PRIOR to the era of the House of Austria it is possible to deal with the ecclesiastical institutions in Spain at the same time with other manifestations of a social, political, economic, or intellectual character, but the period of Hapsburg rule was so replete with interest on the religious side and so important in that respect in its ultimate results on the Americas that this phase of Spanish life in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries is deserving of separate treatment. Two ideas dominated the period: the struggle for the maintenance of the Catholic faith against the inroads of Protestantism and other heretical beliefs; and the efforts of the Spanish state to acquire a virtual political supremacy over the church. Few periods of history more clearly illustrate the distinction maintained in Catholic countries between Catholicism as a religious faith and the Catholic Church as an institution, a difference which people of the United States do not readily grasp. Thus it was entirely consistent that the kings of Spain should have been almost the most ardent champions in Europe of Catholic Christianity, officers of the church not excepted, and also most persistent in their endeavors to limit the ecclesiastical authority in Spanish domains. The greatest exponent of the latter policy as well as of the former was Philip II, one of the most devout monarchs who ever occupied the Spanish throne. In both of these controversies the kings were successful. Heresy made no headway in Spain or in the colonies, and the king gained the upper hand in the management of the Spanish and American church. Meanwhile Spanish missionaries were carrying on one of the greatest campaigns of proselytism ever waged. The thoroughness of the conversion of the natives in Spain’s colonial possessions has been questioned, but there is no doubt that something of the external forms and the glamour—so much, at least—of the Catholic religion was implanted in the Americas in such a way that it has withstood the experiences of centuries. Spanish American peoples, like Spaniards, were to have their conflicts with the church,—very bitter ones in recent years,—but never, since the Franciscan, Dominican, and Jesuit Fathers first preached their doctrine, has favor been shown for any great length of time to the other exotic faiths, or has any noteworthy success been met with in the attempts, usually short-lived, at a reversion to the earlier native creeds. The work of the Spanish missionary was indeed a permanent factor of indisputable importance in the new world.

One of the effects of the attainment of religious unity by the conversion or expulsion from Spain of the Jews, MudÉjares and Moriscos was to exalt the feeling of religious sentiment in the peninsula. The Protestant Reformation and the religious wars which accompanied it tended to keep alive these emotions among Spaniards, partly because of the spirit of controversy they excited, and partly because of the blows and suffering they involved, and this spirit of religious exaltation was sustained by the increasing vigor of the Inquisition and by the activities of the Jesuit order, founded in this period. In consequence the power and social influence of the clergy were materially enhanced. The regular clergy was looked upon with especial favor, with the result that both in riches and in membership they far surpassed the secular branch. Many new orders were founded, while the older ones received fresh stimulus. At the beginning of the seventeenth century there were some 200,000 members of the regular clergy and over 9000 convents for men, and in both cases the numbers increased thereafter, while the population of the peninsula declined,—a factor which caused political and economic writers, many of whom were churchmen, not a little concern.[56] Despite this fact the clergy enjoyed the highest social consideration, and intervened in all phases of Spanish life. This was due not only to the religious sentiment of the people but also in great measure to the superior intellectual attainments of some of the clergy. Thus they distinguished themselves on the one hand as theologians, students of the canon law, jurisconsults, men of letters, historians, and university professors, and on the other as members of state councils, or in high political positions in the Americas. The increase in the landed wealth of the church, while it was the subject of numerous unsuccessful petitions of the Cortes to forbid the giving of lands in mortmain, was largely responsible for the imposition of taxes on the clergy, thus diminishing the immunities they had formerly enjoyed. The church could well afford to pay, for if not the richest proprietor in Spain it was certainly among the first; toward the middle of the sixteenth century the combined rents of the clergy amounted to some 5,000,000 ducats ($75,000,000) a year, or half the total for the kingdom, four-fifths of which amount was paid to the establishments of the regular clergy. Part of the funds was expended in charities for the benefit of the poor, such as the maintenance of asylums, hospitals, and soup-kitchens, measures which (disinterested though they might be) served also to augment their popularity with the masses.

Despite the flourishing condition of the Spanish clergy and their high standing in the peninsula the state of morality among them left much to be desired. Abundant evidences on this score are at hand, not only in the form of unsympathetic attacks and satires, but also in the works of zealous and devout reformers. The fact that such writings were not condemned by the Inquisition argues the need for reproof. The practice of barraganÍa was not unknown, even among bishops, some of whom entailed estates to their sons. Among the lesser churchmen, more particularly the secular clergy, the custom was more general. Solicitation by confessors and the avarice of clerical collectors of revenues were also frequently censured in the writings of the time. Nevertheless, it is but fair to consider these evils from the standpoint of that era. As compared with previous periods this age was one of marked advance in the average of clerical rectitude, and there were even writers who could claim that the Spanish clergy surpassed the churchmen of other countries in moderation and chasteness of life. Meanwhile, reforms like those instituted in the time of the Catholic Kings by XimÉnez were being pushed on vigorously and effectively, and were reinforced by the decisions of the great church council of Trent (1545-1563).

The Protestant Reformation and the Catholic Reaction, or Counter-Reformation, belong rather to European and church history than peculiarly to that of Spain, although Spain played a leading part in the events connected with them. Much in regard to them may therefore be omitted, except in so far as they affected problems in the peninsula itself and, by extension, the Spanish colonies. Charles I was an ardent partisan of church reform, but was desirous that it should be effected without change in dogma, and in this attitude he was joined by many of the greatest Catholic churchmen of the day, including some of the popes, who recognized the prevalence of abuses of which the Protestant leaders were able to make capital in the furtherance of their reforms. One of the principal policies of Charles I was the calling of a general church council for the discussion of this matter, and despite the resistance of several of the popes he labored to attain this end until he was at length successful. In 1545 there began the series of congresses which are called collectively the Council of Trent. Spanish prelates were one of the most important elements at these meetings, and in accordance with the ideas of Charles I and Philip II resisted the attempts made at a suspension of the sessions and the efforts of certain popes and other churchmen to bring about their failure. They were not only among the most frank in their references to the need for reform, but were also most rigid in their insistence upon disciplinary methods, even suggesting the application of the Spanish institution of the residencia to officers of the church. The eventual success of the council was due in no small degree to Spaniards, who also were among the most active in executing the corrective measures which were decided upon.

The kings of Spain combated heresy within the peninsula to the fullest extent of their ability, supported by the general opinion of Spanish Christians, who were almost unanimously opposed to the new ideas. Measures were taken to prevent the dissemination in Spain of the works of Martin Luther or other heretical thinkers. In 1546 Charles I caused the first Index, or list of prohibited works, to be published, and this was reproduced, with the addition of some other volumes, by the Inquisition. Later the Bible was included in the Index, except the authorized Latin version, on the ground that the reading of the scriptures by uncultivated persons might result in misconceptions as to the true religion. Nevertheless, Protestantism gained devotees in the various cities of Spain, more particularly in Seville and Valladolid. The number of heretics was at no time great, but it was recruited from the highest ranks of society. Churchmen, more often friars, were the principal element, and they found converts in not a few members of noble families. Foreigners from northern lands frequently cast in their lot with the Protestant groups. As was natural, proselytism on a wide scale could not be carried on; the Valladolid group numbered only about fifty and that of Seville one hundred and thirty (although there is some evidence to the effect that the latter body attained a membership of eight hundred), while those of other cities were still fewer in numbers. The greatest name in the Sevillian movement was that of Constantino Ponce de la Fuente, whom a modern writer has ventured to compare with Martin Luther for his high qualities, within the Protestant movement. Ponce, who was at one time the confessor of Charles I and Philip II, was the author of various heretical works. Discovered, at length, he was imprisoned, and shortly afterward was found dead. In the year 1559 great activity was displayed by the Inquisition in ferreting out and punishing the Protestant communities. Some individuals escaped to foreign countries, but many were condemned to die at the stake, meeting their fate, almost without exception, with admirable fortitude. The most celebrated case was that of BartolomÉ Carranza, archbishop of Toledo. Head of the Spanish secular church though he was, only the efforts of Pope Pius IV saved him. After more than seven years of imprisonment he was allowed to go to Rome. Some years later he was required to forswear some of his writings which had figured in the original proceedings against him in Spain, shortly after which he died. In all of this vigorous persecution of Protestantism, Charles I and Philip II took the lead. By the end of the sixteenth century the new faith was no longer a problem in Spain. Under Philip IV a degree of toleration which would not have been dreamed of in earlier years began to be allowed. By that time Catholic France was Spain’s principal enemy, and this tended to soften the attitude of Spaniards toward Protestants, although the restrictions of the laws were still enforced. In 1641 a treaty was made with Denmark, permitting Protestants of that country to enter the peninsula. From this time forward Spain was to evolve toward a more lenient policy still. A discussion of Spanish Protestantism would not be complete without a reference to the numerous Spaniards who took refuge in Protestant lands, and even for a time in Italy and France. They wrote a number of works which were remarkable for the excellent literary qualities of the Castilian they employed and for the scientific value of their content. While most of their writings were of a controversial, religious type they also made translations into Castilian or even wrote volumes of a scientific character dissociated from religion. Juan de ValdÉs and Juan DÍaz were outstanding names among them. Miguel Servet and Pedro GalÉs, whose heresies were equally in disfavor with Catholics and Protestants, were also men of great distinction.

Protestantism was not the only heterodoxy to menace the religious unity of the peninsula. The conversion of the MudÉjares of the eastern provinces and the expulsion of the Moriscos have already been mentioned. The Jews also gave occasional trouble. Of the other sects the most noteworthy was that of the Iluminados (Illuminati). The origins of this faith are obscure. Many believe it to have been purely Spanish, a conclusion to which the peculiar mystical character of the creed lends color. Others hold that it was of German extraction. In any event, though the time of its founding is not clear, it antedated the Lutheran outbreak, for it was in existence at least as early as 1512. Many of the doctrines sustained by Luther were a part of its creed, and indeed it paved the way for the entry of Protestantism into Spain. In addition it upheld the following tenets: the abdication of one’s own will in that of the divine; and the capacity of the faithful, by means of ecstacies, to put themselves in personal communication with the divine essence, on which occasions it was impossible for them to commit sin. The practical result of these beliefs was an indulgence in all manner of licentious practices while in the sinless state. As in the case of Protestantism, so in this, the devotees were usually members of the clergy, especially friars and nuns. The Inquisition attacked the new faith with vigor, but found it difficult to extirpate in entirety. A notable derivation from Illuminism was that of Quietismo (Quietism), or Molinismo, founded in the seventeenth century by Miguel de Molinos, a member of the clergy. This creed, though similar even in its licentiousness to Illuminism, was not at first considered unorthodox, wherefore it gained many converts, but in the end it was condemned.

Similar in some respects to the two heretical creeds just mentioned was a peculiarly Spanish religious philosophy, that of Catholic Mysticism. It traces back through the ideas of Raymond Lull to those of the Arabic philosophers, but in the main it was a product of the Spanish religious thought of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. The fundamental idea was that of direct communication with God through prayer, love of God, and the renunciation of earthly things, which enabled the purified soul in a state of ecstasy to appear in the divine presence. The whole process was accompanied by miracles, but without any loss to the individual of his spiritual existence or of his intelligence for an understanding of God. At first the ecclesiastical authorities were suspicious of it, prohibiting the writings of the mystics and conducting investigations into the conduct of those who professed a belief in it. At length, however, it was accepted as orthodox, and its devotees were not molested. They produced a rich literature, in which they set forth not only the fundamental bases of their belief but also the experiences they had in journeying to God. One of the mystics, MarÍa de JesÚs de Ágreda, is famous as “the Blue Lady” of the American (United States) southwest and Pacific coast, for she is said to have visited these regions while in a state of ecstacy and to have converted many of the natives, recounting her travels in her published works. She is also famous for her correspondence with Philip IV. The greatest names, however, were those of Santa Teresa de JesÚs[57] and San Juan de la Cruz, the former notable in literature for the excellence of her prose, and the latter equally noteworthy as a poet. The writings of these and other mystics also displayed a profound psychological study, such, for example, as was required by their ability to distinguish between the processes of the soul on the way to communication with God, and as was evidenced by their skill in differentiating between the various elements in religious sentiment.

The two principal instruments employed to combat heresy were the Inquisition and the Jesuit order. So far as the former concerned itself with matters of the faith, it had the support of the Spanish people, who equally with the kings were desirous of the establishment and maintenance of religious unity. The Inquisition had acquired various powers and privileges, however, which were not directly connected with its principal office. Papal bulls had been procured giving it jurisdiction in cases of usury, crimes against nature, and improper solicitations of confessors; it claimed exemption for its officers and servants from the operation of the civil law courts; and its relations with these courts, made necessary by the legal incapacity of the Inquisition to execute its own sentences, often gave rise to conflicts and misunderstandings. The people of Spain were perfectly able to distinguish between the Inquisition as an instrument of the faith and the Inquisition in these extra-jurisdictional phases, and protested vigorously against that body in the latter sense. The various Cortes of Castile, Aragon, and Catalonia presented many a petition on this score to the kings, and it was a prominent factor in the Catalan revolt of 1640. Nevertheless, the kings consistently sustained the Inquisition. When the Aragonese Cortes secured a papal license reducing the Inquisition to the same footing as the other ecclesiastical courts, Charles I procured the withdrawal of the license. Philip II prohibited all appeals from or complaints against the Inquisition before the audiencias or the Consejo Real. The decisions of the Inquisition thus became final, although it is true that cases of appeal and the recourse of fuerza (also forbidden by Philip) were occasionally allowed to go beyond that body. When there seemed to be a likelihood that the Council of Trent might deprive the Inquisition of some of its authority, Charles I used every effort to cause a failure of the project. In fact the Inquisition was virtually an instrument of the kings, who did not hesitate to direct its action as if it were legally subject to them, and who were always able to procure the appointment of members of the Consejo Real to the Council of the Inquisition. As regards heresy the period, naturally, was exceedingly fruitful in prosecutions and was marked by an excess of suspicion, such that individuals whose purity of faith was hardly open to question were not infrequently brought to trial,—among others, Ignacio de Loyola (Saint Ignatius), and Teresa de JesÚs, who, like Loyola, was later canonized. Extreme rigor was displayed in placing the ban on unorthodox books and in expurgating those which were allowed to circulate. Charles I required all books to have the authorization of the Consejo Real before they could be published. Foreign books were also scrutinized carefully, and libraries were made subject to inspection. The grant of a license by the Consejo Real did not mean that a book might not be placed on the Inquisition’s Index of forbidden works. It is worthy of note, too, that the Spanish Index and that of the Inquisition of Rome often varied from each other in their lists; thus a book condemned at Rome might circulate in Spain, and vice versa, but this of course was not the general rule. The Spanish Inquisition did not make its way to Spain’s Italian possessions, but was established in the Low Countries, where it was very active, and in the Americas.

The other important agency of the Spanish Counter-Reformation, the Jesuit order, was the creation of a Spaniard, Ignacio de Loyola (1491 or 1495-1556), who became Saint Ignatius (San Ignacio) with his canonization in 1609. As a youth Loyola led the somewhat wild life of a soldier. Wounded in 1521 during the defence of Pamplona from an attack of the French, he was a long time in recovering his health, devoting the period of his convalescence to the reading of religious works. He thereupon resolved to dedicate his life to religion, and as soon as he was restored to health made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem. Upon his return he pursued religious studies at the universities of Barcelona, AlcalÁ, Salamanca, and Paris. While at AlcalÁ, where he and several companions made a practice of wearing sackcloth and preaching in the streets, he was arrested by the Inquisition, but was set free without other penalty than an order to give up his sackcloth and his preaching. A similar fate befell him in Salamanca. Eventually Loyola and his companions found their way to Rome, where they continued their street preaching, despite the opposition of the Augustinian order and some of the cardinals. They applied to themselves the name “Company of Jesus” (hence Jesuits), and in 1539 organized an order in military form, vowing implicit obedience to their superiors,—especially to the pope,—prescribing the rule of a general for life, and pledging themselves to the founding of colleges. The new order was formally approved by the pope in 1540, and Loyola became the first general.

While an extended discussion of the characteristics of the Jesuit order is not necessary, some of the respects in which it differed from the others should be pointed out, in order to make clear the effect of the Jesuit appearance in Spain and the Americas. Great emphasis was placed on the military side; Loyola was wont to say that he had never ceased to be a soldier,—he had merely become a soldier of God. Obedience to superiors and to the pope was not a new idea, but with the Jesuits it was as rigidly literal as in an army. They became one of the principal supports of the popes at a time when many church leaders were advocating the reform of the papacy with a view to limiting the powers of the head of the church. Like soldiers, they attacked the enemies of the pope, church, and the Catholic religion, and were charged with employing methods which gave rise to the term “Jesuitry” in an opprobrious sense. They did not stay in convents, but went forth among the people to fight for the principles for which they stood. There was no election of their leaders; the attainment of office came through appointment by the general, who even chose his own successor. Education was their principal weapon,—education of the high and the low. In other respects the Jesuits were at the same time more simple and more mundane in their exterior practices—at least in the beginning—than the other orders. They opposed choral singing, the wearing of a distinctive habit, participation in religious processions, the monastic life, and asceticism. They believed in the individual poverty of their members, but were willing that the order and its separate institutions should prosper in a material way. In other words they were going into the world, not away from it, and were desirous of the best equipment for the struggle which lay before them.

The influence of the new order soon made itself felt throughout the world. At first Spaniards were in the majority, and it was natural that the Jesuits should establish themselves in Spain’s dominions. By 1547 they had five institutions in Spain, and by 1566 sixteen. Soon afterward they began to appear in the Americas, where they became one of the principal agencies of the Spanish crown in the conversion and subjection of the natives, being perhaps the most effective of the missionary orders. Not only as missionaries but also as theologians, scientists, and men of letters the Spanish Jesuits were among the most distinguished men of the age. They were not welcomed by their fellow-countrymen in Spain, however; rather, they had to contend against some of the most powerful elements in the peninsula. Members of the clergy, both regular and secular, were opposed to them,—notably the Dominicans, Franciscans, Augustinians, and the officers of the Inquisition, the first named especially,—while the universities and at the outset the kings were also hostile. Melchor Cano, a Dominican and one of the most influential men of his day, charged the Jesuits with heresy, claiming that their vows savored of the doctrines of the Iluminados. The archbishop of Toledo, Cardinal Siliceo, forbade them to preach, confess, say mass, or administer sacraments, but was obliged by the pope to retract his decrees. Arias Montano attacked them in the preface of his polyglot Bible, asserting that the Jesuits claimed that they alone had knowledge and that they were the nearest of all men to Jesus. These are but a few instances out of many, showing the difficulties encountered by the Jesuits in establishing themselves in Spain. It seems likely that jealousy may have entered into much of the resistance to them, for they early began to outrank and even supersede other elements in teaching and in learning. Charles I and Philip II objected to them because they placed the pope ahead of the king, not acknowledging the latter’s authority over them, and this was not altogether in accordance with the royal ideal of centralization. Furthermore, the Jesuits were such an aggressive factor that they were hard to manage. The Inquisition took exception among other things to the Jesuit claim of a right to absolve their own members from the charge of heresy, and imprisoned the Jesuit provincial, or commanding official, in Spain, together with other members of the order. Philip II took sides with the Inquisition, but the pope sustained the Jesuits. By the seventeenth century the Jesuits had succeeded in overcoming their rivals, although they never ceased to have enemies. Their success was due in the first place to the continued support of the popes; in the second to the change of heart experienced by Philip II late in life, when he began to realize that they were one of the most effective instruments for the religious unification of his dominions, and in so much furthered his ideal of centralization; in the third place to the backing of the opponents of their enemies, especially those who were hostile to the Inquisition; and, finally, and perhaps most of all, to their own superior attainments, whereby they were able to win a devoted following among all ranks of society. The successors of Philip II followed the later policy of that king, with the result that the seventeenth century was the most prosperous era in the history of the Jesuit order.

One thing Spanish kings failed to do elsewhere in Europe they achieved in Spain,—their ideal of religious unity. At the same time that they were suppressing heresy they were giving a welcome to Catholics fleeing to Spain from Protestant persecution, notably to the Irish, who came to the peninsula in great numbers. The ideal of Catholic unity was carried to an excess which transcended unity itself through an extension of the institution of limpieza de sangre. Certificates of limpieza de sangre (that is to say, sworn statements that the bearer had no Jewish, Moslem, or heretic antecedents) now began to be required for the holding of various church offices or for entry into religious orders and often also for admission to the guilds. As a matter of fact there were few families which could have withstood a close examination of their ancestry; the upper classes would almost surely have been found to contain Jewish blood, and the masses, certainly in the east and south, would have had a Moslem admixture in their veins. The attainment of religious unity and the extreme suspicion in which non-Catholics were held did not succeed in making the Spanish people respond to the moral code of their faith. Not only such licentious practices as have already been alluded to were in vogue, but also a surprising lack of reverence was displayed, as exemplified by the improper use of sacred places and sacred objects and the mixture of the human and the divine in masquerades. Nevertheless, it is not too much to say that the principal preoccupation of Spaniards in the sixteenth and the seventeenth centuries was the salvation of their souls. The worst of men would want to confess and seek absolution before they died, and many of them no doubt believed themselves to be good Catholics, even though their every-day life would not have borne inspection. One notable religious manifestation of the era was the ardent insistence of Spaniards on the mystery of the Immaculate Conception at a time when Catholics of other countries were not yet ready to accept that view.

In distinguishing between the spiritual and the temporal phases of papal authority the kings of the House of Austria followed the policy of the Catholic Kings, but surpassed the latter in their claims of the superiority, or independence, as the case might be, of the royal power. Various factors contributed to this attitude in Spain. The monarchical ideal of a centralized absolutism, now that it had triumphed over the nobility and the towns, sought out the church in its civil aspects as the next outstanding element to dominate; the interests of the Spanish kings in Italy continued to bring them into opposition to the popes as sovereigns of the Papal States; and the problems of ecclesiastical reform often found the kings and the popes widely, even bitterly, apart. Charles I had frequent conflicts with the papacy, but Philip II had even more serious contests, in which he displayed yet more unyielding resistance than his father to what he regarded as the unwarranted intrusions of the popes into the sphere of Spanish politics. When in 1556 it seemed likely that Philip would be excommunicated and his kingdom laid under an interdict, Philip created a special council to exercise in Spain such functions as were customarily in the hands of the pope. In this as in his other disputes of a political nature with the papacy he was able to count on the support of the Spanish clergy. One document reciting Philip’s grievances against Pope Paul IV, applying harsh epithets to him, and expressing doubt as to the legitimacy of his election, is believed to have been written by a member of the clergy. Another document, the Parecer, or opinion, of Melchor Cano, a Dominican, argued the lawfulness of making war on the pope, and said that in such cases, when communication with Rome was insecure, the bishops might decide ecclesiastical questions which were ordinarily left to the pope.

To avoid such disputes and to assure Spain of an ally in Italian affairs Charles I and Philip II bent their efforts to procure the election of popes who would be favorable to them. Charles had much to do with the choice in 1522 of Adrian VI, who as a cardinal had been one of his principal administrative officers during his own absence from the peninsula in the early years of his reign. Philip was successful in the same way when in 1559 he was able to cause the elevation of his candidate to the papal throne. This pope, Pius IV, proceeded to annul the action of his predecessor, Paul IV, against Charles and Philip, and condemned to death two members of the deceased pope’s family, one of them a cardinal. At the election of 1590 Philip was again fortunate, but the new pontiff, Urban VII, lived only thirteen days. A fresh conclave was held, at which Philip went to the extreme not only of excluding the candidates whom he opposed but also of naming seven Spanish churchmen as the only ones from among whom the cardinals were to choose. One of the seven was elected, taking the name Gregory XIV, and no pope of the century was more unconditionally favorable to the wishes of a Spanish king. This constant intrusion of Philip ended by exasperating the high authorities of the church, who a few years later under another pope condemned Philip’s practices and declared him ipso facto excommunicated. This proved to be a decisive blow to the influence of the Spanish crown.

One of the principal struggles between the popes and the kings was the royal claim of the pase regio, or the right to examine papal bulls and pontifical letters and, if deemed advisable, to retain them, prohibiting their publication and therefore their execution in Spanish domains. The origin of this claim on the part of the Spanish monarchs seems to date from the period of the Great Schism, when Urban VI (1378-1389) granted such a privilege to the princes allied with him. It was not officially decreed in Spain until the early years of Charles I, when provision for the pase regio in all Spanish dominions was made in a document drawn up by Cardinal XimÉnez. According to this arrangement papal communications were to be examined in the Consejo Real, and if found to be contrary to the royal prerogative or otherwise objectionable their circulation was to be postponed and the pope asked to change or withdraw his dispositions. Usually the retention of such documents took place without giving official notice to the pope,—which in the case of a hostile pontiff would have been in any event unavailing. If the popes insisted on their point of view the royal prohibitions were nevertheless continued. If any subjects of the king resisted his will in this matter, even though they were churchmen, they might incur the penalty of a loss of goods or banishment or both, and notaries or attorneys might even be condemned to death. When Paul IV excommunicated Charles I and Philip II, the latter put into effect the pase regio. Unable to procure the publication of his bull in Spain, Paul IV summoned to Rome two Spanish bishops who were intensely royalist in their sympathies. Philip II protected them by retaining the papal order, so that the individuals did not learn officially of the summons. Not only in serious contests of this character but also in matters of comparatively little moment the kings exercised the right of retention,—for example, in the case of a bull of Sixtus V about the dress and maintenance of the clergy. The above are only a few instances out of many. One of the most bitter conflicts was waged by Philip II in opposition to a bull of Pius V excommunicating those who retained papal dispositions. Philip II retained this bull, and punished some bishops of Spain’s Italian domains who had published it within their dioceses. The pope threatened to put Spain under an interdict, but Philip declined to yield. The bull was never published in the peninsula, and the pope did not make use of the interdict.

The successors of Philip II were equally insistent upon the royal prerogative in their relations with the church. One of the most curious incidents in the disputes of the kings and the popes occurred in the reign of Philip IV. Cardinal Borja and several other Spanish cardinals were sent to Rome to present the king’s grievances against the pontiff arising out of matters connected with the wars against the Protestants. Borja was roughly handled on making his protest; it is said that Cardinal San Onofre punched him in the face by direction of the pope. When this event was reported in Spain a general meeting of royal councillors was held, in which it was even discussed whether it would be lawful to challenge the pope to settle the matter by means of a duel! In this and other matters there was talk of an appeal from the pope to a church council. As the royalist attitude toward the popes was often defended in books, many of them by churchmen, a practice sprang up at Rome of placing such works in the Index as writings which the faithful were forbidden to read, but these volumes did not appear in the Index of the Spanish Inquisition. Finally the attitude of superiority on the part of the monarchs made itself evident, as already indicated, in questions of the reform of the church. Charles and Philip II labored to establish their views at the Council of Trent not only in matters of administration but also in those of doctrine. Indeed, many Catholics believed that it was the duty of the kings to remedy the evils of the church. With the conclusion of the Council of Trent, Philip II hesitated for a year before publishing its decisions, because of his belief that some of the provisions of the council diminished, or might diminish, his royal authority. When he at length did publish them, he did so with the reservation that they were not to be considered as introducing any variation from the usual jurisdiction of the king. Consequently, various canons of the council remained without effect in Spain and her possessions.

The same conflict of authority between the church and the monarch manifested itself in the relations of the kings with papal nuncios, who in the reign of Charles I began to reside at the Spanish court as permanent ambassadors. In 1537 Charles I obtained a license from the pope for the creation of the tribunal of the nunciature, or court of the papal embassy in Spain. This court, composed in part at least of Spanish officials, was to hear the numerous cases in ecclesiastical law which had customarily been settled at Rome. At the same time, the nuncio was empowered to grant the benefices which formerly lay within the jurisdiction of the popes. The nuncio also collected the considerable sums which went to the popes from ecclesiastical prebends, or livings, from the expolios of deceased bishops and archbishops (accretions in their benefices which they had procured out of rents), and from the income of vacantes, or vacant benefices (that which accrued between the death of a bishop or archbishop and the appointment of his successor). Once having transferred authority from the pope to the nuncio and nunciature the kings proceeded to attack these elements near at hand so as to reduce their power of interference with the royal authority. In this they were aided by all classes. The churchmen were royalist and at the same time opposed to papal intervention in ecclesiastical administration in Spain. People generally objected to such wide jurisdiction being in the hands of a foreigner, for the nuncios were usually Italians. There were frequent complaints that the nunciature was guilty of the advocacy of lawsuits and the collection of excessive costs, with the result that the court was sustained out of Spanish funds instead of by the popes. All of these matters were the subject of criticism in both the Cortes and the Consejo Real, and the inevitable result was the employment of restrictive measures. The pase regio was applied to the directions by the popes to the nuncios, and the intervention of the nunciature in ecclesiastical cases in first instance was prohibited. There were times when the relations of the kings with the nuncio were indeed strained; Philip II went to the extreme of expelling a nuncio who had endeavored to publish a papal bull which the king had decided to retain; the same thing happened under Philip IV, who closed the papal embassy. Matters were arranged in 1640 by the Fachenetti concordat, or agreement of the nuncio of that name with the king. This document reduced the procedure of the nunciature and the attributes of the nuncio to writing, and although it did not remove all the causes of dispute served as the basis for diplomatic relations with the papal embassy until the middle of the eighteenth century.

The relations of the kings with the popes and nuncios formed only part of the former’s royalist policy with the church. The same course was followed with the ecclesiastical organization in Spain. The gradual reduction of the clergy to a tributary state as regards payment of taxes has already been referred to. Charles I procured various grants of a financial nature from the popes, such as the right to sell certain ecclesiastical holdings (whose proceeds were to be devoted to the war with the Turks), the collection of various church rents yielding over 1,000,000 ducats (some $15,000,000), and finally the gift of expolios and vacantes. On the other hand, despite the petitions of the Cortes and the opinions of leading jurisconsults, the kings declined to prevent the giving of lands in mortmain, or in other words the acquisition of estates by the church. The most serious conflicts arose over questions of immunities, growing out of the survival of ecclesiastical jurisdictions of a seigniorial character and out of the relations of the church courts to those of the king and to the royal authority in general. Many of the seigniorial groups were incorporated into the crown, especially by Philip II. As regards the legal immunity of churchmen it came to be accepted as the rule that it could be claimed only in cases within the jurisdiction of the ecclesiastical courts. This was diminished still further by royal invasions of ecclesiastical jurisdiction, as by limiting the scope of the church courts, prohibiting (under severe penalties) the intrusions of their judges in civil affairs, and intervening to correct abuses, real or alleged. The king reserved a right of inspection of the ecclesiastical courts, exercised for him by members of the Consejo Real or the audiencias, and if anybody were unduly aggrieved by a decision of the church courts he might make use of the recourse of fuerza to bring an appeal before the Consejo Real, the CÁmara, or the audiencias. The effect of this was to suspend the execution of an ecclesiastical sentence, subordinating the church courts to the royal will. Many matters of a religious character were taken over into the exclusive jurisdiction of the Consejo Real or the CÁmara, such as the inspections of convents of the regular clergy and the action taken as a result thereof and the execution of the decisions of the Council of Trent. Laws relative to the recourse of fuerza were amplified so as to prohibit ecclesiastical judges from trying cases which were considered by any of the litigants concerned as belonging to the civil law; other laws forbade the summoning of Spaniards before foreign judges; and still others diminished the number of appeals to Rome. Even churchmen took advantage of the recourse of fuerza to have their cases removed to the royal courts when it suited their convenience, despite the attempts of the popes to check the practice. In such instances, as in so many others, the pase regio was employed to prevent effectual action by the popes. Even in the case of the provincial councils of the Spanish church the king sent delegates, on the ground that no conventions or congresses of any sort could be held without the consent of the king and the attendance of his representatives. In 1581 Pope Gregory XIII ordered the archbishop of Toledo not to admit anybody to a council about to be held at that time who was not a member of the clergy. Philip II sent his delegate, nevertheless, and his successors followed his example. In like manner religious processions were forbidden unless authorized by the civil authorities.

The royal authority over the Spanish church is largely explained by the institution of the patronato real, or royal patronage. Charles I early gained a right to make nominations to most of the bishoprics and abbacies in Spain, although the pope had to approve before the appointment should take effect. Even in the case of benefices still reserved by the pope the kings insisted that the appointees should be Spaniards. As regards the Americas the church was yet more completely under the king’s control, thus giving still other lucrative posts into his power to grant. Under these circumstances it is not surprising that the Spanish clergy should favor the king, to whom they owed their rents and dignities, rather than the pope, and should even consent to diminutions in the privileges of Spanish churchmen. Indeed, faithful service as a councillor might be the stepping-stone to a bishopric. Nevertheless the kings did not allow churchmen to intrude in political affairs without being asked, and instances of official reproof on this score were numerous, despite which fact the clergy took a prominent part in political intrigues, and were possibly the principal factor in the Portuguese war of independence from Spain. Furthermore, the solicitation of inheritances by churchmen was insistently forbidden by the king; on one occasion when accusations of this character were made against the Jesuits of Flanders the Duke of Alba annulled all testamentary dispositions to that order and provided for the inheritance of the legal heirs.