over, had too much worldly wisdom to imperil their dangerous career by any alliance with fanatics whose extravagances provoked opposition so general. The cause of the Reformation, therefore, although it suffered no little from so portentous an illustration of the dangers resulting from the destruction of the ancient barriers, escaped all contamination in itself, and its leaders pursued their course undeviatingly.

Meanwhile the League of Schmalkalden accomplished its purpose. Henry VIII. and Francis I. were eager to seize the opportunity of encouraging dissension in the empire. The Turk became more menacing than ever. Charles, always ready to yield for a time when opposition was impolitic, gracefully abandoned the position assumed at Augsburg; and the negotiations of Schweinfurth and Nürnberg resulted in the decree of the Diet of Ratisbon in 1532, by which, until the assembling of the future council, all religious disturbances were prohibited, and the imperial chamber was commanded to undertake no prosecutions on account of heresy. Toleration was thus practically established for the moment, but the abbots and monks who had been ejected, and who had been anticipating their restoration, became naturally restive. Charles cunningly sent from Italy full powers to the chamber to decide as to what causes arose from religious disputes, and what were simply civil or criminal. Thus entrusted with the interpretation of the Ratisbon decree, the chamber assumed that claims on Church lands were not included in the forbidden class, while old edicts prohibiting the observances of Lutheranism brought all religious questions within the scope of criminal law. The promised toleration was thus practically denied, but, fortunately for the Protestants, Ferdinand was anxiously negotiating for their recognition of his dignity as King of the Romans, and by the Transaction of Cadam

in 1533 he purchased the coveted homage by accepting their construction of the edict of Ratisbon.

Still the Protestants complained of persecution and the Catholics of proselytism. The ensuing fifteen years were filled with a series of bootless negotiations, pretended settlements, quarrels, recriminations, and mutual encroachments, which year after year occupied the successive Diets, and kept Germany constantly trembling on the verge of a desolating civil war. It would be useless to disturb the dust that covers these forgotten transactions, which can teach us nothing save that the Protestants still refused to recognise that the schism was past human power to heal; that Rome, recovering from her temporary hesitation, would not abate one jot of her pretensions to save her supremacy over half of Christendom;1 and that Charles, as a wily politician, was always ready in adversity to abandon with a good grace that which he had arrogantly seized in prosperity. How eager, indeed, were the Protestants to effect some compromise which should relieve them from their exceptional position is strikingly manifest in the Articles which Melanchthon and his friends in 1535 submitted to Francis I., after the Sorbonne had refused to enter into a disputation or conference with them. In this document all non-essentials were abandoned; doctrinal dissidences were skilfully evaded, and stress only was laid upon such regulations as should remove the external corruption of the Church.

2

1 How little the situation was comprehended is amusingly shown in a letter from an enlightened and liberal prelate, Johann Schmidt, Bishop of Vienna, to Ferdinand, in 1540, concerning some proposed negotiations then on foot for a reconciliation between the Churches. He lays down as a condition precedent to reunion that all the Church lands confiscated by the Protestants shall be restored, and the monastic orders re-established. The mesne profits, he admits, cannot be collected, but some composition for them should be made.-Le Plat, Monument. Concil. Trident. II. 649.

2 An elaborate series of documents relating to these transactions may be found in Goldast. Constit. Imp. I. 511, III. 172–235. Also in Le Plat, Monument. Concil.

Trident. Vol. II.

Melanchthon proposed that the monastic orders should be continued, but that the vows should not be perpetual, so that religion might not be disgraced by the excesses of those who had mistaken their vocation. So, as regards priestly celibacy, he proposed that, as human nature rendered it impossible to supply the multitude of parishes with men able to live in continence, those who could not preserve their purity should be allowed to marry; while, to prevent the dilapidation of Church property, the higher positions should be reserved to men of mature age who could lead a single life.1 The Sorbonne, in reply, condescended to no argument, but contented itself with asserting that the Protestants desired the subversion of all religion, while, on the other hand, Melanchthon had the satisfaction of being proclaimed a traitor by the Germans.

In all this the only point which possesses special interest for us is another authoritative attempt at reconciling the irreconcilable which occurred in 1540 and 1541. It was suggested that all parties should unite on the basis of sacerdotal marriage, the use of the cup by the laity, and the rejection of the authority of the Holy See. Matters reached such a point that the legate Morone reported, in July 1540, that he was ready to run away in despair; the three great ecclesiastical electors and all the episcopate except the Bishop of Trent, and the princes except the Dukes of Bavaria and Brunswick, were in favour of it, while France would undoubtedly follow the example, while he distrusted the assurances of Charles and King Ferdinand that they would not abandon the papacy. If Charles had only had Germany in view, he might well have been tempted to follow in the footsteps of Henry VIII., and found an independent Church under

1 Artic. Melanch. ad Regem Franciæ, No. X., XI. (Le Plat, op. cit. II. 785-7.) 2 Dittrich, Nunciaturberichte Giovanni Morones, pp. 73, 76-9.-Lämmer, Monumenta Vaticana, Sæculi XVI. pp. 288-9.

his supremacy, but his interests in Spain and Italy bound him to the papacy, and he was sincere in his pledges to Morone. He was anxious, however, to put an end to the religious strife, and after a conference between Melanchthon and Dr. Eck at Worms, Charles himself presented to the Diet of Ratisbon in 1541 a statement of the questions in dispute, with propositions for mutual concession and compromise. In the course of this he reviewed the practice of the Church in various ages with regard to sacerdotal celibacy, admitting that the enforcement of it was not in accordance with the ancient canons, and indicating a willingness to see it abrogated.1 The Protestants, who were ready to make many sacrifices for peace, hailed this intimation with triumph, stoutly insisting on the repeal of the obnoxious rule, which they stigmatised as unjust and pernicious.2 So nearly did the parties at length approach each other, that there appeared every reason to anticipate a successful result to the effort, when Paul III. interfered and pronounced all the proceedings null and void, as the Church alone had power to regulate its internal affairs. The expectations excited by these negotiations naturally stimulated the desire of the people for a change in the discipline of the Church, and the next year we find Paul III. obliged to exhort the Bishop of Merseberg, under threats of ejection, to resist the clamours of his subjects, who demanded the abrogation of priestly celibacy and the use of the cup for the laity. The Council of Trent, he said, had been called to consider these matters, and immediate change was especially inadmissible.3

1 Lib. ad Rationem Concord. ineundam Art. XXII. § 13 (Goldast. II. 199).

2 Respons. Protestant. Art. X. § 3 (Ibid. II. 206). This was still more strongly insisted on in a paper subsequently drawn up by Bucer and presented in the name of the Protestants.-Respons. Protestant. c. 11-14 (Ibid. p. 213).

3 Le Plat, Monument. Concil. Trident. III. 152–3.

Pope Paul III. was created Cardinal by Pope Alexander VI. His name was Alexander Farnese, and, owing to his dissipated habits and to the fact that his pro

The

Charles had long recognised that the perpetual menace of a powerful confederation such as the Schmalkaldic League, entertaining constant relations with the external enemies of the empire, was incompatible with the peace of Germany and with an imperial power such as he was resolved to wield. The time at last came for the development of his plans. The skill of Alva and the treachery of Maurice of Saxony were crowned with success. battle of Muhlberg broke the power of the Protestants utterly, and laid them helpless at his feet. Yet the progress of the new ideas had already placed them beyond the control of even the triumphant Charles, though he had the Elector of Saxony and the Landgrave of Hesse in his dungeons. When, at the Diet of Augsburg in 1548, he proposed the curious arrangement known as the Interim, by which he hoped to keep matters quiet until the final verdict of that Ecumenic council which constantly vanished in the distance, he felt it necessary to permit all married priests to retain their wives until the question should be decided by the future council. A faint expression of a preference for celibacy, moreover, was significant both in what it said and what it left unsaid.1

The Interim, of course, satisfied neither party. The

motion was obtained for him by his sister Giulia Orsini (neé Farnese), one of Pope Alexander's mistresses, he was known as "the Cardinal of the Petticoat "— Cardinale della Gonella. A son of Paul III., Pietro Ludovico Farnese, born 1490, became Duke of Parma. He was assassinated in 1547. One of his sons, born 1520, was named Alexander, and was created a Cardinal by his grandfather, Paul III.

1 Et quanquam cum Apostolo sentiendum eum qui cœlebs est curare quæ sunt Domini, etc. (I. Cor. vii.) eoque magis optandum multos inveniri clericos qui cum cœlibes sint vere etiam contineant, tamen quum multi qui ministerii ecclesiastici functiones tenent, jam multis in locis duxerint uxores, quas a se dimittere nolint; super ea re generalis concilii sententia expectetur, cum alioqui mutatio in ea re, ut nunc sunt tempora, sine gravi rerum perturbatione nunc fieri non possit.—Interim cap. XXVI. § 17.

Charles must have entertained the expectation that a change would be authorised by the Council of Trent, or prudence would have dictated the policy of not leaving the matter open with the consciousness that the difficulty could only become daily greater by tolerance.