RELIGION AND THE CHURCH, 1516-1700
[Sidenote: Outstanding facts in the religious and ecclesiastical history
of the era.]
Prior to the era of the House of Austria it is possible to deal with the
ecclesiastical institutions in Spain at the same time with other
manifestations of a social, political, economic, or intellectual
character, but the period of Hapsburg rule was so replete with interest
on the religious side and so important in that respect in its ultimate
results on the Americas that this phase of Spanish life in the sixteenth
and seventeenth centuries is deserving of separate treatment. Two ideas
dominated the period: the struggle for the maintenance of the Catholic
faith against the inroads of Protestantism and other heretical beliefs;
and the efforts of the Spanish state to acquire a virtual political
supremacy over the church. Few periods of history more clearly
illustrate the distinction maintained in Catholic countries between
Catholicism as a religious faith and the Catholic Church as an
institution, a difference which people of the United States do not
readily grasp. Thus it was entirely consistent that the kings of Spain
should have been almost the most ardent champions in Europe of Catholic
Christianity, officers of the church not excepted, and also most
persistent in their endeavors to limit the ecclesiastical authority in
Spanish domains. The greatest exponent of the latter policy as well as
of the former was Philip II, one of the most devout monarchs who ever
occupied the Spanish throne. In both of these controversies the kings
were successful. Heresy made no headway in Spain or in the colonies, and
the king gained the upper hand in the management of the Spanish and
American church. Meanwhile Spanish missionaries were carrying on one of
the greatest campaigns of proselytism ever waged. The thoroughness of
the conversion of the natives in Spain’s colonial possessions has been
questioned, but there is no doubt that something of the external forms
and the glamour--so much, at least--of the Catholic religion was
implanted in the Americas in such a way that it has withstood the
experiences of centuries. Spanish American peoples, like Spaniards, were
to have their conflicts with the church,--very bitter ones in recent
years,--but never, since the Franciscan, Dominican, and Jesuit Fathers
first preached their doctrine, has favor been shown for any great length
of time to the other exotic faiths, or has any noteworthy success been
met with in the attempts, usually short-lived, at a reversion to the
earlier native creeds. The work of the Spanish missionary was indeed a
permanent factor of indisputable importance in the new world.
[Sidenote: Religious exaltation and the increase in the prestige and
wealth of the clergy.]
One of the effects of the attainment of religious unity by the
conversion or expulsion from Spain of the Jews, Mudéjares and Moriscos
was to exalt the feeling of religious sentiment in the peninsula. The
Protestant Reformation and the religious wars which accompanied it
tended to keep alive these emotions among Spaniards, partly because of
the spirit of controversy they excited, and partly because of the blows
and suffering they involved, and this spirit of religious exaltation was
sustained by the increasing vigor of the Inquisition and by the
activities of the Jesuit order, founded in this period. In consequence
the power and social influence of the clergy were materially enhanced.
The regular clergy was looked upon with especial favor, with the result
that both in riches and in membership they far surpassed the secular
branch. Many new orders were founded, while the older ones received
fresh stimulus. At the beginning of the seventeenth century there were
some 200,000 members of the regular clergy and over 9000 convents for
men, and in both cases the numbers increased thereafter, while the
population of the peninsula declined,--a factor which caused political
and economic writers, many of whom were churchmen, not a little
concern.[56] Despite this fact the clergy enjoyed the highest social
consideration, and intervened in all phases of Spanish life. This was
due not only to the religious sentiment of the people but also in great
measure to the superior intellectual attainments of some of the clergy.
Thus they distinguished themselves on the one hand as theologians,
students of the canon law, jurisconsults, men of letters, historians,
and university professors, and on the other as members of state
councils, or in high political positions in the Americas. The increase
in the landed wealth of the church, while it was the subject of numerous
unsuccessful petitions of the _Cortes_ to forbid the giving of lands in
mortmain, was largely responsible for the imposition of taxes on the
clergy, thus diminishing the immunities they had formerly enjoyed. The
church could well afford to pay, for if not the richest proprietor in
Spain it was certainly among the first; toward the middle of the
sixteenth century the combined rents of the clergy amounted to some
5,000,000 ducats ($75,000,000) a year, or half the total for the
kingdom, four-fifths of which amount was paid to the establishments of
the regular clergy. Part of the funds was expended in charities for the
benefit of the poor, such as the maintenance of asylums, hospitals, and
soup-kitchens, measures which (disinterested though they might be)
served also to augment their popularity with the masses.
[Sidenote: Prevalence of loose practices among the clergy.]
Despite the flourishing condition of the Spanish clergy and their high
standing in the peninsula the state of morality among them left much to
be desired. Abundant evidences on this score are at hand, not only in
the form of unsympathetic attacks and satires, but also in the works of
zealous and devout reformers. The fact that such writings were not
condemned by the Inquisition argues the need for reproof. The practice
of _barraganía_ was not unknown, even among bishops, some of whom
entailed estates to their sons. Among the lesser churchmen, more
particularly the secular clergy, the custom was more general.
Solicitation by confessors and the avarice of clerical collectors of
revenues were also frequently censured in the writings of the time.
Nevertheless, it is but fair to consider these evils from the standpoint
of that era. As compared with previous periods this age was one of
marked advance in the average of clerical rectitude, and there were even
writers who could claim that the Spanish clergy surpassed the churchmen
of other countries in moderation and chasteness of life. Meanwhile,
reforms like those instituted in the time of the Catholic Kings by
Ximénez were being pushed on vigorously and effectively, and were
reinforced by the decisions of the great church council of Trent
(1545-1563).
[Sidenote: Prominence of Spanish kings and prelates in church reform.]
The Protestant Reformation and the Catholic Reaction, or
Counter-Reformation, belong rather to European and church history than
peculiarly to that of Spain, although Spain played a leading part in the
events connected with them. Much in regard to them may therefore be
omitted, except in so far as they affected problems in the peninsula
itself and, by extension, the Spanish colonies. Charles I was an ardent
partisan of church reform, but was desirous that it should be effected
without change in dogma, and in this attitude he was joined by many of
the greatest Catholic churchmen of the day, including some of the popes,
who recognized the prevalence of abuses of which the Protestant leaders
were able to make capital in the furtherance of their reforms. One of
the principal policies of Charles I was the calling of a general church
council for the discussion of this matter, and despite the resistance of
several of the popes he labored to attain this end until he was at
length successful. In 1545 there began the series of congresses which
are called collectively the Council of Trent. Spanish prelates were one
of the most important elements at these meetings, and in accordance with
the ideas of Charles I and Philip II resisted the attempts made at a
suspension of the sessions and the efforts of certain popes and other
churchmen to bring about their failure. They were not only among the
most frank in their references to the need for reform, but were also
most rigid in their insistence upon disciplinary methods, even
suggesting the application of the Spanish institution of the
_residencia_ to officers of the church. The eventual success of the
council was due in no small degree to Spaniards, who also were among the
most active in executing the corrective measures which were decided
upon.
[Sidenote: Failure of Protestantism to gain a substantial footing in
Spain.]
The kings of Spain combated heresy within the peninsula to the fullest
extent of their ability, supported by the general opinion of Spanish
Christians, who were almost unanimously opposed to the new ideas.
Measures were taken to prevent the dissemination in Spain of the works
of Martin Luther or other heretical thinkers. In 1546 Charles I caused
the first _Index_, or list of prohibited works, to be published, and
this was reproduced, with the addition of some other volumes, by the
Inquisition. Later the Bible was included in the _Index_, except the
authorized Latin version, on the ground that the reading of the
scriptures by uncultivated persons might result in misconceptions as to
the true religion. Nevertheless, Protestantism gained devotees in the
various cities of Spain, more particularly in Seville and Valladolid.
The number of heretics was at no time great, but it was recruited from
the highest ranks of society. Churchmen, more often friars, were the
principal element, and they found converts in not a few members of noble
families. Foreigners from northern lands frequently cast in their lot
with the Protestant groups. As was natural, proselytism on a wide scale
could not be carried on; the Valladolid group numbered only about fifty
and that of Seville one hundred and thirty (although there is some
evidence to the effect that the latter body attained a membership of
eight hundred), while those of other cities were still fewer in numbers.
The greatest name in the Sevillian movement was that of Constantino
Ponce de la Fuente, whom a modern writer has ventured to compare with
Martin Luther for his high qualities, within the Protestant movement.
Ponce, who was at one time the confessor of Charles I and Philip II, was
the author of various heretical works. Discovered, at length, he was
imprisoned, and shortly afterward was found dead. In the year 1559 great
activity was displayed by the Inquisition in ferreting out and punishing
the Protestant communities. Some individuals escaped to foreign
countries, but many were condemned to die at the stake, meeting their
fate, almost without exception, with admirable fortitude. The most
celebrated case was that of Bartolomé Carranza, archbishop of Toledo.
Head of the Spanish secular church though he was, only the efforts of
Pope Pius IV saved him. After more than seven years of imprisonment he
was allowed to go to Rome. Some years later he was required to forswear
some of his writings which had figured in the original proceedings
against him in Spain, shortly after which he died. In all of this
vigorous persecution of Protestantism, Charles I and Philip II took the
lead. By the end of the sixteenth century the new faith was no longer a
problem in Spain. Under Philip IV a degree of toleration which would not
have been dreamed of in earlier years began to be allowed. By that time
Catholic France was Spain’s principal enemy, and this tended to soften
the attitude of Spaniards toward Protestants, although the restrictions
of the laws were still enforced. In 1641 a treaty was made with Denmark,
permitting Protestants of that country to enter the peninsula. From this
time forward Spain was to evolve toward a more lenient policy still. A
discussion of Spanish Protestantism would not be complete without a
reference to the numerous Spaniards who took refuge in Protestant lands,
and even for a time in Italy and France. They wrote a number of works
which were remarkable for the excellent literary qualities of the
Castilian they employed and for the scientific value of their content.
While most of their writings were of a controversial, religious type
they also made translations into Castilian or even wrote volumes of a
scientific character dissociated from religion. Juan de Valdés and Juan
Díaz were outstanding names among them. Miguel Servet and Pedro Galés,
whose heresies were equally in disfavor with Catholics and Protestants,
were also men of great distinction.
[Sidenote: The Illuminist and Quietist heresies.]
Protestantism was not the only heterodoxy to menace the religious unity
of the peninsula. The conversion of the Mudéjares of the eastern
provinces and the expulsion of the Moriscos have already been mentioned.
The Jews also gave occasional trouble. Of the other sects the most
noteworthy was that of the _Iluminados_ (Illuminati). The origins of
this faith are obscure. Many believe it to have been purely Spanish, a
conclusion to which the peculiar mystical character of the creed lends
color. Others hold that it was of German extraction. In any event,
though the time of its founding is not clear, it antedated the Lutheran
outbreak, for it was in existence at least as early as 1512. Many of the
doctrines sustained by Luther were a part of its creed, and indeed it
paved the way for the entry of Protestantism into Spain. In addition it
upheld the following tenets: the abdication of one’s own will in that of
the divine; and the capacity of the faithful, by means of ecstacies, to
put themselves in personal communication with the divine essence, on
which occasions it was impossible for them to commit sin. The practical
result of these beliefs was an indulgence in all manner of licentious
practices while in the sinless state. As in the case of Protestantism,
so in this, the devotees were usually members of the clergy, especially
friars and nuns. The Inquisition attacked the new faith with vigor, but
found it difficult to extirpate in entirety. A notable derivation from
Illuminism was that of _Quietismo_ (Quietism), or _Molinismo_, founded
in the seventeenth century by Miguel de Molinos, a member of the clergy.
This creed, though similar even in its licentiousness to Illuminism, was
not at first considered unorthodox, wherefore it gained many converts,
but in the end it was condemned.
[Sidenote: Spanish Mysticism.]
Similar in some respects to the two heretical creeds just mentioned was
a peculiarly Spanish religious philosophy, that of Catholic Mysticism.
It traces back through the ideas of Raymond Lull to those of the Arabic
philosophers, but in the main it was a product of the Spanish religious
thought of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. The fundamental idea
was that of direct communication with God through prayer, love of God,
and the renunciation of earthly things, which enabled the purified soul
in a state of ecstasy to appear in the divine presence. The whole
process was accompanied by miracles, but without any loss to the
individual of his spiritual existence or of his intelligence for an
understanding of God. At first the ecclesiastical authorities were
suspicious of it, prohibiting the writings of the mystics and conducting
investigations into the conduct of those who professed a belief in it.
At length, however, it was accepted as orthodox, and its devotees were
not molested. They produced a rich literature, in which they set forth
not only the fundamental bases of their belief but also the experiences
they had in journeying to God. One of the mystics, María de Jesús de
Ágreda, is famous as “the Blue Lady” of the American (United States)
southwest and Pacific coast, for she is said to have visited these
regions while in a state of ecstacy and to have converted many of the
natives, recounting her travels in her published works. She is also
famous for her correspondence with Philip IV. The greatest names,
however, were those of Santa Teresa de Jesús[57] and San Juan de la
Cruz, the former notable in literature for the excellence of her prose,
and the latter equally noteworthy as a poet. The writings of these and
other mystics also displayed a profound psychological study, such, for
example, as was required by their ability to distinguish between the
processes of the soul on the way to communication with God, and as was
evidenced by their skill in differentiating between the various elements
in religious sentiment.
[Sidenote: The Inquisition as an instrument of the kings and an agency
to suppress heresy.]
The two principal instruments employed to combat heresy were the
Inquisition and the Jesuit order. So far as the former concerned itself
with matters of the faith, it had the support of the Spanish people, who
equally with the kings were desirous of the establishment and
maintenance of religious unity. The Inquisition had acquired various
powers and privileges, however, which were not directly connected with
its principal office. Papal bulls had been procured giving it
jurisdiction in cases of usury, crimes against nature, and improper
solicitations of confessors; it claimed exemption for its officers and
servants from the operation of the civil law courts; and its relations
with these courts, made necessary by the legal incapacity of the
Inquisition to execute its own sentences, often gave rise to conflicts
and misunderstandings. The people of Spain were perfectly able to
distinguish between the Inquisition as an instrument of the faith and
the Inquisition in these extra-jurisdictional phases, and protested
vigorously against that body in the latter sense. The various _Cortes_
of Castile, Aragon, and Catalonia presented many a petition on this
score to the kings, and it was a prominent factor in the Catalan revolt
of 1640. Nevertheless, the kings consistently sustained the Inquisition.
When the Aragonese _Cortes_ secured a papal license reducing the
Inquisition to the same footing as the other ecclesiastical courts,
Charles I procured the withdrawal of the license. Philip II prohibited
all appeals from or complaints against the Inquisition before the
_audiencias_ or the _Consejo Real_. The decisions of the Inquisition
thus became final, although it is true that cases of appeal and the
recourse of _fuerza_ (also forbidden by Philip) were occasionally
allowed to go beyond that body. When there seemed to be a likelihood
that the Council of Trent might deprive the Inquisition of some of its
authority, Charles I used every effort to cause a failure of the
project. In fact the Inquisition was virtually an instrument of the
kings, who did not hesitate to direct its action as if it were legally
subject to them, and who were always able to procure the appointment of
members of the _Consejo Real_ to the Council of the Inquisition. As
regards heresy the period, naturally, was exceedingly fruitful in
prosecutions and was marked by an excess of suspicion, such that
individuals whose purity of faith was hardly open to question were not
infrequently brought to trial,--among others, Ignacio de Loyola (Saint
Ignatius), and Teresa de Jesús, who, like Loyola, was later canonized.
Extreme rigor was displayed in placing the ban on unorthodox books and
in expurgating those which were allowed to circulate. Charles I required
all books to have the authorization of the _Consejo Real_ before they
could be published. Foreign books were also scrutinized carefully, and
libraries were made subject to inspection. The grant of a license by the
_Consejo Real_ did not mean that a book might not be placed on the
Inquisition’s _Index_ of forbidden works. It is worthy of note, too,
that the Spanish _Index_ and that of the Inquisition of Rome often
varied from each other in their lists; thus a book condemned at Rome
might circulate in Spain, and vice versa, but this of course was not
the general rule. The Spanish Inquisition did not make its way to
Spain’s Italian possessions, but was established in the Low Countries,
where it was very active, and in the Americas.
[Sidenote: Ignacio de Loyola and the founding of the Jesuit order.]
The other important agency of the Spanish Counter-Reformation, the
Jesuit order, was the creation of a Spaniard, Ignacio de Loyola (1491 or
1495-1556), who became Saint Ignatius (San Ignacio) with his
canonization in 1609. As a youth Loyola led the somewhat wild life of a
soldier. Wounded in 1521 during the defence of Pamplona from an attack
of the French, he was a long time in recovering his health, devoting the
period of his convalescence to the reading of religious works. He
thereupon resolved to dedicate his life to religion, and as soon as he
was restored to health made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem. Upon his return
he pursued religious studies at the universities of Barcelona, Alcalá,
Salamanca, and Paris. While at Alcalá, where he and several companions
made a practice of wearing sackcloth and preaching in the streets, he
was arrested by the Inquisition, but was set free without other penalty
than an order to give up his sackcloth and his preaching. A similar fate
befell him in Salamanca. Eventually Loyola and his companions found
their way to Rome, where they continued their street preaching, despite
the opposition of the Augustinian order and some of the cardinals. They
applied to themselves the name “Company of Jesus” (hence Jesuits), and
in 1539 organized an order in military form, vowing implicit obedience
to their superiors,--especially to the pope,--prescribing the rule of a
general for life, and pledging themselves to the founding of colleges.
The new order was formally approved by the pope in 1540, and Loyola
became the first general.
[Sidenote: Characteristics of the Jesuit order.]
While an extended discussion of the characteristics of the Jesuit order
is not necessary, some of the respects in which it differed from the
others should be pointed out, in order to make clear the effect of the
Jesuit appearance in Spain and the Americas. Great emphasis was placed
on the military side; Loyola was wont to say that he had never ceased to
be a soldier,--he had merely become a soldier of God. Obedience to
superiors and to the pope was not a new idea, but with the Jesuits it
was as rigidly literal as in an army. They became one of the principal
supports of the popes at a time when many church leaders were advocating
the reform of the papacy with a view to limiting the powers of the head
of the church. Like soldiers, they attacked the enemies of the pope,
church, and the Catholic religion, and were charged with employing
methods which gave rise to the term “Jesuitry” in an opprobrious sense.
They did not stay in convents, but went forth among the people to fight
for the principles for which they stood. There was no election of their
leaders; the attainment of office came through appointment by the
general, who even chose his own successor. Education was their principal
weapon,--education of the high and the low. In other respects the
Jesuits were at the same time more simple and more mundane in their
exterior practices--at least in the beginning--than the other orders.
They opposed choral singing, the wearing of a distinctive habit,
participation in religious processions, the monastic life, and
asceticism. They believed in the individual poverty of their members,
but were willing that the order and its separate institutions should
prosper in a material way. In other words they were going into the
world, not away from it, and were desirous of the best equipment for the
struggle which lay before them.
[Sidenote: Spanish opposition to the Jesuits.]
The influence of the new order soon made itself felt throughout the
world. At first Spaniards were in the majority, and it was natural that
the Jesuits should establish themselves in Spain’s dominions. By 1547
they had five institutions in Spain, and by 1566 sixteen. Soon afterward
they began to appear in the Americas, where they became one of the
principal agencies of the Spanish crown in the conversion and subjection
of the natives, being perhaps the most effective of the missionary
orders. Not only as missionaries but also as theologians, scientists,
and men of letters the Spanish Jesuits were among the most distinguished
men of the age. They were not welcomed by their fellow-countrymen in
Spain, however; rather, they had to contend against some of the most
powerful elements in the peninsula. Members of the clergy, both regular
and secular, were opposed to them,--notably the Dominicans, Franciscans,
Augustinians, and the officers of the Inquisition, the first named
especially,--while the universities and at the outset the kings were
also hostile. Melchor Cano, a Dominican and one of the most influential
men of his day, charged the Jesuits with heresy, claiming that their
vows savored of the doctrines of the _Iluminados_. The archbishop of
Toledo, Cardinal Siliceo, forbade them to preach, confess, say mass, or
administer sacraments, but was obliged by the pope to retract his
decrees. Arias Montano attacked them in the preface of his polyglot
Bible, asserting that the Jesuits claimed that they alone had knowledge
and that they were the nearest of all men to Jesus. These are but a few
instances out of many, showing the difficulties encountered by the
Jesuits in establishing themselves in Spain. It seems likely that
jealousy may have entered into much of the resistance to them, for they
early began to outrank and even supersede other elements in teaching and
in learning. Charles I and Philip II objected to them because they
placed the pope ahead of the king, not acknowledging the latter’s
authority over them, and this was not altogether in accordance with the
royal ideal of centralization. Furthermore, the Jesuits were such an
aggressive factor that they were hard to manage. The Inquisition took
exception among other things to the Jesuit claim of a right to absolve
their own members from the charge of heresy, and imprisoned the Jesuit
_provincial_, or commanding official, in Spain, together with other
members of the order. Philip II took sides with the Inquisition, but the
pope sustained the Jesuits. By the seventeenth century the Jesuits had
succeeded in overcoming their rivals, although they never ceased to have
enemies. Their success was due in the first place to the continued
support of the popes; in the second to the change of heart experienced
by Philip II late in life, when he began to realize that they were one
of the most effective instruments for the religious unification of his
dominions, and in so much furthered his ideal of centralization; in the
third place to the backing of the opponents of their enemies, especially
those who were hostile to the Inquisition; and, finally, and perhaps
most of all, to their own superior attainments, whereby they were able
to win a devoted following among all ranks of society. The successors of
Philip II followed the later policy of that king, with the result that
the seventeenth century was the most prosperous era in the history of
the Jesuit order.
[Sidenote: _Limpieza de sangre_ and the fervor of Spanish Catholicism.]
One thing Spanish kings failed to do elsewhere in Europe they achieved
in Spain,--their ideal of religious unity. At the same time that they
were suppressing heresy they were giving a welcome to Catholics fleeing
to Spain from Protestant persecution, notably to the Irish, who came to
the peninsula in great numbers. The ideal of Catholic unity was carried
to an excess which transcended unity itself through an extension of the
institution of _limpieza de sangre_. Certificates of _limpieza de
sangre_ (that is to say, sworn statements that the bearer had no Jewish,
Moslem, or heretic antecedents) now began to be required for the holding
of various church offices or for entry into religious orders and often
also for admission to the guilds. As a matter of fact there were few
families which could have withstood a close examination of their
ancestry; the upper classes would almost surely have been found to
contain Jewish blood, and the masses, certainly in the east and south,
would have had a Moslem admixture in their veins. The attainment of
religious unity and the extreme suspicion in which non-Catholics were
held did not succeed in making the Spanish people respond to the moral
code of their faith. Not only such licentious practices as have already
been alluded to were in vogue, but also a surprising lack of reverence
was displayed, as exemplified by the improper use of sacred places and
sacred objects and the mixture of the human and the divine in
masquerades. Nevertheless, it is not too much to say that the principal
preoccupation of Spaniards in the sixteenth and the seventeenth
centuries was the salvation of their souls. The worst of men would want
to confess and seek absolution before they died, and many of them no
doubt believed themselves to be good Catholics, even though their
every-day life would not have borne inspection. One notable religious
manifestation of the era was the ardent insistence of Spaniards on the
mystery of the Immaculate Conception at a time when Catholics of other
countries were not yet ready to accept that view.
[Sidenote: Conflict of the kings with the popes in matters of temporal
import.]
In distinguishing between the spiritual and the temporal phases of papal
authority the kings of the House of Austria followed the policy of the
Catholic Kings, but surpassed the latter in their claims of the
superiority, or independence, as the case might be, of the royal power.
Various factors contributed to this attitude in Spain. The monarchical
ideal of a centralized absolutism, now that it had triumphed over the
nobility and the towns, sought out the church in its civil aspects as
the next outstanding element to dominate; the interests of the Spanish
kings in Italy continued to bring them into opposition to the popes as
sovereigns of the Papal States; and the problems of ecclesiastical
reform often found the kings and the popes widely, even bitterly, apart.
Charles I had frequent conflicts with the papacy, but Philip II had even
more serious contests, in which he displayed yet more unyielding
resistance than his father to what he regarded as the unwarranted
intrusions of the popes into the sphere of Spanish politics. When in
1556 it seemed likely that Philip would be excommunicated and his
kingdom laid under an interdict, Philip created a special council to
exercise in Spain such functions as were customarily in the hands of the
pope. In this as in his other disputes of a political nature with the
papacy he was able to count on the support of the Spanish clergy. One
document reciting Philip’s grievances against Pope Paul IV, applying
harsh epithets to him, and expressing doubt as to the legitimacy of his
election, is believed to have been written by a member of the clergy.
Another document, the _Parecer_, or opinion, of Melchor Cano, a
Dominican, argued the lawfulness of making war on the pope, and said
that in such cases, when communication with Rome was insecure, the
bishops might decide ecclesiastical questions which were ordinarily left
to the pope.
[Sidenote: Interference of Charles I and Philip II in papal elections.]
To avoid such disputes and to assure Spain of an ally in Italian affairs
Charles I and Philip II bent their efforts to procure the election of
popes who would be favorable to them. Charles had much to do with the
choice in 1522 of Adrian VI, who as a cardinal had been one of his
principal administrative officers during his own absence from the
peninsula in the early years of his reign. Philip was successful in the
same way when in 1559 he was able to cause the elevation of his
candidate to the papal throne. This pope, Pius IV, proceeded to annul
the action of his predecessor, Paul IV, against Charles and Philip, and
condemned to death two members of the deceased pope’s family, one of
them a cardinal. At the election of 1590 Philip was again fortunate, but
the new pontiff, Urban VII, lived only thirteen days. A fresh conclave
was held, at which Philip went to the extreme not only of excluding the
candidates whom he opposed but also of naming seven Spanish churchmen as
the only ones from among whom the cardinals were to choose. One of the
seven was elected, taking the name Gregory XIV, and no pope of the
century was more unconditionally favorable to the wishes of a Spanish
king. This constant intrusion of Philip ended by exasperating the high
authorities of the church, who a few years later under another pope
condemned Philip’s practices and declared him _ipso facto_
excommunicated. This proved to be a decisive blow to the influence of
the Spanish crown.
[Sidenote: The _pase regio_ as an aid to the kings in the conflict with
the popes.]
One of the principal struggles between the popes and the kings was the
royal claim of the _pase regio_, or the right to examine papal bulls and
pontifical letters and, if deemed advisable, to retain them, prohibiting
their publication and therefore their execution in Spanish domains. The
origin of this claim on the part of the Spanish monarchs seems to date
from the period of the Great Schism, when Urban VI (1378-1389) granted
such a privilege to the princes allied with him. It was not officially
decreed in Spain until the early years of Charles I, when provision for
the _pase regio_ in all Spanish dominions was made in a document drawn
up by Cardinal Ximénez. According to this arrangement papal
communications were to be examined in the _Consejo Real_, and if found
to be contrary to the royal prerogative or otherwise objectionable their
circulation was to be postponed and the pope asked to change or withdraw
his dispositions. Usually the retention of such documents took place
without giving official notice to the pope,--which in the case of a
hostile pontiff would have been in any event unavailing. If the popes
insisted on their point of view the royal prohibitions were nevertheless
continued. If any subjects of the king resisted his will in this matter,
even though they were churchmen, they might incur the penalty of a loss
of goods or banishment or both, and notaries or attorneys might even be
condemned to death. When Paul IV excommunicated Charles I and Philip II,
the latter put into effect the _pase regio_. Unable to procure the
publication of his bull in Spain, Paul IV summoned to Rome two Spanish
bishops who were intensely royalist in their sympathies. Philip II
protected them by retaining the papal order, so that the individuals did
not learn officially of the summons. Not only in serious contests of
this character but also in matters of comparatively little moment the
kings exercised the right of retention,--for example, in the case of a
bull of Sixtus V about the dress and maintenance of the clergy. The
above are only a few instances out of many. One of the most bitter
conflicts was waged by Philip II in opposition to a bull of Pius V
excommunicating those who retained papal dispositions. Philip II
retained this bull, and punished some bishops of Spain’s Italian domains
who had published it within their dioceses. The pope threatened to put
Spain under an interdict, but Philip declined to yield. The bull was
never published in the peninsula, and the pope did not make use of the
interdict.
[Sidenote: The case of Cardinal Borja.]
[Sidenote: Interference of Charles I and Philip II in matters of church
reform.]
The successors of Philip II were equally insistent upon the royal
prerogative in their relations with the church. One of the most curious
incidents in the disputes of the kings and the popes occurred in the
reign of Philip IV. Cardinal Borja and several other Spanish cardinals
were sent to Rome to present the king’s grievances against the pontiff
arising out of matters connected with the wars against the Protestants.
Borja was roughly handled on making his protest; it is said that
Cardinal San Onofre punched him in the face by direction of the pope.
When this event was reported in Spain a general meeting of royal
councillors was held, in which it was even discussed whether it would
be lawful to challenge the pope to settle the matter by means of a duel!
In this and other matters there was talk of an appeal from the pope to a
church council. As the royalist attitude toward the popes was often
defended in books, many of them by churchmen, a practice sprang up at
Rome of placing such works in the _Index_ as writings which the faithful
were forbidden to read, but these volumes did not appear in the _Index_
of the Spanish Inquisition. Finally the attitude of superiority on the
part of the monarchs made itself evident, as already indicated, in
questions of the reform of the church. Charles and Philip II labored to
establish their views at the Council of Trent not only in matters of
administration but also in those of doctrine. Indeed, many Catholics
believed that it was the duty of the kings to remedy the evils of the
church. With the conclusion of the Council of Trent, Philip II hesitated
for a year before publishing its decisions, because of his belief that
some of the provisions of the council diminished, or might diminish, his
royal authority. When he at length did publish them, he did so with the
reservation that they were not to be considered as introducing any
variation from the usual jurisdiction of the king. Consequently, various
canons of the council remained without effect in Spain and her
possessions.
[Sidenote: Royal restrictions on the powers of papal nuncios and the
nunciature.]
The same conflict of authority between the church and the monarch
manifested itself in the relations of the kings with papal nuncios, who
in the reign of Charles I began to reside at the Spanish court as
permanent ambassadors. In 1537 Charles I obtained a license from the
pope for the creation of the tribunal of the nunciature, or court of the
papal embassy in Spain. This court, composed in part at least of Spanish
officials, was to hear the numerous cases in ecclesiastical law which
had customarily been settled at Rome. At the same time, the nuncio was
empowered to grant the benefices which formerly lay within the
jurisdiction of the popes. The nuncio also collected the considerable
sums which went to the popes from ecclesiastical prebends, or livings,
from the _expolios_ of deceased bishops and archbishops (accretions in
their benefices which they had procured out of rents), and from the
income of _vacantes_, or vacant benefices (that which accrued between
the death of a bishop or archbishop and the appointment of his
successor). Once having transferred authority from the pope to the
nuncio and nunciature the kings proceeded to attack these elements near
at hand so as to reduce their power of interference with the royal
authority. In this they were aided by all classes. The churchmen were
royalist and at the same time opposed to papal intervention in
ecclesiastical administration in Spain. People generally objected to
such wide jurisdiction being in the hands of a foreigner, for the
nuncios were usually Italians. There were frequent complaints that the
nunciature was guilty of the advocacy of lawsuits and the collection of
excessive costs, with the result that the court was sustained out of
Spanish funds instead of by the popes. All of these matters were the
subject of criticism in both the _Cortes_ and the _Consejo Real_, and
the inevitable result was the employment of restrictive measures. The
_pase regio_ was applied to the directions by the popes to the nuncios,
and the intervention of the nunciature in ecclesiastical cases in first
instance was prohibited. There were times when the relations of the
kings with the nuncio were indeed strained; Philip II went to the
extreme of expelling a nuncio who had endeavored to publish a papal bull
which the king had decided to retain; the same thing happened under
Philip IV, who closed the papal embassy. Matters were arranged in 1640
by the Fachenetti concordat, or agreement of the nuncio of that name
with the king. This document reduced the procedure of the nunciature and
the attributes of the nuncio to writing, and although it did not remove
all the causes of dispute served as the basis for diplomatic relations
with the papal embassy until the middle of the eighteenth century.
[Sidenote: Subjection of the ecclesiastical organization in Spain to the
royal will.]
The relations of the kings with the popes and nuncios formed only part
of the former’s royalist policy with the church. The same course was
followed with the ecclesiastical organization in Spain. The gradual
reduction of the clergy to a tributary state as regards payment of taxes
has already been referred to. Charles I procured various grants of a
financial nature from the popes, such as the right to sell certain
ecclesiastical holdings (whose proceeds were to be devoted to the war
with the Turks), the collection of various church rents yielding over
1,000,000 ducats (some $15,000,000), and finally the gift of _expolios_
and _vacantes_. On the other hand, despite the petitions of the _Cortes_
and the opinions of leading jurisconsults, the kings declined to prevent
the giving of lands in mortmain, or in other words the acquisition of
estates by the church. The most serious conflicts arose over questions
of immunities, growing out of the survival of ecclesiastical
jurisdictions of a seigniorial character and out of the relations of the
church courts to those of the king and to the royal authority in
general. Many of the seigniorial groups were incorporated into the
crown, especially by Philip II. As regards the legal immunity of
churchmen it came to be accepted as the rule that it could be claimed
only in cases within the jurisdiction of the ecclesiastical courts. This
was diminished still further by royal invasions of ecclesiastical
jurisdiction, as by limiting the scope of the church courts, prohibiting
(under severe penalties) the intrusions of their judges in civil
affairs, and intervening to correct abuses, real or alleged. The king
reserved a right of inspection of the ecclesiastical courts, exercised
for him by members of the _Consejo Real_ or the _audiencias_, and if
anybody were unduly aggrieved by a decision of the church courts he
might make use of the recourse of _fuerza_ to bring an appeal before the
Consejo Real, the _Cámara_, or the _audiencias_. The effect of this was
to suspend the execution of an ecclesiastical sentence, subordinating
the church courts to the royal will. Many matters of a religious
character were taken over into the exclusive jurisdiction of the
_Consejo Real_ or the _Cámara_, such as the inspections of convents of
the regular clergy and the action taken as a result thereof and the
execution of the decisions of the Council of Trent. Laws relative to the
recourse of _fuerza_ were amplified so as to prohibit ecclesiastical
judges from trying cases which were considered by any of the litigants
concerned as belonging to the civil law; other laws forbade the
summoning of Spaniards before foreign judges; and still others
diminished the number of appeals to Rome. Even churchmen took advantage
of the recourse of _fuerza_ to have their cases removed to the royal
courts when it suited their convenience, despite the attempts of the
popes to check the practice. In such instances, as in so many others,
the _pase regio_ was employed to prevent effectual action by the popes.
Even in the case of the provincial councils of the Spanish church the
king sent delegates, on the ground that no conventions or congresses of
any sort could be held without the consent of the king and the
attendance of his representatives. In 1581 Pope Gregory XIII ordered the
archbishop of Toledo not to admit anybody to a council about to be held
at that time who was not a member of the clergy. Philip II sent his
delegate, nevertheless, and his successors followed his example. In like
manner religious processions were forbidden unless authorized by the
civil authorities.
[Sidenote: The _patronato real_ as a source of royal authority over the
clergy.]
The royal authority over the Spanish church is largely explained by the
institution of the _patronato real_, or royal patronage. Charles I early
gained a right to make nominations to most of the bishoprics and
abbacies in Spain, although the pope had to approve before the
appointment should take effect. Even in the case of benefices still
reserved by the pope the kings insisted that the appointees should be
Spaniards. As regards the Americas the church was yet more completely
under the king’s control, thus giving still other lucrative posts into
his power to grant. Under these circumstances it is not surprising that
the Spanish clergy should favor the king, to whom they owed their rents
and dignities, rather than the pope, and should even consent to
diminutions in the privileges of Spanish churchmen. Indeed, faithful
service as a councillor might be the stepping-stone to a bishopric.
Nevertheless the kings did not allow churchmen to intrude in political
affairs without being asked, and instances of official reproof on this
score were numerous, despite which fact the clergy took a prominent part
in political intrigues, and were possibly the principal factor in the
Portuguese war of independence from Spain. Furthermore, the solicitation
of inheritances by churchmen was insistently forbidden by the king; on
one occasion when accusations of this character were made against the
Jesuits of Flanders the Duke of Alba annulled all testamentary
dispositions to that order and provided for the inheritance of the legal
heirs.