The Age of the Great Western Schism E-Book

Clinton Locke

• Herausgeber: Blackmore Dennett
• Kategorie: Geisteswissenschaft
• Sprache: Englisch
• Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2019

Beschreibung

The Great Western Schism, also called Papal Schism, Great Occidental Schism and Schism of 1378, was a split within the Catholic Church lasting from 1378 to 1417 in which two, since 1410 even three, men simultaneously claimed to be the true pope, having excommunicated one another.

Leseprobe

THE AGE OF THE

GREAT SCHISM

by Clinton Locke

Published 2019 by Blackmore Dennett

All rights reserved. This book or any portion thereof may not be reproduced or used in any manner whatsoever without the express written permission of the publisher except for the use of brief quotations in a book review.

Thank you for your purchase. If you enjoyed this work, please leave us a comment.

1 2 3 4 10 8 7 6 5 00 000

Also available from Blackmore Dennett:

TABLE OF CONTENTS

THE FOURTEENTH CENTURY.

DEATH OF BONIFACE—BENEDICT XI

THE FALL OF THE TEMPLARS.

AVIGNON.

JOHN XXII.

BENEDICT XII.

CLEMENT VI.

RIENZI.

THE BLACK DEATH—THE FLAGELLANTS—THE JEWS.

THE JUBILEE OF 1350—DEATH OF CLEMENT—INNOCENT VI.

URBAN V.-GREGORY XI.- CATHERINE OF SIENA.

DEATH OF GREGORY XI. ELECTION OF URBAN VI.

URBAN VI AND CLEMENT VII.

CLEMENT VII—BONIFACE IX.

BENEDICT XIII.-INNOCENT VII.

THE COUNCIL OF PISA.

ALEXANDER V

JOHN XXIII.

THE COUNCIL OF CONSTANCE.

COUNCIL OF CONSTANCE.

THE TRIAL OF JOHN HUSS.

THE AFFAIRS OF GREGORY AND BENEDICT.

THE ARRANGEMENTS FOR THE ELECTION— MARTIN V.

THE EFFECTS OF THE SCHISM.

JOHN WYCLIF.

CLOSE OF COUNCIL OF CONSTANCE—MARTIN V.

THE RETURN OF MARTIN V TO ROME, AND HIS TRIUMPH

THE HUSSITE WAR.

EUGENIUS IV AND THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.

CONTINUATION OF THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.

CONTINUATION OF THE COUNCIL.

THE COUNCIL OF FERRARA AND FLORENCE.

THE GERMAN MYSTICS.

THE INQUISITION IN THE FOURTEENTH CENTURY.

LITERATURE AND ARTS IN THE FOURTEENTH CENTURY.

THE FOURTEENTH CENTURY.

THE fourteenth century of the Christian era was no dull and stagnant period of the world’s history. It glows with life and power. The stage is filled constantly with men and scenes which stir the blood and fix the attention. Consequences which we feel now in religious and in political life had their causes then, and blows struck then for religious and social liberty cut so deeply that in this very hour we note their effects. There were dark tragedies and amusing comedies. There were splendid gatherings of clerics and of nobles, and there were battles where the cross of the merciful Saviour, Prince of Peace, was borne before the armies of either side, and was held to sanction causes in principle and practice directly opposed to the genius of Christianity.

In a book of this size many minor incidents must be omitted, many interesting episodes passed over. The political history will be considered only so far as it is interwoven with the history of the church, and it was only in the century we are considering that men began seriously to think that the two things could be at all separated and such a thing exist as a church and state untrammeled by each other. We have to consider in this volume: the tremendous blow that the papal pretensions received; the prestige which the Papacy lost by the transference of the seat of its power to Avignon; the vast consequences of the great Western schism; the noble efforts of the councils of Basel and Pisa and Constance to reform the church; the lives of Wycliffe and of Huss; and with these great questions others of less importance, such as the mysterious episode of the ruin of the Templars, the terrors of the Black Death, the story of the Flagellants, the career of Rienzi, and the victory of national languages over the Latin tongue.

When the curtain rises on the fourteenth century, the stage is occupied by two figures which dwarf all the rest, the Pope of Rome, Boniface VIII, and the King of France, Philip IV, surnamed “the Fair” on account of his personal beauty. Boniface had succeeded that weak pontiff Celestine, whom Dante with infinite scorn places in the mouth of hell among the

“Melancholy souls of those

Who lived without ten infamy or praise”,

and stamps him forever with the bitter words:

“The shade of him

Who made, thro’ cowardice, the grand refusal”,

referring to his cowardly resignation of the papal throne.

If ever one man was a contrast to another, Boniface was to Celestine. His will was indomitable, his craft unfathomable, his ambition beyond the dreams of even his most ambitious predecessors. He was determined to push the domination of the spiritual power to itsextremest point, and for a while it seemed as if he would succeed; but all over Europe men were beginning to think. The universities were heaving in the throes of discussions on civil and religious liberty, and a body of great lawyers was coming to the front, who could oppose, in the fashion of the day, imperial precedent to papal pretension with equal learning and with splendid ability. The Pope’s most powerful foe was the King of France, like himself strong-willed, crafty, ambitious, resolved to put his foot on the neck of priestly domination. His was not a noble, unselfish nature, but he was an able man, and, like many another of as coarse a grain, he was to be the instrument, under God, of checking the career of papal supremacy, which was at that time a menace to the liberty of every subject of every European kingdom.

Quarrel between Philip and Boniface

It is not within the limits of this book to enter into all the details of the quarrel over supremacy between the Pope and the kingdom of France, the insulting documents which hurtled through the air between Rome and Paris, the unfounded charges against Boniface’s private character, the forged messages on either side, and the ever-garbled statements. A reading of the document put forth in 1302 by the Pope, styled “Unam Sanctam”, and which is of undisputed authority, shows to what height papal claims could climb, and the good grounds on which the French king, clergy, and people rested their opposition. In this “constitution”, as it is called, Boniface lays down in the strongest terms the superiority of the spiritual to the temporal authority. With that false exegesis so common then, so utterly repudiated now by the most superficial scholars, he cites St. Peter in the garden saying to our Lord, “Behold, here are two swords”. This, he says, shows clearly that the temporal as well as the spiritual sword was in St. Peter’s hands, and our Lord confirms that opinion by saying not, “It is too much”, but, “It is enough”. The spiritual sword is to be exercised by the church, the temporal sword by laymen under the direction of the church. The temporal must always be subject to the spiritual, as being a lower power. God Himself, in Jeremiah I. 10, by the words: “See, I have this day set thee over the nations and over the kingdoms, to root out, and to pull down, and to destroy, and to throw down, to build, and to plant”, clearly shows the authority He meant the Pope to have. Kings are accountable to the Pope, but he is accountable to no one except God. It is no wonder that this document drove the whole French nation into absolute fury, the flame of which Philip diligently fanned. Then followed more insulting and defying words, and at last the Pope not only excommunicated the king, but forbade any election to any church office until the king repented, suspended the universities from teaching, and gave notice that he was about to publish a bull deposing Philip and releasing his subjects from all allegiance.

Boniface had one great ally, which Philip could not match: he had plenty of money for bribing and the gaining of support, and he obtained this money at the jubilee which marked the opening year of this century. This jubilee merits a few words. During the year 1299 one of those curious and unaccountable waves of feeling swept over the European world. A general conviction was evident that great indulgences and spiritual privileges were to be obtained at Rome at the beginning of the new century, arid from all over Europe a crowd of pilgrims about Christmastide thronged every church and every street in Rome. The Pope took advantage of this movement, and, actuated perhaps by sagacity, perhaps by religious enthusiasm, mounted the pulpit in the Basilica of St. Peter on February 22, AD 1300, and ordered the immediate promulgation of a bull which granted extraordinary indulgences to all who within that year should with penitence and devotion visit the tombs of St. Peter and St. Paul. This was to be called the jubilee, and it was to be celebrated every hundredth year.

The effect of this bull was tremendous. All Europe was fired with religious frenzy, and throughout Germany, Italy, and even England the roads were crowded with pilgrims. As many as two hundred thousand strangers were in Rome at one time, and so admirable was the management that every one easily found good lodgings and good food at reasonable prices. The offerings were enormous. Priests stood raking away from the altars the gold and silver coins thrown down before them, and all this money was for the Pope alone. He had the sole distribution of it, and who can doubt that he used much of it to advance his interests in his quarrel with France and England? The world and the church have greatly changed since the first jubilee, but these pilgrimages still continue. The time has been successively shortened to fifty years, thirty-three years, and twenty-five years. It stands at that figure now, and the last ordinary jubilee was held in the year 1875.

DEATH OF BONIFACE—BENEDICT XI

THE insult to Philip conveyed by the papal bulls was too deep for that proud king to brook, and just when the Pope seemed most triumphant the knell of his doom had struck.

He had left Rome on account of the excessive heat and gone to his native place, Anagni, where he got ready the document degrading Philip from his throne, and he intended to publish it in the cathedral of Anagni on the 8th of September, 1303. Of course creatures of Philip in the papal court kept him informed of all the Pope’s movements, and on September 7th an armed force, commanded by William de Nogaret and Sciarra Colonna, and in the pay of France, burst into the papal palace with cries of, “Death to Boniface!”, “long live the King of France!”. The Pope robed himself in the papal vestments of ceremony, put the crown of Constantine on his head, and, taking his seat on the papal throne, awaited their coming. They paused a moment at the sight of the brave old man, but the rude Colonna dragged him from his throne, and with buffets and jeers the ribald soldiery paraded the venerable pontiff through the streets of the town mounted on a horse with his face to the tail. After this cruel insult they threw him into prison, but on the second day his townspeople rescued him, and, escorted by papal troops, he got back to Rome.

He was at that time eighty-one years old, and all this suffering told deeply on his enfeebled frame, so it was not surprising that on the 11th of October he was found dead in his room. Of course his death was attributed to poison. In those days and for centuries after, the sudden death of any prominent person was always supposed to come from poison, but there is not the slightest proof of it in this case. He certainly had undergone enough to kill him. All Christendom shuddered when it heard of this outrage on the Vicar of Christ, and Dante, while he has branded Boniface with his bitterest words and consigned him to a very low place in the other world, well expresses the general feeling in those lines in the “Purgatorio” (xx, 89) :

“I see the flower-de-luce Anagni enter,

And Christ, in his own Vicar, captive made;

I see him yet another time derided;

I see renewed the vinegar and gall,

And between living thieves I see him slain”.

The Sacred College consisted at that time of twenty cardinals; but two of them were of the Colonna family and had been expressly excommunicated by the late Pope, therefore they could not vote. The other eighteen assembled immediately, and eleven days after Boniface’s death unanimously raised Nicolas, Bishop of Ostia, to the papal throne. He took the name of Benedict, and was the eleventh Pope of that name. The choice seemed a very wise one. Benedict had been a loyal and steadfast friend of Boniface, and was a man of calm, wise character, very anxious to do all he could to make peace. This was shown by his immediate dispatch of officers to France to remove the excommunication from king, clergy, and people. He restored to the French cathedral chapters their right of election and to the universities their privileges, and granted the tithe of all the French benefices to Philip for two years. He did more; he pardoned the Colonnas and restored the two Colonna cardinals to their dignity. In fact, he pardoned nearly everyone except William de Nogaret, and a few others who had been personally engaged in the outrage at Anagni. Surely he would have been wanting in the first principles of manhood if he had pardoned those ruffians.

If Philip of France had been in any way reasonable, all the disasters which darkened down upon the church during this just opening century might have been avoided; but Philip, as far as the dead Boniface was concerned, had the ferocity of a tiger, and nothing would appease him but the calling of a council which should brand the dead pontiff with heresy, simony, impurity, and all imaginable crimes. Benedict was too true, too brave, too honest, to consent to any such thing. How could he lend himself to such a degradation of the Papacy as would be presented by the spectacle of a general council sitting in judgment on a Pope already dead? He had tried conciliation; it had produced no effect, and he now resolved to change his tactics. He left Rome, not only on account of the heat, but because he had no liberty of action there, for the city was filled with jarring factions, and a liberal supply of French gold was a powerful weapon in the hands of his enemies. He retired to Perugia, and there, on the 7th of June, 1304, he issued a bull denouncing William de Nogaret and fourteen others, excommunicating them all and citing them to appear before him on the feast of St. Peter and St. Paul, June 29th. On the 27th of June the Pope, after a short illness, died of dysentery, brought on by overindulgence in ripe figs, of which he was very fond. Of course poison, as usual, was suspected, but there is not a shred of evidence to justify the suspicion.

Election of Clement V.

The cardinals hurried together, and now there commenced in Perugia a conclave noted for its squabbles, its factions, and its delays. It is said that nearly a year had passed when the people of Perugia, wearied out by the unending strife, threatened to deprive the august body of all provisions, and even to loot their palaces. There were two factions in the conclave, the French and the Italian, and neither could elect without some help from the other. The French faction was headed by Napoleon Orsini and the Cardinal of Prato, as wily and astute a man as ever lived, and (though the other cardinals were not aware of it) the confidential agent of King Philip. The leaders of the Italian faction were Matthew Orsini and Francis Gaetani, nephew of Pope Boniface. Both factions felt that something must be done; very shame forced them to a decision.

The French faction, through the Cardinal of Prato, proposed that the Italian party should nominate three candidates, not cardinals (for at that time the election was not restricted to the members of the Sacred College); these candidates must be prelates living beyond the Alps, and Prato pledged his side to agree on one of the three. He was playing a deep game, but its success proved his keen sagacity. The three were nominated, and the choice of the Sacred College fell upon one of them, Bertrand de Got, Archbishop of Bordeaux. Momentous choice it was, and full of momentous consequences.

If ever a side considered itself a winner it was the Italian party in the Perugia conclave when they had secured the election of Bertrand de Got. He was, though a Frenchman, a subject of the King of England, who then ruled over Bordeaux and much else of France. He had been involved in a well-known quarrel with King Philip’s brother, and was therefore not thought tobe persona grata to the king. He had been a firm friend of Boniface in the French quarrel, and he owed his high ecclesiastical position entirely to the favor of Boniface. If any man seemed likely to stand by the memory of the accused Pope he did, but the Cardinal of Prato knew his man better than his colleagues. It had been arranged in the conclave, probably by Prato to gain time, that forty days should elapse between the nomination and the election of a new Pope. As soon as Bertrand had been nominated Cardinal Prato hurried off a secret messenger to King Philip, urging him to see the Archbishop of Bordeaux, flatter him, promise him his full support, and make his own terms with him. The king lost no time in doing so.

It has often been stated that the two met in secret in the forest of St. Jean d’Angely, but from documents lately discovered a personal interview seems improbable. The negotiations were doubtless carried on by go-betweens. We know all about them, however, for the king did not conceal from his intimate friends the conditions he had made with Bertrand in exchange for the promise of his favor and support. These conditions were six in number:

1. The excommunication of the king was to be withdrawn (this Benedict had offered) and he was to be pronounced without blame.

2. All his agents in the struggle with the Pope were to be absolved.

3. He was to have for five years a tenth of all clerical incomes.

4. The memory of Boniface was to be condemned.

5. The Colonna cardinals were to be cleared of all ecclesiastical disability.

The sixth condition was kept secret, and unending have been the conjectures as to its import. No one knows for certain, but the general opinion is that it was the condemnation of the Templars.

Philip sent word immediately to the Cardinal of Prato that everything was all arranged, and the cardinal forthwith notified his brethren that his side was ready to proceed to the election without delay. Bertrand, in whom both parties saw their man, was unanimously elected, and took the name of Clement V.

Of course, as he was not present, much of the ceremonial had to be omitted. The Italians in the conclave were soon awakened from their dream of trust in the new Pope by receiving a summons from him to come to Lyons for his coronation. They had not imagined that any other place than Rome could be the papal residence, but many a long year would pass before the realization of any such hope, for now was to commence the “Babylonish captivity”, as Roman Catholic historians designate the residence of the popes in Avignon, calling it that because it lasted, like the captivity of the Jews, just seventy years. Protestant historians often apply the word “Babylon” to papal Rome, which proves it to be a convenient word of cursing, the use of which depends on your point of view.

The coronation of the Pope was not a very happy affair, for a wall crowded with spectators fell just as Clement, mounted on horseback, was passing in procession. The Duke of Brittany, who was leading the papal horse, was killed, the Pope knocked off his steed, his tiara sent rolling in the mire, and the king’s brother very badly hurt. As soon as possible after his coronation Clement began to carry out his agreement. He absolved the king and declared him free from all blame. He gave him the tenths. He restored the Colonna cardinals and created ten new cardinals, all French, and then he paused, for he could not, servile tool though he might be, bring himself to pronounce pardon on all those who had so abused Pope Boniface, nor could he condemn Boniface as a heretic and a villain, for, if he did, it would seem to invalidate his own election by cardinals whom Boniface had created. No wonder he shirked these questions, but he was in the hands of a deadly hater. Philip was determined not to let go until Boniface had been pronounced by the Pope a heretic, and his body dug up and burned. Clement did at last absolve Nogaret and his companions on condition of their performing certain penances, and he managed to stave off the affair of Boniface to a general council which. he announced he would soon call at Vienne. He hoped the king would die, or something turn up that would let him out of the net in which he struggled. His hopes were realized; something did turn up. It was the famous affair of the Templars, which was now absorbing Philip, the Pope, and everyone else.

THE FALL OF THE TEMPLARS.

THE military order of the Temple was the noblest, the most famous, the bravest in the world. For nearly two hundred years had the Templars been the bulwark of the Christian power in Palestine, and now that all hope of any further Christian rule was over, and their last battle fought, the remnant came back to join their brethren in France, where the order was the most numerous and its installation the most splendid. The Grand Master was James de Molay, and with a long and magnificent train of knights and serving-men, twelve horses loaded with gold ducats, and sumpter-mules by scores bearing silver and tapestries and precious Eastern treasures, he landed from Cyprus and travelled through France to Paris, where, in the Temple, so well known in modern times as the prison of Louis XVI, was the chief seat and treasure-house of the order. King Philip marked the splendid home-coming and resolved on the destruction of the whole body.

A great deal of mystery has been thrown around his action by historians, but the motives which actuated him are evident enough. In the first place, Philip was one of the most avaricious men known in history, and was always in pecuniary difficulty. He knew that the Templar body was the richest corporation in the world and would prove a splendid booty. He owed them immense sums, and no man loves his creditors. But there was a far deeper reason than this. Philip was an able and far-seeing king, and he was confronted with the spectacle of a body of eight thousand knights and a vast host of servitors and clergy camped right in the centre of his kingdom, armed better than any of his soldiers, more thoroughly trained, and under the absolute command of one man, who might at any time take a notion to make himself king, and in that case had power to summon to his aid not only the French knights, but eight thousand more scattered over Europe. Such a course, especially if the religious difficulties were kept up, would be sure of papal support, for the order of the Temple had always been devoted papalists.

Philip doubtless reasoned that he would be able to offer very little resistance to such a force, and so, for reasons of state, the king determined to down this gigantic specter which threatened his very life. He knew that he would not be without sympathy, for the Templars were cordially hated. The French clergy hated them because they had so many privileges; for example, whenever an interdict spread its ghastly pall over a land, and the parish churches were all shut, and only with maimed rite were children secretly baptized and the dead buried, by papal decree the churches of the Templars were exempted. There the lights blazed, the censer swung, the mass was chanted, and all the rites of the church were openly performed. The nobles hated them for their haughtiness and exclusiveness and because they had come by inheritance into possession of so many of their family estates, and the people hated them because they were proud and rich, luxurious and overbearing.

The Arrest of De Molay.

Rumors of grave scandals existing in their order had been floating about Europe for many years, but the Templars had always disdained to notice such reports. Their power and their wealth made them feel thoroughly secure, but it proved a false security. The king laid all his plans with the secrecy of the grave. On October 12, 1307, the Grand Master, De Molay, was one of the pall-bearers at the funeral of the king’s sister, and was treated by the king with distinguished courtesy. He woke at dawn of day to find the armed soldiers of the king by his bedside, and before the night of the 13th had come everywhere in France the highest and the noblest of the knights were dragged to prison, over nine hundred in Paris alone. The news flew like lightning over Christendom, and men asked everywhere in amazement, “What are the charges and who made them?”

The originators of the charges seem to have been two apostate Templars, Squin of Béziersand a Florentine named Naffo, both men of bad reputation and who made each other’s acquaintance in prison. From such wretched creatures Philip listened to the following accusations:

1. That the candidates for Templar knighthood were compelled to deny Christ and spit on the cross.

2. That they worshipped an idol.

3. That they were allowed to practice sodomy and committed other indecencies.

4. That parts of the mass were omitted in Templar churches.

5. That the Grand Master and other chief officers, though laymen, gave absolution.

6. That they often had betrayed the Christian cause in Palestine. The truth or falsity of these charges has been one of the “vexed questions” over which whole volumes have been written, and even now, with the keen light of modern researches thrown upon it, it is difficult to come to a perfectly fair conclusion.

Of course, if the charges had never been sustained the case would have begun and ended with the first informers, but the difficulty lies in the number of admissions made by many of the knights in their examinations before courts and councils. Yet when we look into these admissions we find that they were wrung from tortured men, worn out by harsh treatment in loathsome prisons, men used to luxury and unable to bear physical torture, while brave as lions on the battlefield. Courage and endurance of physical pain are two entirely different things, and there are but few natures which can long withstand horrible torture. Most men will confess almost anything to have the torture stopped. Against the admissions must be offset the conduct of hundreds of knights who, under the severest torture and amid the flames of the stake, would not acknowledge one atom of the crimes charged. Indeed, of those who confessed, the vast majority retracted everything the moment the pressure was removed. For example, it was said that the Grand Master, De Molay, confessed that every accusation was true to a commission of cardinals sent by the Pope to Chinon, and yet when this confession was read over to him in Paris he started with horror and declared that it was all a forgery and a lie, that he had never said such words. The aged and high-born chief lifted his arms and fervently recited the Apostles’ Creed to show his perfect orthodoxy.

Charges against the Order.

Some of the charges can be explained. The denial of Christ and the spitting on or near the cross were probably meant as a trial of faith. The candidate was asked to do this, and if he complied he was shown the lesson of constancy and faith, and adjured never to yield to such a temptation. No idol (the idol’s name was said to be Baphomet) was ever found, though all thecommanderies were searched thoroughly and suddenly before the inmates had time to secrete anything. As to impurity, there was doubtless much of it. It was likely to exist more or less in communities of high-living, drinking soldiers, but there was not the slightest proof that it was a common or acknowledged thing. The omission of part of the canon of the mass rests on the vaguest and most unreliable testimony. The absolution by the Grand Master seems merely to have been the remission of certain penalties for violation of discipline, which was perfectly within his power as a layman; and the secret treaties with the Saracens can be explained by those courtesies of war which had grown up from the long intercourse of Turkish and Christian warriors in Palestine.

Every secret society rising to prominence has always been the subject of much gossip and slander. The Masonic body in America, in the early part of this century, came very near being as ruined as the Templar order, from the rumors and accusations against it, which its members in vain denied.

Whether the Templars were guilty or not did not much influence Philip. He was determined to have their blood and their money, and the Pope was too much in his power and too servilely his henchman not to aid him in every way. On May 12, 1308, fifty-four Templar knights were burned alive in Paris, every one of them protesting until the smoke suffocated him that the order of the Temple was entirely innocent of the charges brought against it. Hundreds of others were burned all over France, but there is no true evidence that one recanted at the stake, and it seems scarcely credible that all these high-born men, noted for their honor, were liars and deceivers.

The Pope had put off for some time the Council of Vienne, but he and Philip came to a secret understanding about Boniface and the Templars, and he was no longer afraid to call it. He summoned it, therefore, for October 16, 1311, and it was attended by nearly two hundred bishops and abbots. Philip had secretly agreed that, if the Pope would allow him to carry out his designs on the Templars and sweep them from the face of the earth, he would abate his demands about Boniface’s memory, and would say nothing more about any heresy or his wish to have the body dug up and burned. So on April 4, 1311, a bull was issued which annulled Boniface’s acts against the king and kingdom of France and ordered them to be torn out of the papal registers, but nothing was said about heresy or evil living on the part of the Pope. Philip was pronounced as innocent as a lamb of all personal hatred of Boniface, and to have been merely actuated by great zeal for the church.

So this great matter of Boniface, which had convulsed the Christian world for so many years, was settled, and in the Council of Vienne but little was said about it; both sides dropped it. Clement labored hard to get the order of the Temple condemned, when nine Templars suddenly appeared before the council, prepared to defend the order and demanding to be heard; and the whole assembly, except three French prelates who had been concerned in the burning of some Templars, declared that they ought to be heard. The Pope adjourned the council, and for many months argued and strove with the bishops; but they would not consent to condemn the Templars unheard, although the King of France bullied the council at its very doors. At last the Pope, in a secret consistory of the bishops on whom he could depend, announced that he was going to dissolve the Templar order, not as a condemnation for crime, but as a question of expediency, in order to put an end to all the trouble. This was agreed to, and on April 3, 1312, the act of dissolution was read in a general session of the council, the king and his family being present.

The Pope did not dare openly to give the vast wealth of the order to Philip, but reserved to himself and to the church the disposition of the knights and of their possessions; the king, however, laid hands on a great deal of their treasure. In France most of their lands and castles were given to the Knights of St. John, who, however, did not profit much by their legacy, for Philip put in so many claims for rent and caretaking and repairs that he eventually got a great part away from them. In the other countries of Europe trials of Templars were here and there held, but they suffered no severe punishment. Of course everywhere, on the receipt of the decree of the council, the order was dissolved, and generally their possessions were given to the Knights of St. John, save in Spain, where they were given to the crown to use in the crusades against the Moors. Many of the Templars became Hospitallers, many went back to civil life, and in a few years this magnificent order had completely vanished away.

It is one of the strangest episodes in history, a ruin so complete, so quietly accomplished, and about which there was so little regret. It only shows how completely their race was run and their errand accomplished. It is not worthwhile to bring up a modern theory, which has been advanced by some German writers (Wilcke, Von Hammer), that they had within themselves a secret section, where was taught a sort of Oriental mysticism, tinctured with Gnosticism, into which members after long probation were initiated, and that this gave rise to the heretical charges against them; for the theory rests only on vague grounds and far-fetched conclusions. It is not history. St. Antonino of Florence puts in one sentence reason enough for their ruin: “The whole affair was woven together by avarice, that these religious Templars might be despoiled of their goods”.

But one more scene need be shown from their romantic history. For six years and a half the Grand Master, De Molay, and three other chief officers of the Temple had been immured in a Paris prison, and on March 11, 1314, they were brought out for execution. The Archbishop ofAlbi mounted a pulpit and began to read their confessions, but the Grand Master, undaunted by his dreadful sufferings and fate, interrupted him, and, according to Milman, used the following words: “Before heaven and earth, on the verge of death, when the least falsehood bears like an intolerable weight upon the soul, I protest that we have richly deserved death, not on account of any heresy or sin of which ourselves or our order has been guilty, but because we have yielded, to save our lives, to the seductive words of the Pope and the king, and so by our confessions brought shame and ruin on our blameless, holy, and orthodox brotherhood”. This made a profound sensation in the great crowd present, and the moment the king heard of it he ordered the wood to be got ready for their burning, and the stakes were set up just where the statue of Henri Quatre now stands in Paris. There De Molay and one of his officers—for the other two recanted—were burned alive, the cruel king sitting by and feasting his eyes on the horrible spectacle. There went about the rumor for many years that De Molay in his dying moments had summoned Clement and Philip to meet him within forty days before the throne of the Most High, but there is no good authority for any such statement. Neither Clement nor Philip died until the year after, but their base and unrighteous conduct is not forgotten, and there is a secret order now extant and flourishing which never meets without repeating in the most solemn way, “Remember Clement V; remember Philip the Fair”.

AVIGNON.

IT was not until 1309 that Clement, after dwelling for a while in various cities in southern France, settled himself at Avignon, in Provence. Although in France, it was not then French territory; it belonged to the countship of Provence, and therefore at that time to the kingdom of Naples, for the kings of Naples were counts of Provence. The popes bought it from Joanna of Naples when she was a minor, in 1348, and promised to pay her eighty thousand crowns of gold for it; but she always said they cheated her out of that, and she got nothing. She was a lady, however, who had as little regard for truth as she had for some other virtues. Avignon remained papal territory through all the centuries down to 1791, when it was definitely united to France. It is still surrounded by the lofty walls built by Clement VI in the middle of the fourteenth century and still in perfect repair, though they enclose much empty space, for the population has greatly dwindled since the popes reigned there.