom to inflict on those who died
impenitent. The congregation at Meaux was thus broken up, but the survivors
carried the evangelical seeds to other towns in France.
The “Fourteen of Meaux” were not the only victims of
the year 1546. Five others had already been burned at Paris, including the
scholar and printer Etienne Dolet.
Others were burned in the provinces. The next year, 1547, opened with fresh
executions; and on January 14 the mutilation of a statue of the Virgin was
expiated by a solemn procession at Paris.
Results of the policy of Francis I.
Such was the policy which Francis I began definitely
to adopt towards Protestantism after the affair of the placards, and which he
put into active execution during the last seven years of his life. How far was
it successful? As we have seen, it drove a large number of persons into exile;
and these consisted chiefly of the better-born and better-educated among the
Reformers. It intimidated many into outward conformity with the Church. It
prevented all public exercise of the Reformed religion, and all open
propaganda. Religious meetings were held by night or in cellars; doctrines were
spread by secret house-to-house teaching, or by treatises concealed amongst the
wares of pretended pedlars.
On the other hand the frequent executions helped to spread the evil they were
meant to repress. The firm courage with which the victims faced death did as
much as the purity of their lives to convert others to their faith. Moreover,
the influence of the exiles reacted on their old homes. From Geneva and the
other Swiss centres of
Protestantism missionaries came to evangelize France.
The result was that there was no longer a province in
France, except Britanny,
in which Protestantism had not acquired a foothold. In all the large towns it
had been established at an early date. In Lyons, the most enlightened town of
France, the Lutherans were already described in 1524 as “swarming”. At
Bordeaux, where the first seed had been sown by Farel, the preaching of a Franciscan, Thomas Illyricus, in 1526, had produced
a rich harvest; and the revival in 1532 of the old College of Arts under the
name of the College of Guyenne had done much to foster the movement. Rouen was
deeply infected in 1531 and thence the contagion spread to other parts of
Normandy and to Amiens in Picardy. Orleans became an important centre, partly through the influence of Melchior Wolmar, who lived there from 1528 to the end of 1530. Even
at Toulouse, where the University had been founded as a bulwark of orthodoxy,
and on the whole had fully maintained its reputation, the new doctrines could
not be kept out, and in 1532 Jean de Caturce, a young licentiate of laws, was burned at
the stake.
Other Universities contributed to the spread of
Evangelical teaching; Poitiers, Angers, Bourges, and especially Nimes, the new
foundation of Margaret of Navarre, the rector of which was the well-known
humanist Claude Baduel,
an avowed Protestant. At Poitiers one of the professors of theology, Charles
de Sainte Marthe, openly taught the new
doctrines till, a persecution breaking out in 1537, he had to fly for his life.
Protestantism was also rife at Loudun and Fontenay, and before long spread to Niort and La Rochelle.
Poitou became the stronghold of French Protestantism. Other provinces to which
it gained admission at an early date were Dauphiné, where Farel had preached in 1522, and the Vivarais, in which Annonay near the Rhone
became an important centre.
As was natural, the water-ways of the great rivers
helped to spread the movement. On the Loire there was hardly a town from
Le Puy to Angers which it did not reach,
while between Orleans and Tours it took a firm hold. It worked up the Sarthe to
Le Mans and Alençon, and up the Allier to Moulins and Issoire.
It penetrated the Limousin by the Vienne and La
Marche by the Creuse.
It made its way along the Seine from Rouen to Troyes and along the Yonne to Sens and Auxerre.
From Lyons it travelled down the Rhone to Tournon, and up the Saône to Mâcon and
Châlons. At Dijon, the old capital of the duchy of Burgundy, a Lutheran was
executed in 1530, and soon afterwards a pastor was sent there from
Geneva. Agen on
the Garonne formed a connecting link between Bordeaux and Toulouse; Sainte Foy
and Bergerac were reached by the Dordogne, and Villeneuve by the Lot. The
preaching of Philibert Hamelin at Saintes has been described in a well-known passage by
his fellow-Protestant Bernard Palissy; thence
it spread up the Charente to Cognac and Angoulême.
This then was the result of the repressive policy
which Francis I had carried out with more or less consistency for ten years.
The outward manifestation of Protestantism was indeed kept under, though not
without difficulty; but the work of propagandism went
on in secret, until nearly the whole of France was covered with a network of
posts which, insignificant enough at present, were ready at a favorable
opportunity and with proper organization to become active centres of a militant
Protestantism. But a change was now impending in the government of France. At
the end of January, 1547, Francis I was seized with a serious illness, which
terminated fatally on the 31st of March. He was succeeded by his only surviving
son, under the title of Henry II.
Henry II. La Chambre Ardente. [1547-58]
Henry’s policy towards the Protestants from the first
was far more uniformly rigorous than his father's. It was not biassed either by sympathy
with humanism, or by the necessity of conciliating his Protestant allies.
Moreover it was the one point of policy upon which all his advisers were
agreed. Here the opposing influences of Montmorency and Guise united in a
common aim. In the very first year of his reign a second criminal Court of the
Parliament of Paris was created for the trial of heretics (October 8, 1547). It
became known as la Chambre Ardente, and fully deserved its name. From the
beginning of December, 1547, to January 10, 1550, it must have condemned to
death at least a hundred persons, belonging for the most part to the class of
smaller shopkeepers and artisans, and that although its jurisdiction was
confined to a quarter of France. The provincial Parliaments, especially those
of Rouen, Toulouse, and Aix, were no less active. Owing to the jealousy of the
ecclesiastical Courts the sole right of trying cases of heresy was restored to
them by an Edict of November 19, 1549, and the Chambre Ardente was temporarily suppressed. But the
ecclesiastical Courts continued to show remissness; and a new Edict was issued
from Chateaubriand on June 27, 1551. It transferred to the civil Courts the
cognizance of heretical acts which involved a public scandal or disturbance,
and encouraged informers by the promise of a third of the accused's property.
Fresh executions in various parts of France showed that the judges were more to
be relied on than the Bishops. In March, 1553, the Chambre Ardente was revived, and soon afterwards an
execution took place at Lyons which made a deep impression on the public mind.
It was that of the “Five Scholars of Lausanne”. Natives of different places in
the south-west of France, they had gone to Lausanne to prepare themselves by
study for the work of evangelization. One had lodged with Beza, another with Viret. On their return home they were arrested at
Lyons (May 1, 1552) and condemned to death for heresy by the ecclesiastical
judge. Having appealed to the Parliament of Paris, they were kept for a whole
year in prison awaiting its decision. Beza,
Pierre Viret, the
Cantons of Zurich and Bern, interceded in vain with the King and with the Cardinal
of Tournon. The
scholars were burnt on May 16, 1553. They had been guilty of no crime except
that of heretical opinions; they had committed no act which could possibly be
construed as dangerous to the public peace or to the orthodox religion. Their
execution made a deep impression, and the account of it fills a large space
in Crespin’s Martyrology which
appeared in the following year (1554), and immediately took rank with the
Protestant Bible and the Protestant Psalter as a cherished source of inspiration
and support in persecution.
In the year 1555 French Protestantism took a definite
step forwards. It began to organise its
Churches. It is true that before this date Churches had been established at
Meaux (1546) and Nimes (1547), but they had both been broken up by persecution.
Now Paris set the example. The Church was organized, as that of Meaux had been,
on the model of that of Strasburg, founded by Calvin in 1538. Jean le Maçon, surnamed Le Rivière, was
chosen as pastor, and he was assisted in the work of government by a consistory
of elders and deacons. In the same year Churches were organized after the same
pattern at Angers, Poitiers, and Loudun,
and in the little peninsula of Arvert,
between the Gironde and the Seudre.
In the following year (1556) were added Blois and Montoire in the Orléanais; Bourges, Issoudun, and Aubigny in Berry; and Tours; while the Church
of Meaux was refounded in
the same year. The Churches of Orleans and Rouen date from 1557, and as many as
twenty were established in 1558, including Dieppe, Troyes, Bordeaux, La
Rochelle, Toulouse, and Rennes. This important work was due largely to the
instigation of Calvin, and was carried out under his supervision. During the
eleven years from 1555 to 1566 no less than 120 pastors were sent from Geneva
to France. Geneva was in fact now regarded as the capital of French
Protestantism; French refugees had gone there in increasing numbers, and had
contributed to Calvin’s definite triumph over his opponents in the very year,
1555, in which the French Churches began to be organized.
Meanwhile the French government was devising a more
powerful engine for the suppression of Protestantism. At the instance of the
Cardinal of Lorraine Edicts were drawn up establishing an Inquisition after the
Spanish pattern. They were submitted to the Parliament of Paris early in the
year 1555, but the Parliament refused to register them, and when Pierre Séguier, one of the
presidents à mortier, appeared
before the King to justify its action (October 22, 1555) he spoke with such
convincing eloquence that the matter was dropped for a time. But in 1557 Henry,
finding the existing machinery for the suppression of heresy still
insufficient, obtained a papal brief authorizing the proposed step. To this was
joined a diploma appointing the Cardinals of Lorraine, Bourbon, and Châtillon as Inquisitors-General (April 25,1557). As,
however, the Parliament refused to recognize it, the brief remained
inoperative, and the King had to content himself with a new Edict against
heresy which was issued from Compiègne on July 24.
Before it was registered (January 15,1558) a fresh
persecution broke out. The defeat of St Quentin (August 10) had thrown Paris
into a paroxysm of unreasoning terror, which was repeated on the news of the
surrender of the town (August 27). On the evening of September 4 a congregation
of three or four hundred Protestants, which had assembled for worship in a
large house in the Rue St Jacques, was attacked by a furious mob. The majority
of the men, many of whom were armed, forced their way out, but the rest
remained in the building till the arrival of a magistrate and an armed force,
when they were carried off to prison. As a result of the investigations which
followed, seven persons, including a young married lady of rank, were burned.
There were also some high-born ladies among those prisoners who were eventually
released. The fact is significant. During the last few years Protestantism,
which at first affected mainly the artisan class, had begun to spread among the
higher ranks of society, and it now received some notable accessions.
François d'Andelot,
the youngest of the Châtillon brothers, became a
Protestant during his imprisonment at Melun (1551-6),
and the imprisonment of Gaspard de Coligny after the fall of St Quentin had the
same result. About the same time Antoine de Bourbon, the titular King of
Navarre, who was the next in succession to King Henry II and his sons, joined
the ranks of the Reformers. He was followed by his brother Louis, Prince of
Condé.
The most active of these converts was d'Andelot. In April, 1558, he
visited his wife's large estates in Britanny together with one of the Paris
pastors, Gaspard Carmel, and thus helped to spread Protestantism in that remote
and conservative province. But soon after his return to Paris he was arrested
by the King's order, and confined at Melun for
two months. The immediate cause of his arrest was his alleged presence in
the Pré-aux-Clercs, where, for five
successive evenings (May 13-17), a large concourse of persons of all ranks had
assembled to take part in the singing of Marot's Psalms. The psalm-singing was
stopped, but it made a considerable stir, for as many as five or six thousand
were said to have taken part in it. The Protestants, it was evident, were
increasing rapidly in numbers as well as in importance. Calvin, writing on
February 24 in this year, says that he had been told by a good authority that
there were 300,000 Protestants in France.
In the following year, 1559, another important step
was taken. On May 26 the first Synod of the French Protestant Church was opened
at Paris. We do not know how many deputies were present, but apparently there
were representatives of a considerable proportion of the forty to fifty
Churches then constituted, though doubtless in some cases the same deputy
represented several Churches. There was also a lay element consisting of
elders. The pastor of the Paris Church, François Morel, was chosen as
president. The outcome of the Synod, which transacted its business in haste and
secrecy, was a scheme of Church government or “Discipline”, and a Confession of
Faith. The “Discipline”, which was based on the principle of the equality of
the individual Churches, recognized the already prevailing organization in each
Church, namely the pastor and the consistory of elders and deacons. The
election to the consistory being by co-optation, the government was practically
an oligarchy. It remained to weld together the various Churches into a united
whole. This was done by instituting first an assembly called a Colloquy, which
bound together a group of neighboring Churches, then above this a Provincial
Synod, and finally, to crown the edifice, a National Synod.
The Confession of Faith was based on one drawn up by Calvin
and sent to the King of France towards the close of 1557. Though Calvin was
opposed to any Confession being issued by the Synod, in case they should
persist in their intention, he sent to them an enlarged form of his former
Confession, and this with a few alterations and some additions was adopted. The
language of it is singularly clear and noble, and is doubtless Calvin’s own.
A few days after the close of the Synod the King
attended a meeting of the whole Parliament of Paris. It was an unusual proceeding
on his part, but the occasion was a special one, namely the adjourned
consideration of the whole religious question, which had been recently
discussed in a Mercuriale,
or Wednesday sitting, held at the end of April. Many speakers opposed the
repressive policy of the government, the boldest being Anne du Bourg, nephew of
the former Chancellor, Antoine du Bourg, who advocated the suspension of all
persecution of “those who were called heretics”. Henry was highly incensed at
the plain speaking of the counselors, and had du Bourg and three others
arrested. He vowed that he would see du Bourg burned with his own eyes. But on
the last day of June, at the jousts in the Tournelles held in honor of the approaching
marriage between Philip of Spain and Elizabeth of France, Henry was mortally
wounded above the right eye by the broken lance of his antagonist, Gabriel de
Montgomery, the captain of his Scottish guard. He died on July 10, 1559.
Francis II and the Guises. The Tumult of Amboise [1559
The accession to the throne of a sickly boy, Francis
II, threw all the power into the hands of his wife's uncles, the Guises.The Queen-Mother
made common cause with them, and the Constable and Diane de Poitiers were
driven from the Court. “The Cardinal”, wrote the Florentine ambassador, “is
Pope and King”. There was a widespread feeling of discontent. Though the King,
being fifteen, had attained his legal majority, it was urged that his weak
understanding made a Council of Government necessary, and that this Council
ought to consist, according to custom, of the Princes of the Blood. The Guises
were unpopular as foreigners, and the Cardinal of Lorraine was hated on his own
account. Even the measures which he took for the much -needed improvement of
the finances - the public debt amounted to over forty million livres and there was an annual deficit - added to his
unpopularity. An active element of discontent was furnished by the younger sons
of the nobility, whose only trade was war, and who were pressing in vain for
their arrears of pay. To the Protestants the Cardinal's rule was a natural
source of apprehension. He was known to be a thoroughgoing opponent of heresy
and an advocate of the severest measures of repression. At first the Reformers
had hopes in Catharine, but these were soon disappointed. She had no power
apart from the Cardinal. Severe persecutions were set on foot, and Paris began
to have the air of a captured city. In September Calvin was consulted as to
whether persecution might be resisted by force. His answer was unfavorable,
but, whatever effect it may have had on his co-religionists as a body, the
political agitation continued. The execution of Anne du Bourg (December 23,
1559), his speech on the scaffold, his resolute bearing, made a profound
impression, not only on Protestants but on Catholics. “His one speech”,
wrote Florimond de Raemond, who was an eyewitness
of his execution, “did more harm to the Catholic Church than a hundred
ministers could have done”. The malcontents increased in number, but they
lacked a leader. Their natural leader, the King of Navarre, was too unstable
and irresolute. His brother Condé promised them his secret support provided
their enterprise was limited to the capture of the Guises. When that was
effected he could come forward. Meanwhile an acting leader was found in a
Protestant gentleman of Périgord, Godefroy de Barry, Seigneur
de la Renaudie, whose
brother-in-law, Gaspard de Heu,
a patriotic citizen of Metz, had recently been strangled by order of the Guises
without form of trial in the castle of Vincennes. A large meeting of noblemen
and others was held secretly at Nantes on February 1, 1560, and it was agreed
that the arrest of the Guises should take place at Blois on March 6. Finding
however before this date that the Court had already left Blois for Amboise the
conspirators altered it to the 16th. Already on February 12 the Cardinal had
been informed, in somewhat vague terms, of the existence of the plot. On his
arrival at Amboise ten days later he received more precise information.
"The Duke of Guise took measures accordingly; several small bands of
conspirators were captured; Jacques de la Mothe,
Baron de Castelnau,
a Gascon nobleman, who had seized the
castle of Noizay near
Amboise, capitulated on a promise of pardon; and finally la Renaudie himself was killed
in a skirmish (March 19). Summary vengeance was taken on the prisoners; some
were hanged, some beheaded, some flung into the Loire in sacks. Castelnau, who was honored with
a form of trial, was executed on March 29. The Chancellor, François Olivier,
who had presided at his trial, died on the following day.
The Tumult of Amboise, as it was contemptuously
called, had been rashly designed and feebly executed. But its barbarous
suppression increased the unpopularity of the government and the disorder in
the state of the kingdom. In April and May there were frequent disturbances
in Dauphiné and
Provence. In Dauphiné,
where the Bishop of Valence, Jean de Montluc, and the Archbishop of Vienne, Charles
de Marillac, were in favor of toleration, the
Protestants had an able leader in Montbrun.
In Provence Protestantism was spreading rapidly, and, at a conference held at Mérindol on February 15, 1560, sixty Churches were
represented. Here also there was an active and resolute leader in the person of
Antoine de Mouvans.
Meanwhile the hatred of the Guises found vent in numerous pamphlets, one of
which has become almost a classic. It was entitled a “Letter sent to the
Tiger of France”, and was written by the distinguished jurist,
François Hotman.
It was evident that some change must be made in the
policy of the government. Catharine saw her opportunity of checking the power
of the Guises. By her influence Michel de l'Hôpital was made Chancellor, and, though the
formal decree of his appointment was not drawn up till June 30, he assumed the
duties of his office on his arrival at Paris early in May. His first step was
to secure the passing of the Edict of Romorantin (May 18, 1560), which restored to
the Bishops the sole cognizance of cases of simple heresy, and imposed
penalties on false accusers. In spite of its apparent severity it was in
reality milder than that of Compiègne, for it allowed several stages of appeal.
Moreover it obviated the introduction of the Inquisition. It was also by the
advice of the Chancellor, supported by that of Coligny, that Catharine called
together an Assembly of Notables, which met at Fontainebleau on August 21.
Among the speakers were the two prelates, Montluc and Marillac.
They both deprecated extreme measures of repression and warmly advocated two
remedies, the reformation of the morals and discipline of the clergy, and
either a General or a National Council.
Still more important was the attitude of Coligny. At
the very opening of the second session he presented a petition from the
Protestants, in which, after protesting their loyalty to the King, they begged
that the prosecutions might cease and that "temples" might be
assigned to them for worship. There were no signatures, but Coligny, when it
came to his turn to speak, declared that he could have obtained 50,000 names in
Normandy alone. He went on to advocate warmly the proposals of Montluc and Marillac. Thus the wisest statesman in France stood boldly
forward as the champion of the Protestants. The assembly broke up on August 25,
and on the following day the Estates were summoned for December 10 and an
assembly of the clergy for January 20. Meanwhile all prosecutions for simple
heresy, apart from sedition, were to cease.
Hardly had this decision been announced when
information was received of a fresh plot, in which not only Navarre and Condé
but the Constable and other Catholic nobles were implicated. Its exact nature
remains a mystery, but it seems clear that a general rising in the South of
France under the leadership of the Bourbon Princes was contemplated. Calvin
knew of it, but apparently hoped that if a sufficiently imposing demonstration
were made bloodshed would be averted. With this object Beza had gone to Nérac to
urge the King of Navarre to put himself at the head of the movement. A relative
of Condé's, Jean de Maligny,
did actually seize part of Lyons, but from want of proper support had to retire
(September 5). Throughout the months of September and October the Court was
agitated with news of disturbances in the provinces, especially in Languedoc.
As the result of Catharine’s fears the Guises regained their ascendancy, and
made it their first object to get possession of the persons of Navarre and
Condé, both of whom had declined an invitation to the assembly of
Fontainebleau. They were peremptorily summoned to Court, and towards the end of
September set out to obey the summons. Rejecting the urgent invitations which
they received on the way to put themselves at the head of an armed force they
arrived at Orleans, where the Court now was, on October 30. Condé was
immediately arrested, and Navarre, though left at liberty, was closely watched.
On November 26 Condé was condemned to death and his execution was fixed for
December 10. More than one attempt was made to assassinate the King of Navarre;
and there were vague rumors that the Cardinal intended to remove by death or
imprisonment all the leaders of the opposition. But his scheme, whatever it
was, was frustrated by the young King's death, after a brief illness, on
December 5.
During the short reign of Francis II a great change
had been wrought in the character of French Protestantism. Though still purely
religious in its aims it had become imbued with a political element. The fact
that the natural leaders of the opposition to the Guises were Protestants made
this inevitable. It was both an evil and a gain; an evil because it brought
into the Protestant ranks men whose only Protestantism consisted in offering
the grossest insults to forms of religion consecrated by long usage and
deep-rooted in the affections of the people; a gain, because henceforth
Protestantism, powerful in the numbers, quality and organization of its
adherents, and led by men of the highest rank in the kingdom, became a force in
the State. To this new condition of things corresponded a new name, that of
Huguenot. Its precise origin is uncertain, but recent research has shown that
it is at any rate purely French.
1561] Charles IX. Estates of Orleans.
The death of Francis II brought the Guise domination
to an end. His successor, Charles IX, was only ten years old, and therefore
unquestionably a minor. There was no longer the influence of a wife to
overshadow that of the mother, and the right to the Regency belonged by custom
to the King of Navarre. But just before the late King’s death Navarre had
renounced, so far as he legally could, this right in favor of Catharine, on
condition that his position in the kingdom should be inferior only to hers. It
was to Navarre therefore and the Constable, who was at once recalled to Court,
that Catharine gave the chief place in her counsels ; and it was upon Navarre
that the hopes of the Huguenots were now centered.
The first event of the new reign was the meeting of the
Estates at Orleans on December 13. The Chancellor in his opening speech
deprecated persecution for religious opinions, and urged mutual toleration and
the abandonment of offensive nicknames such as Papist and Huguenot. On January
1, 1561, the representatives of the three Estates made their speeches; and in
the course of the next ten days the various cahiers, or written statements of
grievances, were presented. Both the nobles and the Third Estate insisted
strongly on the need for a reformation of the Church. As regards Protestantism
the Third Estate pressed for complete toleration, while the clergy demanded
vigorous measures of repression. The nobles, being divided in their opinions,
presented three cahiers representing three groups of provinces. One group,
consisting of the central provinces, were in favor of rigid repression;
another, formed by the western provinces and the towns of Rouen and Toulouse,
demanded toleration; while the third group, composed of the Eastern provinces
with Normandy and Languedoc, urged that both parties should be ordered to keep
the peace and that only preachers and pastors should be punished. All three
Estates alike demanded the abolition of the Concordat. On January 28 a royal
Edict was issued ordering Parliament to stop all prosecutions for religion and
to release all prisoners. On the 31st the Estates were prorogued till May 1 for
the purpose of considering the financial question. The meeting of the clergy
fixed for January 20 was dropped, in view of the General Council which the Pope
had ordered to reassemble at Trent on Easter-Day. Meanwhile the answer of the
government to the demands of the Estates was being embodied in a, statute known
as the Ordinance of Orleans which, though dated January 31, 1561, was not
completed till the following August. The Concordat was abolished, and the
election of the Bishops was transferred to a mixed body of laymen and
ecclesiastics who were to submit three names to the King. Residence was imposed
on all holders of benefices.
The Edict of January 28 and the general attitude of
the government gave a considerable impulse to the Protestant movement. On March
2 their second national synod was held at Poitiers. At Fontainebleau during
Lent Protestant ministers preached openly in the apartments of Coligny and of
Condé; fasting was ostentatiously neglected; and the Queen-Mother and the King
listened to sermons from Bishop Montluc in
one of the state rooms of the palace. The mere fact of a Bishop preaching
marked him as a Lutheran in the eyes of old-fashioned Catholics. The Constable,
who went to hear Montluc once,
came away in high dudgeon. His orthodoxy took alarm at this general
encouragement of heretical doctrine and practice; and at a supper party at his
house on Easter-Day (April 6) he formed with the Duc de
Guise and St André a union which was afterwards known as the Triumvirate. As
the result of success the Protestants became insolent and defiant. At Agen and Montauban they seized unused Catholic places of
worship. In many towns the mob rose against them and the disturbances ended in
bloodshed. At Beauvais, where the Cardinal de Châtillon was Bishop, there was a dangerous riot on Easter Monday, in consequence of
which an Edict was issued on April 19 forbidding all provocation to
disturbance. It remained a dead letter. At the end of the month a Paris mob
having attacked the house of a Protestant nobleman was fired on by the
defenders. The assailants fled, leaving several dead, and more wounded. On May
2 there were fresh disturbances. It was not till the middle of the month that
the condition of the capital began to grow quieter. On May 28 the clergy of
Paris presented a remonstrance on the conduct of the Protestants; and on June
11 the Protestants presented a petition asking for churches to be assigned to
them or for permission to build them.
In their perplexity the government determined on a
conference between the Council and the Parliament of Paris, to consider the
means of putting an end to these disturbances. On June 18 the Chancellor opened
the proceedings in a clear and impartial speech. The deliberations dragged on
from June 23 to July 11. As the result a new Edict, known as the “Edict of
July”, was issued (registered July 31). All acts and words tending to faction
or disturbance were forbidden. Attendance at any assembly at which worship was
celebrated otherwise than according to the forms of the Catholic Church was to
be punished by imprisonment and confiscation of property. The cognizance of
cases of simple heresy was left to the ecclesiastical Courts. If the accused
was handed over to the secular arm no penalty higher than banishment could be
imposed. Finally it was stated that the Edict was only provisional, pending the
decision of either a General or a National Council. In spite of this provisional
character the Edict found no favor with either party. Both alike abused and
ignored it.
On August 1 the prorogued meeting of the Estates,
fixed originally for May, was opened at Pontoise. Only twenty-six deputies were present,
thirteen for each of the two lay Estates; the deputies of the clergy were
already in session at Poissy,
where the ecclesiastical synod had begun to sit on July 28. It was not till
August 27 that the cahiers were presented at a session held at St Germain at which the clerical deputies were also1
present. Both cahiers were remarkable for the boldness of
their proposals. They included a total reform of the judicial system, and a
transference of a share in the sovereignty to the Estates by making their
consent requisite for war or for any new taxation. To meet the financial
difficulties three proposals were made. The most thoroughgoing was one made by
the Third Estate, that the whole ecclesiastical property of the kingdom should
be nationalized, that the clergy should be paid by the State, and that out of
the surplus of 72,000,000 livres thus
obtained 42,000,000 should be devoted to the liquidation of the public debt.
However enlightened this proposal may have been it was neither practical nor
opportune. It completed the alienation of the Paris Parliament from civil and
religious reform; and it led to an arrangement between the clergy and the
Crown. Alarmed by the proposals for their spoliation the clergy offered the
Crown a sum of 16,600,000 livres, to be
paid in installments spread over ten years. The offer was accepted.
With regard to the religious question the nobles and
the Third Estate alike advocated complete toleration and the calling together
of a National Council. Already on July 25 a proclamation had been issued
inviting the Protestant ministers to the assembly at Poissy. It was to be a National Council in
everything but the name. So much concession was made to the Pope and the King
of Spain. Accordingly on September 9 the village of Poissy, three miles west of St Germain, celebrated as the birthplace of St Louis, was the
scene of unusual splendor. The Protestants were represented at the
"Colloquy" (as it came to be called) by twelve ministers,
including Beza, François de Morel, the
president of the first National Synod, and Nicolas des Gallars, the minister of the French Protestant
Church in London, and by twenty laymen. Six Cardinals, forty Archbishops and
Bishops, twelve doctors of the Sorbonne, and as many canonists, represented the
French Catholic Church. The King and the Queen-Mother, the rest of the royal
family, the Princes of the Blood, and the members of the Council of State,
completed the imposing assemblage.
The chief event of the first day was Beza’s speech, which, both in matter and manner, made
a deep impression. The Cardinal of Lorraine replied to it on September 16. Though
his speech was contemptuously criticized by his theological opponents, it was
skillfully adapted to his purpose of making a favorable impression on the
unlearned majority of his audience. Both Coligny and Condé praised it. But even
more than Beza’s it was the speech of an
advocate, and it concluded with a fervid appeal to the young King to remain in
the faith of his ancestors. On September 19 Ippolito d'Este, the Cardinal of Ferrara,
who enjoyed the revenues of three French archbishoprics, one bishopric, and
eight abbeys, arrived at St Germain in the
capacity of legate a latere from
Pius IV, with instructions to use his influence to stop the conference. In his
numerous suite was Laynez,
the successor of Loyola as General of the Jesuit Order, whose college at Paris
had been formally legalized by the assembly at Poissy four days before. Whether owing to the
efforts of the legate or not, the last two meetings of the Colloquy, which were
held on September 24 and 26 with greatly diminished numbers, were wasted in
angry and useless discussion. The speech of Laynez on the 26th was especially
uncompromising. Catharine however did not despair. She arranged a conference
between five of the Protestant ministers and five of the Catholic clergy who
favored reform. Among the Protestants was the famous Peter Martyr, who had
arrived at Poissy on
the evening of September 9. The delegates met on September 30 and the following
day. Having drawn up a formula relating to the sacrament of Holy Communion,
they submitted it to the assembly of Bishops, by whom it was straightway
rejected (October 9).
From Catharine’s point of view the Colloquy had, as
she said, borne no fruit. It had failed to bring about the religious unity
which seemed to her essential to the pacification of the kingdom. On Sunday,
October 12, there was a fresh tumult at Paris outside the gate of St Antoine;
and several Protestants were killed or wounded. Moreover the outlook abroad was
threatening. The Spanish ambassador, Thomas Perrenot de Chantonnay, told Catharine in his usual bullying
tone that his master was ready to come to the assistance of her Catholic
subjects. But the Queen-regent put on a bold front, and showed a determination
to be mistress in her own house. The Guises now left the Court (October 20),
and were shortly followed by the Constable and the Maréchal de
Saint André. The principal management of affairs passed into the hands of
Coligny and the Chancellor. Never had the Protestants been so sanguine of
success. Though the Colloquy had failed to produce the result which Catharine,
and perhaps a few liberal Bishops, like Montluc, had expected, from the Protestant point of
view it had been singularly successful. It had enabled the Reformers to
publish urbi et orbi by the mouth of
one of their ablest and most eloquent representatives a clear statement of
their doctrines. It is true that by the so-called Edict of Restitution, issued
on October 20, as an equivalent for the sixteen millions voted by the clergy,
the Protestants were ordered to restore all the churches of which they had
taken possession; but almost at the same time Beza persuaded
the government to send letters to the provincial magistrates enjoining them to
allow the Protestants to meet in security, and to interpret the Edict in a
lenient spirit, pending a more definite settlement. Even in Catholic Paris the
numbers attending the meetings reached 15,000. The demand for ministers was
greater than Geneva could satisfy. On Michaelmas-day Beza had
celebrated, according to the Protestant rite, the marriage of a young Rohan with the niece of Madame d'Étampes. There were rumors
that several Bishops would shortly declare themselves Protestants; there were
even hopes of the King.
Meanwhile the country was in a more disturbed state
than ever. On November 16 there was a massacre at Cahors;
every Sunday produced a disturbance at Paris, and the Feast of St John
(December 27) was signalized by one of more than ordinary violence round the
Church of St Médard.
Partly in consequence of these outbreaks Catharine summoned a fresh conference
to meet at St Germain on January 3, 1562.
On the 7th the actual business began with a remarkable speech by the Chancellor
in which, far in advance of his time, he enunciated modern principles of
religious toleration. The question before them, he said, was a political, not a
religious one; “a man may be a citizen without being a Christian”. Those who
had been summoned to the conference, thirty Presidents and Councilors chosen
from the eight Parliaments and twenty members of the Privy Council including
the Princes of the Blood, then gave their opinions in order. The King of
Navarre’s speech showed that he had virtually abandoned the Protestant cause.
This step, to which his position rather than his character gave importance, had
for some time been skillfully maneuvered by the Cardinal of Ferrara, who had
dangled before the King various suggestions of compensation for the territory
of Spanish Navarre, of which his wife’s ancestor had been deprived by Ferdinand
the Catholic. In the final voting the party of repression coalesced with the
middle party, which thus obtained a small majority; and it was in the sense of
their views that an Edict was drawn up (January 17). By this Edict, known as
the “Edict of January”, which was declared to be provisional pending the
decision of a General Council, the Protestants were ordered to give up all the
churches and other ecclesiastical buildings in their possession, and were
forbidden to assemble in any building, or to assemble at all within the walls
of any city. With these limitations the right of assemblage free of molestation
was granted to them. Thus Protestantism for the first time in France obtained
legal recognition. The Protestants were far from satisfied, but, acting on the
advice of their leaders, they accepted the compromise. The Catholics were less
submissive. It was not till after a long and obstinate resistance that the
Parliament of Paris registered the Edict on March 6. By that date the issue to
which events had been inevitably tending had already declared itself. The
religious war had begun.