The fourth, because it declares before the world_
that it is determined to live in the unity of the Catholic Church, which
ought to be repeated in order to show under what authority' your Serene
Highness wishes to live, whilst exempting yourself from obedience to the
Pope.
that it is determined to live in the unity of the Catholic Church, which
ought to be repeated in order to show under what authority' your Serene
Highness wishes to live, whilst exempting yourself from obedience to the
Pope.
Sarpi - 1868 - Life of Fra Paolo Sarpi
handle.
net/2027/uc1.
31158010289923 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www.
hathitrust.
org/access_use#pd-google
? 92 THE LIFE OF [A D. 1605.
continual fear of death in consequence of the prognostic of an astrologer
who told him after the death of Clement, of the election of Leo and of a
Paul who would only live a short time; but his friends and relations
found a remedy for his fears, they held a numerous assembly of the
astrologers and soothsayers of Rome, and they came to the conclusion,
that the fatal time being past, he would live long. Thus freed from his
fear of death, Paul returned to his purpose, the aggrandizement of his eo-
clesiastical jurisdiction. Agreeable to this, he began making proposals to
' King Henry of France, who at length acceeded to the reception of the
Council of Trent; all the remonstrances of De Ferrier were forgotten, all -
the just reproaches which the French made to the Cardinal of Lorraine on
his return from the Council were as if ignored, and the French nation,
against the will of nearly all the wisest of that people, was bound to obey
Rome. In Spain, the Jesuits were exempted from paying tithes. Naples,
Malta, Parma, Lucca and Genoa all felt the encroachments of Paul: this
augured ill for Venetia. The disputes as to the channel of the Po con-
tinued, the sovereignty of Ceneda was not yet decided, and the Pa-
triarch Vendramino had been cited to Rome.
" As yet there was no pretext to attack Venice as to things spirit-
ual, " but this soon occurred. Saracena, Canon of Vicenza, was accused of
atrocious crime, and was imprisoned by order of the Council of Ten. His
cousin, the Bishop of Citta Nuova, took up his defence, and as he was
Director of all the N uncios he sent information to the Bishop of Vicenza
at Rome, entreating him to defend the Canon and ecclesiastical liberty.
Nani, the Ambassador from Venice to Rome, had notice of these pro-
ceedings. -
The Pope said that he would not permit the Canon to be judged by
the civil power, and Nani informed the senate that the Pope had objected
to two laws of the Republic of 1337, confirmed and renewed 1450, 1515,
1536, 1561, and again confirmed 1603.
The first of these enacted, that no one was to build churches, chapels,
monasteries or oratories, or institute any new religious Order without the
consent of the Doge, under pain of banishment and confiscation of the
property and funds. The second of these laws of 1333, extended in 1605 to
all the dominions of Venetia, decreed that no one should sell, give
or dispose of anything whatsoever to the Clergy, either regular or secular,
without special permission from a magistrate. These laws were necessary,
as a third, some affirm a fourth, of all property was actually possessed
by the ecclesiastics. Some of the convents were very rich, for example the
rental of the Benedictines was estimated at 18,000 pounds sterling per
annum.
It will be found on reference to the treatise of Sarpi on Ecclesiastical
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-11 22:53 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. 31158010289923 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? E1'. 53. ] FRA PAOLO SARPI 93
Benefices and Revenues, how entirely he disapproved of the riches of the
Church of Rome, and how he contrasted her revenues with the com-
mands of the Holy Saviour to his Apostles. He also shows that tithes
were not to be given as in the days of Moses, but that the provision of
the Clergy was to be regulated as necessity pointed out; he appears to
have held these opinions long previous to the publication of the above
volume. The Venetians had levied tithes and taxes as they chose, but
now the Court of Rome had made still larger exemption as to their
payment in favor of the Cardinals, Knights of Malta, monastic establish-
ments, and a great part of the priesthood. The revenue of the Clergy
of Venetia was estimated at eleven millions of ducats yearly! It was
therefore with astonishment that the Senate learned that the Pope al-
leged that a large sum was owing to him by the Republic.
The Ambassador Nani had an audience of the Pope, and active com-
munications and negotiations continued till the month of December, when
he informed the Pontiff that an ordinance did exist which directed that
the goods of the laity could not be alienated to the clergy, and he also
produced briefs of Clement VII and of Paul III, both authorizing the
jurisdiction of the Senate of Venice over ecclesiastics. There was no
intention on the part of the Republic to conform to the commands of
the Pope, and in direct opposition orders had been given for the im-
prisonment of another ecclesiastic, the Count Valdemirono Abbot of
Nervesa.
The Pope was angry: he treated the briefs lightly, and said the Bull
In Coena Domini revoked them entirely. It was in vain that Nani urged
the right of the Senate to make their own laws, that he declared that
the Republic had been guilty of no innovation, that he cited the
examples of kings and princes having jurisdiction over ecclesiastics,
the letter of S. Jerome, the acts of Charlemagne, Saint Louis, Henry III
of France, Edward III of England, Charles V in Flanders, and the
laws of Portugal,'Aragon, Genoa, and Milan; for the Pope was deter-
mined to destroy all such jurisdiction, and protested specially against a
statute Which forbade a church to be built without permission of the
Senate. The Ambassador then stated the long established right of
Venetia to cite ecclesiastics before the civil authorities, that this was
founded on the Theodosian and Justinian Code, that the Pope could
not be ignorant that although from 1160' till 1220 there had been
many constitutions to establish ecclesiastical exemptions, the Republic
had exercised its full jurisdiction from 450. He also told the Pope
that God had not given him greater power than he had given to other
princes, and that as it did not'belong to Venice to govern the States
of the Church, neither did it belong to the Pope to govern the States
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-11 22:53 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. 31158010289923 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? 94 THE LIFE OF [A. D. 1605-
of Venice, that the laws were not secret but open to all, published
throughout the city and registered in the Chancery where all might
copy them, and he concluded by entreatiug the Pope not to listen to
calumny, in which case the controversy might be endless. These latter
words were in answer to the alleged retention of money by the Republic.
He further said, that although the Republic had yielded to the Pope
on trivial occasions, so she had always preserved her jurisdiction over
ecclesiasties in important matters, that this was confirmed by the Bulls
of Sixtus IV, Innocent, and Alexander VI, and that the Venetian
laws of which the Pope complained, being anterior to the ecclesiastical
exemption, no constitution of the Pope could derogate therefrom,
that no ecclesiastical exemption had ever been made of those guilty of
crimes against the person of the prince in any state, that in France
the king and magistrates, nay even a commissary, could arrest an eccle-
siastic, though he could not be condemned by an ecelesiastic only, but by
the civil judge also, that in Spain an ecelesiastic could be arrested
and that although the Popes had endeavored to exercise ecclesiastical
exemption in the States of Venice /it had never been permitted, that
a prince would be one but in name if hecould not punish all his subjects
alike, when the public weal demanded it, that he could not accuse the
Senate of overstepping its bounds, having only acted according to its
liberties, the consent of the Popes, and of late years by their appro-
bation.
These, although only a small part of the communications of the Ve-
netian Ambassador, are given in order to inform the reader what Sarpi
had to contend against. At one time His Excellency hoped that he had
produced some effect, and the Pope somewhat reduced his demands,
and said he would be satisfied if these were granted, without the
payment of 50,000 scudi. His demands were, that the laws against
building churches be abrogated, as also the laws against alienating the
goods of the laity to ecclesiasties, and that the suit against the Canon
and the Abbot be cancelled.
The Pope declared he would be obeyed, and that if not, he
would dispatch an horotary brief to the Republic. While the Car-
dinal Dclfino and the good Cardinal Valiero craved delay, the Car-
ndinals Sfrondato and Arrigono fanned the flame; they, with the
Spanish Ambassador, were bent upon Spain waging war against Venetia
and calling in the Pope to their assistance, the Cardinal Bellarmine was
not satisfied with the Pope's measures towards Venice, and there can be
no doubt from his subsequent conduct but that he felt regret in being
opposed to his friend Fra Paolo. However the Pope did not take the
vote of the Cardinals; he expected, as Genoa had just yielded tohim, Ve-
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-11 22:53 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. 31158010289923 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? ET. 63. ] FRA PAOLO SARPI 95
nice would do the same, but he was mistaken. The Genoese had no Fra
Paolo Sarpi to counsel their resistance.
The Venetian Senate returned a firm and decisive refusal to the ponti-
fical demands. The unanimity of the senators showed the concord of the
Republic in the defence of her liberties, and surely Europe never saw a
more illustrious sight than that of these patriots for a time burying every
jealousy, every past feud, every minor wrong, and voting with one voice
against the encroachments of a foreign power, which was not only of much
inferior antiquity to their own, but was one, the temporal part of which,
their great theologian and counsellor Fra Paolo Sarpi told them was but
lately constituted.
You who have trod the grand council chamber of the Ducal Palace of
Venice, can well imagine the august assembly that met on the eventful
day when refusal to the Pope's demands was voted. You can see their
looks of determination, their strong resolution, their eager and indignant
expression, their lofty endurance, exchanged for promptitude as they
unhesitatingly but silently resented the insult offered to their country; The
voice of the oppression of Europe had penetrated the heavens, the dawn
of the morning of liberty had arisen, and as if the clangor of the Papal
chains which had bound the nations as they cast them from them, had
attracted the notice of the free, those who had effected their freedom
from papal tyranny rallied around Venice, determined to uphold her in
her resolve. The hopes which the Pontiff had entertained of victory were
thus withered in the dustJ he had been told by the Jesuits that the
senators were divided in opinion.
The reply of the Senate was brief but conclusive, that the prisoners
could not be given up because lawfully detained, that the laws could not
be abrogated, and that the Republic recognized no superior but God only,
and Paul V, having received it and hearing the same statements from the
Ambassador Nani, immediately despatched two briefs to the Doge and
Senate. In audience he appeared benign and agreeable, but his purpose
was visible, and the end of all the painstaken audiences, deliberations and
remonstrances of the Doge and Senate by their Ambassadors was, that
the Pope informed his Consistory that Venice had violated ecclesiastical
liberty in framing the two laws, and retaining the two prisoners. The Ve-
netian Ambassador at Rome was cautioned to observe a good understand-
ing with the French Envoy and other representatives of the different
Courts, and the Senate, apprized by their Ambassador of the briefs, in-
formed every foreign power with which they had relation of the state of
affairs. The N uncio Withheld the briefs on their arrival, but having received
positive commands from the Pope, he presented them, but they were not
opened.
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-11 22:53 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. 31158010289923 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? as THE LIFE or ' [Am 1606.
It was Christmas day, a day of joy and gladness to all who like Fra
Paolo Sarpi reverenced, loved and served the Redeemer of the world, but
it was a day of grief and anxiety in the ducal palace of Venice, the Doge
Grimani lay at the point of death. It requires little imagination to paint
the eager solicitude of the patriots of Venice, the anxious looks and eager
words of the Senators as they question Fra Paolo in this crisis, read his
looks of undismayed but thoughtful expression, and confidently trust him
as the soul of honor with their yet strictly private communications.
It was an hour of great difiiculty, all felt it to be so, but the hopes of
the Venetians were shortly raised, as on the death of the good Grimani,
the Donato was elected Doge, "who unquestionably, was one of the most
eminent of all the senators for his integrity, experience in the affairs of
state, for his acquaintance with letters, and for all those noble qualities
which are now so rarely to be met with. " Such is the character which
Sarpi draws of Donato, and as a senator it is not overdrawn; well known
at foreign Courts, all the Ambassadors hastened to do him homage. The
Doge was determined to uphold the dignity and independence of the Re-
public, and Paul V found that whatever might have been the policy of
Europe heretofore, she was now to derive a lasting lesson from the resis-
tance of the Republic of Venice to papal demands.
In the hour of difficulty and danger to which of their subjects
could the Doge and Senate turn? To whom so confidently as to Fra
Paolo Sarpi, known through life to the Donato and to many of the
senators, and venerated by them for his piety and humility, as well
as for his talents. What was more Wise than that they should now
publicly seek the aid of the patriot who, well as he loved peace and
quiet, loved his country more? He saw Venice coerced by a fellow
mortal, Venice the proudest, the wisest, the most independent nation of
any who acknowledged the Pope; he heard the distant roll of the
thunders of the Vatican, and he was too learned in the history of
his own country not to know how deadly a blight the Pope had
spread over Venetia by former interdicts. He already saw her over-
whelmed if she did not present a front of brass to the oppressive foe,
and although he preferred the silent repose of his own Convent to
the anxious and arduous life of a Theologian and Counsellor to the
State, he put his hand to the oar, he made no remonstrance, he made
no excuse, all that he did was to ask permission of the General of
his Order and his blessing; -these given, Sarpi publicly gave his service
to the State.
It has been observed that he had been consulted privately; he there-
fore had long carefully studied the subject, and was well aware of the
whole bearing of the disputes between Venice and Rome. On the
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-11 22:53 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. 31158010289923 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? 51. 54. ] FRA PAQLO SARPI 97
fourteenth of January, when the Senate proclaimed that protection would
be given to all who aided the Republic by their counsel, he presented
a document to the Senate in which he explained the two remedies
which might be employed against the threats of Rome; and this
document was read in the Senate with such applause that Fra Paolo
Sarpi was immediately appointed Theologian and Canonist to the Re-
public of Venice.
It is not extant, but the following is a translation of the docu'
ment, which was presented by Fra Paolo, at a later period, to the
Doge of Venice. '
" Most Serene Prince,
" In the commencement of the controversies, which are now at their
height, between your Serene Highness and the Sovereign Pontiff, when
he had only issued his first brief concerning the laws of neither building
churches nor alienating the property of the laity to ecclesiasties without
permission, in a writing of mine, presented to your Serene Highness, I
said, that there were two remedies which might be opposed to the thun-
ders of Rome, one, defacto, to forbid their publication, and prevent their
execution, resisting violent force by a force which is legitimate, not pas-
sing the limits of natural defence: the other, de jure, an appeal to the
future council. I expressed no doubt as to the inexpediency of the first;
as to the second, I said that on several occasions it has been used by
many princes and private persons, and also by your Serene Highness,
but that where the first would sufifice, the other need not be used which
would give unmeasured ofi'enee to the Pontiff. Still, if accidents should
ensue that might render it necessary, it could be made available, because
the superiority of the council is allowed in France and Germany; and in
Italy the celebrated doctors, although they maintain that it belongs to the
Pope, do not hold the difficulty to be decided and determined.
" These accidents seem to be now imminent, since the Pope has print- -
ed, published, and posted a monitory against your Serene Highness, which
is very modest in its abstinence from maledictions, but most severe in
all besides, both on account of the sentence Which it pronounces against
the Senate in a body (an unusual thing), and the interdict laid upon the
whole State, and also because it threatens the ad ulteriora, in which there
is no limit at all. Although from past examples given by other Poutiffs,
we may form some conjecture of what is intended, yet, considering the
strange course adopted hitherto, we may apprehend something yet more
absurd. It is necessary, then, to balance all the reasons for or against the
1
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-11 22:53 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. 31158010289923 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? 98 THE LIFE OF [A. D. 1606.
appeal, and to consider what may be the soundest and most advisable re-
solution to form.
" Against the appeal we have the decree made by Pius II in 1459 in a
Congress held in Mantua by the advice of his Court, excommunicating all
who appeal from the decrees of the Pope to a future Council, because such
appeal is made to what does not exist, neither is it known when it shall
have existence. This decree has been always confirmed by his successors,
and placed among the clauses of jthe bull In (_};e'na Domini, because in
Italy the superiority of the Pope over the Council is a maintained dogma,
and an appeal can only be made as such to a higher power. We may thence be
very sure that an act of appeal to the Pontiff would draw down upon us
an additional excommunicatory brief, and would further complicate the
matter of the four points of controversy, making five. These are potent
reasons dissuasive of the appeal, but answer may be made.
" First, relative to the decree, advising that, after it was made by Pius II,
all the princes against whom it was fulminated have appealed, and this
Serene Republic . has done so on two occasions, once under Sixtus IV, and
again under Julius II. For examples of other princes may be adduced,
amongst the most notable, the appeal of Louis XII of France and the
Gallican Church from the same Julius II, and that of the Emperor Char-
les V from Clement VII.
" There is not an example to be found of princes in such circumstances
abstaining from appeal through respect for such excommunication. It inay
also be said, with some appearance of reason, that this decree does not
include princes, if they are not, according to the rules of the chancery,
specially named in the bull In Cggna Domini. In most cases they are
named, but not in this; then it seems that there has not been any inten-
tion of including them in it. And if any one shall say that they are includ-
ed in all the others, it follows that their being distinctly named in sonic
has been superfluous.
" Secondly, concerning the reasons of the decree, namely, that an ap-
peal is made to what has no present existence, neither is it known when
it shall exist. They certainly have no weight, since, when the Apostolic
seat is vacant, and there is no Pope then appeal is made, " adfidis apo-
stolicae futurum pontificem, " who, in a similar manner, has no present
existence, neither is it known when he will exist. And if any one shall
say that it is the custom to create a Pope very soon, I reply, that 250
years ago the seat remained vacant for two years running, and another
time for seven years. Who knows what may occur? . And as regards the
Council, one might know when it would have an existence, if the canons
were duly observed for its formation every ten years.
" Thirdly, as to the supreme power which the Pontiffs claim, in order
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-11 22:53 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. 31158010289923 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? ? 1'. 54. ] FRA PAOLO SARPI 99
to establish the perpetual confirmation of the decree, it will be needful to
speak at some length as to whether this resides in the Pontiff or in the
Council, and to this I will now proceed. We have only to consider, that
if the Pontiff has no judge on earth, there remains for the rest of men,
whether princes or private persons, nothing but obedience; and we must
sayin the words of Tacitus, " Tibi supremum vero arbitrium Dii dedere,
nobis obsequii gloria relicta est. " He has power to make all such laws as
may seem good to him, all must -be valid, nor can he be overruled by
any one. If he has a controversy with others, he has only to make a law
in favour of his own opinion, and the thing is decided.
" Some one may reply that he has supreme power in things spiritual
but not in things temporal. I might answer by showing how many {incon-
veniences would arise if it were so even in things spiritual. But we are
speaking of things temporal. When the Pope wishes anything, he will
say it is spiritual, as is the case in the present controversy, because your
' Serene Highness says you have made laws concerning things temporal,
and the Pope says these are things spiritual. He confesses that he is wil-
ling to leave the temporal, but he claims this as 'spiritual. Here, however,
we are brought to a stand. If we are to own him as supreme judge, we
ought to believe him when he determines, as in the present case, that a
certain thing is spiritual; it follows then that nothing remains for, us short
of obeying him in all things that come into his mind. If it is said that
we may resist de facto I agree, but it seems to me that the wisdom of
Christ our Lord was more likely to have provided a manner of obedience
' de jure than defacto, as he acted when he gave supreme power to the
Church. " Si non audierit, dic Ecclesiaa; si autem Ecclesiam non audierit,
sit tibi sicut ethnicus et publicanus. " For the rest, since the Pope has
commanded us under pain of excommunication not to appeal from him,
so, if he should command us, under pain of excommunication, not to dare
to contradict him, we are as much bound to obey him in the one case as
in the other, and we shall go on becoming more and more guilty. I may
doubtless say that the Popes put some limit to their enormous power
rather through fear that Italy and Spain should set forth the doctrines of
a Couucil's superiority maintained in France and Germany, than from any
other motive of restraint. And if they can once liberate themselves from
such danger, the world will see whether they will rest contented within
any limits whatsoever.
- " The fourth and last consideration is, that if the appeal is made, the
Pope may be induced to publish a further censure. Sixtus IV issued four
successive briefs against the Republic, which appealed against them all,
and all these appeals depend one upon another. I think the same thing
was done under Julius II, though I have not seen it; however, no doubt
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-11 22:53 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. 31158010289923 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? 100 ' THE LIFE on [A. D. 1606.
exists about this. Who does not believe that fresh excommunications will
appear against all things done by the Prince de facto, without issuing
proclamations for all who have a copy of the monitory, and against all
that may be needful to do in future? Everybody holds for certain that
three or four may he expected, and perhaps more.
" Some one will perhaps say that the principal reason against an ap-
peal to the Council is, not the fear of irritating the Pope, but of sur-
rendering rights to ecclesiasties. I reply that we only appeal against the
Pope's abuse of power, and therefore we are not surrendering the laws of
the Senate. And since this consideration has not prevailed under Sixtus IV
and Julius II, nor influenced other princes similarly circumstanced, neither
is it likely to affect us now- I say, moreover, that to defend our own rights
in a Congress where so many princes are concerned who have interests
and af1"airs common with ourselves, cannot be so great a fault. Would to
God that this matter were treated by a free Council! Your Serene High-
ness, without any increase of territory, would increase your power one-third,
but we are not worthy of such a blessing. Let us now consider the reasons
favourable to the appeal.
" The first and most powerful is following the example of so many
great princes, and of the Serene Republic. The second, that we have no
precedent of a different course of action on the part of any other State,
except that of the French under Gregory'XIV, when they burned his
briefs in the public square. The third is, that it does not seem honourable
to say that the Senate would have all ole facto and nothing de jure, as if it
had no show of right.
The fourth, because it declares before the world_
that it is determined to live in the unity of the Catholic Church, which
ought to be repeated in order to show under what authority' your Serene
Highness wishes to live, whilst exempting yourself from obedience to the
Pope. The fifth reason is, that without appealing, nothing remains to be
done, and every other 'course would be without precedent and dangerous.
If arbiters were demanded the Pope would not accept them, for it would
be more against his dignity to submit to them than to the Council, and
what is an important consideration, if a demand were put forth for arbiters
and refused by the Pope, the act would be an empty one, serving only to
show the world that everything has been tried.
" But some one may perhaps say that the time for making the appeal
has gone by; that such a remedy should have been tried immediately after
the first brief, or even previous to it. Yet if the appeal is now made,
although it irritates the Pope, we have this advantage, that the excom- '
munication and the interdict are suspended. It may be answered that the
Pope will not understand it so. I own that he will not consider them
suspended, but France and Catholic Germany will, since they hold that,
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-11 22:53 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. 31158010289923 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? arr. 54. ] FRA PAOLO SARPI 101
de jure, they are suspended by appeal, so that we are of the same opinion,
and they will say that-they act justly in communicating with this Govern-
ment, and if the Pope complains, as he assuredly will, they will reply
that they do not consider us under an interdict, because of the appeal,
and so the quarrel will involve others as well as ourselves. If we do not
appeal, we can only War by means of manifestos, a thing not to be neglect-
ed, yet neither to be used alone. I venture to affirm that if we do not ap-
peal, France and Germany will laugh at our pusillanimity, and will per-
haps think poorly of our conscientiousness, seeing us satisfied to act by
deeds only. It would, therefore, be necessary to issue a manifesto declaring
our motives for not appealing. If we venture therein to declare the truth,
namely, that we have abstained through fear of the excommunication
contained in the bull In Coena 'Domini, the world will marvel where-
fore we took alarm at this one, and. not at the other fulminated in the
monitory, which last was without any exclusion, whereas in the 'bull there
were reasons to show that we were not comprehended in it.
" If we appeal, everybody will feel according to his own view of things.
The French and Germans will be pleased that we hold their opinion of
the superiority of the Council. The English will not blame us, for they
constantly affirm that a Council is necessary to decide the matter ole
auaciliis, and who knows -whether they do not speak thus with the view
of forming a Council under such a protest? But it would take me too long
to speak fully on this matter. .
" I have now to adduce the reasons which prove the superiority of the
Council. The first of all owes its being to Saint Peter, when alive; whose
acts are recorded by Saint Luke. A controversy having arisen whether
believers were bound to observe the laws of Moses, a Council was sum-
moned in J crusalem, at which the holy Apostles, Saint Peter and Saint
James, were present, and whither Saint Papl and Saint Barnabas had repair-
ed for the same reason. Not only the Apostles and priests, but many
other believers, were present at this Council. At first there was much
disputing; then Saint Peter gave his opinion; then Saint Paul and Saint
Barnabas; and lastly Saint James. Finally, the whole Council established
a decree, and sent two legates, Barnabas and Silas, to declare it, and this
title was written on it: " Apostoli et seniores fratres; " and in the letter
was said, " Visum est Spiritui Sancto et nobis. " If then, Saint Peter in
Council expressed his opinion as any other, if the deliberation was that
of the Council, if the Council sent legates and wrote letters, who can
doubt that IT had supreme power'? And if we add to this the election of
the seven deacons, not by Saint Peter, but by the whole body of the
Church, and the recorded fact that when two Apostles were dispatched to
Samaria to impart to this people the gift of the Holy Ghost, Saint Peter
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-11 22:53 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. 31158010289923 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? 102 THE LIFE OF [A. D. 1606.
was selected by the others; not going of his own accord, but being sent,
as the sacred text expresses it, with Saint John, by the rest of the Apos-
tles; who will not conclude that the supreme authority was vested in the
Church?
" In the year 200, Pope Victor, on occasion of a controversy relative to
the celebration of Easter, commanded the Asiatic Bishops, under pain of
excommunication, to conform to the Roman Church. Polycrates, Bishop-
of Hieropolis, refused; and Saint Irenasus, Bishop of Lyons, in the name
of all the bishops of that province, wrote to Pope Victor a reprehensory
letter, condemning his anger and his mode of procedure.
" In the year 260, Stephen, the Roman Pontiff, in a controversy con-
cerning the rebaptism of heretics, determined against it, excommunicating
all who held a contrary opinion. The martyr Saint Cyprian opposed him,
and in one of his epistles he calls him bold, impertinent, and unwise,
resolving to hold the opinion contrary to him, without, however, intending
to put any one out of communion on such account. Saint Cyprian never
thought of changing his opinion through fear of Papal excommunication,
and Saint Augustine, in four passages of his works, commends him, saying
that he was not bound to conform to Pope Stephen until the question in
agitation was decided by a General Council. The doctrine and the examples
of Saint Cyprian and Saint Augustine, men who have helped to establish
the Church, both by their learning, and one also by his blood, will, I
think, have more influence with every good Christian than the Cardinals
Torrecremata and Albano.
" In the year 312, Cecilian, Bishop of Carthage, having been absolved
by the Council of Africa, Donatus, his accuser, appealed to' Constantine,
who committed the cause to the Bishop of Arles with other French bishops,
and they confirmed the first sentence. Saint Augustine, who gives this
history, speaks of having seen the authentic deeds, and, writing against
the followers of the above named'Donatus, he says, " After these judges,
what more remained but a General Council? " From this narration it ap-
pears first, that neither Constantine nor the French bishops saw any
impropriety in reconsidering the sentence of the Pope, therefore they did
not deem his judgment supreme; secondly, it is plain that Saint Augustine
was of opinion that the cause might be reexamined in a General Council :
he did not then think the Pope was superior to it. But we pass on to relate
a still more remarkable occurrence. About the year 425, Apiarius, an
African priest, was condemned first by the Bishop of Sicca, and afterwards
by the Council of Africa. He had recourse to Rome, to Pope Boniface. He
sent Faustinus, Bishop of Potenza, his legate in Africa, to the Council
which was then sitting in Carthage, to take the part of Apiarius, and he
sent with him some canons, purporting to be those of the Nicene Council,
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-11 22:53 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. 31158010289923 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? Ar. 54. ] FRA PAOLO SARPI 103
which established an appeal to the Pope in all causes. The Fathers
answered, that in the acts which they possessed of the Nicene Council, no
such thing was to be found, but that they would send for other authentic
copies to Constantinople, Alexandria, and Antioch, and that if it were so,
they would obey. Next year the Council having met again at Carthage,
answers were presented from Saint Cyril of Alexandria, and Saint Atticus
of Constantinople, both of whom sent the acts of the Nicene Council, in
which the suppositious canons brought by the Legate were not found.
Wherefore the African Bishops wrote to Pope Celestine, who had suc-
ceeded Boniface, that it was a great error in the Roman See to have given
ear to Apiarius; that in future His Holiness should not afford such refuge,
nor imagine that the Holy Spirit should give more assistance to one man
(alluding to the Pope) than to so many brethren met together in the
name of Christ; that he should send them no more legates, and that the
acts sent from Rome under the name of the Nicene Council were not to
be found in the acts sent by Saint Cyril and Saint Atticus, and that he
should desist from introducing such haughty ambition into the Church of
Christ. This epistle deserves to be read by every one. The acts of the
said Council are extant, and (which is very important) Saint Augustine
was one of the Fathers who took part in it and affixed his signatures. A
canon was also made by these Fathers that no one in Africa should in
future appeal to the regions beyond the sea. We may well believe that
Saint Augustine, and more than 200 Bishops with him, must have under-
stood the Divine Writings, and known whether Christ our Lord intended
the supreme power to reside in the Pope or in the Church.
" In the year 455, a General Council was held in Chalcedonia, in which
it was decreed that the Patriarch of Constantinople should take precedence
of the Patriarch of Alexandria and the others, in consideration of the
rank of the imperial city. The Legates of the Pope, who were in Council,
opposed this decree, as did also Leo I, who then ruled the Roman See.
Nevertheless, the determination of the Council prevailed.
" In the year 550 a Council was held in Constantinople. Vigilius, the
Roman Pontiff, was then in this city, Whither he had gone to have an
' audience of the Emperor; he would not take part in the Council unless
there were given to him a higher seat than that of the Patriarch of Con-
stantinople. The Council decided that the two seats should be equal; to
which the Pope would never submit, and therefore he abstained from
taking any part in it. Yet this was one of the most holy Councils of the
Catholic Church, and the fifth of those termedgeneral.
" About the year 88. 0, the eighth General Council was held in Constan-
tinople, being the last of those held in Greece. In its twentieth Canon,
it was decreed that the General Council may decide upon the causes of
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-11 22:53 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. 31158010289923 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? 104 THE LIFE 0's [A. D. 1606.
all the Patriarchs, adding expressly, that if there shall be any cause
againstthe Roman Pontiff, the same shall be treated with some reserve.
- " This Council has not appeared in print, but its acts are found in
manuscript, both in Greek and Latin, and there is a Greek copy, with the
Latin translation, in the public library of your Serene Highness, amongst
the codices of Cardinal Bessarione. '
" In times nearer to our own, after the Greek Church had separated
from us, when the disgraceful spectacle was exhibited of three Popes at
the same time, that is to say, John XXIII, Gregory XII, and Benedict
XIII, the Bishops who acknowledged the authority of John assembled
at Constance in a Council, convoked by him in the year 1414. At the
fourth session it was determined that the Council derives its power im-
mediately from Christ, and that the Pope owes obedience thereunto in
all matters concerning faith, the extirpation of schism, or the reformation
of the Church, whether in its head or members.
" In the twelfth session Pope John was deprived of the pontificate: in
the fourteenth, the prelates who were obedient to Gregory, joined the
Council, Gregory himself renouncing the papacy, and at last those who
belonged to Benedict came over likewise, and Benedict, remaining con-
tumacious, was deposed. Then all the Fathers renewed the decision that
had been already made, that in matters of faith the Council was superior
to the Pope. They extirpated schisms, reformed the Church in the head
and the members, and decreed that the Council should henceforth meet
every ten years, perpetually. Then, in the manner determined by the
Council, Martin Vwas elected, who obeyed it so far as to summon a
fresh one, and in its forty-fifth session, he did not take it ill that the
ambassadors of the King of Poland should declare that they would ap-
peal to the Council, if he inflicted a certain grievance upon them.
" In this Council many things were ordained for the reformation of the
Roman court. Pope Eugenius IV, successor to Martin, wished to dissolve
it, and issued three successive Bulls against it, declaring himself its
superior. The Council, on the other hand, made many acts against the
Pope, and against the Cardinals who adhered to him, even going so far as
to suspend him. Afterwards a composition was entered into, the Pope
revoking the three Bulls issued against the Council, and acknowledging
its authority. '
" It should here be considered how there can be any truth in the alleged
superiority of the Pope to the Council, since Pope Eugenius, who had
asserted this in his Bulls; would in this case have revoked that which
was true, and consented to false opinions.
" But let us return to the Council which, continuing to reform the
court, incurred anew the hostility of the Pope, and matters went on so
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-11 22:53 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. 31158010289923 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? $1. 54. ] FRA PAOLO SARPI 105
far, that the Council deposed Pope Eugenius, and put in his place Felix V.
Eugenius, however, not obeying, assembled another Council, first in Fer-
rara, and then in Florence. .
"After his death and the election of Nicholas V, Felix, who was a good
man, weary of contests, abdicated, and the Council of Lausanne, which
had removed thither from Basle, accepted his abdication in favour of
Pope Nicholas, and so ended the schism.
" From this time France and Germany have continued to hold the
opinion of the Fathers of Basie as to the superiority of the Council to
' the Pope, while Italy has inclined to the party of Eugenius. I leave every
one to draw from this history such conclusions as it warrants.
" In 1516, Pope Leo in a Bull of his, having alleged many reasons,
decides that the Pope is above the Council, but this decision is rather
against them than against us. Therefore the Cardinal Bellarmine says that
the question is still undecided whether the Pope or the Council is the
superior, and as to the Bull of Leo, he says that the Council in which he
published it is not held to have been a general one. Thus, according to
those competent to decide a question, he concludes, that the Pope is not
superior to the Council. I invite any man of intelligence to the considera-
tion of this fact, turning our adversaries' weapons against themselves.
"Finally, in the Council of Trent there is no mention made of this
doubtful point, nevertheless some have tried to infer from it also the
superiority of the Pontiff. To this end they adduce a decree in which the
Council declares that all things appertaining to reform and discipline, by
whatever clauses they may be established, it shall be in such a manner
that a reserve for the apostolic authority shall always be understood. But I
marvel at those who appeal to this decree to prove the superiority of the
Pope, when the very contrary is evidently to be deduced therefrom. Be-
cause, according to their manner of speaking, if the Council had not
passed this decree, the authority of the Apostolic See would have 'been
treated in a derogatory manner. Then the Pope is not superior to the
Council. Let us examine this consequence more closely by means of an
-example; if the high and supreme Council of Ten were to make a law
concerning the judgment of criminals, and were to add the clause, " with
reserve nevertheless, for the authority of the Avogadori was higher than
that of the Council of Ten. " And if the Avogadori were to make a statute,
and say therein, " with reserve, nevertheless, for the authority of the Coun-
oil of Ten," who would not laugh at the folly of an inferior tribunal, as if
it feared that, without making such reserve, anybody might question
whether one of their statutes derogated from the authority of the Coun-
cil of Ten, their superior? If the General Council were inferior to the
Pope, how could it fear to derogate from his authority, so as _to deem it
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-11 22:53 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. 31158010289923 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? 106 THE LIFE OF [A. D. 1606.
necessary to declare that it had no such interest? Then we may well con-
sider that the said decree, if it concludes anything, proves the superiority
of the Council rather than the superiority of the Pontiff.
" If any one wishes to know what authors have written on this subject,
I reply that the most celebrated are the Cardinal Cameracense, Jean Ger-
son, Guglielmo Ocamo, Jacopo Almain,/\the Cardinal Cusano, Alphonso
Tostato. But what use is it to seek for authors, since whoever writes in
favour of the Cduncil is immediately prohibited?
" The Abbe? Panormitano is most' celebrated amongst the Canonists
employed by the court of Rome, Where his works are in higher esteem
(I speak freely) than those of any other author: nevertheless that part of
them which contains these opinions has been prohibited there, the rest
being held in great veneration. They have not ventured to prohibit the
Cardinal Cusano, because he is held as a martyr, but they have suspended
him, that is, ordered that his writings should not be printed any more.
Well did he say,
" Non oportet scribere in eum qui potest prohibere. "
" I say in conclusion, that if after the example of so many princes and
that of your Serene Highness yourself, an appeal should be considered desi-
rable, it should not be desisted from on account of the imagined superiority
of the Pope to the Council, or through fear of the Bull In Coena Domini. ' "
" Venice 1606. "
The tidings of Sarpi's appointment were ill received at Rome, and
the Cardinals Bellarmine, Baronius, Colonna and others already felt,
how powerful would be the opposition offered by a Theologian and
Canonist, whose talents were not only great, but whose decisions had
been approved by former Pontiflis.
" Nothing was spoken of at Rome but the Interdict, " however, the
Ambassador Duodo had no better success than Nani. The Pope was
bent on extreme measures, and the Doge Donato soon received the
second brief, condemnatory of the Republic's proceedings against the
two ecclesiasties, and full of menace as to any future act against papal
supremacy. The Doge and Senate replied, spoke of their divine right,
and even advanced the fact that the predecessors of Paul had allowed
that they did not possess the power to which he laid claim; still, it
ought to be remarked that their communications were respectful, but
it Was unlikely that Fra Paolo would advise one word of concession
to a Pope who had serious thoughts of not acknowledging Donato as
Doge, 0f this, however, he repented.
1 Venetian Archives.
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-11 22:53 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. 31158010289923 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? ? 1'. 54. ] FRA PAOLO SARPI ' 107
The Pope expressed anger on receiving the reply, and cited the example
of Julius II, but Nani warned the Pope that these days were past, that
the world was no longer what it was in the time of that Pontiff. If a
gleam of light did break in upon Paul V, it was quickly overshadowed, and
he returned to his former ideas of exacting obedience from the Republic.
It 'will be seen that Sarpi always encouraged a good understanding
between Venetia. and France. From the first, the King of France did
not foment the disputes between Venice and the Pope, On the contrary,
M. de Canaye was empowered by the King to counsel reconciliation.
But the Doge still manfully asserted the independence of Venice, and
was fully aware of her position. Sarpi too had reason to fear for his
country; if Spain decided against Venetia, all was lost, but he and
his friends hoped that the issue of this dispute might be a wider se-
paration of the Republic from the power of Rome. He saw that the
temporal power of the Pope stood between Venice and true religion,
and in all his writings during the Interdict he speaks of the Pope,
the papal authority, and his temporalities, not only with the voice of
a seer, of a student of canonical law and of the Fathers, but of a
lowly follower of Him on whom the Church is built.
No notice as to the disputes had been as yet made to Sir Henry
Wotton, but the diplomatic servants of the Republic in London had
orders to communicate the matter to King James.
The first defence of Sarpi was by the Ambassador of England. The
Council of Ten were imperative in their command that no member of
the government should hold any communication with the Ambassadors
resident at Venice. But upon Sir Henry Wotton insisting upon con-
versing with the Secretary Scaramelli, leave was at length given. Sir
Henry informed him that for state reasons his royal master had spies
at the Court of Rome, and that one of these had told him of mea-
sures that had already been taken against Fra Paolo at Rome. To
corroborate this assertion, Sir Henry gave a letter to the Secretary, in
which were the following words written in cypher by the General of
the Jesuits to the Father Possevin, "They are instituting a suit here
secretly against Master Paul of Venice, of the Order of the Servi, on
account of a writing of his, in which he not only defends the Venetians
against excommunication, and the demands made by Nostro Signore
as to the late differences, as you, Reverend Father, well know, but in
many points he lessens the Pontifical authority by certain allegations
deduced from certain ancient privileges, for which it is said the Re-
public have given him two hundred dncats per anuum for life. "'
1 1 April 1606. Esposiz. Roma.
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-11 22:53 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. 31158010289923 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? 108 THE LIFE OF [A. D.
? 92 THE LIFE OF [A D. 1605.
continual fear of death in consequence of the prognostic of an astrologer
who told him after the death of Clement, of the election of Leo and of a
Paul who would only live a short time; but his friends and relations
found a remedy for his fears, they held a numerous assembly of the
astrologers and soothsayers of Rome, and they came to the conclusion,
that the fatal time being past, he would live long. Thus freed from his
fear of death, Paul returned to his purpose, the aggrandizement of his eo-
clesiastical jurisdiction. Agreeable to this, he began making proposals to
' King Henry of France, who at length acceeded to the reception of the
Council of Trent; all the remonstrances of De Ferrier were forgotten, all -
the just reproaches which the French made to the Cardinal of Lorraine on
his return from the Council were as if ignored, and the French nation,
against the will of nearly all the wisest of that people, was bound to obey
Rome. In Spain, the Jesuits were exempted from paying tithes. Naples,
Malta, Parma, Lucca and Genoa all felt the encroachments of Paul: this
augured ill for Venetia. The disputes as to the channel of the Po con-
tinued, the sovereignty of Ceneda was not yet decided, and the Pa-
triarch Vendramino had been cited to Rome.
" As yet there was no pretext to attack Venice as to things spirit-
ual, " but this soon occurred. Saracena, Canon of Vicenza, was accused of
atrocious crime, and was imprisoned by order of the Council of Ten. His
cousin, the Bishop of Citta Nuova, took up his defence, and as he was
Director of all the N uncios he sent information to the Bishop of Vicenza
at Rome, entreating him to defend the Canon and ecclesiastical liberty.
Nani, the Ambassador from Venice to Rome, had notice of these pro-
ceedings. -
The Pope said that he would not permit the Canon to be judged by
the civil power, and Nani informed the senate that the Pope had objected
to two laws of the Republic of 1337, confirmed and renewed 1450, 1515,
1536, 1561, and again confirmed 1603.
The first of these enacted, that no one was to build churches, chapels,
monasteries or oratories, or institute any new religious Order without the
consent of the Doge, under pain of banishment and confiscation of the
property and funds. The second of these laws of 1333, extended in 1605 to
all the dominions of Venetia, decreed that no one should sell, give
or dispose of anything whatsoever to the Clergy, either regular or secular,
without special permission from a magistrate. These laws were necessary,
as a third, some affirm a fourth, of all property was actually possessed
by the ecclesiastics. Some of the convents were very rich, for example the
rental of the Benedictines was estimated at 18,000 pounds sterling per
annum.
It will be found on reference to the treatise of Sarpi on Ecclesiastical
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-11 22:53 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. 31158010289923 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? E1'. 53. ] FRA PAOLO SARPI 93
Benefices and Revenues, how entirely he disapproved of the riches of the
Church of Rome, and how he contrasted her revenues with the com-
mands of the Holy Saviour to his Apostles. He also shows that tithes
were not to be given as in the days of Moses, but that the provision of
the Clergy was to be regulated as necessity pointed out; he appears to
have held these opinions long previous to the publication of the above
volume. The Venetians had levied tithes and taxes as they chose, but
now the Court of Rome had made still larger exemption as to their
payment in favor of the Cardinals, Knights of Malta, monastic establish-
ments, and a great part of the priesthood. The revenue of the Clergy
of Venetia was estimated at eleven millions of ducats yearly! It was
therefore with astonishment that the Senate learned that the Pope al-
leged that a large sum was owing to him by the Republic.
The Ambassador Nani had an audience of the Pope, and active com-
munications and negotiations continued till the month of December, when
he informed the Pontiff that an ordinance did exist which directed that
the goods of the laity could not be alienated to the clergy, and he also
produced briefs of Clement VII and of Paul III, both authorizing the
jurisdiction of the Senate of Venice over ecclesiastics. There was no
intention on the part of the Republic to conform to the commands of
the Pope, and in direct opposition orders had been given for the im-
prisonment of another ecclesiastic, the Count Valdemirono Abbot of
Nervesa.
The Pope was angry: he treated the briefs lightly, and said the Bull
In Coena Domini revoked them entirely. It was in vain that Nani urged
the right of the Senate to make their own laws, that he declared that
the Republic had been guilty of no innovation, that he cited the
examples of kings and princes having jurisdiction over ecclesiastics,
the letter of S. Jerome, the acts of Charlemagne, Saint Louis, Henry III
of France, Edward III of England, Charles V in Flanders, and the
laws of Portugal,'Aragon, Genoa, and Milan; for the Pope was deter-
mined to destroy all such jurisdiction, and protested specially against a
statute Which forbade a church to be built without permission of the
Senate. The Ambassador then stated the long established right of
Venetia to cite ecclesiastics before the civil authorities, that this was
founded on the Theodosian and Justinian Code, that the Pope could
not be ignorant that although from 1160' till 1220 there had been
many constitutions to establish ecclesiastical exemptions, the Republic
had exercised its full jurisdiction from 450. He also told the Pope
that God had not given him greater power than he had given to other
princes, and that as it did not'belong to Venice to govern the States
of the Church, neither did it belong to the Pope to govern the States
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-11 22:53 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. 31158010289923 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? 94 THE LIFE OF [A. D. 1605-
of Venice, that the laws were not secret but open to all, published
throughout the city and registered in the Chancery where all might
copy them, and he concluded by entreatiug the Pope not to listen to
calumny, in which case the controversy might be endless. These latter
words were in answer to the alleged retention of money by the Republic.
He further said, that although the Republic had yielded to the Pope
on trivial occasions, so she had always preserved her jurisdiction over
ecclesiasties in important matters, that this was confirmed by the Bulls
of Sixtus IV, Innocent, and Alexander VI, and that the Venetian
laws of which the Pope complained, being anterior to the ecclesiastical
exemption, no constitution of the Pope could derogate therefrom,
that no ecclesiastical exemption had ever been made of those guilty of
crimes against the person of the prince in any state, that in France
the king and magistrates, nay even a commissary, could arrest an eccle-
siastic, though he could not be condemned by an ecelesiastic only, but by
the civil judge also, that in Spain an ecelesiastic could be arrested
and that although the Popes had endeavored to exercise ecclesiastical
exemption in the States of Venice /it had never been permitted, that
a prince would be one but in name if hecould not punish all his subjects
alike, when the public weal demanded it, that he could not accuse the
Senate of overstepping its bounds, having only acted according to its
liberties, the consent of the Popes, and of late years by their appro-
bation.
These, although only a small part of the communications of the Ve-
netian Ambassador, are given in order to inform the reader what Sarpi
had to contend against. At one time His Excellency hoped that he had
produced some effect, and the Pope somewhat reduced his demands,
and said he would be satisfied if these were granted, without the
payment of 50,000 scudi. His demands were, that the laws against
building churches be abrogated, as also the laws against alienating the
goods of the laity to ecclesiasties, and that the suit against the Canon
and the Abbot be cancelled.
The Pope declared he would be obeyed, and that if not, he
would dispatch an horotary brief to the Republic. While the Car-
dinal Dclfino and the good Cardinal Valiero craved delay, the Car-
ndinals Sfrondato and Arrigono fanned the flame; they, with the
Spanish Ambassador, were bent upon Spain waging war against Venetia
and calling in the Pope to their assistance, the Cardinal Bellarmine was
not satisfied with the Pope's measures towards Venice, and there can be
no doubt from his subsequent conduct but that he felt regret in being
opposed to his friend Fra Paolo. However the Pope did not take the
vote of the Cardinals; he expected, as Genoa had just yielded tohim, Ve-
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-11 22:53 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. 31158010289923 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? ET. 63. ] FRA PAOLO SARPI 95
nice would do the same, but he was mistaken. The Genoese had no Fra
Paolo Sarpi to counsel their resistance.
The Venetian Senate returned a firm and decisive refusal to the ponti-
fical demands. The unanimity of the senators showed the concord of the
Republic in the defence of her liberties, and surely Europe never saw a
more illustrious sight than that of these patriots for a time burying every
jealousy, every past feud, every minor wrong, and voting with one voice
against the encroachments of a foreign power, which was not only of much
inferior antiquity to their own, but was one, the temporal part of which,
their great theologian and counsellor Fra Paolo Sarpi told them was but
lately constituted.
You who have trod the grand council chamber of the Ducal Palace of
Venice, can well imagine the august assembly that met on the eventful
day when refusal to the Pope's demands was voted. You can see their
looks of determination, their strong resolution, their eager and indignant
expression, their lofty endurance, exchanged for promptitude as they
unhesitatingly but silently resented the insult offered to their country; The
voice of the oppression of Europe had penetrated the heavens, the dawn
of the morning of liberty had arisen, and as if the clangor of the Papal
chains which had bound the nations as they cast them from them, had
attracted the notice of the free, those who had effected their freedom
from papal tyranny rallied around Venice, determined to uphold her in
her resolve. The hopes which the Pontiff had entertained of victory were
thus withered in the dustJ he had been told by the Jesuits that the
senators were divided in opinion.
The reply of the Senate was brief but conclusive, that the prisoners
could not be given up because lawfully detained, that the laws could not
be abrogated, and that the Republic recognized no superior but God only,
and Paul V, having received it and hearing the same statements from the
Ambassador Nani, immediately despatched two briefs to the Doge and
Senate. In audience he appeared benign and agreeable, but his purpose
was visible, and the end of all the painstaken audiences, deliberations and
remonstrances of the Doge and Senate by their Ambassadors was, that
the Pope informed his Consistory that Venice had violated ecclesiastical
liberty in framing the two laws, and retaining the two prisoners. The Ve-
netian Ambassador at Rome was cautioned to observe a good understand-
ing with the French Envoy and other representatives of the different
Courts, and the Senate, apprized by their Ambassador of the briefs, in-
formed every foreign power with which they had relation of the state of
affairs. The N uncio Withheld the briefs on their arrival, but having received
positive commands from the Pope, he presented them, but they were not
opened.
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-11 22:53 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. 31158010289923 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? as THE LIFE or ' [Am 1606.
It was Christmas day, a day of joy and gladness to all who like Fra
Paolo Sarpi reverenced, loved and served the Redeemer of the world, but
it was a day of grief and anxiety in the ducal palace of Venice, the Doge
Grimani lay at the point of death. It requires little imagination to paint
the eager solicitude of the patriots of Venice, the anxious looks and eager
words of the Senators as they question Fra Paolo in this crisis, read his
looks of undismayed but thoughtful expression, and confidently trust him
as the soul of honor with their yet strictly private communications.
It was an hour of great difiiculty, all felt it to be so, but the hopes of
the Venetians were shortly raised, as on the death of the good Grimani,
the Donato was elected Doge, "who unquestionably, was one of the most
eminent of all the senators for his integrity, experience in the affairs of
state, for his acquaintance with letters, and for all those noble qualities
which are now so rarely to be met with. " Such is the character which
Sarpi draws of Donato, and as a senator it is not overdrawn; well known
at foreign Courts, all the Ambassadors hastened to do him homage. The
Doge was determined to uphold the dignity and independence of the Re-
public, and Paul V found that whatever might have been the policy of
Europe heretofore, she was now to derive a lasting lesson from the resis-
tance of the Republic of Venice to papal demands.
In the hour of difficulty and danger to which of their subjects
could the Doge and Senate turn? To whom so confidently as to Fra
Paolo Sarpi, known through life to the Donato and to many of the
senators, and venerated by them for his piety and humility, as well
as for his talents. What was more Wise than that they should now
publicly seek the aid of the patriot who, well as he loved peace and
quiet, loved his country more? He saw Venice coerced by a fellow
mortal, Venice the proudest, the wisest, the most independent nation of
any who acknowledged the Pope; he heard the distant roll of the
thunders of the Vatican, and he was too learned in the history of
his own country not to know how deadly a blight the Pope had
spread over Venetia by former interdicts. He already saw her over-
whelmed if she did not present a front of brass to the oppressive foe,
and although he preferred the silent repose of his own Convent to
the anxious and arduous life of a Theologian and Counsellor to the
State, he put his hand to the oar, he made no remonstrance, he made
no excuse, all that he did was to ask permission of the General of
his Order and his blessing; -these given, Sarpi publicly gave his service
to the State.
It has been observed that he had been consulted privately; he there-
fore had long carefully studied the subject, and was well aware of the
whole bearing of the disputes between Venice and Rome. On the
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-11 22:53 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. 31158010289923 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? 51. 54. ] FRA PAQLO SARPI 97
fourteenth of January, when the Senate proclaimed that protection would
be given to all who aided the Republic by their counsel, he presented
a document to the Senate in which he explained the two remedies
which might be employed against the threats of Rome; and this
document was read in the Senate with such applause that Fra Paolo
Sarpi was immediately appointed Theologian and Canonist to the Re-
public of Venice.
It is not extant, but the following is a translation of the docu'
ment, which was presented by Fra Paolo, at a later period, to the
Doge of Venice. '
" Most Serene Prince,
" In the commencement of the controversies, which are now at their
height, between your Serene Highness and the Sovereign Pontiff, when
he had only issued his first brief concerning the laws of neither building
churches nor alienating the property of the laity to ecclesiasties without
permission, in a writing of mine, presented to your Serene Highness, I
said, that there were two remedies which might be opposed to the thun-
ders of Rome, one, defacto, to forbid their publication, and prevent their
execution, resisting violent force by a force which is legitimate, not pas-
sing the limits of natural defence: the other, de jure, an appeal to the
future council. I expressed no doubt as to the inexpediency of the first;
as to the second, I said that on several occasions it has been used by
many princes and private persons, and also by your Serene Highness,
but that where the first would sufifice, the other need not be used which
would give unmeasured ofi'enee to the Pontiff. Still, if accidents should
ensue that might render it necessary, it could be made available, because
the superiority of the council is allowed in France and Germany; and in
Italy the celebrated doctors, although they maintain that it belongs to the
Pope, do not hold the difficulty to be decided and determined.
" These accidents seem to be now imminent, since the Pope has print- -
ed, published, and posted a monitory against your Serene Highness, which
is very modest in its abstinence from maledictions, but most severe in
all besides, both on account of the sentence Which it pronounces against
the Senate in a body (an unusual thing), and the interdict laid upon the
whole State, and also because it threatens the ad ulteriora, in which there
is no limit at all. Although from past examples given by other Poutiffs,
we may form some conjecture of what is intended, yet, considering the
strange course adopted hitherto, we may apprehend something yet more
absurd. It is necessary, then, to balance all the reasons for or against the
1
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-11 22:53 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. 31158010289923 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? 98 THE LIFE OF [A. D. 1606.
appeal, and to consider what may be the soundest and most advisable re-
solution to form.
" Against the appeal we have the decree made by Pius II in 1459 in a
Congress held in Mantua by the advice of his Court, excommunicating all
who appeal from the decrees of the Pope to a future Council, because such
appeal is made to what does not exist, neither is it known when it shall
have existence. This decree has been always confirmed by his successors,
and placed among the clauses of jthe bull In (_};e'na Domini, because in
Italy the superiority of the Pope over the Council is a maintained dogma,
and an appeal can only be made as such to a higher power. We may thence be
very sure that an act of appeal to the Pontiff would draw down upon us
an additional excommunicatory brief, and would further complicate the
matter of the four points of controversy, making five. These are potent
reasons dissuasive of the appeal, but answer may be made.
" First, relative to the decree, advising that, after it was made by Pius II,
all the princes against whom it was fulminated have appealed, and this
Serene Republic . has done so on two occasions, once under Sixtus IV, and
again under Julius II. For examples of other princes may be adduced,
amongst the most notable, the appeal of Louis XII of France and the
Gallican Church from the same Julius II, and that of the Emperor Char-
les V from Clement VII.
" There is not an example to be found of princes in such circumstances
abstaining from appeal through respect for such excommunication. It inay
also be said, with some appearance of reason, that this decree does not
include princes, if they are not, according to the rules of the chancery,
specially named in the bull In Cggna Domini. In most cases they are
named, but not in this; then it seems that there has not been any inten-
tion of including them in it. And if any one shall say that they are includ-
ed in all the others, it follows that their being distinctly named in sonic
has been superfluous.
" Secondly, concerning the reasons of the decree, namely, that an ap-
peal is made to what has no present existence, neither is it known when
it shall exist. They certainly have no weight, since, when the Apostolic
seat is vacant, and there is no Pope then appeal is made, " adfidis apo-
stolicae futurum pontificem, " who, in a similar manner, has no present
existence, neither is it known when he will exist. And if any one shall
say that it is the custom to create a Pope very soon, I reply, that 250
years ago the seat remained vacant for two years running, and another
time for seven years. Who knows what may occur? . And as regards the
Council, one might know when it would have an existence, if the canons
were duly observed for its formation every ten years.
" Thirdly, as to the supreme power which the Pontiffs claim, in order
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-11 22:53 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. 31158010289923 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? ? 1'. 54. ] FRA PAOLO SARPI 99
to establish the perpetual confirmation of the decree, it will be needful to
speak at some length as to whether this resides in the Pontiff or in the
Council, and to this I will now proceed. We have only to consider, that
if the Pontiff has no judge on earth, there remains for the rest of men,
whether princes or private persons, nothing but obedience; and we must
sayin the words of Tacitus, " Tibi supremum vero arbitrium Dii dedere,
nobis obsequii gloria relicta est. " He has power to make all such laws as
may seem good to him, all must -be valid, nor can he be overruled by
any one. If he has a controversy with others, he has only to make a law
in favour of his own opinion, and the thing is decided.
" Some one may reply that he has supreme power in things spiritual
but not in things temporal. I might answer by showing how many {incon-
veniences would arise if it were so even in things spiritual. But we are
speaking of things temporal. When the Pope wishes anything, he will
say it is spiritual, as is the case in the present controversy, because your
' Serene Highness says you have made laws concerning things temporal,
and the Pope says these are things spiritual. He confesses that he is wil-
ling to leave the temporal, but he claims this as 'spiritual. Here, however,
we are brought to a stand. If we are to own him as supreme judge, we
ought to believe him when he determines, as in the present case, that a
certain thing is spiritual; it follows then that nothing remains for, us short
of obeying him in all things that come into his mind. If it is said that
we may resist de facto I agree, but it seems to me that the wisdom of
Christ our Lord was more likely to have provided a manner of obedience
' de jure than defacto, as he acted when he gave supreme power to the
Church. " Si non audierit, dic Ecclesiaa; si autem Ecclesiam non audierit,
sit tibi sicut ethnicus et publicanus. " For the rest, since the Pope has
commanded us under pain of excommunication not to appeal from him,
so, if he should command us, under pain of excommunication, not to dare
to contradict him, we are as much bound to obey him in the one case as
in the other, and we shall go on becoming more and more guilty. I may
doubtless say that the Popes put some limit to their enormous power
rather through fear that Italy and Spain should set forth the doctrines of
a Couucil's superiority maintained in France and Germany, than from any
other motive of restraint. And if they can once liberate themselves from
such danger, the world will see whether they will rest contented within
any limits whatsoever.
- " The fourth and last consideration is, that if the appeal is made, the
Pope may be induced to publish a further censure. Sixtus IV issued four
successive briefs against the Republic, which appealed against them all,
and all these appeals depend one upon another. I think the same thing
was done under Julius II, though I have not seen it; however, no doubt
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-11 22:53 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. 31158010289923 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? 100 ' THE LIFE on [A. D. 1606.
exists about this. Who does not believe that fresh excommunications will
appear against all things done by the Prince de facto, without issuing
proclamations for all who have a copy of the monitory, and against all
that may be needful to do in future? Everybody holds for certain that
three or four may he expected, and perhaps more.
" Some one will perhaps say that the principal reason against an ap-
peal to the Council is, not the fear of irritating the Pope, but of sur-
rendering rights to ecclesiasties. I reply that we only appeal against the
Pope's abuse of power, and therefore we are not surrendering the laws of
the Senate. And since this consideration has not prevailed under Sixtus IV
and Julius II, nor influenced other princes similarly circumstanced, neither
is it likely to affect us now- I say, moreover, that to defend our own rights
in a Congress where so many princes are concerned who have interests
and af1"airs common with ourselves, cannot be so great a fault. Would to
God that this matter were treated by a free Council! Your Serene High-
ness, without any increase of territory, would increase your power one-third,
but we are not worthy of such a blessing. Let us now consider the reasons
favourable to the appeal.
" The first and most powerful is following the example of so many
great princes, and of the Serene Republic. The second, that we have no
precedent of a different course of action on the part of any other State,
except that of the French under Gregory'XIV, when they burned his
briefs in the public square. The third is, that it does not seem honourable
to say that the Senate would have all ole facto and nothing de jure, as if it
had no show of right.
The fourth, because it declares before the world_
that it is determined to live in the unity of the Catholic Church, which
ought to be repeated in order to show under what authority' your Serene
Highness wishes to live, whilst exempting yourself from obedience to the
Pope. The fifth reason is, that without appealing, nothing remains to be
done, and every other 'course would be without precedent and dangerous.
If arbiters were demanded the Pope would not accept them, for it would
be more against his dignity to submit to them than to the Council, and
what is an important consideration, if a demand were put forth for arbiters
and refused by the Pope, the act would be an empty one, serving only to
show the world that everything has been tried.
" But some one may perhaps say that the time for making the appeal
has gone by; that such a remedy should have been tried immediately after
the first brief, or even previous to it. Yet if the appeal is now made,
although it irritates the Pope, we have this advantage, that the excom- '
munication and the interdict are suspended. It may be answered that the
Pope will not understand it so. I own that he will not consider them
suspended, but France and Catholic Germany will, since they hold that,
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-11 22:53 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. 31158010289923 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? arr. 54. ] FRA PAOLO SARPI 101
de jure, they are suspended by appeal, so that we are of the same opinion,
and they will say that-they act justly in communicating with this Govern-
ment, and if the Pope complains, as he assuredly will, they will reply
that they do not consider us under an interdict, because of the appeal,
and so the quarrel will involve others as well as ourselves. If we do not
appeal, we can only War by means of manifestos, a thing not to be neglect-
ed, yet neither to be used alone. I venture to affirm that if we do not ap-
peal, France and Germany will laugh at our pusillanimity, and will per-
haps think poorly of our conscientiousness, seeing us satisfied to act by
deeds only. It would, therefore, be necessary to issue a manifesto declaring
our motives for not appealing. If we venture therein to declare the truth,
namely, that we have abstained through fear of the excommunication
contained in the bull In Coena 'Domini, the world will marvel where-
fore we took alarm at this one, and. not at the other fulminated in the
monitory, which last was without any exclusion, whereas in the 'bull there
were reasons to show that we were not comprehended in it.
" If we appeal, everybody will feel according to his own view of things.
The French and Germans will be pleased that we hold their opinion of
the superiority of the Council. The English will not blame us, for they
constantly affirm that a Council is necessary to decide the matter ole
auaciliis, and who knows -whether they do not speak thus with the view
of forming a Council under such a protest? But it would take me too long
to speak fully on this matter. .
" I have now to adduce the reasons which prove the superiority of the
Council. The first of all owes its being to Saint Peter, when alive; whose
acts are recorded by Saint Luke. A controversy having arisen whether
believers were bound to observe the laws of Moses, a Council was sum-
moned in J crusalem, at which the holy Apostles, Saint Peter and Saint
James, were present, and whither Saint Papl and Saint Barnabas had repair-
ed for the same reason. Not only the Apostles and priests, but many
other believers, were present at this Council. At first there was much
disputing; then Saint Peter gave his opinion; then Saint Paul and Saint
Barnabas; and lastly Saint James. Finally, the whole Council established
a decree, and sent two legates, Barnabas and Silas, to declare it, and this
title was written on it: " Apostoli et seniores fratres; " and in the letter
was said, " Visum est Spiritui Sancto et nobis. " If then, Saint Peter in
Council expressed his opinion as any other, if the deliberation was that
of the Council, if the Council sent legates and wrote letters, who can
doubt that IT had supreme power'? And if we add to this the election of
the seven deacons, not by Saint Peter, but by the whole body of the
Church, and the recorded fact that when two Apostles were dispatched to
Samaria to impart to this people the gift of the Holy Ghost, Saint Peter
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-11 22:53 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. 31158010289923 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? 102 THE LIFE OF [A. D. 1606.
was selected by the others; not going of his own accord, but being sent,
as the sacred text expresses it, with Saint John, by the rest of the Apos-
tles; who will not conclude that the supreme authority was vested in the
Church?
" In the year 200, Pope Victor, on occasion of a controversy relative to
the celebration of Easter, commanded the Asiatic Bishops, under pain of
excommunication, to conform to the Roman Church. Polycrates, Bishop-
of Hieropolis, refused; and Saint Irenasus, Bishop of Lyons, in the name
of all the bishops of that province, wrote to Pope Victor a reprehensory
letter, condemning his anger and his mode of procedure.
" In the year 260, Stephen, the Roman Pontiff, in a controversy con-
cerning the rebaptism of heretics, determined against it, excommunicating
all who held a contrary opinion. The martyr Saint Cyprian opposed him,
and in one of his epistles he calls him bold, impertinent, and unwise,
resolving to hold the opinion contrary to him, without, however, intending
to put any one out of communion on such account. Saint Cyprian never
thought of changing his opinion through fear of Papal excommunication,
and Saint Augustine, in four passages of his works, commends him, saying
that he was not bound to conform to Pope Stephen until the question in
agitation was decided by a General Council. The doctrine and the examples
of Saint Cyprian and Saint Augustine, men who have helped to establish
the Church, both by their learning, and one also by his blood, will, I
think, have more influence with every good Christian than the Cardinals
Torrecremata and Albano.
" In the year 312, Cecilian, Bishop of Carthage, having been absolved
by the Council of Africa, Donatus, his accuser, appealed to' Constantine,
who committed the cause to the Bishop of Arles with other French bishops,
and they confirmed the first sentence. Saint Augustine, who gives this
history, speaks of having seen the authentic deeds, and, writing against
the followers of the above named'Donatus, he says, " After these judges,
what more remained but a General Council? " From this narration it ap-
pears first, that neither Constantine nor the French bishops saw any
impropriety in reconsidering the sentence of the Pope, therefore they did
not deem his judgment supreme; secondly, it is plain that Saint Augustine
was of opinion that the cause might be reexamined in a General Council :
he did not then think the Pope was superior to it. But we pass on to relate
a still more remarkable occurrence. About the year 425, Apiarius, an
African priest, was condemned first by the Bishop of Sicca, and afterwards
by the Council of Africa. He had recourse to Rome, to Pope Boniface. He
sent Faustinus, Bishop of Potenza, his legate in Africa, to the Council
which was then sitting in Carthage, to take the part of Apiarius, and he
sent with him some canons, purporting to be those of the Nicene Council,
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-11 22:53 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. 31158010289923 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? Ar. 54. ] FRA PAOLO SARPI 103
which established an appeal to the Pope in all causes. The Fathers
answered, that in the acts which they possessed of the Nicene Council, no
such thing was to be found, but that they would send for other authentic
copies to Constantinople, Alexandria, and Antioch, and that if it were so,
they would obey. Next year the Council having met again at Carthage,
answers were presented from Saint Cyril of Alexandria, and Saint Atticus
of Constantinople, both of whom sent the acts of the Nicene Council, in
which the suppositious canons brought by the Legate were not found.
Wherefore the African Bishops wrote to Pope Celestine, who had suc-
ceeded Boniface, that it was a great error in the Roman See to have given
ear to Apiarius; that in future His Holiness should not afford such refuge,
nor imagine that the Holy Spirit should give more assistance to one man
(alluding to the Pope) than to so many brethren met together in the
name of Christ; that he should send them no more legates, and that the
acts sent from Rome under the name of the Nicene Council were not to
be found in the acts sent by Saint Cyril and Saint Atticus, and that he
should desist from introducing such haughty ambition into the Church of
Christ. This epistle deserves to be read by every one. The acts of the
said Council are extant, and (which is very important) Saint Augustine
was one of the Fathers who took part in it and affixed his signatures. A
canon was also made by these Fathers that no one in Africa should in
future appeal to the regions beyond the sea. We may well believe that
Saint Augustine, and more than 200 Bishops with him, must have under-
stood the Divine Writings, and known whether Christ our Lord intended
the supreme power to reside in the Pope or in the Church.
" In the year 455, a General Council was held in Chalcedonia, in which
it was decreed that the Patriarch of Constantinople should take precedence
of the Patriarch of Alexandria and the others, in consideration of the
rank of the imperial city. The Legates of the Pope, who were in Council,
opposed this decree, as did also Leo I, who then ruled the Roman See.
Nevertheless, the determination of the Council prevailed.
" In the year 550 a Council was held in Constantinople. Vigilius, the
Roman Pontiff, was then in this city, Whither he had gone to have an
' audience of the Emperor; he would not take part in the Council unless
there were given to him a higher seat than that of the Patriarch of Con-
stantinople. The Council decided that the two seats should be equal; to
which the Pope would never submit, and therefore he abstained from
taking any part in it. Yet this was one of the most holy Councils of the
Catholic Church, and the fifth of those termedgeneral.
" About the year 88. 0, the eighth General Council was held in Constan-
tinople, being the last of those held in Greece. In its twentieth Canon,
it was decreed that the General Council may decide upon the causes of
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-11 22:53 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. 31158010289923 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? 104 THE LIFE 0's [A. D. 1606.
all the Patriarchs, adding expressly, that if there shall be any cause
againstthe Roman Pontiff, the same shall be treated with some reserve.
- " This Council has not appeared in print, but its acts are found in
manuscript, both in Greek and Latin, and there is a Greek copy, with the
Latin translation, in the public library of your Serene Highness, amongst
the codices of Cardinal Bessarione. '
" In times nearer to our own, after the Greek Church had separated
from us, when the disgraceful spectacle was exhibited of three Popes at
the same time, that is to say, John XXIII, Gregory XII, and Benedict
XIII, the Bishops who acknowledged the authority of John assembled
at Constance in a Council, convoked by him in the year 1414. At the
fourth session it was determined that the Council derives its power im-
mediately from Christ, and that the Pope owes obedience thereunto in
all matters concerning faith, the extirpation of schism, or the reformation
of the Church, whether in its head or members.
" In the twelfth session Pope John was deprived of the pontificate: in
the fourteenth, the prelates who were obedient to Gregory, joined the
Council, Gregory himself renouncing the papacy, and at last those who
belonged to Benedict came over likewise, and Benedict, remaining con-
tumacious, was deposed. Then all the Fathers renewed the decision that
had been already made, that in matters of faith the Council was superior
to the Pope. They extirpated schisms, reformed the Church in the head
and the members, and decreed that the Council should henceforth meet
every ten years, perpetually. Then, in the manner determined by the
Council, Martin Vwas elected, who obeyed it so far as to summon a
fresh one, and in its forty-fifth session, he did not take it ill that the
ambassadors of the King of Poland should declare that they would ap-
peal to the Council, if he inflicted a certain grievance upon them.
" In this Council many things were ordained for the reformation of the
Roman court. Pope Eugenius IV, successor to Martin, wished to dissolve
it, and issued three successive Bulls against it, declaring himself its
superior. The Council, on the other hand, made many acts against the
Pope, and against the Cardinals who adhered to him, even going so far as
to suspend him. Afterwards a composition was entered into, the Pope
revoking the three Bulls issued against the Council, and acknowledging
its authority. '
" It should here be considered how there can be any truth in the alleged
superiority of the Pope to the Council, since Pope Eugenius, who had
asserted this in his Bulls; would in this case have revoked that which
was true, and consented to false opinions.
" But let us return to the Council which, continuing to reform the
court, incurred anew the hostility of the Pope, and matters went on so
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-11 22:53 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. 31158010289923 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? $1. 54. ] FRA PAOLO SARPI 105
far, that the Council deposed Pope Eugenius, and put in his place Felix V.
Eugenius, however, not obeying, assembled another Council, first in Fer-
rara, and then in Florence. .
"After his death and the election of Nicholas V, Felix, who was a good
man, weary of contests, abdicated, and the Council of Lausanne, which
had removed thither from Basle, accepted his abdication in favour of
Pope Nicholas, and so ended the schism.
" From this time France and Germany have continued to hold the
opinion of the Fathers of Basie as to the superiority of the Council to
' the Pope, while Italy has inclined to the party of Eugenius. I leave every
one to draw from this history such conclusions as it warrants.
" In 1516, Pope Leo in a Bull of his, having alleged many reasons,
decides that the Pope is above the Council, but this decision is rather
against them than against us. Therefore the Cardinal Bellarmine says that
the question is still undecided whether the Pope or the Council is the
superior, and as to the Bull of Leo, he says that the Council in which he
published it is not held to have been a general one. Thus, according to
those competent to decide a question, he concludes, that the Pope is not
superior to the Council. I invite any man of intelligence to the considera-
tion of this fact, turning our adversaries' weapons against themselves.
"Finally, in the Council of Trent there is no mention made of this
doubtful point, nevertheless some have tried to infer from it also the
superiority of the Pontiff. To this end they adduce a decree in which the
Council declares that all things appertaining to reform and discipline, by
whatever clauses they may be established, it shall be in such a manner
that a reserve for the apostolic authority shall always be understood. But I
marvel at those who appeal to this decree to prove the superiority of the
Pope, when the very contrary is evidently to be deduced therefrom. Be-
cause, according to their manner of speaking, if the Council had not
passed this decree, the authority of the Apostolic See would have 'been
treated in a derogatory manner. Then the Pope is not superior to the
Council. Let us examine this consequence more closely by means of an
-example; if the high and supreme Council of Ten were to make a law
concerning the judgment of criminals, and were to add the clause, " with
reserve nevertheless, for the authority of the Avogadori was higher than
that of the Council of Ten. " And if the Avogadori were to make a statute,
and say therein, " with reserve, nevertheless, for the authority of the Coun-
oil of Ten," who would not laugh at the folly of an inferior tribunal, as if
it feared that, without making such reserve, anybody might question
whether one of their statutes derogated from the authority of the Coun-
cil of Ten, their superior? If the General Council were inferior to the
Pope, how could it fear to derogate from his authority, so as _to deem it
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-11 22:53 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. 31158010289923 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? 106 THE LIFE OF [A. D. 1606.
necessary to declare that it had no such interest? Then we may well con-
sider that the said decree, if it concludes anything, proves the superiority
of the Council rather than the superiority of the Pontiff.
" If any one wishes to know what authors have written on this subject,
I reply that the most celebrated are the Cardinal Cameracense, Jean Ger-
son, Guglielmo Ocamo, Jacopo Almain,/\the Cardinal Cusano, Alphonso
Tostato. But what use is it to seek for authors, since whoever writes in
favour of the Cduncil is immediately prohibited?
" The Abbe? Panormitano is most' celebrated amongst the Canonists
employed by the court of Rome, Where his works are in higher esteem
(I speak freely) than those of any other author: nevertheless that part of
them which contains these opinions has been prohibited there, the rest
being held in great veneration. They have not ventured to prohibit the
Cardinal Cusano, because he is held as a martyr, but they have suspended
him, that is, ordered that his writings should not be printed any more.
Well did he say,
" Non oportet scribere in eum qui potest prohibere. "
" I say in conclusion, that if after the example of so many princes and
that of your Serene Highness yourself, an appeal should be considered desi-
rable, it should not be desisted from on account of the imagined superiority
of the Pope to the Council, or through fear of the Bull In Coena Domini. ' "
" Venice 1606. "
The tidings of Sarpi's appointment were ill received at Rome, and
the Cardinals Bellarmine, Baronius, Colonna and others already felt,
how powerful would be the opposition offered by a Theologian and
Canonist, whose talents were not only great, but whose decisions had
been approved by former Pontiflis.
" Nothing was spoken of at Rome but the Interdict, " however, the
Ambassador Duodo had no better success than Nani. The Pope was
bent on extreme measures, and the Doge Donato soon received the
second brief, condemnatory of the Republic's proceedings against the
two ecclesiasties, and full of menace as to any future act against papal
supremacy. The Doge and Senate replied, spoke of their divine right,
and even advanced the fact that the predecessors of Paul had allowed
that they did not possess the power to which he laid claim; still, it
ought to be remarked that their communications were respectful, but
it Was unlikely that Fra Paolo would advise one word of concession
to a Pope who had serious thoughts of not acknowledging Donato as
Doge, 0f this, however, he repented.
1 Venetian Archives.
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-11 22:53 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. 31158010289923 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? ? 1'. 54. ] FRA PAOLO SARPI ' 107
The Pope expressed anger on receiving the reply, and cited the example
of Julius II, but Nani warned the Pope that these days were past, that
the world was no longer what it was in the time of that Pontiff. If a
gleam of light did break in upon Paul V, it was quickly overshadowed, and
he returned to his former ideas of exacting obedience from the Republic.
It 'will be seen that Sarpi always encouraged a good understanding
between Venetia. and France. From the first, the King of France did
not foment the disputes between Venice and the Pope, On the contrary,
M. de Canaye was empowered by the King to counsel reconciliation.
But the Doge still manfully asserted the independence of Venice, and
was fully aware of her position. Sarpi too had reason to fear for his
country; if Spain decided against Venetia, all was lost, but he and
his friends hoped that the issue of this dispute might be a wider se-
paration of the Republic from the power of Rome. He saw that the
temporal power of the Pope stood between Venice and true religion,
and in all his writings during the Interdict he speaks of the Pope,
the papal authority, and his temporalities, not only with the voice of
a seer, of a student of canonical law and of the Fathers, but of a
lowly follower of Him on whom the Church is built.
No notice as to the disputes had been as yet made to Sir Henry
Wotton, but the diplomatic servants of the Republic in London had
orders to communicate the matter to King James.
The first defence of Sarpi was by the Ambassador of England. The
Council of Ten were imperative in their command that no member of
the government should hold any communication with the Ambassadors
resident at Venice. But upon Sir Henry Wotton insisting upon con-
versing with the Secretary Scaramelli, leave was at length given. Sir
Henry informed him that for state reasons his royal master had spies
at the Court of Rome, and that one of these had told him of mea-
sures that had already been taken against Fra Paolo at Rome. To
corroborate this assertion, Sir Henry gave a letter to the Secretary, in
which were the following words written in cypher by the General of
the Jesuits to the Father Possevin, "They are instituting a suit here
secretly against Master Paul of Venice, of the Order of the Servi, on
account of a writing of his, in which he not only defends the Venetians
against excommunication, and the demands made by Nostro Signore
as to the late differences, as you, Reverend Father, well know, but in
many points he lessens the Pontifical authority by certain allegations
deduced from certain ancient privileges, for which it is said the Re-
public have given him two hundred dncats per anuum for life. "'
1 1 April 1606. Esposiz. Roma.
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-11 22:53 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. 31158010289923 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? 108 THE LIFE OF [A. D.
