 |
BOOK I
. THE GREAT SCHISM. 1378-1414
CHAPTER VI.
THE COUNCIL OF PISA.
1409.
Christendom had fallen away from the two refractory
Popes, and the Cardinals had undertaken to heal the Schism of the Church. All
plans had failed which rested on either the voluntary or compulsory withdrawal
of one or both of the contending Popes. It was impossible to get rid of these
two claimants to the Papal dignity and yet leave the foundations of that
dignity itself unmoved. The bold theory of an appeal from the Vicar of Christ
on earth to Christ Himself residing in the whole body of the Church was to be
tried, and the long-forgotten name of a General Council was again revived. The
Cardinals, however, knew that the weight of such a Council would depend upon
the fullness of its representation; and they did all they could to win the
recognition of the princes of Europe. France, of course, was anxious for a
Council. Henry IV of England accepted it willingly, and even wrote to Rupert,
King of the Romans, urging him to take part in it. The difficulty lay with
Germany, where Rupert and Wenzel both claimed the Imperial title. Wenzel
offered to send ambassadors to the Council if they were received as the
ambassadors of the King of the Romans. When this was agreed to, he published,
on January 22, 1409, a declaration of neutrality throughout his dominions.
This, however, had the effect of rendering Rupert uneasy. He was uncertain what
view a new Pope might take of his claims, which had been recognized by Boniface
IX, and were bound up in the recognition of Gregory XII. At a Diet held at
Frankfort, in January, 1409, Cardinal Landulf of Bari maintained the cause of
the Cardinals, and Gregory’s nephew Antonio the cause of the Pope. The majority
of the princes were in favor of the Cardinals, but Rupert still held to
Gregory; and it was finally resolved that both parties should send envoys to
the Council to represent their views.
Nor was it only in high political matters that the
Cardinals pursued their efforts for Gregory’s overthrow. Pisa itself was a
manufactory of satires and invectives against him. One may be quoted as a
remarkable instance of the mediaeval notions of reverence and of wit. Two of
the Cardinals died in Pisa, in July, 1408, and a letter purporting to give
their experiences of the politics of the other world was found one morning
affixed to the gates of the Cathedral of Pisa. It describes with rhetorical
realism a consistory held by Christ in Heaven, in which one of the saints rises
and calls attention to the distracted state of the Church on earth. He is made
to describe the two Popes and their followers with the vilest scurrility of
personal spite. After hearing this speech, the Cardinals meet with a
friend, who tells them that, on his road to Paradise, he happened to miss his
way and peep into the regions of punishment, where he saw a fiery chariot being
prepared for Gregory, to which were harnessed the chief persecutors of the
Church. He saw Urban VI and Clement VII made objects of mockery even by their
fellow- sufferers in the abode of heretics; while Innocent VII was condemned to
menial work in Heaven, where he hid himself from shame at the thought that he
had made Gregory a Cardinal. Finally, the two Cardinals are welcomed by the
Almighty into the heavenly assemblage, and are assured that a blessing will
rest on the labors which they have begun. There were many such pamphlets, and
much coarse wit was mingled with theological discussion. In one, which issued
from the University of Paris, Peter de Luna is reminded that, if he were true
to his name, he would be shining like the moon in a clear sky; as it is, he is
eclipsed by clouds of vanity. Angelo Correr is informed that his name means
“angel”, but he seems to be Satan transforming himself into an angel of light.
The great question, however, for the Cardinals was to
strengthen themselves in Italy. It was clear that Ladislas would maintain the
cause of Gregory; and such was the power of Ladislas in Italy, that he might
render insecure the position of the Cardinals in Pisa, and bring their Council
to naught. The Cardinals looked for help to one of their own number, Baldassare
Cossa, who in the days of Boniface IX had been made legate in Bologna, over
which he established himself supreme. Cossa was a Neapolitan, who began his
career as a piratical adventurer in the naval war between Ladislas and Louis of
Anjou. When peace was made, his occupation was gone, and he determined to seek
advancement in other ways, though his old habits never entirely left him, and
he had a robber’s custom of working all night, and sleeping only when dawn
appeared. He entered as a student in the University of Bologna, which he
quitted for Rome, where Boniface IX soon recognized and esteemed his practical
sagacity. He was made by Boniface one of his chamberlains, and his ingenuity in
extorting money won the Pope’s admiration. Cossa would write to absent bishops,
warning them with all friendly concern that the Pope was indignant with them,
and intended to transfer them from their present posts to some unknown regions
or districts in the hands of the Saracens; after thus exciting their fears, he
proffered himself for the office of treasurer of the gifts which they eagerly
sent to propitiate the Pope. Besides this, he organized and superintended the
vast army of Papal officials who went out for the sale of Indulgences. Boniface
rewarded these merits by making him Cardinal in 1402; and when, on the death of
Gian Galeazzo Visconti, there was an opportunity of extending the power of the
Church in Aemilia, Cardinal Cossa was sent as legate, and established the
Pope’s power in Bologna. Thenceforth he ruled the city and the district with
firmness and severity. He knew how far to allow a plot to proceed before
bringing it to light and punishing its authors; he knew how to involve in
charges of treason those who stood in his way; and, while carefully
strengthening the fortifications, he pleased the citizens by beautifying their
city. He managed to turn to his own purposes the schemes of Alberigo da
Barbiano, who was striving to win a principality in the Romagna. When Alberigo
pressed on Faenza, Cardinal Cossa bought the signiory for the Church from the
terrified Ettore de' Manfreddi, and occupied the territory. He borrowed the
money from the city of Bologna, but did not pay it to Manfreddi, whom in
November, 1405, he invited to Faenza, and put to death on the charge of
attempted treason. At the same time died Cecco degli Ordelaffi, lord of Forli,
leaving a young son to succeed him. Cossa claimed Forli for the Church, on the
ground that the grant of Boniface IX had been a personal grant to Cecco. The
people of Forli rose and set up their old municipal government. For a while
there was war; but in 1406 peace was made, and the Republic of Forli recognized
their allegiance to the Roman Church by accepting a Podestà and Legate
from Rome. These triumphs abroad improved Cossa’s hold upon Bologna, which he
ruled as an independent prince. Complaints were made against him to Innocent
VII, but Cossa imprisoned the complainants, and Innocent was too feeble to do
more than express his distrust. Cossa openly defied Gregory XII, and refused to
admit his nephew Antonio to the possessions of the bishopric of Bologna, which
the Pope conferred upon him; he pleaded that he needed them for his own
expenses. It was not as a Cardinal, but rather as an Italian prince, that he
declared himself in favor of the Council of Pisa, and took the Cardinals under
his protection. It was said that he bore a deadly hatred to Ladislas, who had
captured and put to death two of his brothers, who had not been so wise as
himself in desisting from piracy in good time. Without this motive of
vindictiveness Cossa had motives of self-interest to induce him to side with
the Cardinals. He became at once the most powerful man amongst them, and his
support was necessary to enable them to carry out their Council. Cossa saw the
Papacy henceforth dependent on himself.
Cossa’s first step was to secure Florence for the side
of the Cardinals; and Florence, which had always been on good terms with the
Popes at Avignon, was easily won over. Early in 1409 a Council of Florentine
ecclesiastics determined that they were in conscience bound to withdraw from
allegiance to Gregory; and this determination was announced to take effect from
March 26, in case he did not appear or send commissioners with full power to
the Council of Pisa. Moreover, Cossa succeeded in establishing firmly a league
between Florence and Siena, so as to secure the safety of the Council against
an attack of Ladislas. Had it not been for Cossa’s skill, the Council might
easily have been disturbed by the hostile demonstrations of Ladislas, who was
determined to uphold Gregory as long as possible, and meanwhile to get all he
could from a Pope who had no other refuge than himself. Gregory had sunk to the
lowest pitch of degradation : he sold to Ladislas for the small sum of 25,000 florins
the entire States of the Church, and even Rome itself. After this bargain
Ladislas set out for Rome, intending to proceed into Tuscany and break up the
Council. He entered Rome on March 12, and took up his abode in the Vatican,
where he lived in regal state, and appointed new magistrates for the city. On
March 28 he left Rome for Viterbo, but was driven back by a violent tempest,
and again set out on April 2. His standard bore a doggerel rhyme: —
Io son un povero
Re, amico delli Saccomanni,
Amatore delli Popoli, e destruttore delli Tiranni.
With this assuring promise he marched northwards and
threatened Siena, which was too strong for assault, having been reinforced by a
Florentine garrison. Florence, true to her policy of opposing the overweening
might of any power, resolved to hold by the Cardinals and further the election
of a new Pope, so as to have a barrier against the outspoken intentions of
Ladislas to seize the States of the Church. Already they had warned Ladislas
that they could not recognize his sovereignty over the States of the Church;
and when he scornfully asked with what troops they would defend themselves, the
Florentine ambassador, Bartolommeo Valori, answered, “With yours”. Ladislas
checked himself, for he knew that the wealth of the Florentine citizens could
allure his followers from his ranks. It was lucky for Cossa’s plans that on
April 26 died Alberigo da Barbiano near Perugia, when on his way to join
Ladislas at Rome. Alberigo was full of indignation against Cossa, who had
seized his castles in Romagna, and his death robbed Ladislas of an important
ally. To check the progress of Ladislas, the Florentines engaged Malatesta de'
Malatesti, lord of Pesaro, who, being far outnumbered by Ladislas, could only
pursue a cautious policy of cutting off supplies and harassing the advance of
the army. When Ladislas found that he could not take Siena, he pressed on to
Arezzo, which also closed its gates against him; thence he made an attempt on
Cortona, which was also unsuccessful. Though master of the country, he could
not capture any fortified place, but only laid waste the fields. The peasants
began to mock at him, and gave him the nickname “Re Guastagrano”, King
Waste-the-Corn. A second attempt on Cortona was more successful, as the
citizens, through hatred to their lord, plotted with Ladislas and opened the
gates to his troops on June 3.
Meanwhile the Council was sitting peaceably at Pisa,
and the attempt of Ladislas to prevent its assembling had entirely failed. The
luckless city of Pisa greeted with joy the meeting of the Council within her
walls. Once mistress of the trade in the Mediterranean, and chief in wealth and
importance among the Italian cities, she had sunk from her lofty position
overshadowed first by Genoa and then by Florence. Internal dissensions
accomplished the work of her downfall; she passed from one lord to another
till, in 1405, the once haughty city was sold as a chattel to Florence.
Florentine rule was not established without a desperate struggle, in which the
Pisans were reduced only by famine, and in the hour of their uttermost despair
were betrayed by him whom they had chosen leader of their last desperate
defence. But, though reduced, the Pisans were not subdued, and their old spirit
of independence was still strong within them. Pisa in this condition of
enforced quietude, with its many memories of departed glories, was well fitted
to be the meeting-place of the Council which was to restore the peace of
Christendom.
The building, moreover, in which the Council was held,
is the noblest monument which Christendom contains of the aspirations and
activity of the mediaeval Church. Nowhere is a more vivid impression gained of
the magnificent sobriety and earnestness of the Italian citizen than when first
the Cathedral of Pisa strikes upon the eye. Away from the Arno, with its throng
of ships and noise of sailors, away from the Exchange where merchants
congregate, away from the Piazza where the people meet to manage the affairs of
their city, away at the extremest verge of the city, where there is nought that
can hinder the full force of their impressiveness, the Pisans raised the noble
buildings which tell the sincerity of their piety and the greatness of their
municipal life. The stately simplicity of the vast basilica, which was
consecrated in 1118, shows how the rich fancy of the Lombards enriched without
destroying the purity and severity of the Roman forms. The graceful proportions
of the Baptistery, which was begun in 1153, testify the increased freedom of
handling among the Pisan architects; and the Campanile is a memorial of their
determined spirit and joyous resoluteness in facing unforeseen difficulties.
The exquisite Gothic cloister of Giovanni Pisano surrounding the peaceful
burying-ground of their forefathers tells of the poetic seriousness of the
Pisan people and the freshness of their great architects to receive new
impulses. Nor was this all; inside these splendid buildings were stored the
treasures of Italy’s earliest and most reflective art. The Pisan school of sculpture
put forth all its strength and grace in decorating the great church of the
city; the most thoughtful and earnest of the flourishing school of painters at
Siena unfolded in allegory on the walls of the Campo Santo the great realities
of human life. Such was the place, so full of many and varied associations, to
which the assembled Cardinals summoned the representatives of every land in
Christendom.
The Council was opened on the Festival of the
Annunciation, March 25. The long procession of its members formed in the
monastery of S. Michele, and wound slowly through the streets to the cathedral.
The number of those who attended the Council was imposing, though all had not
arrived at first. There were present twenty-two Cardinals of both obediences,
four patriarchs, ten archbishops, and sixty-nine bishops; besides these,
thirteen archbishops and eighty-two bishops sent their representatives.
Seventy-one abbots were present, a hundred and eighteen sent proctors; there
were also sixty priors, the Generals of the great orders of the Dominicans,
Franciscans, Carmelites, Augustinians, the Grandmaster of the Knights of S.
John, and the prior of the Teutonic Knights; besides a hundred and nine
representatives of cathedral and collegiate Chapters. Ambassadors were sent by
Wenzel, King of the Romans; the Kings of England, France, Sicily, Poland,
Cyprus; the Dukes of Burgundy and Brabant, Cleves, Bavaria, Pomerania; the
Landgraf of Thuringia; the Markgraf of Brandenburg; the Universities of Paris,
Toulouse, Angers, Montpellier, Vienna, Prague, Koln, Cracow, Bologna,
Cambridge, and Oxford. One hundred and twenty-three doctors of theology and
more than two hundred doctors of law are said to have been there. It was
computed that altogether ten thousand strangers visited Pisa during the period
of the Council.
The first day of the Council, March 25, was devoted to
the procession, and opening service. Next day the Council assembled in the long
nave of the cathedral. After mass a sermon was preached by the Cardinal of
Milan; then all knelt in silent prayer, which was followed by a Litany, and
then the assembly on their knees raised through the vaulted roof the strain of
the hymn “Veni Creator”. The business of the Council then began, under the
presidency of Guy Malésec, Cardinal of Poitiers, who was both venerable from
his age and from the fact that he was the only Cardinal who had been created
before the outbreak of the Schism. The Archbishop of Pisa, in behalf of the
Council, read a solemn profession of faith, and, the better to assert its
orthodoxy, ended with a declaration that it firmly held “that every heretic or
schismatic must share with the devil and his angels the burning of eternal
fire, unless before the end of this life he be restored to the Catholic
Church”. The Council then elected its officials — marshals, auditors,
advocates, promoters, notaries — who took the oaths of office. Immediately one
of the advocates, Simon of Perugia, demanded that the letters of summons
addressed to the two rival Popes be read. When this ceremony had been gone
through, he asked that steps be taken to discover whether these men, whom he
nicknamed Benefictus and Errorius, had been guilty of contumacy. With a
ridiculous imitation of the forms of a law-court, which had no relevancy to the
present matter, two of the Cardinals, accompanied by an archbishop, a bishop,
and several officials, advanced to the great doors of the cathedral, which were
thrown open. Standing on the steps, they summoned the two Popes, and enquired
of the gaping crowd if they had seen in the city any of the household of either
of them. Then they solemnly returned, and informed the Council that no one had
answered to their summons. The advocate thereupon demanded that they should be
declared contumacious. The proposition was submitted by the President to the
other Cardinals, who gave their voices for delay until the morrow. The
other members signified their assent by cries of “Placet, placet”, and the
session came to an end. Next day the same formalities were repeated with the
same result, and the third session was fixed for March 30. After a third
fruitless summons, the rival Popes were declared contumacious; the one Cardinal
still adhering to Gregory and the three who remained with Benedict were called
upon to be present at the next session, when further steps were to be taken
against Gregory and Benedict if they still refused to appear. To give them time
to do so, the day of meeting was fixed for April 15.
It was well for the Council to delay that its members
might confer privately and assure themselves of the basis upon which their
proceedings were to rest. It was one thing to wish to remedy the evils of the
Schism; it was another thing to settle the nature of the authority by which the
Schism was to be brought to an end. The Papal monarchy had so entirely absorbed
all the powers of the Church that its old mechanism had disappeared; and the
very principles upon which it had rested were a matter of uncertainty. Opinions
were eagerly sought upon this point. Pamphlets were freely published, and
different views were set forward which enable us to judge of the difficulties
in the way of obtaining the unanimity which was necessary before active steps
could be taken.
It is worthwhile to notice some of the principal views
by which the freedom of conciliar action was vindicated. Cossa caused the
University of Bologna to express its opinion, which it did with the cautious
proviso that, if it said anything deviating from the traditions of the Church,
it was to be counted as unsaid. It took for its starting-point the proposition
that schism of long duration passes into heresy. A Pope elected under an oath
to do away with the Schism, if he fail, nourishes heresy; and those subject to
him are therefore bound to withdraw their allegiance, and seek a true Pope who
will extirpate the Schism. If the Cardinals, whose chief duty it is, do not
call a Council for that purpose, provincial synods and princes may take such
steps as they think wise in the matter. This opinion, founded on canon law, was
technical and formal, and admitted of technical and formal answer. It seems to
have been supplemented at the time of its publication by a statement of more
general principles deduced from the nature of the Church itself, such as had
been insisted upon by the University of Paris. True Cardinals represent the
Universal Church, in electing a Pope, and in all questions that concern the
unity of the Church; for the object of the election of a Pope is to embody that
unity; all obligations that they imposed in making an election they imposed in
the name of the Universal Church, and are bound to see them carried out,
otherwise they incur the guilt of heresy. This additional opinion, which is
compelled to fall back upon general principles, still does so with caution, and
shows an unwillingness to go further than was necessary to justify technically
the summons of a Council under existing circumstances. Its object is to show
the existence of a legal obligation on the Cardinals to proceed in the way
which they had chosen. The Italian mind was clearly not much interested in the
question. It was from France that the conciliar movement came, and it was
French intellect which advocated General Councils as a recurrence to
primitive antiquity.
Peter d'Ailly and Jean Gerson codified their opinions
for the good of the Pisan fathers, and in their utterances we see the advance
of opposition to the principles of the Papal monarchy which the Schism had
brought about. D'Ailly was loth to cut himself entirely off from obedience of Peter
to Benedict, but he set the unity of the Church above personal feeling. The
Head of the Church, he writes, is Christ; and in unity with Him, not
necessarily with the Pope, does the unity of the Church consist. From Christ
its Head the Church has the authority to come together or summon a Council to
preserve its unity; for Christ said, “Where two or three are gathered together
in My name, there am I in the midst”; He said not “in the name of Peter”, or
“in the name of the Pope”, but “in My name”. Moreover, the law of nature
prompts every living body to gather together its members and resist its own
division or destruction. The primitive Church, as may be seen in the Acts of
the Apostles, used this power of assembling Councils; and in the Council of
Jerusalem it was not Peter, but James, who presided. With the growth of the
Church this power was reasonably limited for the sake of order, so that
Councils were not called without the Pope’s authority; but this limitation did
not abolish the power which was inherent in the Church itself, and which in
cases of necessity it was bound to use. It is true that positive laws of the
Church are opposed to this conclusion; but in the present necessity they must
be broadly construed, without affecting the rights of the Pope when there is
one canonical Pope universally recognized. To get over the existing difficulty
a General Council may be called, not only by the Cardinals, but by any faithful
men who have the power. Before this Council the rival Popes are bound to appear,
or, better, to send their proctors, and, if necessary, abdicate their position
to promote the unity of the Church. If they refuse, the Council can take action
against them as promoters of schism, and proceed to a new election, which,
however, would not be expedient unless the whole of Christendom were likely to
agree to it.
These conclusions of D'Ailly were still further
strengthened by a tractate of Gerson on the “Unity of the Church”, which he
sent from Paris before he was able personally to join the Council. In this he
examines all the objections on the ground of canon law which can be raised
against the Council. He asserts that the unity of the Church to one Vicar of
Christ need not be procured by a literal observance of the terms or ceremonies
of positive law, but by the wider equity of a Council, in which resides the
power of interpreting positive law and adapting it to the great end of
promoting unity. The unity of the Church depends on divine law, natural law,
canon law, and municipal law; but the last two must in cases of emergency be
interpreted by the first two. A case has now arisen in which neither canon law
nor municipal law can avail. The Council, therefore, must use divine law and
natural law to interpret them, but must do so with discretion and moderation,
so as not to injure their stability. Gerson agrees with D'Ailly in urging that,
unless the Council be unanimous about proceeding to a new election, such a
course be deferred. Moreover, as the search for unity must be undertaken with
prayers and penance, since the Schism has its origin in sin, so must unity
itself be established by a reformation of the Church in head and members, lest
worse befall.
In these utterances of D'Ailly and Gerson we see the
root of all the efforts after reform which formed the ideal of thinking men for
the next century and a half. We find ideas of the nature of the Church and the
position of the Papacy which are founded on broad principles of historical fact
and natural right. These ideas might long have been discussed as abstract
problems in a few learned circles; but the Schism made them articles of popular
belief in every country. One great result of the Schism was that it forced men
to enquire into matters which otherwise would never have been investigated.
Every Christian was driven to form an opinion on a subject of vital interest to
Christendom. The letters of the rival Popes and the statements of their
opponents were widely circulated and eagerly discussed. All parties appealed to
the people, and felt that their claims must rest finally on popular assent.
Abstruse questions, that ordinarily were discussed by scholars in the closet,
were now noised abroad on the housetop.
Schoolmen and legists might discuss; but it was clear
that the Pisan Council must owe its power to the universality of its
acceptance. It was true that the greater part of the Christian world had
declared its allegiance, but some powers still held aloof. The Spanish kingdoms
were true to the obedience of Benedict. Ladislas would not give up so useful an
instrument as Gregory. The Northern nations stood aloof, as did Sigismund of
Hungary. Venice maintained an attitude of cautious neutrality; and Carlo
Malatesta, lord of Romagna, still upheld Gregory. In Germany Rupert opposed the
Council which his rival Wenzel supported. When the Council met for its fourth
session, on April 15, it had to face the existence of opposition to its
authority. Four ambassadors from Rupert, the German King, attended the Council;
but, though all were ecclesiastics, they did not appear in their vestments, nor
did they take their seats among the others. As soon as the opening ceremonies
were over, one of them, the Bishop of Verdun, rose, and in a lengthy speech
propounded twenty-two objections to the Council, all of which were of a narrow
and technical character, mostly founded on an acute criticism of the terms of
the summons to the Council, and difficulties concerning its dates. The
ambassadors were requested to put their objections in writing, which they did
the next day; and April 24 was fixed for the next session, when an answer would
be given them. But the ambassadors did not think it worthwhile to await an
answer. On April 21, which was a Sunday, they attended mass in the cathedral,
and heard a sermon preached in refutation of their statements; the same evening
they hurriedly left Pisa, after lodging an appeal from the Council to a future
Council to be convoked by Gregory.
In the same week there came to Pisa, Carlo Malatesta,
lord of Rimini, in whose dominions Gregory had taken shelter. Carlo had already
sought to make terms between Gregory and the Council, and had proposed a change
of the place of the Council to Bologna, Mantua, or Forli, to any of which
Gregory would promise to come. The Cardinals had answered that, having summoned
the Council to Pisa, they were no longer free to change the place. Now Carlo
came to Pisa to try and make peace. The Cardinals suggested that, if Gregory
would not abdicate, Carlo should seize his person as a schismatic and heretic.
But Carlo was too honorable to entertain the suggestion; he was himself a
learned and eloquent man of upright character, and answered that, what he could
do lawfully, he was ready to do, but he could use no violence. He returned to
Rimini on April 26, and informed Gregory of the state of affairs at Pisa; he
added that, unless the Pope’s righteousness exceeded the righteousness of the
Pharisees, the Church would never have peace. Gregory answered that
difficulties beset him on every side — if he abdicated, what was to become of
his Cardinals and of King Ladislas? if he did not, great danger beset the
Church; his only practical step was to hasten the meeting of the Council which
he had summoned.
At Pisa the fifth session of the Council was held on
April 24. An advocate read a long statement, which lasted for three hours, of
the charges against the two Popes, and demanded that they should be adjudged
heretical, and deprived of their office. This document, which was drawn up by
the Cardinals, glided gently over the blame which they themselves had incurred
by making their elections. It insisted on the pains which they had taken to
induce the Popes to yield, the bodily terror in which they stood of the violent
temper of the Popes, and the persistent obstinacy shown in neglecting their
advice. The Council appointed commissioners to examine witnesses as to the
truth of the statements contained in the thirty-eight charges so preferred. The
same day arrived in Pisa the ambassadors of the King of France, headed by Simon
Cramaud, Patriarch of Alexandria, and soon after came the English ambassadors,
headed by Robert Hallam, Bishop of Salisbury. The next session, on April 30,
seems to have been spent in welcoming them. Cramaud presided, and Hallam
addressed the Council, urging them to united action, and assuring them of the
goodwill of the English King towards their efforts to restore unity. The
Bishop’s speech lasted so long that nothing else could be done that day.
At the seventh session, May 4, a learned legist of
Bologna, Piero d'Anchorano, rose to answer the objections made by Rupert’s
ambassadors. This he did with much legal skill and acuteness; but his argument
was founded on the assumption that, by the Schism, the Church was without a
head, and that in the vacancy the Cardinals were the rightful administrators of
the Papacy. The legal mind could not advance beyond the basis of law, which
only opened up interminable questions of dispute. We see, as we look through
the objections of Rupert’s ambassadors and the answers of D'Anchorano, that the
controversy on legal grounds might be protracted endlessly. Only by an adoption
of the theoretical grounds of D'Ailly and Gerson — that the supreme power
vested in the Church itself, which must act according to the laws of God and
nature in cases of emergency — could the Council be justified. It is not to be
wondered at that the legal mind of the canonists, which saw in the Papal
monarchy over the Church the only foundation of law and order, shrank from any
assertion that might affect the basis of this authority. Yet without some such
assertion the authority of the Council could not be established, and the Schism
could not be brought to an end.
The eighth session, on May 10, brought one of these
technical difficulties to light. The advocate demanded a decree that the union
of the two Colleges had been duly and canonically effected. On this the Bishop
of Salisbury remarked that he did not understand how the two Colleges were on
the same footing, seeing that Gregory’s had formally withdrawn their obedience,
while Benedict’s had not. It was suggested that a decree be passed, that it was
lawful, and also was a duty, for everyone to withdraw from both Popes since the
time when it became clear that they had no intention of promoting the unity of
the Church by common abdication. To this some of the Cardinals, especially
those of Poitiers and Albano, demurred; but the Council affirmed it by cries of
“Placet”. Then the President — the Patriarch of Alexandria — read out a decree
of the Council according to the advocate’s demand, declaring approval of the
union of the two Colleges, and affirming the Council to be duly assembled as
representative of the Universal Church, and to have authority to decide all
questions concerning the Schism and the restoration of unity.
Before the next session, on May 17, the Cardinals had
been won over to accept the decree brought forward at the last session
declaring the withdrawal of allegiance from both Popes: and the powers of the
commissioners who had been appointed to examine witnesses about the charges
against the Popes were extended, to allow them to get through their work more
quickly. In the tenth and eleventh sessions, May 22 and 23, the articles
against the two Popes were read, and their truth was attested by the Archbishop
of Pisa, who declared each of them to be true and notorious, and mentioned in
the case of each the number of witnesses by whose testimony was established. On
the same day Bulls from Benedict were brought to his Cardinals, who at first
refused to receive them; but the Cardinal of Milan at length opened them, at
the instigation of Simon Cramaud. The Bulls contained an inhibition to proceed
to a fresh election, and pronounced excommunication against all who should
withdraw from obedience to the Roman See. These Bulls of Benedict, in the
existing temper of the Council, were regarded as more convincing than many
witnesses of his stubbornness and incapacity. At last, in the twelfth session,
on May 25, Gregory and Benedict were declared contumacious, and the charges
against them were pronounced notoriously true.
On May 28 the doctors of theology who were present at
the Council, to the number of a hundred and twenty, gave their opinions that
the two Popes were schismatics and heretics, and might be excommunicated and
deprived of their rights. At the session next day, Dr. Pierre Plaoul spoke in
the name of the University of Paris, which, he said, was not only a
representative of the French kingdom, but had scholars from England, Germany,
and Italy by whose co-operation its opinions were formed. He declared its view
to be, that the Church stood above the two claimants of the Papal throne, who
were both heretical and schismatic; the same opinion was held by the
Universities of Angers, Toulouse, and Orleans. Similar opinions were also
expressed on behalf of the Universities of Bologna and Florence. On June 1 the
Archbishop of Pisa read a summary of the articles against the two Popes and the
evidence on which they were founded. Finally, on June 5, the Patriarch of
Alexandria read the sentence of deposition against the two Popes as schismatics
and heretics; all the faithful were absolved from allegiance to them and their
censures were declared of no effect. The sentence was read before the open
doors to the assembled crowd, and was received with rejoicing. The magistrates
proclaimed it with the sound of trumpets and ordered a universal holiday. The
bells of the cathedral pealed out joyously, and each church took up the peal,
which spread from village to village, so that in four hours’ time the news was
carried in this way to Florence.
The Council was not, however, very sure of its own
position in spite of its lofty pretensions, if we may judge from the fact that,
in the same session, it prohibited any of its members to depart till they had
signed the decree of deposition. It seems to have felt that its authority,
after all, would depend upon its numerical strength and unanimity. In the same
spirit, at the next session, on June 10, letters were sent to the communities
and lords of the patriarchate of Aquileia, where Gregory had taken refuge,
requiring them to use all diligence to restrain Gregory from holding a council.
At the same time the Cardinal of Chalant, who had at length departed from
Benedict, was, on the intercession of the Cardinal of Albano, allowed in
silence to take his seat in the Council.
The existing Popes had been set aside by the authority
of the Council; there remained the important question how a new Pope was to be
obtained. The proceedings of the Council really rested on popular assent; a
disputed succession to the Papal monarchy had led to the assembling of an
ecclesiastical parliament to end the miseries of civil war. The authority of
this parliament was necessary to put down the two claimants to the Papal throne;
but the ecclesiastical hierarchy was anxious to check any movement towards
democracy. The Cardinals could elect a Pope, but could not depose one. They
were driven to have recourse to a Council, as the only means of getting rid of
the two claimants for the Headship of the Church; but they were anxious that
the pretensions of the Council should extend no further. Now that the rival
Popes were gone, the Cardinals were prepared to revive the old custom, and
proceed quietly to the election of a new Pope. With a view of giving assurance
to the Council, and preventing any interference in the election to the Papacy,
the Cardinals, in the session on June 10, caused a paper to be read by the
Archbishop of Pisa, in which they bound themselves, in case any one of them
should be elected Pope, not to, dissolve the Council until a “due, reasonable,
and sufficient reform of the Church, in head and members, had been brought
about”. There were, in fact, different opinions about the procedure in the
election of a new Pope. Some were of opinion that, as the Cardinals had been
created during the Schism, an election by the Council would be the best way of
restoring legitimacy. But this seemed too revolutionary; and as a compromise,
the representatives of the University of Paris urged that the Council should
authorize the Cardinals to proceed to an election, and should provide that a
two-thirds majority of each College should be required. On the necessity of
such an authorization there was a difference of opinion even among the French
prelates; nevertheless, at the next session, on June 14, the Patriarch of
Alexandria read an authorization of the Council without submitting the question
to a vote. An oath was administered to the city magistrates that they would
secure peace and order during the election.
Ambassadors from the King of Aragon, who had just
arrived, with difficulty obtained a hearing from the Council, whose interest
now lay entirely in the election of a new Pope. They demanded that the envoys
from Benedict’s Council of Perpignan should be heard by the Council; and
received answer that it was now late in the day, and was the eve of the
Conclave. Commissioners were, however, appointed to confer with them, before
whom they appeared next day, in the church of S. Martin, but were received with
scant courtesy. The Bull of deposition was read to them, and when the
Archbishop of Tarragona persisted in calling himself the envoy of Pope
Benedict, there was a cry, “You are an envoy of a heretic and a schismatic”. A
tumult arose, and the declaration of the city magistrates that they could not,
in accordance with their oath, allow anything which might disturb the Council,
rendered it useless for the envoys to stay longer. They asked for a
safe-conduct to go and confer with Gregory about peace; but were told by
Cardinal Cossa that, if they entered the district where he was legate, he would
have them burned, safe-conduct or no. The envoys in fear left the city. In this
matter the Council failed to act either with dignity or fairness. It is true
that they were wearied with fruitless embassies to the recalcitrant Popes; it
is true that this embassy came late, and that the Council had already decided
on a course of conduct which no embassy could affect. Still the restoration of
unity to the Church could only be brought about by tact, by conciliation, by
imposing dignity; it was necessary to prove the two Popes hopelessly in the
wrong, and leave them nothing to which they could appeal in their own defence.
The ambassador of the King of Aragon informed the Patriarch afterwards
that they had come with powers to tender Benedict’s resignation, even though
Gregory did not resign. A chance of reconciliation had been thrown away by
the precipitate action of the Cardinals just at the last.
The Cardinals were bent on the new election, and on
June 15 they entered into Conclave in the Archbishop’s palace. There were ten
Cardinals of Benedict’s obedience, fourteen of Gregory’s. There was a
controversy whether a term should be set, within which the Cardinals should
make an election, or the right of election should pass to the Council; but it
was agreed to leave the Cardinals full liberty. Fears were entertained lest the
election should be long deferred; but on June 26 it was announced that the
unanimous choice of the Cardinals had fallen on Peter Philargi, Cardinal of
Milan. Of the proceedings in the Conclave we know nothing for certain. The
Cardinals must have felt that they had a difficult task before them: it was
necessary to elect someone who would awaken no national jealousy, and who would
be capable of dealing energetically with the disturbances in the Papal States.
It is said that at first their thoughts turned upon the vigorous Legate of
Bologna, Baldassare Cossa. But Cossa was alive to the difficulties which one so
deeply concerned in Italian politics would have to face. He besought them to
choose Philargi instead of himself, as being a man of learning and of stainless
character, a Greek by birth, who would be a compromise between contending
nationalities, and who had no relatives whom he could wish to aggrandize at the
expense of the Church. He promised that he himself would do all in his power to
recover from usurpers the possessions of the Holy See. The Cardinals agreed,
and elected Philargi, who was over seventy years of age, and seemed to promise
only a short tenure of office.
Philargi’s election was hailed with joy. The bells
were rung, the new Pope was carried to the cathedral and there enthroned. He
took the name of Alexander V. Everyone was fairly satisfied with his election,
as being a judicious compromise which could offend no one. Born of a humble
family in Crete, Peter Philargi knew neither father nor mother. As a beggar-boy
in the street, he was taken and educated by a friar minor. After his admission
into the Franciscan order, he went into Italy, and thence proceeded as a
student to the Universities of Oxford and Paris, where he gained great
reputation for his theological knowledge. Returning into Lombardy, he won the
confidence of Giovanni Visconti, lord of Milan, and was by him made tutor of
his sons. Promotion rapidly followed; he was made Bishop of Vicenza, then of
Novara, next Archbishop of Milan; Innocent VII created him Cardinal, and his
authority in North Italy had been of great service in arranging the
preliminaries of the Council. He was universally popular for his affability,
kindliness, and munificence; to the benefits of which everyone hastened at once
to put in a claim.
On July 1 the new Pope preached before the Council,
and then the Cardinal of Bologna (Cossa) read in his behalf decrees approving
of everything that had been done by the Cardinals from May, 1408, up to the
beginning of the Council, and also uniting the two Colleges into one, so that
there should be no more question who were true Cardinals and who were not.
Whichever was the true College, as all had been unanimous in Alexander’s
election, he was indisputably a true Pope, and could supply all defects either
of law or fact. On July 7, was the solemn coronation of the Pope, and, on July
10, came ambassadors from Florence and Siena, who delivered complimentary
speeches. The Sienese envoy urged the Pope to hasten his return to Rome,
whither the way now lay open by the retreat of Ladislas.
In fact, now that a Pope was elected, political
motives rapidly began to outweigh ecclesiastical. Cossa, who was the Pope’s
chief adviser, pined to find a field for his adventurous spirit in the recovery
of the States of the Church. Louis of Anjou hastened to Pisa in hopes that this
change in the Papacy might bring again into prominence his claims on the
Neapolitan crown. It was true that the Cardinals had bound themselves before
the election that the Pope should proceed at once to a reform of the Church;
but this was a vague undertaking, and it was hard to know how to begin to carry
it out. The times were stirring, and the Pope, if he were to establish himself,
must show a power of vigorous action.
The session which was to begin the reform of the
Church had been fixed for July 15; but the Cardinals wavered, and on the excuse
of the Pope's illness it was put off till the 20th, the 24th, and finally the
27th. Then, as the result of many conferences between the Cardinals and the
Council, the Archbishop of Pisa declared, in the Pope’s name, that he renounced
all pecuniary claims that had been accruing during the vacancy up to the day of
his election, and gave up reservations of the goods of deceased prelates, and
claims to the revenues of vacant benefices. The Cardinals were asked to do the
same as regarded their claims, and all, except the Cardinals of Albano and
Naples, assented. A series of decrees were passed securing in their benefices
and possessions all who adhered to the Council, confirming all their acts, and
declaring that a General Council was to be summoned by the Pope or his
successor in three years — that is, in the month of April, 1412. In the last
session, on August 7, a few trivial decrees were promulgated directing the
holding of diocesan and provincial synods and chapters of monks. Plenary
absolution, which was to avail even in the hour of death, was given to all who
had attended the Council, and to their attendants. Finally the Pope declared
his intention of reforming the Church in head and members. Much had already
been done, but more remained, which, owing to the departure of prelates and
ambassadors, could not now be undertaken. The Pope therefore deferred further
reforms to the future Council, which was to be regarded as a continuation of
the present one.
There were some members of the Council who wished to
make their voice heard on the question of reform. The prelates and proctors of
England, France, Germany, Poland, Bohemia, and Provence presented to the
Pope a list of grievances to which they called his attention, as deviating from
the old laws and customs of the Church. They enumerated translations of bishops
against their will, Papal reservations and provisions, destruction of the
rights of patronage of bishops and chapters, the exaction of first-fruits and
tenths, grants of exemptions from the visitatorial power of bishops, the
excessive liberty of appeal to the Pope in cases which had not been heard in
the inferior courts. They petitioned for a remission of debts to the Papal
Camera, by which many churches were entirely overwhelmed, and for a
simplification of the rules of the Papal Chancery, which were opposed to the
common law, and baffled even the learned. They prayed that the Pope would not
rashly alienate nor mortgage the possessions of the Roman See. To these requests
Alexander V returned fair answers, except in the matter of appeals, about which
he only said that he would consider further. The promise of a future Council
enabled the Pope to put aside for the present the question of reform; and the
greed of the chief members of the Council to seek their own promotion from a
Pope whose liberality and kindliness were well known, made them indifferent to
anything beyond their own interest. The Patriarch of Alexandria, who had been
the leader of the Council, was busily engaged in seeking to obtain his own
nomination to the archbishopric of Rheims, which had just fallen vacant.
The members of the Council of Pisa returned home
convinced that they had at length given peace to the Church, and had healed the
long Schism. They had no doubt that their Pope would prevail, and that the
others would sink into oblivion. Benedict XIII had never been very warmly
supported by Aragon: after protesting against the Council of Pisa and its
proceedings, he retired to the rocky fortress of Peñiscola, on the coast, and
there shut himself up for safety. Gregory XII held a council in opposition to
that at Pisa at Cividale, which was but scantily attended. However, it declared
the election of Alexander V to be null and void (August 22), and before its
dissolution, Gregory, on September 5, made a magnanimous offer to abdicate
provided Benedict and Alexander would do the same; he offered to meet them for
this purpose at any place which might be agreed upon by Rupert, Sigismund, and
Ladislas. Such an offer might be specious, but was clearly illusory; Rupert,
Sigismund, and Ladislas were not at all likely to agree in the choice of a
place, and if they did, there was no reason to suppose that Gregory’s rivals
would abide by their decision. But Gregory himself was in sore straits where to
turn when his shadowy council was dissolved. The Patriarch of Aquileia was
hostile to him, and he had difficulty in escaping safely from Cividale; at
last, in disguise, he managed to make his way to the coast, and take refuge in
two galleys of Ladislas, which conveyed him to Gaeta, where he settled for a
time.
The adherents of Benedict and Gregory might be few,
but so long as there were any the object of the Council had failed. It had met
to restore unity to the Church, but did not succeed in doing so. In fact, we
are driven to admit that the Council scarcely proceeded with the care,
discretion, or singleness of purpose which were necessary to enable it to
perform the duty which it had undertaken. Its intention from the beginning
seems to have been to over-ride, not to conciliate, the contending Popes. In
the first session the advocate of the Council was allowed to call them by the
derisive names of Benefictus and Errorius. The Council entirely identified
itself with the Cardinals, and accepted their procedure as its own. It did not
enter into negotiations with the Popes, nor send to invite their presence; but
it assumed at once that the summons of the Cardinals was one which the Popes
were bound to obey, and declared them contumacious for their refusal. It could
hardly have been expected that the Popes would submit themselves at once to the
behest of their rebellious Cardinals. If the Council had taken up a position of
its own, which could have been supported by all moderate men, it might have
exerted such influence on the Popes themselves or their supporters as to have
reduced them to submission. Even if this had failed, the Council should have
remembered that its avowed object was the restoration of the outward unity of
the Church; and it was not possible that the authority of a Council irregularly
convoked should meet with such universal acceptance, that its sentence of
deposition would be received with entire unanimity by the whole Church. Both
the Popes were old; a new election could not be far removed. Judicious
negotiations might have provided satisfactory measures to be taken when a
vacancy occurred: it would have been safer to have ended the Schism surely than
to have aimed at ending it speedily.
Moreover the Council did not sit long enough nor
discuss matters with sufficient freedom to make its basis sure. The teaching of
D'Ailly and Gerson had done much to justify the assembly of a Council as an
extraordinary step due to necessity. But the Council proceeded to depose the Popes
without making out very clearly its right to do so. D'Anchorano had grounded
its right on the assertion that the two Popes, having failed to fulfill their
promises to resign for the sake of promoting unity, had become schismatics and
heretics. But this view was by no means universally accepted, nor did any very
definite view prevail. We find next year that the Cardinal of Bari, before
going on an embassy to Spain, submitted to Alexander V’s successor thirty-four
objections which might be taken to the proceedings of the Council, and
requested that he might be provided beforehand by the University of Bologna
with answers wherewith to meet them. The Council of Constance, by accepting
Gregory’s resignation and negotiating for that of Benedict, tacitly confessed
that their deposition by the Council of Pisa could not be regarded as lawful.
The Council of Pisa has been regarded as of dubious authority, very greatly, no
doubt, owing to its want of success. We cannot wonder that an assembly which
dealt so hastily and so precipitately with difficult and dangerous questions
should fail to obtain a permanent solution. The theory of the sovereignty of
the Church, as against the sovereignty of the Pope, had been so ardently
advocated by French theologians, that it was accepted at Pisa as sufficient for
all purposes without due explanation or consideration. The Council forgot that
the decisions of canonists and theologians are not at once universally
accepted. If all Europe had been unanimous in withdrawing from the obedience of
the rival Popes, the decision of the Council might have been acted upon as a
means of obtaining a new settlement. As it was, there were too many political
motives involved in upholding the existing claimants to make it possible that
the Council’s Pope should receive that universal acceptance which alone could
bring the Schism to an end.
|
