BENEDETTO XIV, POPE. – Prospero Lambertini, born in Bologna on 31 March 1675 to Marcello and Lucrezia Bulgarini; educated by the Somaschi and then in Rome, he devoted himself to ecclesiastical studies, particularly to canon and civil law. Consistorial advocate (1701), Promoter of the Faith (1708) at the Congregation of Rites, canon of St Peter’s (1712), and subsequently consultor of the Holy Office, of Rites, and of the Council, and, from 1722, canonist of the Penitentiary, he acquired practical knowledge of the functioning of the various dicasteries. Appointed titular bishop of Theodosiopolis in 1725 and archbishop of Ancona in 1727, he was created cardinal in pectore on 9 December 1726 and published on 30 April 1728. He received the archiepiscopal see of his Bologna in 1731 and retained it also as pope, until he appointed Cardinal Malvezzi as his successor there.
During the long conclave that followed the death of Clement XII (6 February 1740), Lambertini at first remained in the background, but on 16 August he was suddenly designated and the following day proclaimed pope under the name of B. XIV. Of a good-natured and approachable character, B. went down in history as a witty man, possessing that polished and gentlemanly exterior which is evident in him not only in conversation but also in the private correspondence that he kept alive, even as pontiff, with scholars and friends, most of whom were scholars themselves. In an age in which erudition, including on ecclesiastical subjects, was flourishing, he succeeded in being a well-informed and outstanding scholar, and did not shrink from demonstrating it in his writings; with enlightened judgment he overcame every misoneistic traditionalism.
He was also an able sovereign. In difficult times he took severe measures to restore the treasury, balancing expenditure, resorting to prudent taxation, and succeeding in safeguarding the neutrality of the Holy See. His government also introduced many measures, some of them excellent. Rome received, among other things, a new urban division, while through enlightened patronage the four Academies were founded there—of Councils, of Ecclesiastical History, of Liturgy, and of Roman Antiquities—and the Academy of the Lincei was also reformed into the “Nuovi Lincei,” directing it toward natural-science research. He showed his appreciation of the merits of the Bolognese Archiginnasio, in particular through the establishment of a chair and an anatomical museum, and through other measures that promoted its scientific activity. His greatest concern, however, was ecclesiastical reform, both among the clergy and among the people, and he left a record of it in legislative innovations and in his insistence that the ancient laws be observed. He encouraged missions for the people throughout Italy, aided by the preaching of s. Leonardo da Porto Maurizio and by the jubilee celebrations of 1750. He renewed the condemnations of Freemasonry, following the example already set by Clement XII, and of the writings of the enemies of Christianity, which were spreading ever more widely. He also opposed Jansenism.
International discord, and especially the conflict over the imperial crown that arose after the death of Charles VI (1740), caused B. no small difficulties. The conflict was between Maria Theresa, his daughter, who supported the candidacy of her husband Francis of Lorraine, grand duke of Tuscany, and Charles Albert of Bavaria, backed by France and Prussia. The struggle that broke out in 1742 over the latter’s election and coronation spread to Italy as well, and the Papal States themselves, although neutral, became involved, while Bologna was helplessly prey to Austrian, Spanish, and Sardinian troops. The death of Charles of Bavaria (1745) and the election of the Lorraine Francis I brought general peace through the Treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle (1748); B., however, was forced to protest over the unrecognized rights of the Holy See to Parma and Piacenza.
The negotiations for agreements or concordats with the courts of Turin, Madrid, and Naples were likewise difficult. As regards Turin, Cardinal Lambertini had contributed extensively to easing the tension that had remained acute between 1731 and 1735. As pope, thanks to direct correspondence with Charles Emmanuel III and the Marquis d’Ormea, he was able in 1741 to conclude the agreements concerning the apostolic vicariate over the papal territories ceded in fief to the monarchy and concerning ecclesiastical benefices. More arduous was the question of ecclesiastical jurisdiction and immunity, successfully concluded in 1742 also through the efforts of the papal commissioner Ludovico Merlini; proof of the improved relations is provided by the bull of 1744 in favor of the Order of SS. Maurice and Lazarus, and by the settlement of the question of the right of spoliation and of benefice pensions.
In 1753 the longstanding issue provoked in Spain by dissatisfaction with the concordat concluded with Philip V in 1737 was also brought to a close. After various developments, the sovereign was granted universal patronage over all dioceses and benefices, while the collation of only fifty-two was reserved to the Holy See and that of several others to the bishops, with particular patronages being respected. The compensation granted by Spain did not allay the well-founded apprehensions of the Curia, which was rightly concerned that such a precedent might encourage similar claims by other governments.
With Naples too, as early as 1741, an effort was made to bring to completion a concordat intended to settle old disputes that had resurfaced despite the feudal investiture granted to the new king, Charles of Bourbon. A mixed tribunal was established to decide disputed cases of ecclesiastical jurisdiction, and the Pontiff made broad concessions concerning immunity and the right of asylum, but without encountering, especially through the actions of Tanucci, the response he had hoped for.
At a time of the obstinate and universal claim on the part of Catholic states to interfere in ecclesiastical affairs, B.’s constant aim was to avoid, through conciliatory procedures, conspicuous diplomatic ruptures, thereby saving the Church from the extreme harm resulting from a flood of civil laws and decrees inconsistent with canon law. Thus, between Austria and Venice, he resolved the intricate and longstanding dispute over the patriarchate of Aquileia, which by the bull of 1751 was divided into the two archbishoprics of Udine, for the Venetian dominion, and Gorizia, for the Austrian one. He maintained good relations with Frederick II of Prussia, officially recognized for the first time by the Holy See as king, particularly with regard to the Catholic affairs of Silesia, which he had conquered. France was not free from anxieties, owing to the intrigues and machinations of the Jansenists, the arbitrary actions of the Parlement, and the abuses of Louis XV. Matters went better in Portugal, whose sovereign was granted the title of “most faithful king,” although, shortly before his death, B., as a result of Pombal’s maneuvers, had to appoint Cardinal Saldanha visitor and reformer of the Jesuits of that nation.
In the missionary field B. sought in some way to resolve the centuries-old controversies over the Chinese and Malabar rites, prohibiting by the bull Ex quo singulari of 1742 certain honors paid to ancestors and to Confucius that were practiced in China, and, through the other bull, Omnium sollicitudinum, of 1744, condemning the toleration of certain customs and superstitions in India; finally, he imposed upon missionaries an oath not to permit such rites.
B. was accused of a condescension that seemed excessive toward the governments of his time, and because of that brief correspondence with Voltaire, who with great impertinence dedicated his “Mahomet” to him; but the uprightness of his intention to spare the Church greater harm from the absolutism of the princes and philosophers of the age was undeniable. The great Pontiff died on 3 May 1758 and was buried in the Vatican basilica, where a monument erected according to a design by Pietro Bracci commemorates him.
B. XIV AS A CANONIST. – Endowed with outstanding intellect, combined with constant application to study throughout his long life, and favored by the circumstances of his ecclesiastical career, which led him to hold many important curial offices, from that of consistorial advocate to the supreme pontificate, B. XIV remains one of the Church’s greatest canonists and legislators. What distinguishes all his numerous works is their clear diction, free of all bombast, and above all their method: he does not rely on a priori constructions or purely theoretical considerations, but on profound and extensive historical investigation, which enables him to present the various problems in their true light and resolve them in conformity with the tradition and practice of the Church. Schulte (v. bibliografia) does not hesitate to call B. the true founder of modern historical-legal scholarship, whose development he anticipated.
Some of his works were written in Italian, translat-
1. De servorum Dei beatificatione et beatorum canonizatione, Op. om., vols. I–VII, Prato 1839–46. In addition: Bologna 1734–38, Padua 1743, Rome 1747, Venice 1767, Naples 1773, Rome 1783. The work proper consists of four books: Book I contains the controversiae praeliminare and offers an almost historical and practical overview of the process of beatification and canonization; Book II deals with the process of beatification, beginning with the ordinary process and continuing to its evaluation in the Roman Curia, all from a historical-juridical perspective; Book III concerns the questions to be addressed in the process: witnesses, martyrdom, virtuous life (in general and for individual states), and special graces (gratis datae); Book IV has two parts: the first deals with miracles (with discussion of many concrete cases), while the second presents liturgical questions: concessions of the Divine Office and the Mass, inscription in the Roman Martyrology, and the choice of patron saints.
This work, based on extensive study and on the experience acquired in the office of Promoter of the Faith (1708–28), has remained unsurpassed and classical for the Roman Curia. As regards written historical testimonies, however, he admitted them only as subsidiary proofs, thereby showing himself a formalist in this respect. The establishment of the historical section within the Congregation of Rites (1930) appropriately remedied this deficiency.
2. Institutiones ecclesiasticae (in Italian, ed. Bologna 1731, 1735; Venice 1740; Rome 1742; in Latin, translated by Ildefonso di s. Carlo delle Scuole Pie, Rome 1747 and 1750; Ingolstadt 1751; Bassano 1760; Venice 1765). This is not a systematic work, but a collection of instructions, edicts, and pastoral letters, treating in 107 articles subjects of the greatest diversity, published by B. when he was archbishop of Bologna. They chiefly concern pastoral life, but always with profound historical-juridical learning.
3. De Synodo Diocesano. The first edition, Rome 1748, prepared by Azevedo, is divided into 8 books; the work was subsequently enlarged by the author and divided into 13 books, Rome 1755; Ferrara 1756, 1760; Padua 1756; Parma 1764; Venice 1775, 1792; Mainz 1842. He composed this work when he was archbishop of Bologna, but subsequently perfected it after becoming pope. It contains all the matters that may be the subject of a diocesan synod, with such abundance that it is difficult to find anything lacking that might fall within episcopal administration. Because of its calm and objective exposition, the work was judged a masterpiece, certainly the finest that exists on the subject. The author does not hesitate even to cite and discuss Protestant and Gallican authors.
4. Theaurus revolutionum S. Congregationis Concilii, I–III, Urbino 1739; IV, Rome 1740. Since he was secretary of the Council from 1718 to 1728, he introduced the practice of adding to the Folia causarum distributed before the sessions the earlier decisions in similar cases and the opinions of the best canonists. These sheets were subsequently collected by him and published together with the resolutions of the Council. The collection was later continued through the entire year 1908, and comprises 167 vols., some of them reprinted in Rome 1843 ff. According to Schulte, this innovation, by making Roman practice and jurisprudence evident, had a great influence on canonistic doctrine and on the judgments of ecclesiastical tribunals throughout the world.
5. Quæstiones canonicae et morales. It is substantially identical with the first 4 vols. of the Theaurus; its arrangement, however, is sometimes modified, and some minor matters are omitted.
6. Casus conscientiae de mandato Prosp. Lambertini, Archiepiscopi Bononensis propositi et resoluti, Ferrara 1764; Augsburg 1766 ff.; Liège 1853–59.
7. Bullarium Benedicti XIV (eds. Rome 1746–54, 1754–1758, 1760–62; Venice 1768). In his constitutions B. speaks as a legislator without abandoning his habits as a scholar; consequently, some bulls and encyclicals bear a personal stamp and also contain theoretical considerations, taking account of the doctrine of authors and the decisions of the Roman Congregations. The matters on which B. legislated are exceedingly diverse and cannot be specified here. It may merely be recalled that, by the constitution Dei miseratione of 3 November 1741, he instituted for matrimonial cases, under penalty of nullity, the defensor vinculi, whose duties he specified; by the constitution Vix pervenit of 1 November 1745, he set forth detailed principles concerning interest in a loan; for the rest, cf. P. Gasparri, Codicis Iuris Canonici Fontes, I, Rome 1923, pp. 662–953; II, ibid. 1924, pp. 1–576, where the constitutions that served in compiling the CIC are reproduced and which, in some editions of the latter, are indicated in the notes. They are extremely numerous, far more so than those of any other pontiff.
Also relevant to canon law, among the other works of B. XIV, are De sacrosancto Missae sacrificio and De festis Domini nostri Iesu Christi et Beatae Mariae Virginis, whose content is almost exclusively liturgical.