At the time of
thirteenth century, the Catholic Church was at its peak in regard to power; it
would wane in and out of the sphere of influence and today still holds great
sway over the masses, but its golden age of power was around this time,
especially during the reign of Pope Innocent III. Unfortunately, the Church was
about to enter into a time of utter turmoil, from the early 1300s-mid-1500s.
The Church was faced with a number of crises from within and outside of itself.
For example, the papacy attempted to extend their power and the attempt utterly
failed, which led to what is now called the “Babylonian Captivity,” as well as
other events such as there being more than one pope in power. A papal decree in
1302 declared that the Pope had the ability to hold power over reigning kings.
The pope who made this decree was later attacked and taken out of power, and
Pope Clement replaced him. Clement was much more willing to accept the policies
of King Philip so as to retain his papacy and as such, he did little to hinder
the King. The reign of the Pope itself became more and more oppressive as well
– the church had been corrupted, and virtually indistinguishable from every
other monarchy of the time.
There were
individuals who stand out to us in history who stood up to such power.
Catherine of Sienna is one of these individuals. She literally walked hundreds
of miles in order to talk face to face with the Pope who was living in Avignon
at the time. Catherine challenged the Pope, as the Bishop of Rome, to return to
Rome and actually be the Bishop of Rome. She convinced him. Shortly after this
time, however, more than one pope came to power – the French sided with Pope
Clement whereas the English and Holy Roman Empire were on the side of Pope
Urban. Over time, more issues arose in the papacy, and eventually there was at
one point three popes vying for power as the legitimate pope – Martin, Gregory
and Benedict (Martin won out). Around this time, plagues, wars and other
problems create chaos and death all over Europe. People clung to magical and
superstitious practices, cherished relics of the saints, and indulgences began
being sold to lessen or end a loved one’s time in Purgatory. Those in power in
the Catholic Church did little to decrease these growing problems, and certain
individuals rose to face these issues face to face.
One of these
individuals was Jan Hus. Hus believed that the people ought to have a translation
of the Bible to read for themselves, and claimed that indulgences for Purgatory
were completely unbiblical. Through a series of events, Hus was not only
arrested, he was not given the opportunity to defend himself and was burned at
the stake. Around 1517, another individual like Hus came to the forefront, yet
history shows that he was much more successful in his reforms: Martin Luther. He
disagreed with a number of Catholic teachings and crafted his famous 95 theses,
and argued that the papacy, purgatory (and thus indulgences) and various other
doctrines were completely unbiblical. After this attempt at reform, reform did
indeed come rather quickly. Monks and nuns left their areas and got married,
churches were torn down and church images were destroyed, and Masses in various
places faced trouble. Luther had not intended for such drastic change, but the
essential message of what came to be known as the Protestant Reformation is
this: faith is through Jesus only, tradition should not be considered sacred
but only Scripture, the Pope is neither needed nor biblical, and the common
people ought to be able to discover God’s Word for themselves.
About one-third of
Christians became Protestant, and this posed a major threat to the Catholic
Church. Not only this, but the king of England’s desires did not line up with
the Church, which led to the formation of the Church of England. The Council of
Trent was soon called in response to the alleged heresy and falsity being
spread by the Protestants, and indeed Trent saved Catholicism. It created
documents which clearly spelled out the beliefs of the Church for all to see,
and attempted to counter Protestant claims. Reformer Charles Borromeo is
perhaps one of the more well-known individuals to come out of this period. He
actually cleaned out the church – he took out iconography and ornamentation in
order to put an emphasis on the people and the altar, he was respected as a
Bishop and personally saw that the reforms made by Trent were carried out.
Training for the
priests began to become more much of a militarized sort of effort instead of a
seminary type of effort. This all led to Catholic priests being seen in an odd
light by the lay people: how could the priests expect to relate to the
“ordinary” people if they had never themselves lived ordinary lives? Aside from
this, however, the reforms and decisions made at the Council of Trent enabled
the Catholic Church to return with a strong will, harkening back to the days of
Pope Innocent III. The reforms of Trent came to be seen as authoritative and
were held and treated as such, and these reforms were mainly in place until the
Second Vatican Council in the 1960s.
By the time the
Council of Trent had ended, the political, social, cultural, economic and
geographic situations were essentially the same as they had been prior to the
Council. The papacy did not appear to look fondly on the Council of Trent, and
as such, it was hard to believe that the council would bring any important
changes to Catholicism as a result. Eventually, however, the Pope had confirmed
the decisions made at Trent but there was still hesitation as well as stalling
on the part of the Pope. Not long after, efforts begun to come about to attempt
to interpret the changes and decisions made by Trent, and the publications to
come out of the Council demonstrated that the theology was quite a bit more
complicated as well as structured than had been initially portrayed by some.
Opposition to the council still continued, however. It was not necessarily
Protestants (who often opposed Catholic teachings) who were opposed to the
decisions at Trent, but people from within the Catholic faith who did not want
to see change done to Church discipline.
During the twenty
years following the Council of Trent, there was an intense period of trying to
implement the changes and decisions made, yet these were faced with both
agreement and further opposition. There were numerous individuals – most
famously, it seems, Charles Borromeo – who were even willing to risk their
lives to put forth the changes decreed by the Council, even though they knew
how Rome was viewing them. Reforms were slow but sure. The reforms were partly
concerned with the church structure. It gave the bishops a renewed purpose and
role in the church. However, problems still existed. Cardinal Robert Bellarmine
pointed out six issues with the implementation of the Council: there were still
too many diocese that had no head, the church selection was preferential based
on the status of the church, there were many bishops who were still without a
home, there were many bishops who had power over more than one diocese, there
were still too many bishops who were being transferred from one diocese to the
other on a frequent basis, and the resignation of bishops based on personal
factors happened much too often. Also, more social power was being given to
local parishes: schools, records and overall social control, which forced the
parishioners to be loyal to the bishop.
Toward the end of
the 1500s onward, Rome conveyed that the Church ought to view the Council of
Trent as the final word when it comes to matters of faith. In fact, the decrees
of the council not only superseded and replaced the decisions of previous
councils, but they also came to be seen as equal with the rest of tradition
itself. The idea and system of Tridentinism included the decisions, habits,
decrees and practices between the mid-1500s up until the early 1600s. One of
the major problems with all of this was the simple matter of what the Council
of Trent actually tried to do. It did not seek to reform the entirety of
Catholicism but mainly sought to respond to alleged heresy and present a true
and coherent Catholic set of beliefs. However, the Council of Trent came to be
seen less as a major event in history but instead as a set of disciplines,
doctrines and a body of beliefs. Since we now recognize the importance of
examining the Council as an event in history within its own historical setting
and context as well as its importance as an event, perhaps new light can be
shed on Trent.
Vatican II
recognized the importance of the Council of Trent as a historical event and in
fact utilized terms in their own council such as “implementation” and
“reception.” The Council of Trent provided Catholics with the ability to hold
firm to their doctrines and beliefs, since the Protestant Reformation had been
in full swing at the time and was coming down heavily, specifically upon Roman
Catholicism. The council had come about partly in response to Protestant’s
alleged problems, yet in our world today, should we not look at these decisions
in light of coming together ecumenically in unity? If nothing else, the Council
of Trent demonstrates the usage of theological research in the sixteenth
century, the kind of faithfulness to the Church that later has been sometimes
seen as harmful, yet in many ways is actually much more helpful and enlightening.
No comments:
Post a Comment