KULTURKAMPF (= “struggle for civilization”). — Under this name a violent legal and police persecution was disguised, perpetrated by Chancellor Bismarck against the Catholic Church in Germany and especially in Prussia. Its causes can be identified only in Bismarck’s personal policy, as a fierce advocate of the “reason of State,” supported by Masonic liberalism, anti-Roman German nationalism, and Protestantism.
With the Constitution of 1848, the Church enjoyed a certain degree of freedom in Prussia, which enabled a flourishing development of institutions and works; Catholics were asserting themselves in public life, while the hierarchy was strengthening its doctrinal and disciplinary ties with Rome at the First Vatican Council. Hence the resentment of the Church’s enemies and their reaction. The starting point was provided by three events: 1) victory over France and the establishment of the Empire; 2) the definition of the dogma of papal infallibility; 3) the formation of the Center Party.
Bismarck demanded that the Pope induce the French clergy to yield to German expansion and subsequently influence the Bavarian Catholic deputies, who were hostile to the establishment of the Empire. The papal refusal of both requests caused the loss of Prussian support for the Holy See in the Roman Question. Another reason for hostility toward the Church was the attitude of the Catholics of Westphalia and the Rhineland toward France during the Franco-German War, as well as the Bavarians’ opposition to the war itself. In order to obtain the support of the National Liberals concerning unification, Bismarck yielded to their program of dechristianization. In the religious sphere, there was no lack of hostility from the Protestant conservatives.
Faced with these maneuvers, the Prussian Catholics organized themselves. At Soest, a program of action was established that became the party’s banner during the election of the Landtag. The Catholic candidates prevailed and shortly afterward formed a party called the “Center.” Its principal leaders were Savigny, Windthorst, Mallinckrodt, Pietro and Augusto Reichensperger.
After the Empire had been established, Monsignor Ketteler asked Bismarck to extend throughout Germany (including Alsace-Lorraine) the constitutional guarantees enjoyed by the Prussian Catholics. This request was renewed by the Catholic deputies in the Reichstag, but the motion was rejected by the liberal-conservative coalition. Bismarck attempted to stifle the nascent party by seeking to provoke its condemnation by the Vatican, but without success. Meanwhile, disagreements broke out between the ecclesiastical and civil authorities concerning disciplinary and penal measures taken against anti-infallibilist priests and teachers: in Bavaria, the Minister of Religious Affairs, Lutz, declared that he did not recognize the dogma of papal infallibility and left those affected by the Church’s measures in their positions and in receipt of their salaries. Similar incidents occurred in Cologne, Bonn, and Braunsberg. In Berlin, on the other hand, the Catholic Division of the Ministry of Religious Affairs was suppressed after thirty years of operation, because it was headed by Catholics who were not only faithful to the hierarchy but also of Polish origin, and therefore doubly enemies of the Reich. The foundation of a “Old Catholic” Church detached the anti-infallibilists from Rome, despite Döllinger’s opposition, and provoked numerous disputes, because they demanded and obtained from the State the assignment of Catholic churches for their worship, and the Catholics were forced to abandon them.
The first law inaugurating the K. was the one known as the “pulpit paragraph”: the initiative was taken by Lutz, who called for the Reichstag’s intervention against the alleged danger represented by the abuse committed by priests in preaching, especially in Bavaria. The law was passed on 28 Nov. 1871 by 179 votes to 108; during the following five years it was applied twice in Silesia, twice in the Rhineland, twice in Westphalia, and once in Bavaria. In itself, therefore, it was of little importance, but unfortunately it constituted a precedent of incalculable significance. Indeed, a few months later came the law on “school supervision.” Before then, the State, to which supervision belonged, had asked the ecclesiastical authorities to appoint inspectors chosen from among priests or pastors, depending on the prevailing confession. Suspicious of the clergy’s influence over the school, especially in the Polish territories, Bismarck imposed a bill under which school inspectors were to be appointed, directed, and dismissed solely by the State. The Minister of Religious Affairs, Müller, a believing Protestant, sought to mitigate the bill, but the National Liberals protested and demanded Müller’s resignation from Bismarck. He was replaced by Adalbert Falk, who would become the K.’s dark spirit. The bill immediately met with opposition not only from Catholics but also from Protestants. In the Reichstag, formidable clashes took place between the Center and Bismarck, but the liberal majority approved the bill. In the House of Lords, the strong hostility of the Protestant conservatives was overcome following the Westervelle incident (a former papal zouave accused of having attempted an attack on Bismarck); the government press denounced an international conspiracy promoted by Catholics against Germany’s integrity, and the majority allowed itself to be convinced of the need to strike at the Ultramontanes. At first the law was applied moderately, but the school was now at the mercy of the State. Indeed, Falk refused to recognize the effects of the excommunication of Wollmann and Michelis, “Old Catholics,” by Archbishop Kremenz, and the same thing occurred in Cologne. The Minister of War, Roon, sought to compel the military bishop Namszanowski to permit the worship of the “Old Catholics” in the church of S. Pantaleo; his refusal was followed by his removal.
Following Prussia’s example, the other States too adopted measures hostile to Catholics. Faced with this threatening tide, the German bishops met at Fulda and on 1 Apr. 1872 sent a collective letter to Falk. Bismarck did not abandon the idea of bringing the Pope over to his side: having dismissed Arnim, he considered replacing him with Card. Gustavo di Hohenlohe, an opponent of the Jesuits,
of infallibility, of the ultramontanes, and a regalist. But the Vatican replied that it could not accept him: the blame was attributed to the Jesuits, who paid the consequences: proscription, closure of their houses, expulsion, and arrests, perpetrated even during the celebration of Mass or the administration of the Sacraments. Besides the Jesuits, the Lazarists, the Redemptorists, the Fathers of the Holy Spirit, and the Ladies of the Sacred Heart were affected, being considered “affiliated” with the Society. Falk also excluded all religious from public teaching, causing the closure of 892 convents. In Posnania, lay inspectors replaced ecclesiastical ones. The protests of Pius IX irritated Bismarck even further, and he vented his anger on Archbishop Kremenz, imposing on him unconditional subordination to the laws of the State; when he failed to obtain it, he had him excluded from the celebrations at Marienburg and deprived him of his allowance. Once again the bishops met at Fulda (20 Sept. 1873) and addressed their faithful with a collective letter of protest. The Catholic reaction was joined by that of certain Protestants, such as Gerlach, a sympathizer and later member of the Center, and the conservatives Kleist Retzow, Bismarck’s uncle, and Brüel, while the socialists sought rapprochement with the Catholics in order to have them as allies in the social question. From the little island of Caprera, Garibaldi applauded Bismarck. Among Bismarck’s advisers, there were various tendencies regarding the regulation of relations between Church and State: Abeken, Wagener, and Roessler wanted an uncompromising struggle for scripturization; Meier and Hitzschius favored separation between Church and State; Schulte, an “Old Catholic,” advocated the democratization of the Church under the auspices of the State; Friedberg was the theorist of the subjugation of the Church to the State. Falk inclined toward the adoption of Friedberg’s theories, but Bismarck did not wish to adapt himself to rigid theories, preferring to adopt a flexible policy. The court was little enthusiastic about the belligerent ideas, and Bismarck himself was strangely hostile to imperial ecclesiastical legislation: the experiment was to begin in Prussia, accompanied by a transformation of the bureaucracy, which was accused of conservatism. At Varzin, Bismarck decided to relinquish the office of president of the Prussian government, entrusting it to Roon, a conservative. The projects were temporarily shelved, but following Pius IX’s speech in consistory there was a recrudescence of persecution, and diplomatic relations with the Holy See were severed (30 Dec. 1872).
Meanwhile, Schulte asked the government to recognize the “Old Catholic” Church and one of its bishops; in return, he offered his collaboration with the State’s ecclesiastical policy.
The projects of Falk and his associates awaited the Emperor’s signature: Bismarck’s principal task, despite his resignation as Prussian president, was to persuade Wilhelm I to sign them. Above all, they aimed to deprive Prussian Catholics of the privileges that the Constitution of 1848 had granted them in relation to the other States. Articles 15, 16, and 18 of the Constitution, which guaranteed the freedom and independence of the Catholic Church, were therefore amended. It was during the session of 17 Jan. 1873 that the celebrated materialist Virchow gave the battle waged by the State against the Church the name of K. The debates were extremely violent: on one side, brute force and anti-Catholic and anti-Roman venom; on the other, the defenders of the rights of conscience, freedom, and faith. On 9 May 1873 the laws were approved. The first contained provisions concerning the education and placement of ecclesiastics; it required, as a condition for holding an ecclesiastical office, the passing of a state examination in philosophy, history, and German literature, and subjected every appointment of an ecclesiastic to state approval. The second established rules concerning the Church’s disciplinary power, reserving it to the German ecclesiastical authorities and thus excluding the Holy See; it instituted a royal tribunal for ecclesiastical affairs, to which appeals could be made against disciplinary measures taken by ecclesiastical authorities, and which was granted the right to depose ecclesiastics from their offices in the event of transgression of state laws concerning their office or the spiritual functions of their office. The third law limited the bishops’ right to resort to penal and coercive measures and to disciplinary laws belonging exclusively to the religious sphere, but prohibited the punishment of those who submitted to state laws concerning ecclesiastical matters. The fourth law facilitated “leaving the Church.” Severe penalties were imposed for failure to observe the May laws.
The Vatican, previously consulted about the projects by Melchers, had replied by inviting the German bishops to agree upon a uniform line of conduct. At Fulda, after reflecting on the consequences of their attitude, the German bishops agreed with Ketteler to reject the laws in their entirety and to offer at least passive resistance. As regards the oath of loyalty to the amended Constitution, Catholic officials would take it with a mental reservation.
The Catholics continued their activities undauntedly, indeed multiplying them: prayers, congresses, the press, propaganda, social issues, and elections. Some Silesian Catholic nobles, enemies of the Center, signed an address pledging loyalty to the Emperor and respect for the laws (14 June 1873). But the attempt of the “State Catholics” did not undermine the cohesion of the episcopate, the Center, and the Catholic people. The application of the “May laws” was characterized by intrusions of government commissioners and police raids on colleges and seminaries, fines imposed on bishops, and arrests of priests not recognized by the State. The first to be affected were the Archbishop of Posen, Ledochowski, and the Bishop of Fulda, Kött. The former, a repeat offender and insolvent, was deprived of his endowment; subsequently his furnishings and palace were seized, and he was imprisoned for debts owed to the State.
In vain did Pius IX write personally to the Emperor. On the very day that Wilhelm replied negatively to the Pope, the government recognized the episcopal jurisdiction of the “Old Catholic” bishop Reinkens, who had been consecrated at Rotterdam by the Jansenist bishop of Deventer. On 4 Nov. 1873, elections were held for the Landtag: the Center asserted itself, but unfortunately the national liberals had grown at the expense of the conservatives. To remedy the fact that many of the faithful were celebrating religious marriages clandestinely, Falk considered the time ripe to introduce compulsory civil marriage and, in parallel, to entrust the keeping of civil-status registers to lay officials. Roon, who opposed this, resigned, and Bismarck resumed his position as Prussian president. In the new Landtag, the Center called for the adoption of universal, direct, and secret suffrage and for the payment of parliamentary allowances, since there were by then many workers and peasants among the deputies; but the proposals were postponed by those same national liberals who had nevertheless included them in their electoral program. The request to annul the May laws met with the same fate.
By then ideological factors had also entered the struggle, represented by figures such as Strauss, an enemy of all Churches; Hartmann, the anti-Christian philosopher; Virchow, the materialist; and others. Jews and Freemasons held forth from their platforms, provoking the resentment even of believing Protestants.
Despite the campaign of hatred and lies (the false bull of Pius IX), the Centre made gains in the elections to the Reichstag. Unfortunately, the law on civil marriage and the keeping of civil-status registers was passed and, after some hesitation, signed by the Emperor. Falk also planned to entrust the government with the administration of vacant episcopal endowments and the conferral of ecclesiastical offices. There followed, one after another, the imprisonments of M. Ledochowski, bishop of Gnesna, M. Eberhard, bishop of Trier, P. Melchers, cardinal of Cologne, K. Martin, bishop of
Paderborn, and J. B. Brinkmann, bishop of Münster. But the Catholics resisted: the Chapter of Posen refused to appoint a vicar in place of Ledochowski; the parishioners of Grasdorf refused to read the parish priest’s name in accordance with the government’s directives, and at Xions the faithful deserted the church served by a state-appointed parish priest. Unfortunately, an unfortunate incident in which the Catholics were unjustly implicated—namely, Kullmann’s attempt on Bismarck’s life (Kissingen, 13 July 1874)—provoked a violent reaction against the Catholic press, associations, and personalities.
On 5 February 1875 Pius IX wrote to the German bishops, declaring the May Laws null (irritae), and on 15 March he bestowed the cardinal’s hat on Ledochowski, still in prison. Bismarck attempted in vain to promote an international K. A vile act of blackmail was then put into operation: under the so-called “law of deprivation or starvation” of 2 April 1875, all subsidies owed by the State to the Catholic Church were suspended, while it was declared that the allowance would continue to be paid to those ecclesiastics who declared in writing that they submitted to the May Laws.
Another law, of 31 May 1875, suppressed all religious houses, except those whose members devoted themselves exclusively to the care of the sick, on condition that they be placed under State supervision and could be suppressed at any time. On 18 June, Articles 15, 16, and 18 of the Prussian Constitution were definitively repealed, although the ecclesiastical laws enacted from 1873 onward were in contradiction with them. Immediately thereafter came the law on the administration of ecclesiastical property: this measure, the creation of Schulte, removed ecclesiastical assets from the direct and exclusive management of the parish priests, entrusting it to a church council (Kirchenwortland), elected by the parishioners and supervised by a committee three times larger (Gemeindevertretung), likewise elected; the parish priest was the president, but with only a consultative vote! The bishop and the senior president of the province could offer suggestions, but the final word belonged to the Minister of Worship. The bishops consulted Rome and decided that, although they did not accept the law, it was advisable to tolerate it: in fact, the Catholic people elected to the church councils and committees trustworthy and sincere men who cooperated with the hierarchy. The “Old Catholics” obtained the right to use Catholic churches and benefices whenever they were present in substantial numbers; despite the civil authorities’ leniency, however, very few were their gains. This period is characterized by an interminable series of episodes of heroism and sacrifice. The Catholics resisted, while their adversaries grew increasingly concerned about the consequences. In the Reichstag elections of January 1877, the Centre and the conservatives advanced at the expense of the National Liberals. The Catholic von Galen introduced a proposal for social legislation, which was rejected. While the majority of Germans desired the end of the K., Bismarck finally found two foreign allies: Gambetta and Crispi. But the death of Pius IX and the election of Leo XIII marked a decisive turning point in the struggle.
The two attempts by socialists on the Emperor’s life, together with the parliamentary gains of the Centre and the socialists, shifted the government’s attention to the socialist danger. Meanwhile, both on the occasion of Leo’s elevation and following the attempts on the Emperor’s life, a cordial exchange of messages had taken place between the Pope and the Emperor. At Kissingen, Bismarck held lengthy conversations with the nuncio in Munich, Aloisi-Masella, but no immediate results were achieved, because the Holy See demanded as a preliminary condition the abolition of the May Laws, while Bismarck demanded that the government be notified before ecclesiastical offices were conferred. The first scapegoat of this change in policy was Falk, who was replaced by the conservative von Puttkamer. The discussions continued in Vienna between the Prussian ambassador and the nuncio Jacobini. The first law of détente was that of 14 July 1880. It declared the “official spiritual functions” of ecclesiastics appointed before the May Laws to vacant or interdicted parishes exempt from punishment, and authorized the government to dispense bishops from the oath to observe the laws of the State, to resume state subsidies to individual dioceses, and to permit the establishment of new religious houses devoted to the care of the sick. In 1881 provision was made for filling the sees of Trier and Fulda, and in 1882 those of Osnabrück, Breslau, and Paderborn. In the same year diplomatic relations between Prussia and the Holy See were resumed. Although it maintained its position on the May Laws, on 11 June 1883 a law was issued permitting bishops to exercise episcopal functions in vacant dioceses and to appoint, without any obligation of notification, chaplains and assistant priests to vacant parishes, provided that they were dispensed from the prescribed state examination. Leo allowed the bishops to request the dispensation “for the past and for this one time only,” explicitly protesting that he did not recognize the May Laws. The bishop of Limburg, Blum, was “burdened,” and Brinkmann was able to return from exile. The state “interdict” was also lifted from the dioceses of Ermland, Kulm, Hildesheim, and Cologne.
With the appointment of nuncio Jacobini as Secretary of State, the discussions continued in Rome, but always without producing definitive results. In Berlin, Windthorst continued obstinately to attack the May Laws, succeeding in obtaining votes twice in favor of repealing the law on the expulsion of the clergy. On the Vatican’s side, the insurmountable preliminary condition was freedom in the education of the clergy; on the German side, it was Ledochowski’s renunciation of Posen. The question of Cologne was resolved by Melchers’s appointment as cardinal and Krements’s promotion to archbishop of Cologne.
In Sept. 1883 there was a sudden rapprochement between the Pope and Bismarck: Germany was in conflict with Spain over possession of the Carolines. Umberto I offered himself as arbiter, but Spain refused, and Bismarck turned to Leo XIII. As a sign of goodwill, the Pope conferred upon the chancellor the Supreme Order of Christ. The fruit of this rapprochement was, on the pontifical side, an instruction to the bishops to ascertain, before permanently conferring an ecclesiastical office, whether the government had any objection of a civil or political nature; on the side of the Reich, the law of 21 May 1886 abolished the state cultural examination and authorized theological studies in the existing episcopal institutions; the royal tribunal for ecclesiastical affairs was suppressed, and the Pope’s disciplinary authority was recognized. Leo XIII and Bismarck were eager to be reconciled definitively, and the Vatican preferred to negotiate directly, setting aside the hierarchy and the Zentrum, which tended to continue the struggle intransigently until the return of the status quo ante. The law of 29 Apr. 1887 limited the duty of notification to the definitive appointment of parish priests, restored to priests and religious the freedom to celebrate Mass and administer the Sacraments, and permitted the foundation of institutions devoted to the care of souls, charitable activity, teaching, and the contemplative life. After more than fifteen years of K., the following remained in force: the law against the Jesuits, the law on school inspection, and the suppression of Articles 15, 16, and 18 of the Constitution. These laws, too, were gradually losing their force, and Catholic life was beginning to flourish again after so much devastation.
ne XIII, III, Milano 1933, passim; H. Kars, Kanzler und Kirche, Giessen 1934; K. Eggers, Rom gegen Reich, Stoccarda 1935; F. V. Rummel, Das Ministerium Lutz und seine Gegner 1871-82, Monaco 1935; H. Tötter, Bismarck und das Zentrum, Emedette 1936, Karlsruhe 1938; W. Windelband, Berlin-Madrid-Rom, Essen 1939; E. Schmidt, Bismarcks Kampf mit dem politischen Katholizismus, Amburgo 1942; M. O. Kolbeck, American opinion on the K., Washington 1942; E. Eyck, Bismarck. Leben und Werk, III, Erlenbach-Zurigo 1944, passim; F. Chabod, K. e Triplice alleanza in discussione fra il Vaticano e il governo austro-ungarico nel 1883, in Rivista storica italiana, 62 (1950), pp. 257–268.