Between 1590 and 1605 no less than seven men occupied
the See of Rome. It seemed that election was a portent of imminent
death. Urban VII (1590) died of malaria after 12 days, Gregory XIV
(1590—91) reigned only ten months, Innocent IX (1591) two and a half
months, dying of a respiratory infection and Leo XI (1605), expired from
a chill which he developed following his coronation after twenty-six
days in office. Such rapid alterations in the Papal succession were not
designed to strengthen the Vatican’s political influence as it entered
the seventeenth century.
The one pope who had survived the immediate period
following his appointment, Clement VIII (1592—1605), hardly added
stature to the political influence expected of his role. The kingdom to
the south of Rome, Naples, and the republic to its north, Venice,
constantly overrode Papal ecclesiastical rights with impunity.
The brief rule of Leo XI brought to an end the de’
Medici family’s remarkable Papal success in appointments. When Naples
breached the privilegium fori, the right of priests charged with
criminal offenses to demand to be tried by their own religious orders
rather than the state, the Neapolitan minister was excommunicated by
Leo’s successor, Paul V. The pope then turned his attention to Venice
where the same affronts to Papal demands had erupted. The Doge and the
members of his Senate were all excommunicated and the Republic placed
under an interdict. The Doge responded by demanding all priests in the
territory to continue, against the decree of the interdict, to perform
their religious duties. Those who refused were expelled. It was a battle
of Papal and Venetian wills which almost led to war. Venice had not only
arrested two priests but had prohibited the erection of new church
buildings. Paul V attempted to raise a continental army to crush this
insult to his power, but he was forced to withdraw when tidings from
afar brought news of English and Dutch intentions to send troops in
support of Venice.
King James I of England introduced a new oath of
allegiance after the Gunpowder plot of Guy Fawkes; this oath, comprising
carefully selected words, was seen by Paul to be unacceptable. The oath
caused a schism among English Roman Catholics, weakening them even
further.
When Pope Paul V died of a stroke in 1621, his
successor of short duration, Gregory XV (1621—1623) established the
Congregation of Propaganda in order to emulate the missionary zeal of
the Protestants, and his successor, Urban VIII (1623—1644), created a
missionary training college for the purpose of spreading the Roman faith
worldwide.
The Popes had held it to be their duty to act as
mediators between the warring factions of Europe; but the Thirty Years’
War (1618—1648) was to debase this powerful weapon in the hands of
successive Popes who were ever mindful of their faith’s interests in the
mediatorial process. This was a complex religious war in which France
found itself allied to Protestant nations against principally Austria
and Spain.
Although he died six years prior to the cessation of
the war, the Duc de Richelieu, who was not only a Duke but also a
Cardinal, served as French King Louis XIII’s chief minister. He was the
powerful political figure of that period. He and his successor, Cardinal
Jules Mazarin, first minister for King Louis XIV, refused Papal
mediation. That successive cardinals would snub the traditional
mediatorial role of the Papacy, was an augury of great insults to
follow, and of Papal decline. The Papacy was not accustomed to its
senior clergy placing national interests ahead of the Vatican’s desires.
On the Austro-Spanish side Count Maximilian von
Trauttmannsdorf of Austria dominated discussions. He had more than
philosophical reasons to ignore Papal mediation despite his Roman
Catholic faith, for he, being on the losing side of the conflict, was
intent on compensating Austria’s inevitable loss of territory by the
acquirement of regions under Rome’s control. In fact von Trauttmannsdorf
was the representative of the Holy Roman Empire, which was in the hands
of the Habsburg dynasty.
In reality Urban VIII had abrogated his right to
mediate, asserting that he must refrain from compromising his role of
common fatherhood. He thought his neutrality in the conflict would
recommend him for such a role; but instead his ploy offended the
devoutly Roman Catholic Ferdinand II, Emperor of the Holy Roman Empire,
and no doubt removed Austrian compunctions against seeking to compensate
territorial losses with territorial gains at the expense of Rome. Never
again, following the signing of the Peace of Westphalia, chiefly between
France and the powerful kingdom of Sweden on the one hand, and the Holy
Roman Empire on the other, was the Papacy to play a pivotal role in
peace settlements in Europe during the seventeenth and eighteenth
centuries. Further, many Roman Catholic ecclesiastical estates were lost
as the Holy Roman Empire was compelled to cede some of its territory to
Protestant nations. Despite vigorous protests from Pope Innocent X
(1644—1655), the Papacy was weakened.
It must not be overlooked that the same enlightenment
which blessed Europe with the dispersion of Protestant Biblical
principles also led to the rise of secularism among those who were not
spiritually inclined and who saw the weaknesses, duplicity and even evil
evident in the lives of many popes and prelates. This rise in secularism
was to reach a crescendo at the end of the eighteenth century when
France threw off all restraint, and damned Christianity.
Secular states decided it was their prerogative to
regulate ecclesiastical affairs. These Catholic nations desired to make
the church a subservient ally of the state. This led King Louis XIV of
France to introduce a policy termed Gallicanism, which usurped the Papal
right to control ecclesiastical affairs in France and promoted
administrative autonomy of the Roman Catholic Church in that nation.
Other states in Europe looked favorably upon the French pattern.
Thus by the time of Clement XI’s election in 1700,
the power of the Papacy had endured a century of decline in influence.
It was to be further damaged by the War of the Spanish Succession
(1701—1714). This war was fought over the succession to the Spanish
throne upon the death of King Charles II. Louis XIV of France promoted
his grandson, Philip of Anjou as the new king, since Charles II died
without issue.
Louis’ action brought the two great regal families in
Europe, the Bourbons in France and the Habsburgs in Austria, into fierce
conflict. Charles II was a Habsburg and his replacement by a Bourbon was
seen to be a crucial alteration in the balance of power in Europe.
Philip of Anjou ruled Spain as Philip V. The Austrians, supported by
their allies, promoted the Habsburg son of Emperor Leopold I, Archduke
Charles, as the suitable successor to the Spanish throne.
Pope Clement XI was placed in an unenviable position
with the two most powerful monarchs of Europe, Louis XIV and Leopold I
locked in deadly conflict. While Clement’s inclinations were toward
France, he capitulated to Austria’s candidate when the Austrians
conquered the Papal States and entered Naples, the kingdom of which had
been linked to Spain.
The Pope’s about-turn led Philip V to act against the
Vatican, breaking diplomatic relations and expelling the papal nuncio
from Madrid. The Papacy now had the worst of both parties to the
dispute—the ire of France and Spain on the one hand and decidedly frosty
relations with Austria on the other, for despite the pope’s unwilling
recognition of Archduke Charles as the rightful claimant to the throne
of Spain, the Austrians were well aware of Clement’s real sentiments. To
be out of favor with the major political players in Europe inevitably
weakened Papal influence. Worse still, both monarchs were Roman
Catholics.
Austria was joined by England and Holland. These
nations feared an extension of Louis XIV’s influence. Further support
came from Denmark, Portugal and some German States. Bavaria and Cologne
united their forces with France. This conflict saw the rise of John
Churchill (later created Duke of Marlborough, an ancestor of Sir Winston
Churchill) to military fame, especially after his troops routed the
French and Bavarians at Blenheim.
Depleted in influence in Europe and ignored in the
peace negotiations of Utrecht in 1713 and Rastatt in 1714, the Papacy
had been effectively sidelined on the continent of its origin and lost
territory including Comacchio. Clement also managed to compromise his
missionary outreach in Asia by condemning the rites of the Chinese
Church and the Malabar rites in India in 1704. This led to persecution
of Roman Catholics in China and seriously interrupted their evangelistic
endeavors.
Innocent XIII (1721—1724) and Benedict XIII
(1724—1730) further depleted Papal prestige. Schismatics known as
Jansenists succeeded in having one of their own choosing elected
Archbishop of Utrecht without Papal approval.
But the greatest faux pas was Benedict’s
promotion of the feast of Gregory VII, the renowned Hildebrand, who in
the eleventh century had postulated the concept that all rulers were
subject to Papal dictates and held their posts by Papal pleasure and
could equally be dismissed if it pleased Rome.
The Roman Catholic Potentates of Europe of the
eighteenth century were of an entirely different mind. Pope Paul V’s
canonization of Gregory VII in the early part of the seventeenth century
availed nothing in the minds of these rulers. They saw Pope Benedict’s
promotion of the feast of Gregory VII as a subtle effort to reassert
Papal authority over emperors, kings and princes once more. This they
would not tolerate. The mood of the era was not akin to that which
pertained seven centuries earlier.
There were stern protests from France, Venice and
Naples. The Netherlands prohibited priests from reciting the office of
St. Gregory. Ineffectually the Pope declared all the contrary decrees of
secular governments to be null and void. This was to be the final failed
attempt by Rome to assert its ancient authority, as with gathering speed
it moved toward its crucial meeting with prophecy before the century was
completed.
The appointment of Clement XII (1730—1740) at the age
of 78, a man troubled by gout and soon to be blind, symbolized the
realization in Rome that their fortunes were in decline. On every side
this ailing pontiff saw, if that is the correct word for a blind man,
trouble. The Papacy was once more squeezed between the bitter rivalries
of the Habsburgs and the Bourbons in its own fiefdoms of Parma and
Piacenza when the Duke died without successor. Insulting the pope, these
two nations chose Protestant England to mediate their dispute.
