GALLICANISM.

Early Development of Nationalism (§ 1).

Formulation of the GalHcan Principles (§ 2).

Relation of the Pope to the Episcopate (§ 3).

Relation of the Pope to the State (§ 4).

Gallicanism denotes the attitude, tending toward national independence, which was more or less widely prevalent in the Roman Catholic Church of France especially during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. The Church in Gaul was early recognized as a separate division; in the third century a papal vicar was commissioned to oversee its affairs, and by the fourth the bishop of Arles had succeeded in gaining a definite primacy and appeared as the representative of the pope (see Arles, archbishopric of). Under the Merovingian kings the organization became more firmly established and enjoyed an increasing independence, always in close connection with the monarchy. After the king it was the largest landed proprie- tor, and the bishops and abbots were the most influential magnates of the kingdom. This connection involved the result that scarcely i. Early a single point of church life was ex-

Development

eluded from royal regulation. The of gradual development of the papal suNationalism. premacy from Gregory VII. to Inno- cent III., aiming as it did at the liberation. of the Church from all secular control, came into inevitable conflict with the system established in France and expressed in the Codex Dionysio-Hadrianus given by Adrian 1. to Charlemagne. But while in Germany the Church was in the main successful in the conflict, the struggles of the popes with the French kings, such as that of Innocent III. with Philip Augustus and of Boniface VIII. with Philip the Fair, resulted in the strengthening of the royal power. The voluntary removal of censures and limitation of the bull Clericis laicos by Benedict XI. and the declaration of Clement V. in 1306 that the bull Unam sarictam did not affect the rights of the king, completed the victory of the French conception of a State Church.

In 1594, under the title of Les Libert& de d'eglise gallicane, Pierre Pithou, a famous lawyer and humanist, for a long time procurator-general of Paris (d. 1596), put forth eighty-three propositions expressing the Gallican position on the status of the pope, the king, and the bishops, and on the internal government of the Church. A protest of the bishops against Pithou's work was suppressed by the parliament, and his book, supported later by

Pierre Dupuy's anonymous collection

2. Formulation

of documents (1639) and commen- of the tary (1652), was reprinted with the Gallican royal license and became the stand-

Principles. and in practise. Under Louis XIV. the questions at issue became acute in the R6gale (q.v.) controversy, and Gallicanism in its modern form was officially expressed by the famous Declaratio cleri Galdicani or " Four Articles of Gallicanism," drawn up by Bossuet, accepted by the episcopate on Mar. 19, 1682, and imposed upon the French clergy. The following is a translation of the " Four Articles ":

There are' many who labor to subvert the Gallican decrees and liberties which our ancestors defended with so much zeal, and their foundations which rest upon the sacred canons and the tradition of, the Fathers. Nor are there wanting those who, under the pretext of these liberties, seek to derogate from the primacy of St. Peter and of the Roman pontiffs his successors; from the obedience which all Christians owe to them, and from the majesty of the Apostolic See, in which the faith is taught and the unity of the faith is preserved. The heretics, on the other hand, omit nothing in order to represent that power by which the peace of the Church is maintained as intolerable both to kings and their subjects; and by such artifices estrange the souls of the simple from the communion of the Church, and therefore from Christ. With a view to remedy such evils, we, the archbishops and bishops assembled at Paris by the king's orders, representing together with the other deputies the Galliean Church, have judged it advisable, after mature deliberation, to determine and declare as follows:

1. St. Peter and his successors, vicars of Christ, and likewise the Church .itself, have received from God power in things spiritual and pertaining to salvation, but not in things temporal and civil; inasmuch as the Lord says, My kingdom is not of this world; and again, Bender unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's, and unto God the thugs which are Gods. The Apostolic precept also holds Let every soul be subject

425

unto the higher powers, for there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God; whosoever therefore resisteth the power resisteth the ordinance of God. Conse quently kings and princes are not by the law of God subject to any ecclesiastical power, nor to the keys of the Church, with respect to their temporal government. Their subjects can not be released from the duty of obeying them, nor ab solved from the oath of allegiance; and this maxim, necessary to public tranquillity, and not less advantageous to the Church than to the State, is to be strictly maintained, as conformable to the word of God, the tradition of the Fathers, and the example of the Saints. 2. The plenitude of power in things spiritual, which resides in the Apostolic See and the successors of St. Peter, is such that at the same time the decrees of the ecumenical Council of Constance, in its fourth and fifth sessions, approved as they are by the Holy See and the practise of the whole Church, remain in full force and perpetual obligation; and the Gallican Church does not approve the opinion of those who would depreciate the said decrees as being of doubtful authority, insuufciently approved, or restricted in their ap plication to a time of schism. 3. Hence the exercise of the Apostolic authority must be regulated by the canons enacted by the Spirit of God and con secrated by the reverence of the whole world. The ancient rules, customs, and institutions received by the realm and Church of France remain likewise inviolable; and it in for the honor and glory of the Apostolic See that such enact ments, confirmed by the consent of the said see and of the churches, should be observed without deviation. 4. The pope has the principal place in deciding questions of faith, and his decrees extend to every church and all churches; but nevertheless his judgment is not irreversible until confirmed by the consent of the Church. Under the system thus formally established, the pope was recognized as the successor of Peter and vicar of Christ, the divinely appointed head of 3. Relation the Church, with spiritual jurisdiction of the Pope over the whole body and over national to the Epis- Churches in particular. But the sta copate. tun of the bishops rested equally upon divine ordinance, and they, with the pope, represented the Church in general councils, which were of higher authority than the pope, and could alone issue an irreformable definition in matters of faith; a definition issued by the pope when no council was sitting required the consent of the whole Church before it could be considered irreformable. From the point of view of his rela tions to the French episcopate, the pope was sup posed to be bound by the canons, and in France especially by the recognized ancient customs. These, it is true, had been substantially altered by the Concordat of 1516 between Francis I. and Leo X., which had gone into effect in spite of clerical protests (See Concordats and Delimiting Bulls, III., 2, § 1). The king named the bishops, who were then confirmed by the pope. Papal interference in the affairs of individual dioceses was only to be tolerated as far as the law of the Church allowed. The papal nuncio had no jurisdiction in France, and the presence of a legate to latere was permissible only in virtue of a mutual agreement, and then only during the king's pleasure. The greatest power was conceded to the pope in regard to the ap pointment to benefices; abbots and, in practise, abbesses were nominated by the king and confirmed by the pope, who also claimed for his province dispensations of all kinds, unless the king or the par liaments interfered in a specific case. In theory the Church was an independent power, but in reality the State ruled. Every papal consti-

tution, whether relating to doctrine or discipline, required the approval of the king or a government

official before it went into effect in .y. Relation France, and the same thing applied of the Pope to the decrees of councils. A part of to the State: the decisions of the Council of Trent

was enforced through the royal ordonnance de Blois of 1579. Ecclesiastical jurisdiction was strictly limited. The offenses of clerics, unless purely ecclesiastical, came before secular tribunals, except in the case of bishops, who were tried before a provincial council. All mixed causes (dissolution of marriage, questions of church property, benefices, tithes, etc.) were decided by the higher secular courts. The king claimed the right to tax the clergy and church property, but this was vehemently opposed by the clergy and, never wholly conceded before the Revolution. , The incomes of vacant sees went to the king, who also claimed the right to appoint to all benefices during a vacancy in the see.

The State took strong ground against any immediate interference of the curia in the government of the French Church. A French prelate consecrated in Rome was not allowed to exercise his functions. The decrees of the Roman congregations had no validity in France, nor were Frenchmen allowed to be summoned to Rome in any process of law. As 9, consequence of this conflict between the rival powers, an institution grew up which seriously crippled the ecclesiastical jurisdiction, the appal comma d'abus, by which on the application of one party to a case, or simply on grounds of public interests, the procureur-gWral might cite the case before the parliament of the province for investigation and decision. This institution, created by the Pragmatic Sanction of 1438 (see Pragmatic sanction), was abolished by the Concordat of 1516, but the parliaments still maintained it; it found a new support in the ordonnance de Millers-Coter4s in 1539, was limited or modified on complaint of the clergy by new edicts in 1571, 1580, 1605, and 1695, and stoutly upheld by the parliaments until practically there was no more question of an independent ecclesiastical jurisdiction or administration. Thus the power of the papacy was indeed broken, but at the cost of serious damage to the rights of the episcopate and the complete subjection of the Gallican Church to the State. The downfall of the old r_gime, however, allowed the pope to acquire a degree of power in France which he had never before possessed, and the nineteenth century witnessed the gradual decay of the last remnants of the old Gallican spirit.

(J. F. von Schulte.)

Bibliography: P. de Marca, De ooncordia saardotii et imperil, Paris, 1641; J. B. Boseuet, Detensio declaraiionis

. de potentate eccleeim sanxit clams Gallicanus, Luxemburg, 1730; C. Fleury, Diseours our lea libertt!a de l'6plise pallicane, Paris, 1765; idem, Institution au droit ecrcUsiastique, ib. 1767; L. E. Dupin, Les Libert& de 1'Jplise pailicane, ib. 1824; idem, Manual du droit publique eccUsiastique /rantais, ib. 1847; J, B. Bordas-Demoulin, Las Pouyoirs conatitutifs de 1'hgliae, ib. 1855; F. Host, Le Gallimnisme, ib. 1855; W. H. Jervis, The Gallican Church, London, 1872 (from 1516 to the Revolution); idem, The Gallican Church and the Revolution, ib. 1882; A. Le Roy, Le Gallicanieme au xviii. sipcle, Paris, 1892; L. Mention, Domino* relatila aux rapporta du clerg,' avec 14 royaulE 1888-1705, Paris, 1893 sqq.; A. Debedour. Hist. den rap-

426

ports do 1'dglise o do 1'Ltd . . . 1789--1870, ib. 1898; Seller, La Pin du gnMmnisms et M. Marl son dernier reprbentant, Alenpon, 1901; A. Gslton, Church and State in Prance, IS00-1007, London, 1907; Cambridge Mod em History, v 72sqq., New York, 1908 Documents Pertinent to the subject, including the bulls Cleric4a laioot and Imam sanetam, are in Thatcher and MoNeal, Documents, pp. 811-814; Robinson, Europsan Hisfav, pp. 848 sqq., 488 sqq.; and Reich, Documents, pp. 198-195, 879-886.