 |
BOOK II.
THE COUNCIL OF CONSTANCE
1414 — 1418.
CHAPTER I.
THE COUNCIL OF CONSTANCE AND JOHN XXIII.
1414—1415.
At the time of the assembling of the Council of
Constance there was a widespread and serious desire throughout Europe for a
reformation of the ecclesiastical desire for abuses which the Schism had forced
into such luxuriant growth; not only was unity to be restored to the headship
of the Church, but a remedy must also be found for the evils which beset the
entire body. The gross extortions of the Pope and Curia must be checked and
their occasion done away. The Papal invasion of ecclesiastical patronage all
over Christendom must be stopped. The ordinary machinery of Church government,
which had been weakened by the constant interference of the Pope, must be again
restored. The clergy, whose knowledge, morality and zeal had all declined, must
be brought back to discipline, so that their waning influence over earnest men
might be re-established.
If we would understand aright the force of the
feelings that made the Papacy hateful, till the hatred broke out into open
revolt, it is worthwhile to gather a few of the impassioned utterances of this
time. Dietrich Vrie, a German monk who went to
Constance, in a Latin poem more remarkable for its vigor than its grace, puts
the following language into the mouth of the disconsolate Church: — “The Pope,
once the wonder of the world, has fallen, and with him fell the heavenly
temples, my members. Now is the reign of Simon Magus, and the riches of this
world prevent just judgment. The Papal Court nourishes every kind of scandal,
and turns God’s houses into a market. The sacraments are basely sold; the rich
is honored, the poor is despised, he who gives most is best received. Golden
was the first age of the Papal Court; then came the baser age of silver; next
the iron age long set its yoke on the stubborn neck. Then came the age of clay.
Could aught be worse? Aye, dung; and in dung sits the Papal Court. All things
are degenerate; the Papal Court is rotten; the Pope himself, head of all
wickedness, plots every kind of disgraceful scheme, and, while absolving
others, hurries himself to death”.
Vrie’s History
of the Council of Constance begins with a denunciation of the simony,
the avarice, the ambition, and the luxury of the Pope, the bishops, and the
entire clergy: “What shall I say of their luxury when the facts themselves cry
out most openly on the shameless life of prelates and priests! They spare
neither condition nor sex; maidens and married men and those living in the
world are all alike to them”. “Benefices”, he complains, “which ought to
provide alms for the poor have become the patrimony of the rich. One holds
eighteen, another twenty, a third twenty-four; while the poor man is despised,
his knowledge and his holy life are of no account. An infant newly born is
provided by his careful parents with ecclesiastical benefices. We will hand him
over, say they, to such a bishop who is our friend, or whom we have served,
that we may be enriched from the goods of the Lord, and our inheritance be not
divided amongst so many children”. Another is nurtured with more than fatherly
affection by some dean or provost, that he may succeed him — is nurtured in
luxury and sin. Another, perhaps the son of a prince, is worthy of an
archdeaconry, much more so if he be a bishop’s nephew. Another eagerly seeks a
place on every side, flatters, cringes, dissembles, nay, does not blush to beg,
crawling on hands and knees, provided that by any guile he may creep into the
patrimony of the Crucified One”.
If these utterances of Vrie be thought rhetorical, the more sober spirit of Nicolas de Clemanges,
Doctor of the University of Paris, and Secretary to Benedict XIII, gives no
very different account. “Now-a-days in undertaking a cure of souls no mention
is made of Divine services, of the salvation or edification of those entrusted
to the priest’s care; the only question is about the revenue. Nor do men count
the revenue to be the value of the benefice to one who is resident and serves
the Church, but what it will yield to one who is far away and perhaps never
intends to visit it. No one obtains a benefice however great his merit without
constant and repeated asking for it. The Popes in their desire for money have
drawn all manner of elections into their own hands, and appoint ignorant and useless
men, provided they are rich and can afford to pay large sums. The rights of
bishops and patrons are set at naught; grants of benefices in expectancy are
given to men who come from the plough and do not know A from B. The claims of
the Popes for first-fruits, or the first year’s revenue on presentation to a
benefice, and other dues have become intolerable. Papal collectors devastate
the land, and excommunicate or suspend those who do not satisfy their demands;
hence churches fall into ruins, and the church plate is sold; priests leave
their benefices and take to secular occupations. Ecclesiastical causes are
drawn into the Papal Court on every kind of pretext, and judgment is given
in favor of those who pay the most. The Papal Curia alone is rich, and benefices
are heaped on Cardinals who devour their revenues in luxury and neglect their
duties”.
“In this state of things”, Clemanges proceeds, “the chief care of the clergy is of their pockets, not of their
flocks. They strive, scold, litigate, and would endure with greater
calmness the loss of ten thousand souls than of ten thousand shillings. If by
chance there arise a pastor who does not walk in this way, who despises money,
or condemns avarice, or does not wring gold justly or unjustly from his people,
but strives by wholesome exhortation to benefit their souls, and meditates on
the law of God more than the laws of men, forthwith the teeth of all are
whetted against him. They cry out that he is entirely senseless and unworthy of
the priesthood; he is ignorant of the law and does not know how to defend his
rights, or rule his people, or restrain them by canonical censures; he knows
nothing save idle preaching which is more fitting for friars who have none of
the cares of temporal administration. The study of Holy Writ and its professors
are openly turned to ridicule, especially by the Popes, who set up their
traditions far above the Divine commands. The sacred and noble duty of
preaching is held so cheap among them that they count nothing less befitting their
dignity. Episcopal jurisdiction is useless. Priests condemned for theft,
homicide, rape, sacrilege, or any other serious offence are only condemned to
imprisonment on a diet of bread and water, and are imprisoned only till they
have paid enough money, when they walk away scot free. On the other hand, the
Episcopal jurisdiction is eagerly extended over harmless rustics, and summoners scour the land to pry out offences against canon
law, for which the luckless victims are harassed by a protracted process and
are driven to pay heavy fines to escape. Bishops do not hesitate to sell to
priests licences to keep concubines. No care is taken
to ordain proper persons to the priesthood. Men who are lazy and do not choose
to work, but who wish to live in idleness, fly to the priesthood; as priests,
they frequent brothels and taverns, and spend their time in drinking, reveling,
and gambling, fight and brawl in their cups, and with their polluted lips
blaspheme the name of God and the saints, and from the embraces of prostitutes
hurry to the altar. Bishops are rarely resident in their sees and are generally
engaged in political or temporal pursuits; yet they are of such a character
that their absence is better than their presence. Chapters and their canons are
no better than bishops. Monks are undisciplined and dissolute, idle and good
for nothing. The Friars, on the other hand, are active enough, but active only
in rapacity and voluptuousness. Nunneries are so sunk in shame, so openly given
up to evil, that it is scarcely possible to speak of them”.
Clemanges admits that there are some good men among the clergy, but “scarcely one in
a thousand sincerely does what his profession requires”. The Schism is the
scourge of God on these abuses, and unless a reformation be wrought worse ills
will follow and the Church will be destroyed. Denunciations to the same effect
might be quoted from writers of almost every land. Lamentations over the
corruptions of the Church were not confined to a few enthusiasts; men of high
ecclesiastical position and of undoubted orthodoxy spoke openly of the abuses
which everywhere prevailed. It was not wonderful that heresy spread, that the
doctrines of Wycliffe and Huss made many converts. Men went to Constance with
three aims in view — to restore the unity of the Church; to reform it in head
and members; and to purge it of erroneous doctrines. These objects were to be
attained by means of a General Council, though the exact scope of its power was
yet to be determined.
The foundation of the Council’s authority was the
theory that the plenitude of ecclesiastical power vested in the universal
Church, whose Head was Christ, and of which the Pope was the chief minister.
The executive power in the Church rested generally with the Pope; but a Council
had a concurrent jurisdiction in all important matters, a corrective power in
case of abuses, and a power of removing the Pope in case of necessity. For
these purposes a Council had a power of compulsion and of punishment against a
Pope. Such was the general result of the teaching of the Parisian theologians
which had been turned into practice by the Council of Pisa.
But the Parisian theologians did not wish to push
these principles too far. In practice they only aimed at rescuing the Papal
primacy from the evils of the Schism, restoring its unity, regulating its
powers, and then reinstating it in its former position. There was a school of
German reformers who had a more ideal system before their eyes, who aimed at
diminishing the plenitude of the Papal primacy, and making it depend on the
recognition of the Church. Their views are fully expressed in a treatise
written in 1410, most probably the work of Deitrich of Niem, who well knew the ways of the Roman Curia:
“About the means of unity and reforming the Church”. Beginning from the Creed,
the writer asserts his belief in “one Catholic and Apostolic Church”. The
Catholic Church consists of all who believe in Christ, who is its only Head,
and it can never err; the Apostolic Church is a particular and private Church,
consisting of Pope, Cardinals, and prelates; its head is supposed to be the
Pope, and it can err. The Catholic Church cannot be divided; but for the
sake of its members we must labor for the unity of the Apostolic Church, which
stands to the Catholic Church as a genus to a species. As the object of all
society is the common good, a Pope can have no rights as against the well-being
of the Church. The Papal primacy has been won by guile and fraud, and
usurpation; but the idea that a Pope cannot be judged by any is contrary alike
to reason and Scripture. The Pope is a man, born of man, subject to sin, a few
days ago a peasant’s son; how is he to become impeccable and infallible? He is
bound to resign or even to die if the common good should require it. The unity
of the Church must be secured by the abdication of two of the three Popes, or,
if it be necessary, by the compulsory abdication of all of them. Union with a
particular Pope is no part of the faith of the Catholic Church, nor is it
necessary for salvation; rather, Popes contending for their private goods are
in mortal sin, and have no claim on the allegiance of Christians. A General
Council represents the universal Church; and when the question to be settled is
the resignation of a Pope, it does not belong to the Pope to summon the
Council, but to prelates and princes who represent the community. The Pope is
bound to obey such a Council, which can make new laws and rescind old ones. The
Council must make a general reform in the Church, must sweep away simony, and
amend the ways of Pope, Cardinals, prelates, and other clergy. For this purpose
it must limit the power of the Pope who has invaded the rights of bishops,
drawn all matters to the Curia, and overthrown the original constitution of the
Church. The authority of the Pope must be reduced to its ancient limits, the
abuses of the Cardinals must be checked, and the prelates and clergy purified”.
The writer of this treatise admits that there are many difficulties in the way
— difficulties arising from self-interest and conservative prejudice. A Council
can only succeed if supported by the Emperor who holds from God a power over
the bodies of all men. The work concludes with defining the business of the
Council to be: (1) the reincorporation of the members of the universal Church,
(2) the establishment of one undoubted and good Pope, (3) limitation of the
Papal power, (4) restoration of the ancient rights of the primitive Church, (5)
provisions concerning Pope and Cardinals which may prevent future schism, and finally
(6) the removal of all abuses in the government of the Church.
Such was the large plan of the reforming party in
Germany. It was to be decided in the Council assembled at Constance how much of
it should be carried into actual effect.
The quiet city of Constance was now to be the center
of European politics; for the Council held in it was looked upon as a congress
rather than a synod. Every nation in Europe felt itself more or less helpless
and in need of assistance. Italy was in a condition of hopeless confusion; the
Greek Empire was in its decrepitude menaced by the Turks, whom Hungary also had
just reason to dread; Bohemia was torn by civil and religious discord; the
Empire was feeble and divided; in France, the madness of King Charles VI gave
an opportunity to the bloody feuds of the Burgundians and Armagnacs; England
had gathered strength a little under Henry IV, but was disturbed by the
Lollards, and was on the brink of war with France. Europe was hopelessly
distracted, and longed to realize its unity in some worthy work. The disunion
of the ecclesiastical system was a symbol of the civil discord which everywhere
prevailed. Men looked back longingly upon a more peaceful past, and Sigismund’s
appeal to old traditions met with a ready answer. The Council of Pisa had been
an assemblage of prelates; through Sigismund’s participation the Council of
Constance became the meeting place of all the national interests of
Christendom. Slowly but sincerely all the wisest in Europe prepared to
set their faces towards Constance.
Men did not assemble at once. Till the last there had
been doubts whether the Pope would come. In June came the Bishop of Augsburg
and the Count of the of Nellenburg to make
preparations on Sigismund’s part; it was not till August 12 that the Cardinal
of Viviers arrived on behalf of the Pope, and
preparations were made in earnest. The magistrates and citizens of Constance
set themselves diligently to work to provide lodgings, lay up stores of
provisions, take measures for the safety and order of the city, and make all
the numerous changes which were necessary to enable them to fulfill the
honorable duty which had fallen upon them. At first, however, prelates arrived
slowly, chiefly from Italy, in obedience to the Pope. On November 1, owing to
the scanty attendance, John deferred the opening of the Council till the 3rd,
and in so doing pronounced the Council to be a continuation of the Council of
Pisa. On November 3, the opening was again deferred till the 5th, when the Pope
with fifteen Cardinals, two Patriarchs, twenty-three Archbishops, and a good
number of other prelates, solemnly opened the Council by a service in the
cathedral, after which the first session was fixed for the 16th.
Now that the Council had begun, arrivals became more
frequent, still chiefly from Italy, whence the good news of the recovery of
Rome filled the Pope’s heart with joy. Meanwhile the theologians were busy in
drawing up proposals for the procedure of the Council. They suggested that
proctors and promoters be appointed as at Pisa, who should lay matters before
the Council; besides them was to be chosen a number of doctors who between the
sessions should receive suggestions and determine the form in which
business should be brought forward. It was generally agreed that the first
question should be the restoration of the unity of the Church by procuring, if
possible, the abdication of Gregory XII and Benedict XIII. At the first session
on November 16, John XXIII preached a sermon on the text, “Speak ye every man
the truth”; after which a Bull was read detailing the circumstances of the
summoning of the Council, and its connection with the Councils of Pisa and
Rome, exhorting the members to root out the errors of Wycliffe and reform the
Church, and promising to all entire freedom of consultation and action. Nothing
more was done that day. As yet the Pope and the Council were watching each
other, and no one was ready to take a decided step. Those amongst the Germans
and Italians who wished something to be done were waiting for the French and
English prelates to lead them.
With the arrival of Peter d'Ailly,
Bishop of Cambrai, on November 17, begins the first
formation of an opposition to the Pope, which a trivial incident soon brought
to light. On November 18, lodgings were prepared in the Augustinian monastery
for the Cardinal of Ragusa, legate of Gregory XII. According to custom the
legate’s arms were put up above the door and with them the arms of Gregory XII.
On the following night the arms were ignominiously torn down, without doubt by
the orders of John XXIII. This overt action awoke at once a feeling among the
members of the Council, and a congregation was called to consider the matter.
It was urged that Gregory, having been deposed by the Council of Pisa, could
not have any claim to be acknowledged as Pope; but the general opinion was
against any decision on this broad ground; and merely agreed that the arms
should not be replaced because Gregory XII was not himself present, but only
his legates. Soon after this, on November 28, came a letter from Sigismund
telling of his coronation at Aachen, and announcing his speedy arrival at the
Council. John was compelled in courtesy to answer by a letter urging him to
come as soon as possible; but he was ill at ease. His plans for managing the
Council did not seem to prosper. He had hoped to overbear opposition by the
multitude of Italian bishops dependent on himself; but this intention was so
openly displayed that the Council, in spite of John’s efforts to the contrary,
began to talk of organizing itself by nations, so as to do away with the
numerical preponderance of the Italians, and allow each separate kingdom to
bring forward its own special grievances. Indeed, John was not a skillful
diplomat; he could not disguise his uneasiness, and was too transparent in his
intrigues. He gained secret information from his partisans of everything that
was being talked about, and then was not discreet enough to keep his own
counsel. The opposition between the Pope and the Council was day by day
increasing, and he was anxious to have a secure position before Sigismund came.
Accordingly in a congregation of Cardinals and
prelates held in the Pope’s Palace, though in the Pope’s absence, on December
7, the Italian or Papal party brought forward a schedule to regulate the
business of the Council. This schedule laid down that matters concerning the
faith were to take precedence over other matters; that the first step should be
to confirm the acts of the Council of Pisa, and empower the Pope to proceed against
Gregory XII and Benedict XIII if possible by compact, if not by force; that the
Pope should summon a General Council every ten years, should abolish simony,
and agree to a few obvious regulations. The object of this proposal was to
recognize the acts of the Council of Pisa, so far as the deposition of Gregory
and Benedict was concerned, but to give the Council of Constance an independent
existence so far as regarded the reformation of the Church. Questions relating
to faith the opinions of Wycliffe and Huss, were first to be discussed, and no
doubt they would take up time enough till the Council dissolved, and all
discussions of reforms, except on a few trivial points, might be again put off.
This proposal of the Italians was opposed by Peter d'Ailly and other French prelates, who objected that the present Council was a
continuation of the Council of Pisa for the purpose of proceeding with the
union and reformation of the Church; until that had been accomplished it must
rest on the basis of the Pisan Council, and could not confirm it : whoever
spoke of dissolving or proroguing this Council was a favorer of schism and
heresy.
A third proposal was made by four of the old
Cardinals, which was directly aimed against the Pope. It set forth bluntly and
straightforwardly the reforms which were needed in the Pope’s household and
personal conduct. The Pope, it laid down, ought to have fixed hours in the day
for religious duties, which ought not to be slurred over nor neglected; he must
show diligence in business, and avoid simony; he should appear in public in
Papal attire, and should conduct himself with gravity in word and gesture; he
must take care that the Papal dignity be not counted cheap in the eyes of the nations flocking to the Council, and must remember the
saying that “careless masters make lazy servants” ; he should not waste his
time in idle talk with irresponsible persons, but should act with proper
advice, regulate everything that goes on in the Council, and honestly work with
it. There was certainly no want of plain speaking; and John might have
perceived, had he been wise, how dangerous was his position between those who,
like Peter d'Ailly, wished to set to work at the
reformation of the Church, and those who were convinced that no reformation of the
Church was possible till there had been a very decided reformation in the Pope.
No conclusion was arrived at from this discussion; but
few days later, D'Ailly, in a general congregation in the Pope’s presence, read
a memoir in favor of proceeding mildly against Gregory and Benedict as the
surest way of promoting the cause of union. Resignation ought to be made easy
to them in every way; a committee might be appointed by the Council chosen from
the different nations to confer with them and arrange terms for their
resignation. This view of D'Ailly's was vehemently
attacked both by those who were partisans of John XXIII and by those who wished
to maintain to the letter the authority of the Pisan Council. D'Ailly answered
the arguments of both parties, and in so doing laid down a principle which was
fruitful in later times. “Although the Pisan Council”, he said, “is believed
with probability to have represented the universal Church which is ruled by the
Holy Spirit and cannot err; still, every Christian is not bound to believe that
that Council could not err, seeing that there have been many former Councils,
accounted general, which, we read, have erred. For according to some great
doctors a General Council can err not only in deed but also in law, and, what is
more, in faith; for it is only the universal Church which has the privilege
that it cannot err in faith”. To meet the general suspicion with which the
proceedings of the Council of Pisa were regarded, D'Ailly laid down the weighty
principle that the faith of Christendom was to be found graven on the heart of
Christendom; and the infallibility of Councils was to depend on their decrees
embodying the universal consciousness of the truth.
These differences of opinion prevented any definite
conclusion, and further proceedings were deferred till the arrival of
Sigismund. The second session, which John had announced for December 17, was
not held till March 2, 1415. On the morning of Christmas Day, amid the glare of
torches, Sigismund arrived in Constance with his Queen, Barbara of Cilly, Queen
Elizabeth of Hungary, the Countess of Wurtemberg, and
Rudolph of Saxony. He scarcely had time to change his raiment before he made
his first public appearance at early mass on Christmas morning. The Markgraf of Brandenburg bore the royal scepter; the Elector
of Saxony the drawn sword, and the Count of Cilly the golden apple of the
Empire. Sigismund acted as deacon at the mass, and read with majesty the
Gospel, “There went out a decree from Caesar Augustus”. The Pope, after the
mass was over, handed the King a sword, with a charge to use it in protection
of the Church, which Sigismund swore to do. Sigismund had a love of pomp and
outward magnificence, and had timed his arrival at the Council so as to gratify
it to the full. Once having secured his position, he was sure to receive due
respect afterwards; the staunch adherents of the Council offered extravagant
incense to the Imperial dignity. He was addressed as a second Messiah come to
ransom and restore the desolate Church.
Sigismund’s arrival was the signal to all who had yet
delayed to hasten their journey to Constance. Day by princes and prelates,
nobles and theologians from every court and every nation of Europe, had been
streaming into the little town on the borders of the Boden See. From Italy,
France, and Germany; from England, Sweden, Denmark, Poland, Hungary, Bohemia,
even from Constantinople, flocked the representatives of power and learning. In
their train came a motley crew of sightseers and adventurers of every kind. The
novels of the next generation show us how Constance was regarded as the
metropolis of every kind of enjoyment, gallantry, and intrigue. The number of
strangers present in Constance during the Council seems to have varied between
50,000 and 100,000, amongst whom were counted 1500 prostitutes and 1400 flute
players, mountebanks, and such like. Thirty thousand horses were stalled in the
city; beds were provided for 36,000 men; and boys made fortunes by raking up
the hay that fell from the carts which thronged the streets with fodder.
Excellent precautions were taken under the direction of the Pfalzgraf Lewis for the supply of provisions and the maintenance of order. In spite of
the crowd there was no lack of food, nor did the prices rise owing to the pressure.
Two thousand men sufficed to preserve order, and the utmost decorum marked all
the proceedings of the Council, though we read that during the session of the
Council 500 men disappeared by drowning in the lake. This vast number of
attendants lent splendor and magnificence to all the proceedings, and gave an
overpowering sense of their importance. The number of prelates was twenty-nine
cardinals, three patriarchs, thirty-three archbishops, about 150 bishops, 100
abbots, 50 provosts, 300 doctors of theology, and 1800 priests. More than 100
dukes and earls and 2400 knights are recorded as present, together with 116
representatives of cities. The Pope’s suite alone consisted of 600 horsemen,
and a simple priest like Huss had eight attendants. The enumeration of such
details shows both the pomp and luxury of the age, and also the surprising
power of organization which enabled a little city like Constance, whose
ordinary population cannot have exceeded 7000, to accommodate so vast a
multitude.
The Council awaited Sigismund’s arrival before
deciding what business was first to be taken in hand. John and the Italians
wished to begin with the policy of condemnation of Wycliffe’s opinions and the
trial of Huss; the French, headed by Peter d'Ailly,
wished to take in hand first the restoration of unity to the Church. In an
Advent sermon, preached before Sigismund’s arrival, on the text, “There shall
be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars”, D'Ailly defined
clearly the position of the Council. The sun, he explained, represents the
Papal majesty, the moon the Imperial power, the stars the different orders of
ecclesiastics: in this Council all come together to represent the Universal
Church. There must be one good Pope who lives rightly and governs well, not
three in impious mockery of the Trinity. The Emperor with clemency and justice
must carry out the decrees of the Council; the clergy, summoned by the Pope,
must assist him with their wisdom. Three things are to be done. The past must
be amended — that is, the Church must be reformed — the present must be duly
ordered by attaining unity, and provision must be made for the future by wise
precautions. Such was the policy which D'Ailly advocated with all his zeal and
learning. He laid it down that there could be no real union without
reformation, and no real reformation without union. Sigismund at once fell in
with D'Ailly’s policy, and his first steps showed
that he wished to proceed first with the restoration of unity. On December 29
he laid before the Council a statement of his embassies to Gregory XII, to
Benedict XIII, and to the King of Aragon, and asked the Council to wait for the
arrival of their of the ambassadors envoys.
On January 4, 1415, the question was discussed whether
the envoys of the anti-popes were to be received as cardinals or no. John’s
faction strongly opposed the concession by the Council of any such distinction
to the envoys of those who had been deposed at the Council of Pisa. Peter d'Ailly, true to his principle of proceeding with all
possible gentleness, and throwing no hindrances in the way of a union,
succeeded in carrying his point that they should be received in their
cardinals’ acts. This was a severe blow to John, and showed him that he had not
much to expect from Sigismund’s help. On January 12 the ambassadors of Benedict
and Aragon proposed that Sigismund should advance to Nice, and there confer
with Benedict and the King of Aragon about means to end the Schism; to this
request no answer was given at the time. On January 25 Gregory’s ambassadors
were honorably received by Sigismund and the Council, as they were under the
protection of Lewis of Bavaria, who next day presented a memoir undertaking, on
behalf of himself and Gregory’s adherents, to procure Gregory’s abdication, and
themselves join the Council, provided John did not preside, and Gregory was
invited to attend. To this John’s partisans answered that the abdication of
Gregory and Benedict, according to the provisions of the Council of Pisa, was
desirable, but that the question of John’s presidency could not be discussed,
as he was the lawful Pope whom all were bound to obey, and he was willing to
labor with all his power for the reformation of the Church.
John XXIII felt that the toils were closing round him.
He had not been present at the assemblies for some time, but he was carefully
informed of everything that passed. He was glad to find an opportunity of
making a public appearance, and preside at the solemn ceremony of the
canonization of a saint. A Swedish lady, Briget, who
instituted a new monastic order and died at Rome in 1373, had been canonized
already by Boniface IX. But as this had occurred during the time of the Schism,
the representatives of the northern nations were desirous of having the
authenticity of their countrywoman’s title placed beyond dispute. The
canonization took place on February I. A Danish archbishop, after mass was
over, raised a silver image of the saint to popular adoration: the Te Deum was raised by those present, and the
day closed with splendid festivities.
But ceremonies and festivities did not prevent the
expression of what everyone had in his mind. It was clear that the union of the
Church could only be accomplished by the resignation of all the three Popes,
and the offer of Gregory’s abdication brought forward prominently the
desirability of John’s resignation as well. The first to break the ice and
venture to express the general idea was Guillaume Filastre,
a learned French prelate whom John had made cardinal. Filastre circulated a memoir in which he pointed out that the surest and quickest means
of procuring union was the mutual abdication of all three Popes; if this were
so, John was bound to adopt that method; for if the Good Shepherd would lay
down His life for His sheep, much more ought the Pope to lay down his
dignities. If he was bound to do so, the Council might compel him to do so; but
he should first be asked humbly to adopt this course, and should be assured of
an honorable position in the Church if he complied. Sigismund expressed his
approval of this memoir, which was largely circulated, and soon reached the
Pope, who had not expected to be attacked by his own Cardinals, and was greatly
enraged. Filastre, however, put on a bold face,
visited the Pope, and assured him that he had acted to the best of his
knowledge for the good of the Church. Filastre’s memoir drew forth several answers, urging that the course which he proposed
destroyed the validity of the Council of Pisa, and that it was unjust to
rank a legitimate Pope with men who had been condemned as schismatics and heretics. In a matter of so great delicacy it was judged wise to proceed by
means of written memoirs, and not to enter upon a public discussion till
considerable unanimity had been obtained.
Peter d'Ailly again came
forward to defend the original scheme of the University of Paris and remove by
subtle arguments founded on expediency the formal objections urged against
John’s resignation. He recognized John as the lawful Pope, and allowed the
validity of all that had been done at Pisa; but, he argued, the adherents of
Benedict and Gregory do not agree, and all the arguments in favor of promoting
union by voluntary abdication, which were urged at Pisa, apply with still
greater force when there are three Popes instead of two. In the proposal for
John’s abdication he is not ranked with the Popes who were deposed, but is set
above these by being summoned to perform an “act which is for the good of the
Church. If he refuse, the Council, as representing the Church, may compel him
to lay aside his office, though no charge be made against him, simply as a
means of effecting the unity which the Church longs for”.
John now clearly saw the issue which lay before him,
but he still had hopes of escaping. Memoirs might be circulated and discussions
carried on amongst the right of theologians assembled in Constance, but when
the matters came to voting he would be safe. He had spent money freely to
secure votes: the crowd of needy Italian prelates was all dependent on him; he
had created fifty new bishops with a view to their votes in the Council. John’s
adversaries saw this also, and boldly raised the question who had the right to
vote. According to old custom there was no doubt that this right had been
exercised only by bishops and abbots, and John’s adherents demanded that the
old custom should be followed. But D'Ailly answered, with his usual learning
and clearness of judgment, “that in the most ancient times, as may be found in
the Acts of the Apostles and Eusebius, the object was to represent in councils
the Christian community; only bishops and abbots voted because they were
thoroughly representative. At present priors and heads of congregations had a
greater right to vote than titular abbots who represented no one. Moreover doctors
of theology and law were not heard of in old times, because there were no
universities; they ought now to be admitted, as they had been at Pisa, on
account of their position as teachers and representatives of learning. Also, as
the question under discussion was the unity of the Church, it was absurd to
exclude kings and princes, or their ambassadors, since they were especially
affected”. Filastre went further than D'Ailly. He
demanded that all the clergy should be allowed to vote. “An ignorant king or bishop”,
he said, “is no better than a crowned ass”. He urged that the status of all
priests was the same, though their rank might differ. This extremely democratic
view did not meet with much favor, and D'Ailly’s suggestions were practically adopted by the Council.
Moreover the large crowd of Italians, dependent on the
Pope, possessed a numerical superiority which was out of proportion to the
interests which they represented. There had been some discussion of this point
amongst the Germans; but the arrival of the English representatives on January
21 gave the question new prominence. The English were few in number; their
voting power, if votes were to be counted by heads, was insignificant. The
chief of the English prelates, Robert Hallam, Bishop of Salisbury, faced this
fact and proposed to the Germans a scheme for solving the difficulty. He
suggested that it would be well for the Council to adopt the same system as
prevailed in the universities and organize itself by nations. A session of the
Council had been fixed for February 6; but the English and Germans rose and
protested against procedure by individual voting: they demanded that an equal
number of deputies from each nation should have the ultimate decision on all
important matters. Next day the French gave in their adhesion to the plan, and
the Italians were powerless to resist. Thus without any definite decree of the
Council a new form of constitution was established, which made the prospect of
uniting the Church much more hopeful. Henceforth every matter was first
discussed by each nation separately, and their conclusions were communicated to
one another. When by this means an agreement had been reached, a general
congregation of the four nations was held, and the conclusions were put into a
final shape. A general session of the Council then gave formal validity to
the decree.
John XXIII’s hopes of being able to lead the Council
were now entirely frustrated; he had to consider how he might best escape
destruction. The plan of a common abdication of all three Popes was proposed in
a congregation of the English, Germans, and French on February 15, and was by
them laid before the Italians, who gave a reluctant assent. John’s courage was
entirely upset by hearing that a memoir had been circulated by some Italian,
containing a list of his crimes and vices, and demanding that an enquiry be
instituted into the truth of the charges. Doubtless John’s life had not been
such that he would wish its details to be exposed in the eyes of assembled
Christendom. He had done many things that ill befitted a priestly character,
and enough could be substantiated against him to make the blackest charges seem
credible on very slight evidence. John was entirely unnerved at the prospect;
he consulted with his Cardinals whether he had not better at once confess
to the Council the frailties from which, as a man, he had not been exempt. They
advised him to wait awhile and think over it before committing himself. John’s
relief was great when he heard that many of the English and Germans opposed an
enquiry into his character from a wish to spare the reputation of the Papacy,
and advocated that he be urged to abdicate.
This plan had now received such unanimous assent, that
it was impossible for John to oppose it openly. He professed to accept it
readily; but he hoped to do so in terms so vague as to lead to no results. His
first schedule was rejected as too dubious in meaning. The second met with no
better success, as it indulged in needless condemnation of Gregory and Benedict
as heretics. The Germans passed a series of strong resolutions which pressed
hard upon John. They declared that the Council had supreme authority to end the
Schism, and that John was bound under the penalty of mortal sin to accept a
formula of resignation offered by the three nations. On February 28 the formula
was drawn up. In it John was made to “undertake and promise” to resign, if, and
as far as, Gregory and Benedict did the same. The representatives of the
University of Paris suggested that this only imposed a civil obligation, which
it would be well to strengthen by a religious one; they proposed the addition
of the words “swear and vow”, which were unanimously accepted. On March 1 this
formula was presented to the Pope in the presence of Sigismund and deputies from
the nations. John received it with a good grace. First he read it to himself,
and then, remarking that he had only come to Constance for the purpose of
giving peace to the Church, read it aloud with a clear voice. Tears of joy
streamed down many faces at the accomplishment of this first step towards the
union of the Church; the assembled prelates raised the Te Deum, but more wept than sang and many did
both. In the city the bells rang joyously, and the utmost delight prevailed at
this first result of the Council, which had sat four months and had achieved
nothing. Next day John read the same formula publicly in the cathedral; at the
solemn words of promise he bowed before the altar and laid his hand upon his
breast. Sigismund rose from his throne, laid aside his crown, and kneeling
before the Pope kissed his foot in token of gratitude. The Patriarch of
Alexandria thanked him in the name of the Council.
The unanimity between John and the Council seemed to
be complete; but, when the first outburst of joy was over, John’s resignation
seemed to be too good news to be true. There was a wish to bound him more
completely, and it was suggested that he should embody his resignation in a
Bull. At first he refused; but Sigismund’s influence obtained the Bull on March
7. The Council was anxious to be quite sure of its own position, as it was now
in a position to authorize the interview which Benedict’s ambassadors had
suggested between their master and Sigismund at Nice. When preparations were
being made for this purpose it was suggested that John should name as his
proctors, with full power to resign in his behalf, Sigismund and the prelates
who were to accompany him. This was a vital point, on which John could not give
way: if he did, his chances were entirely lost and his resignation, which was
at present only conditional, would be irrevocably accomplished. He adroitly
proposed that he should go himself to meet Benedict; but the Council remembered
the innumerable obstacles which had been found to prevent the meeting of
Gregory and Benedict; nor did they desire to let John leave Constance lest he
should at once dissolve the Council. Mutual distrust blazed up in an instant.
Frederick of Austria had come to Constance on February 18, and though he
studiously avoided the Pope, rumors were rife of an understanding between them,
and suspicions were keen. John made a last attempt to soften Sigismund by
presenting him, on March 10, with the golden rose, which, according to old
custom, the Popes consecrated, when they chose, three weeks before Easter, and
presented to kings whom they delighted to honor. Sigismund received the gift
with due respect, and bore it in solemn procession through the city; but it was
significant that he did not keep it for himself, but offered it to the Virgin
in the cathedral.
Sigismund soon showed that he was not moved by this
touching mark of Papal affection. Next day, March II, he presided at a
congregation, in which some members spoke of electing a new Pope, after
securing the abdication of the three claimants. Archbishop of Mainz rose and
protested that he could obey no one except John XXIII. Words ran high; the old
accusations against John were again brought up, and the assembly dispersed in
confusion. It was clear that there was war between Sigismund and the Pope. John
did not mean to take any steps to accomplish his resignation; Sigismund was
resolved to hold him to his promise. As John would not give way, it was clear
that he must be purposing to leave Constance. Sigismund gave orders that the
gates should be closely guarded. When one of the Cardinals attempted to pass he
was turned back. John summoned the great lords and magistrates of the city, and
loudly complained to the Council, with good reason, of this violation of the
safe-conduct under which they were all assembled. The burgomaster of Constance
pleaded Sigismund’s orders; Frederick of Austria stood forward and declared
that, for his part, he intended to keep the safe-conduct which he had promised.
Next day, March 14, Sigismund summoned a congregation of the French, Germans,
and English, who sent to the Pope a renewed demand that he would appoint
proctors to carry out his abdication; they added a request that he would
promise not to dissolve the Council or allow anyone to leave Constance till union
had been achieved. With these demands Sigismund sent his excuse about the watch
over the gate; he said that he had set it at the request of some of the
Cardinals, who feared lest the Council should melt away; he wished, however, in
all things to stand by his safe-conduct. John agreed not to dissolve the
Council, but suggested its transference to some place in the neighborhood of
Nice, where he might more conveniently meet Benedict and perform his
resignation in person.
Matters were now in a very awkward position. Sigismund
and the three Transalpine nations stood opposed to the Pope and the Italians.
John’s resistance clearly indicated an intention of quitting Constance; this
made his opponents more eager to deprive him by any means of the power of harming
them. In a congregation on March 17 the Germans and English were for insisting
on the appointment of proctors by the Pope; but the French were opposed to
driving matters to extremities, and voted for adjournment. The French already
had had experience of the difficulties in the way of using violence to a Pope;
they had also a stronger sense of decorum than the Teutons,
and seem to have resented the high-handed way in which Sigismund managed
matters. The close alliance between the English and the Germans somewhat
annoyed them; for, though the mission of the Council was a peaceful one,
national animosity could not be entirely silenced, and the French knew that
England was on the brink of waging an unjust war of invasion against their
country. No sooner was there the faintest sign of a breach in the serried front
of the Transalpine nations than the Italians hastened to take advantage of it.
They sent five Cardinals to detach the French from the English and Germans.
Amongst them was Peter d'Ailly, for the Cardinals as
Italian prelates formed part of the Italian nation. D'Ailly, who had been the
most prominent man in the beginning of the Council, disapproved of the violent
and revolutionary spirit which had been developed since Sigismund’s arrival. He
now used his influence with the French to induce them not to join with the
Germans and English in their scheme of forcing the Pope to appoint proctors; he
also begged them to withdraw from the method of voting by nations, and advocate
the old method of personal voting. Though D'Ailly had argued strongly in favor
of extending the franchise, he was not prepared to admit an entire change in
the method of voting.
The prospect of a union between the French and the
Italians enraged still more the Germans and English. At a Congregation on March
19 the English proposed that John be seized and made prisoner. Sigismund,
followed by the English and Germans, proceeded with this demand to an assembly
where the French were sitting in conference with the five Cardinals deputed by
the Italians. If the French had before resented Sigismund’s conduct, they now
blazed up at this unwarrantable interference, and angrily demanded that their
deliberations should be left undisturbed. The English and Germans withdrew, but
Sigismund and his lords remained. The French demanded that the lords also
should withdraw. Sigismund lost his temper, for the majority of those who sat
amongst the French were his subjects. He angrily exclaimed, “Now it will be
seen who is for union and faithful to the Roman Empire”. Peter d'Ailly, indignant at this attempted coercion, rose and
left the room; the other four Cardinals protested that they were not free to
deliberate. On the King’s departure messengers were sent to ask if the French
were to consider themselves free. Sigismund had now recovered his equanimity,
and answered that they were perfectly free; he had spoken in haste. At the same
time he ordered all who did not belong to the French nation to quit their
assembly on pain of imprisonment. The quarrel seemed to have become serious;
but the ambassadors of the French King, who had arrived on March 5, entered the
French assembly, and said that the French King wished that the Pope should
appoint proctors, and should not leave Constance nor dissolve the Council. This
calmed the wrath of the French, who now separated themselves again from the
Italians and joined the Germans and English.
There now seemed to be no hope for John XXIII, but the
sense of his danger at length spurred him to Frederick take the desperate step
of fleeing from Constance. He had bound to himself Frederick of Austria, a
young and adventurous prince, who hated Sigismund, feared the Council, and
hoped to gain much from the Pope. He had come to Constance, and there found his
pride outraged by the commanding position assigned to Sigismund. He had been
called upon by Sigismund to do homage for his lands, and, though at first he
refused, was driven to do so by the good terms on which the King stood with the
Swiss cantons, the hereditary foes of the Austrian House. He strove to detach
Sigismund from the Swiss by offering aid for a war against them. But Sigismund
was too wily for him, and gave the Swiss information of his proposals; when the
Swiss envoys arrived in Constance, Sigismund confronted them with Frederick,
and offered his services to settle any disputes which might exist between them.
Outwitted and filled with shame and rage, Frederick stammered out excuses, and
had to arrange matters with the Swiss by pleading that he had
been misinformed. But Frederick’s humiliation made him burn with desire to
upset Sigismund’s triumphal progress at the Council. He knew that he would not
stand alone, and that John still had powerful friends. The Duke of Burgundy
wished by all means to dissolve the Council; the Archbishop of Mainz was
Sigismund’s foe and a staunch adherent of John; the Markgraf of Baden had been won over to John’s side by the substantial argument of a gift
of 16,000 florins.
John and Frederick laid their plans cautiously and
skillfully, yet not without awakening some suspicion. Sigismund thought it well
to visit the Pope and reassure him. He found him in the evening lying on his
bed, and enquired about his health; John answered that the air of Constance did
not agree with him. Sigismund said that there were many pleasant residences
near Constance where he might go for change of air, and offered to accompany
him; he begged him not to think of leaving Constance secretly. John answered
that he had no intention of leaving till the Council was dissolved. Men
afterwards regarded this answer as framed like an oracle of old; John meant
that by his departure he would dissolve the Council. No sooner was the King
gone than John, in the hearing of his attendants, called him a “beggar, a
drunkard, a fool, and a barbarian”. He accused Sigismund of sending to demand a
bribe for keeping him in his Papal office. Most likely John here laid his
finger on Sigismund’s weak point; Sigismund was poor, and may have demanded
money for the expenses of the Council from the Pope, whom he was laboring to
drive from his office. John’s attendants wondered to hear such plain speaking:
their master’s tongue was loosened by the thought that he would soon be rid of
the necessity of the intolerable self-restraint under which he had been lately
living.
Next day, March 20, a tournament was held outside the
walls, in which Frederick of Austria had challenged the son of the Count of
Cilly to break a lance with him. The town was emptied of the throng, which
flocked to the spectacle. In the general confusion the Pope, disguised as a
groom, mounted on a sorry nag, covered by a grey cloak and a hat slouched over
his face, with a bow hanging from his saddle, passed out unperceived. He slowly
made his way to Ermatingen, on the Unter See, where a boat was waiting to convey him to
Schaffhausen, a town belonging to Frederick. In the midst of the tourney a
servant whispered the news into Frederick’s ear. He continued the joust for a
while, and gracefully allowed his adversary to win the prize; then he took horse
and rode off the same evening to join the Pope at Schaffhausen.
|
