CONSTANCE
289
CONSTANCE
- uv\ there promulgated, unanimously, as conciliar
(iicioes.
W hile those measures were being taken John XXIII f;n \v daily more suspicious of the council. Neverthe- li-s, and partly in consequence of a fierce anonymous
- ii inik, from an Italian source, on his life and charac-
)i I, lie promised under oath (2 March, 1415) to resign. I Ml L'O March, however, he secretly fled from Constance
- iiiil took refuge at Schaffhausen on territory of his
filiiid Frederick, Duke of Austria-Tyrol. This step fillid the council with consternation, for it threatened l>"ih its existence and its authority. Emperor Sigis- iiiiiiiil, however, held together the wavering assembly. 111. 11 followed the public sessions (third to fifth) of '2G
- ii ill .'!0 March and .5 .\pril out of which came the fa-
I IS decrees "Articles of Constance", long a chief
- iiL;iiiuent of Gallicanism (q. v.). As finally adopted
in the fifth ses.sion they were five in niunber and de- rlircd that the council, legitimately called in the Holy S|iirit, is a general council, represents the whole Chinch Militant, has its authority directly from God; and that in all that pertains to faith, the extinction of tlir schism and reformation in head and members, I ' ' ly Christian, even the pope, is bound to obey it; tliit in case of refusal to obey the council all recalci- t Tint Christians (even the pope) are subject to ecclesi-
- i^n(
- d punishment and in ca.se of necessity to other
(ri\il) sanctions; that without the consent of the ccHincil Pope John cannot call away from Constance till Roman Curia and its officials, whose absence niiuht compel the closing of the council or hinder its w I rk ; that all censures inflicted since his departure by tlir pope on members and supporters of the covmcil ari' void, and that Pope John and the members of the ("inicil have hitherto enjoyed full libertj'. In the 111. aiitime (29 March, 141.5) the English, German, and I'l.iich nations had agreed to four articles, in the first t\Mi of which was expressed the complete supremacy nf the council over the pope; these two were incor- I". rated in the aforesaid articles of the fifth session. It has been maintained that these decrees were nil ant only for the e.xtraordinarj' situation which then fari'd the council; they express, nevertheless, the w 1 ll-known persuasion of the majority of the peculiar CI I li'siastical representation at Constance th.at the (. iiiicil, independently of the pope, was the fuial de- [...-itory of supreme ecclesiastical authority; indeed, l.y \ irtue of these decrees they proceeded at once to jii.lL;e and depose John XXIII, hitherto for them the l.'ijitimate pope. It is to be noted that of the twelve linals present at Constance only seven or eight as- I at the fifth session, and they solely to avoid ial (among the absent was d'Ailly). Nor would
- iiiv cardinal announce these decrees; that office fell
ti. a bishop, Andrew of Posen. The emperor was |ii.si.nt at their pronmlgation, also 200 members, iii..-tly doctors, etc. These decrees, it must be re- innnljered, though adopted at Basle and often quoted Iv the disciples of Gallicanism and other opponents of ).apal supremacy, were formulated and accepted at < '.instance amid quite unusual circumstances, in much liable, and in quasi des])air at the threatened failure of the long-desired general council ; they ran counter to the immemorial praxis of the Church, and substituted for its Divine constitution the will of the multitude or at best a kind of theological parliamentarism. They were never approved by the Apostolic See (Funk, Kirchengeschichtliche Studien, Paderbom, 1897, I, 489-98) and were almost at once implicitly rejected by Martin V (Mansi, Coll. Cone, XXVIII, 2C)0). Tlie rest of March, and the months of ,\pril and May were con- sumed in a tragic conflict of the council with John XXIII. He did not withdraw his resignation, but posited conditions that the council refused; he called away from Constance several cardinals and members of the Curia, who were soon, however, obliged to re- turn ; put forth a plea of lack of libert v ; complained IV — I'J
to the King of France concerning the method of vot-
ing, as w'ell as his treatment by the council and the
emperor; and finally fled from Schafi'hausen to Lauen-
burg, giving the council reason to fear either his final
escape from imperial reach or the withdrawal of the
Italian representatives. The pope soon fled again, this
time to Freiburg in the Breisgau, and thence to Brei-
sach on the Rhine, but was soon compelled to return
to Freiburg, whence eventually (17 May) he was
brought by deputies of the council to the vicinity of
Constance, and there held prisoner, while the council
proceeded to his trial. He had exhausted all means
of resistance, and was morally vanquished. Unwill-
ing to undergo the ordeal of the impending trial he re-
nounced all right of defence and threw himself on the
mercy of the council. He was deposed in the twelfth
session (29 May, 1415), not for heresy but for notorious
simony, abetting of schism, and scandalous life, hav-
ing already been suspended by the council in the tenth
session (14 May). Two days later he ratified under
oath the action of the council and was condemned to
indefinite imprisonment in the custody of the em-
peror. He was held successively in the castles of
Gottlieben, Heidelberg, and Mannheim, but was
eventually released, for a heavy ransom, with the help
of Martin V, and in 1419 died at Florence as Cardinal-
Bishop of Tusculum. (For a fuller treatment of the
charges against him, see John XXIII.) The prom-
ised resignation of Gregory XII (i). v.) was now in
order, and was accomplished with the dignity to be
expected from the pope usually considered by Catho-
lic historians the legitimate occupant of the See of
Peter, though at this time his obedience had practi-
cally vanished, being confined to Rimini and a few
German dioceses. Through his protector and pleni-
potentiary. Carlo Malatesta, Lord of Rimini, he pos-
ited as conditions that the council should be recon-
voked by himself, and that in the session which
accepted his resignation neither Baldassare Cossa nor
any representative of him should preside. The coun-
cil agreed to these conditions. The fourteenth session
(4 July, 1415) had, therefore, for its president the Em-
peror Sigismund, whereby it appeared, as the support-
ers of Gregory wished it to appear, that hitherto the
council was an assembly convoked by the civil au-
thority. The famous Dominican Cardinal John of
Ragusa (Johannes Dominici), friend and adviser of
Gregory XII, and since 19 Dec, 1414, the pope's repre-
sentative at Constance, convoked anew the council in
the pope's name and authorized its future acts. The
reunion of both obediences (Gregory XII and John
XXIII) was then proclaimed, whereupon the Cardinal-
Bishop of Ostia (Viviers) a.ssumed the presidency, and
Malatesta pronounced, in the name of Gregory, the
latter's abdication of all right whatsoever to the papacy.
Gregory confirmed these acts in the seventeenth ses-
sion (14 July) and was himself confirmed as Cardinal-
Bishop of Porto, Dean of the Sacred College and per-
petual Legate of Ancona, in which position he died
(18 Oct., 1417) at Recanati, in his ninetieth year in
the odour of sanctity. From the fourteenth session,
in which he convoked the council, it is considered by
many with Phillips (Kirchenrecht, I, 256) a legiti-
mate general council.
There remained now to obtain the resignation of Benedict XIII (Pedro de Luna). For this purpose, and because he insisted on personal dealings with him- self. Emperor Sigismund and deputies of the council went to Perpignan, then Spanish territory, to confer with him, but the stubborn old man, despite his pre- tended willingness to resign, was not to be moved (Sept.-Oct., 1415) from the claims he had so persist- ently and amid so great vicissitudes defended. Soon, however, he was abandoned by the Kings of Aragon, Castile, and Navarre, hitherto his chief supporters. By the Treaty of Narbonne (Vi Dec, 1415), they bound themselves to co-operate with the Council of
