TRENTO, ARCIDIOCESI DI

TRENTO, archdiocese of. - A provincial capital and, since 1946, of the Trentino-Alto Adige region. The archdiocese comprises the province of Trento and more than half of the province of Bolzano. It has an area of 9,856 sq. km. with a population of 633,997 inhabitants, of whom 631,900 are Catholics, distributed in 439 parishes served by 1,129 diocesan priests (of whom 268 are German-speaking); about 575 regular priests; 2,280 nuns. 86 male religious houses; 264 female. The archdiocese possesses a theological seminary in Trento and two minor seminaries (Trento and Tyrol: cf. Ann. Pont. 1953, p. 429).

A city of Gallic or Rhaetian foundation, permanently occupied by the Romans around 37 B.C. and included in the tenth Augustan region: *Veneta et Histria*. After the fall of the Western Empire it passed under the dominion of Theodoric and the Byzantines. From 569 it was the seat of a Lombard duchy; under the Carolingians the march of Trento was part of the Kingdom of Italy, but in 952 Otto I incorporated it into the German Empire, of which it remained a part until 1803. During the Napoleonic period it passed to Austria (1803-1805), then to Bavaria (until 1810), then to the Kingdom of Italy (until 1816), and finally, for more than a century, again to Austria. Since 1918 it has been reunited with the Italian State.

Ecclesiastically, the diocese was suffragan of Aquileia until 1751, then of Gorizia (a jurisdiction never recognized by the bishop of Trento), from 1772 to 1825 immediately subject to the Holy See, from 1825 to 1829 suffragan of Salzburg, and from 1920 immediately subject to the Holy See, which in 1929 elevated it to an archiepiscopal see without suffragans.

Legend attributes the foundation of the episcopal see to the holy Aquileian martyrs Hermagoras and Fortunatus, disciples of St. Mark. In reality, no Christian records are preserved for the first three centuries. The episcopal see was founded in the 4th century (the first known bishop is Jovinus, second in the list, Abundantius, living in 381). The third bishop was St. Vigilius (q.v., d. 400 or 405), who completed the evangelization of the territory and sealed the missionary work with his martyrdom. His relations with St. Ambrose (PL 16, 982) and St. Simplician (PL 13, 549-552) link the Tridentine Church with Milan, but in the first decades of the 5th century the diocese was part of the metropolitan organization of Aquileia (q.v.). With Aquileia, the diocese of Trento was involved in the Three Chapters schism and returned to communion with Rome at the end of the 7th century. Among the bishops of the first millennium, Eugippius (6th century) deserves special mention; he is credited with the enlargement of the sepulchral church of St. Vigilius and the arrangement of his relics.

Emperor Conrad II in 1027 (according to some already Henry II in 1004), by donating to the Church of Trento the coasts of Trento, Bolzano and Val Venosta, created the temporal principality of the bishops of Trento, whose boundaries differ in various points from the diocesan ones. In the 12th century the beneficial influences of the reform of ecclesiastical life were also felt in the Tridentine territory: the Benedictine abbey of St. Lawrence in Trento and the monasteries of the Augustinian Canons Regular of St. Michael at Adige and of Augia (near Bolzano) were founded. The principal promoter of this reform, Bishop Altmann (1124-49), was also the initiator of the present cathedral, which he consecrated in 1145 in the presence of the patriarch of Aquileia Pellegrino. In the Investiture Controversy the prince-bishops of Trento sided with the emperor and subsequently generally with the Ghibellines. The most flourishing period for the principality was that of Bishop Frederick Vanga (1207-18), who consolidated civil power, promoted agriculture and the systematic exploitation of the mines (the mining statute is famous), enlarged and adorned the cathedral, reorganized the registration of documents (Codex Vangianus). Frederick II's policy led to a kind of temporary secularization. Later a long series of exhausting struggles began with the counts of Tyrol, who evolved from advocates to actual lords of the principality: the Compattate of 1363 and 1454 and the series of German bishops of the 14th and 15th centuries sealed this evolution. Humanism took root in Trent under Prince-Bishop Johannes Hinderbach (1466-86), who enjoyed the trust of Aeneas Silvius Piccolomini (later Pius II) and Nicholas of Cusa (q.v.). To Bishop and Cardinal Bernardo Clesio (q.v., 1514-39) the city owes its social reorganization and its architectural renewal, which were to make it a worthy seat for the Council. After Bernardo Clesio, for over a hundred years the Church of Trento was governed by members of the Madruzzo family (q.v.): Cardinals Cristoforo, Lodovico, Carlo Gaudenzio and Bishop Carlo Emanuele (d. 1658). In particular, Lodovico and Carlo Gaudenzio were active in applying the Tridentine decrees in the diocese and in the erection of the seminary. Franciscans, Somaschi, Carmelites and Jesuits founded or built new convents in the diocese during this period. The last prince-bishop was Pietro Vigilio de Thun (d. 1800). During the vacancy following his death, the ecclesiastical principality was definitively secularized in favor of the House of Austria.

The boundaries of the diocese were enlarged in 1785 and 1818 with the addition of the Valsugana and Primiero (until then belonging to Feltre), Merano and Val Venosta (until then under Chur), the deaneries of Fassa, Chiusa, Kastelruth (until then under Brixen) and other smaller territories. In 1818 the episcopal table and cathedral chapter were newly endowed by the Emperor of Austria, who in turn received the right to nominate the new bishops. The bishops of Trento were recognized by the Emperor of Austria with the title of prince, which was later reconfirmed by the Italian government in 1926. The bishops of the 19th century, F. X. Luschin von Ebengreuth (1823-34), the Servant of God Johannes Nepomuk von Tschiderer ([q.v.] 1834-60), Benedetto Riccabona (1861-79), had to struggle clearly against Josephinism and the systems introduced by it: their action contributed to prepare and then to bring to fruition the agreements concretized between the Holy See and Austria in the Concordat of 1855. Under Bishops Eugenio Carlo Valussi (1886-1903) and Celestino Endrici (1904-40) there was a notable revival of Catholic social activity; at the same time the national question presented new and difficult tasks to pastoral care.

Principal monuments. — The Romanesque cathedral, built over the tomb of the patron saint VIGILIUS, is the work of the Comacine masters. Its exterior is characterized by the development of the Romanesque arcades, the large rose windows of the transept and façade, and the refined apses adjoining the nearby little castle. Inside, special note should be taken of the two long staircases built into the wall, the frescoes of the transept (14th century), and the tombstones of the prince-bishops. Here the Council of T. held its solemn sessions. S. Maria is the ancient parish church of the city. The present Renaissance building is the work of Antonio Medaglia (1520). In 1562–63 it served as the hall for the general congregations of the Council. The Romanesque church of S. Lorenzo is all that remains of the ancient Benedictine abbey, later transformed into a Dominican convent and hospice for celebrated theologians at the time of the Council. The church of S. Francesco Saverio is the work of the Jesuit Andrea Pozzo, a native of Trent. The Castello del Buon Consiglio was from the 13th to the 19th century the residence of the prince-bishops. Enlarged in various periods, its most splendid part owes much to Cardinal Bernardo Clesio, who summoned famous artists to decorate II. Finally, in the city there are convents and palaces that housed notable figures of the Council: the convents of S. Marco, S. Francesco, S. Maria, S. Francesco, S. Maria, S. Francesco, S. Maria, S. Francesco, S. Maria, S. Francesco, S. Francesco, S. Francesco, S. Francesco, S. Francesco, S. Francesco.

The Council of T. — The Council of T., the nineteenth ecumenical council, took place, with various interruptions, from 1545 to 1563, and was convoked to refute the errors against the faith propagated by the “Reformers” and to promote a reform of ecclesiastical discipline.

1. Antecedents

Although Leo X had already condemned 41 errors of Martin Luther by the bull Exsurge Domine of 15 June 1520, the defection movement he had created had by no means ceased. Already after the interrogation he underwent at Augsburg before Cardinal Tommaso De Vio, Luther on 28 November 1518 had appealed from the Pope to a general council, and he renewed this appeal on 17 November 1520, following the publication of the bull Exsurge. These two appeals, however, were nothing more than procedural moves and, in accordance with the bull Execrabilis of Pius II dated 18 January 1460, were invalid and devoid of legal force.

The proposal to bring the question of Luther before a general council was not connected with these two appeals of his, but rather with the request of the German Estates, advanced by both Catholics and Protestants at the Diet of Nuremberg in 1523: the question of Luther was to be taken up and defined by a “free Christian council in German lands.” This formula from Nuremberg aroused the

Superintendence of Monuments and Galleries, Trent.

Trent, Archdiocese of — Page from the Purple Evangeliary (4th–5th century) containing the Old Latin version, the “African text” (cod. e palatinus). Gospel of St Luke 1:22–30 — Trent, Castello del Buon Consiglio.

concerns in Rome, because the Lutherans understood the word “free” to mean “free from the Pope” and aimed especially at releasing bishops from their oath of fidelity to the Pontiff, who would thus be placed in the position of a party to the case before the council; and under the term “Christian” there lay hidden the demand that laymen, and in particular princes, should be admitted to the council alongside the prelates and with equal authority. The persistent demand, moreover, that the council should meet in a German city—among the names proposed were Cologne, Mainz, Strasbourg, Constance, and Regensburg—exposed the council to the danger of falling under the pressure of public opinion, which was openly favorable to Luther.

When the Diet of Nuremberg in 1524 found that nothing had been done to convoke a general council, it proposed a German national council to be held at Speyer; but Clement VII refused it, and Emperor Charles V eventually prohibited II. In the years that followed, no general council was convened either, because Clement VII—with good reason—feared that the false conciliar doctrine of the 15th century, concerning the superiority of the council over the pope, would resurface and provoke fresh complications. Moreover, the long war between the Emperor and Francis I, king of France, divided the two most powerful sovereigns of Christendom into opposing camps. After the peace concluded at Barcelona in 1529, the Pope, on the occasion of the coronation of Charles V as emperor at Bologna (1530), promised him that he would, if necessary, convoke a council; but he added certain conditions that rendered fruitless the preparatory negotiations with the Lutherans; France, moreover, was not favorable to the opening of a council, since it foresaw in it an increase of the Emperor’s power.

A turn for the better occurred only when Clement VII’s successor, Paul III (1534–49), gave first place in his government program to the council and to reform. In agreement with the Emperor, who had visited him in Rome on his return from Africa, the Pope

2. First period (1545–47)

On 22 Feb. 1545 the Pope appointed as his legates to the Council Cardinals Giovanni del Monte, Marcello Cervini and Reginald Pole. Although the first two entered Trent on 13 March, it was still impossible to set a date for the opening, since, apart from the Bishop of Trent, Cardinal Cristoforo Madruzzo, only two external prelates were present: Bishop Sanfelice of La Cava, appointed commissioner of the Council, and Bishop Tommaso Campeggio of Feltre. Despite these unpromising beginnings, the Council did take place that time, because in the summer of 1545 a pact had been concluded between the Pope and the Emperor that at least temporarily silenced the misunderstandings and mistrust that had long divided the two heads of Christendom. The Emperor, in fact, had decided to break the insufferable power of the Schmalkaldic League by force of arms, and the Pope promised financial subsidies and military aid for the war. Once victory was achieved, the Emperor intended to compel the Protestants to participate in the Council in the hope of thereby restoring the unity of the Church.

The Emperor’s inadequate military preparation delayed the execution of this grand design until the spring of 1546. Nevertheless, the Pope had the Council opened on the third Sunday of Advent, 13 Dec. 1545, to prevent the prelates who had arrived in Trent in summer and autumn from leaving the city again. At the opening session in the choir of Trent Cathedral, besides the three legates and Cardinal Madruzzo, there were present 4 archbishops, 21 bishops, 5 generals of religious orders, 42 theologians and 8 jurists. The occasion sermon was preached by the Minorite Cornelio Musso, Bishop of Bitonto. The first weeks were devoted to preparing a programme of work and determining the procedural order of the Council. Besides the bishops, only the generals of religious orders and representatives of entire monastic congregations, e.g., the Benedictine Congregation of Monte Cassino, but not individual abbots or procurators of absent bishops, had the right to vote. Since the Pope wished controversial doctrines to be treated first, while the Emperor desired that reform should come first, a compromise was reached on 22 Jan. 1546, on the proposal of the Bishop of Feltre, to deal with dogma and reform simultaneously. The discussion of dogmatic matters generally followed this order: the legates, who throughout the Council reserved to themselves the exclusive right of proposing, presented to the “minor theologians” a list of Protestant errors concerning a given doctrine; the theologians then discussed these errors in the so-called “Congregations of Theologians,” to which voting prelates could attend but were not obliged to do so; then the articles to be condemned were presented to the voting prelates in the “General Congregations” and discussed until the decree had received the approval of the majority. The initial subdivision of the General Congregation into three classes, each under the direction of a legate, was abandoned after the fifth session. Solemn sessions served solely for the publication of decrees thus prepared. As for decrees dealing with reform, the first stage, namely discussion in the Congregations of Theologians, did not take place. The secretary of the Council during the three periods of sessions was Angelo Massarelli.

After publishing in the second session (7 Jan. 1546) the decree *De modo vivendi et aliis in Concilio servandis* and in the third (4 Feb. 1546) establishing the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed as the common foundation of all Christians, the Council in its fourth session (8 Apr. 1546) laid down the basis for all future discussions. Not only, as Luther wished, was Holy Scripture to serve as the source of revelation, but also apostolic traditions were to be accepted “pari pietatis affectu” as the books contained in the canon of Holy Scripture (including the deuterocanonical books). Moreover, against the abuse of rejecting dogmatic proofs drawn from the common Latin version, namely the Vulgate, on the pretext that it was defective in some points, the Vulgate was declared authentic in the same session; this did not mean that the Council disapproved of the study of the original biblical languages, Hebrew and Greek.

To elevate the theological training of the clergy, the Council in its fifth session (17 June 1546) decreed the establishment of lectors of Holy Scripture in cathedral and collegiate churches as well as in suitable convents and monasteries. After a very lively clash between the Ordinaries and the mendicant orders, the powers for preaching were precisely defined and parish priests were obliged to preach to the people every Sunday and feast day. The decree on original sin defined, against the doctrine of Luther, who held that its essence lay in concupiscence remaining as sin in man even after baptism, that through baptism original guilt and everything pertaining to sin (“totum id quod veram et propriam peccati rationem habet”) is wiped out.

On 22 June 1546 the Congregations of Theologians began to discuss the articles on justification, which occupied the Council for six months, not only because this was the central problem in Luther’s doctrine and had never before been treated by any previous Council, but also because the discussions dragged on both out of consideration for the Emperor and because of a plan to transfer the Council, which was already in the air at that time. After a first draft of a decree on justification, presented to the Fathers of the Council on 24 July — which was not, as was first believed, the work of the Franciscan Andrea de Vega — had been rejected, the General of the Augustinians, Seripando, at the request of Cardinal Cervini drew up a new decree in which the doctrinal chapters were distinguished from the canons proper. Despite many corrections, Seripando’s draft was presented to the General Congregation on 23 Sept. 1546 and remained until the end the basis of further discussions, although certain particular doctrines of Seripando were opposed and rejected by theologians such as Salmerón and Laínez and even by the majority of the Fathers. The care with which the decree on justification was prepared is also shown by the fact that on two controversial questions among the Council’s theologians, namely the doctrine of double justice as the foundation of justification and the question of the certitude of grace (*certitudo gratiae*), the theologians were consulted again from 15 to 26 Oct. The decree, promulgated in the sixth session on 13 Jan. 1547, which with its 16 chapters and 33 canons is the longest dogmatic decree of the whole Council, laid down against the Protestant doctrine of justification by faith alone (*sola fide*) and the imputation of the justice of Jesus Christ (*imputatio iustitiae Christi*) that man is not justified before God by faith alone, but after a proper interior preparation (chs. 5 and 6) receives sanctifying grace (chs. 7, 8, 9), which makes him capable of truly meriting for heaven (ch. 16). In the same session the Council promulgated the reform decree on the duty of bishops to reside personally in their sees.

Luther left only two, or at most three, of the seven sacraments of the Church intact (Baptism, the Eucharist, and, with certain limitations, Penance); but he also emptied and falsified the very concept of sacrament itself. Therefore, the Council, in its seventh session (March 3, 1547), addressed the definition of the essence and the number of the sacraments, and in addition to the thirteen canons on the sacraments in general, it added fourteen on Baptism and three on Confirmation. At the same time, it promulgated a reform decree prohibiting the accumulation of multiple bishoprics or benefices with cure of souls in the hands of a single person.

3. The transfer of the Council to Bologna (1547–1548) and its return to Trent (1551–1552)

Immediately after the seventh session, the Council’s work was abruptly interrupted and

the eighth session, held on March 11, 1547, decided to transfer the Council from Trent to Bologna. A minority of fourteen imperial prelates, led by Cardinal Pedro Pacheco, voted against this decision and remained in Trent in protest, while the majority of the council fathers hastily departed for Bologna. The pretext for the transfer was the outbreak of malignant fevers, which claimed the life of the Bishop of Capaccio on March 6, 1547; these fevers were officially declared by Girolamo Fracastoro, the Council’s physician, to be of an epidemic nature. In reality, however, the true motive driving the legates to effect the transfer was the desire to escape the pressure of imperial power, which weighed heavily upon Trent; they knew that a transfer of the Council to the soil of the Papal States would please the Pope, though at that moment they lacked an explicit mandate from him, having only the general authorization granted in the bull of February 22, 1545. From the Emperor’s perspective, this transfer thwarted his grand design. At that very time, he was on the verge of concluding his victorious war against the Protestants; on April 24, 1547, he defeated the Elector of Saxony at the Battle of Mühlberg and took him prisoner. This would have been the opportune moment to compel the Protestants to attend the Council; yet the city approved for this purpose by the German states was Trent, not Bologna. It was evident that the Protestants would never appear in a city of the Papal States, nor would they ever regard a Council held there as truly free. For this reason, the Emperor refused to approve the transfer to Bologna. Out of deference to him, the Council continued its work in Bologna, where it discussed the doctrine concerning the sacraments of the Eucharist, Penance, Extreme Unction, and Matrimony, as well as those concerning the Mass and Indulgences; it also examined at length and in detail the abuses that had arisen in these areas, though it did not promulgate any authoritative decrees.

Luther’s doctrine on immanation and ubiquity – transubstantiation.

The fourteenth session (November 25, 1551) defended the Catholic doctrine of auricular confession, the judicial character of the priest’s absolution in the sacrament of Penance, the necessity of satisfaction, and moreover the sacramentality of Extreme Unction. Parallel reform decrees regulated the order of appeals in ecclesiastical tribunals, the intervention of the Curia’s authority against punishable bishops, and the rights and duties of bishops in admitting candidates to ordination, in overseeing the clergy, and in conferring benefices subject to the right of patronage.

In the preparation of these decrees, for the first time numerous bishops and theologians from Germany and the Low Countries took part. The archbishops of Mainz, Cologne, and Trier—who were also prince-electors of the Empire—were in attendance; at the fifteenth session (January 25, 1552), fourteen bishops from German-speaking territories participated, ten residential and four suffragan. The University of Louvain was represented by the dean of the Faculty of Theology, Ruard Tapper, and other theologians; among the retinue of the Rhenish electors were Johann Gropper, Eberhard Billick, and Ambrogio Pelargo; among the Spanish theologians, Melchior Cano stood out. France was absent; indeed, in the twelfth session, the invitation extended by Henry II’s representative, Amyot, had provoked a formal protest against the Council. For the first and only time, envoys and theologians of the German Protestants appeared in Trent: first, those of Elector Joachim II of Brandenburg, who had previously declared his acceptance of the Council’s decrees; then the envoys of Duke Christoph of Württemberg and Elector Maurice of Saxony; and as the envoy of the city of Strasbourg, Johann Sleidan, historian of the Schmalkaldic League. Since all of these representatives not only demanded a more extensive safe-conduct than that granted in the thirteenth session and an extension of dogmatic discussions until the arrival of their own theologians—Philip Melanchthon was even on his way to Trent—but also insisted that all previously published dogmatic decrees be re-examined and that the superiority of the Council over the Pope be proclaimed, all negotiations with them ended in failure. To this already extremely tense situation in Trent was added the rapid conclusion brought about by an unexpected political-religious event: Elector Maurice of Saxony, allied with France, launched an attack against the unarmed Emperor, who was then at Innsbruck, thereby endangering the safety of the Council as well. Thus, at the sixteenth session on April 28, 1552, the Council’s suspension was decreed, and despite the protests of many Spanish bishops, it was dissolved.

During the years 1552–1554, Julius III sought to implement part of the Tridentine reform decrees through a major reform bull, in order to counter certain aspirations that had arisen in Spain and Portugal, where efforts were being made, on their own authority, to execute the conciliar reform decrees—which, lacking papal confirmation, had not yet acquired legal force. However, the Pope’s death on March 23, 1555, prevented this plan from being carried out and the reform bull from being published. His successor, Marcellus II (Cardinal Cervini), who had been a legate to the Council, lived too briefly to consider resuming the Council. Nor was Paul IV, who succeeded him and intended to implement ecclesiastical reform through a commission gathered in Rome and later expanded into a Council, able to translate his design into practice. Meanwhile, the German Protestants secured formal recognition within the Empire through the Peace of Augsburg.

4. Third period (1561–1563)

Only Pius IV, with the bull *Ad Ecclesiae regimen* of November 29, 1560, was able to convoke the Council in Trent for a third time. Whereas the first two periods had been closely tied to Germany and had been subject, at times quite strongly, to the influence of the Emperor, the impetus for this third resumption now came from France. There, Calvinism had already taken root under the reign of King Henry II, and after his death, under the successive reigns of Francis II and Charles IX, it had gained ground thanks to the indecisive policies of the queen mother

Catherine de’ Medici, so great were the advances made that the danger of a defection even on the part of France was no longer far off. Now, a general Council would have undermined the plan for a national Council, dangerous above all in a Gallican France, and would have strengthened the hand of the Catholic party, whose leadership was in the hands of the brothers François and Charles of Guise. In Germany the invitation to the Council was brought by the nuncios Delfino and Commendone; yet not even the Catholic princes and bishops could make up their minds to go to the Council, because of the threatening attitude of the Protestants, who for their part, at the meeting held at Naumburg from 20 January to 6 February 1561, again sharply rejected every invitation.

On 14 February 1561 the Pope appointed as legates Cardinals Ercole Gonzaga and Giacomo Puteo, though the latter never assumed office because of illness, and on 4 March he added others chosen from among the new cardinals: Girolamo Seripando, Stanislao Hosio, Ludovico Simonetta, and finally also his own nephew Marco Sittich of Hohenems. Although Seripando and Gonzaga had already been in Trent since 16 April 1561, the fluctuating situation in France (Assembly of the Clergy at Poissy, August–September 1561), the contrast between the Spanish idea that the Council should be regarded as a continuation of the earlier sessions and the idea of the Emperor and France, who for the sake of the Protestants wanted a Council that would appear entirely new, delayed its opening for the whole of that year. Only the arrival of Cardinal Simonetta, the Pope’s trusted representative, on 9 December 1561, gave the signal for the true opening, which took place on 18 January 1562 with the relatively large participation of 111 prelates with voting rights (Session XVII).

Since the envoys of Emperor Ferdinand I opposed the resumption of the discussions on the Sacrifice of the Mass, which had been interrupted in 1552, because this would have highlighted the Council’s continuity, which they did not want, the Council first devoted itself to reforming the Index librorum prohibitorum (Session XVIII, 26 February 1562) and to granting an unimplemented safe-conduct to the Protestants. On 11 March the legates finally presented to the Council twelve articles of reform, at the head of which—despite the backward decree of the seventh session—stood the execution of the duty of episcopal residence. A minority, composed of Spanish bishops and of imperial and Italian prelates, held that the only effective means of enforcing residence was a conciliar decree obliging bishops to reside in their dioceses by divine right (de iure divino). The majority rejected this solution, because in its view it diminished the primatial right of the Pope; part of the majority, on 20 April 1562, referred the decision to the Pope. While the opinion of the minority found favour with Cardinals Seripando and Gonzaga, the majority was supported by Cardinal Simonetta and in Rome. On 11 May the Pope censured the conduct of the first two legates and ordered that the question of the obligation of residence be deferred. The consequence was a serious crisis of confidence both among the legates and on the part of the “ultramontanes.” After two fruitless sessions (the nineteenth on 14 May and the twentieth on 5 June 1562), the Council resumed its work on 6 June, when Cardinal Gonzaga, who had already offered his resignation to Rome, promised discussion of the question of residence together with that of the sacrament of Order.

In the twenty-first session on 16 July 1562 a decree on the use of the Eucharist was promulgated, which, against the Protestant doctrine of the necessity of Communion under both kinds, defined the doctrine that Jesus Christ is whole and indivisible under each kind. But the decision on the practical question whether to accede to the request made by the Emperor and the Duke of Bavaria to allow, with certain safeguards, the laity under their rule to receive Communion under both kinds (communio sub utraque specie) was deferred in the following session to the Pope. This twenty-second session on 17 September 1562, after a lively discussion of the sacrificial character of the Last Supper, together with the decree on justification, constituted the most important doctrinal decision of the entire Council. In a decree comprising nine doctrinal chapters and nine canons, it was defined that the Mass is a true and proper sacrifice of thanksgiving and propitiation and can be offered also for the dead and in honour of the saints. Although in these two sessions various reform decrees were also promulgated on the conferral of sacred Orders, the election of bishops, and the curbing of excessive foundations, the “ultramontanes” did not see in these decrees the full satisfaction of their extensive reform proposals, presented to the Council in many memorials (Spanish articles of reform of April 1562; imperial libellus of reform of June 1562). There even came a joint protest by the spokesmen of the non-Italian powers accredited to the Council. Opposition grew stronger when, on 13 November 1562, Cardinal Charles of Guise, the Lorraine, arrived in Trent with fourteen French prelates. He soon became the leader of the opposition. The partly Gallican and episcopalist conceptions that the French and the majority of the Spanish, under the leadership of the zealous reformer Archbishop Pietro Guerrero of Granada, had maintained in the discussions on the obligation of episcopal residence and on the sacrament of Order in December 1562 and January 1563, clashed with the lively opposition of the “zealots,” who defended the definition of the Florentine Council on the primacy. The contrasts seemed insurmountable, and negotiations reached a deadlock by the end of January. Cardinal Lorraine went to the Emperor’s court to complain of the inflexibility of the zealots and of the papal policy at the Council. The crisis reached its height when on 2 March 1563 Cardinal Gonzaga died, and shortly afterward, on 17 March, so did Cardinal Seripando. The Pope, however, with a letter entirely in his own hand of 19 April 1563, succeeded in convincing the most powerful monarch in Christendom, Philip II of Spain, that he did not shrink from reform of the Church, indeed desired it and was determined to carry it through. And first of all he replaced the two deceased cardinal legates with Cardinals Giovanni Morone and Bernardo Navagero. The diplomatic skill of Morone succeeded, through personal negotiations with the Emperor at Innsbruck, in winning him over and then, in Trent, Cardinal Lorraine as well, to a compromise and thereby saved the Council. After ten months of grave discussions, it was finally possible to promulgate in the twenty-third session on 15 July 1563 the decree on Order, which however did not define the much-debated question of the relation between the primacy and the bishops. At the same time chapter 1 of the reform decree obliged all bishops, including cardinals, to observe residence, without saying anything about the declaration, demanded by the opposition, of the divine right of the obligation of residence. In chapter 18 of the same decree, following a decree issued by Cardinal Pole for England, all bishops were ordered to establish seminaries for the clergy.

In late July 1563 Cardinal Morone presented to the Council a broad programme of reform, which in many points accommodated the requests of the “ultramontanes” while yet maintaining due regard for the tradition of the Roman Curia. The most important points of this programme passed into the reform decrees of the last two sessions, the twenty-fourth on 11 November and the twenty-fifth on 3–4 December 1563.

In this moment
It is our
Charter. But it is not
only a
charter, but
a
charter
that
tells itself
that
it recounts itself
that
recounts
recounts
that
recounts
th
recounts
that
recounts
recounts
that
recounts
th
recounts
that
recounts
recounts
that
recounts
th
recounts
that
recounts
recounts
that
recounts
th
recounts
th
recounts
that
recounts
th
recounts
that
recounts
th
recounts
recounts
that
recounts
th
recounts
th
recounts
that
recounts
th
recounts
recounts
that
recounts
th
recounts
th
recounts
that
recounts
th
recounts
that
recounts
that
recounts
th
recounts
that
recounts
th
recounts
th
recounts
that
recounts
that
recounts
th
recounts
that
recounts
th
recounts
th
recounts
that
recounts
that
recounts
th
recounts
that
recounts
th
recounts
th
recounts
that
recounts
that
recounts
th
recounts
that
recounts
th
recounts
th
recounts
that
recounts
that
recounts
th
recounts
that
recounts
th
recounts
thche
tracconta
che
tracconta
ch
tracconta
che
tracconta
ch
tracconta
ch
tracconta
che
tracconta
che
tracconta
ch
tracconta
che
tracconta
ch
tracconta
ch
tracconta
che
tracconta
che
tracconta
ch
tracconta
che
tracconta
ch
tracconta
ch
tracconta
che
tracconta
che
tracconta
ch
tracconta
che
tracconta
ch
tracconta
ch
tracconta
che
tracconta
che
tracconta
ch
tracconta
che
tracconta
ch
tracconta
ch
tracconta
che
tracconta
che
tracconta
ch
traccontata
ch
tracconta
che
tracconta
che
tracconta
ch
tracconta
che
tracconta
ch
tracconta
ch
tracconta
che
tracconta
che
tracconta
ch
tracconta
che
tracconta
ch
tracconta
ch
tracconta
che
tracconta
che
tracconta
ch
tracconta
che
tracconta
ch
tracconta
ch
tracconta
che
tracconta
che
tracconta
ch
tracconta
che
tracconta
ch
tracconta
ch
tracconta
che
tracconta
che
tracconta
ch
tracconta
che
tracconta
ch
tracconta
ch
tracconta
che
tracconta
che
tracconta
ch
tracconta
che
traccontaconta
ch
tracconta
ch
tracconta
che
tracconta
che
tracconta
ch
tracconta
che
tracconta
ch
tracconta
ch
tracconta
che
tracconta
che
tracconta
ch
tracconta
che
tracconta
ch
tracconta
ch
tracconta
che
tracconta
che
tracconta
ch
tracconta
che
tracconta
ch
tracconta
ch
tracconta
che
tracconta
che
tracconta
ch
tracconta
che
tracconta
ch
tracconta
ch
tracconta
che
tracconta
che
tracconta
ch
tracconta
che
tracconta
ch
tracconta
ch
tracconta
che
tracconta
che
tracconta
ch
tracconta
che
tracconta
ch
tracconta
ch
tracconta
che
tracconta
che
tracconta
ch
tracconta
che
tracconta
ch
tracconta
ch
tracconta
che
tracconta
che
tracconta
ch
tracconta
che
tracconta
ch
tracconta
ch
tracconta
che
tracconta
che
traccontache
tracconta
che
tracconta
che
tracconta
ch
tracconta
che
tracconta
ch
tracconta
ch
tracconta
che
tracconta
che
tracconta
ch
tracconta
che
tracconta
ch
tracconta
ch
tracconta
che
tracconta
che
tracconta
ch
tracconta
che
tracconta
ch
tracconta
ch
tracconta
che
tracconta
che
tracconta
ch
tracconta
che
tracconta
ch
tracconta
ch
tracconta
che
tracconta
che
tracconta
ch
tracconta
che
tracconta
ch
tracconta
ch
tracconta
che
tracconta
cheacconta
that
tracconta
ch
tracconta
that
tracconta
ch
tracconta
ch
tracconta
that
tracconta
that
tracconta
ch
tracconta
that
tracconta
ch
tracconta
ch
tracconta
that
tracconta
that
tracconta
ch
tracconta
that
tracconta
ch
tracconta
ch
tracconta
that
tracconta
that
tracconta
ch
tracconta
that
tracconta
ch
tracconta
ch
tracconta
that
tracconta
that
tracconta
ch
tracconta
that
tracconta
ch
tracconta
ch
tracconta
that
tracconta
that
tracconta
ch
tracconta
that
tracconta
ch
tracconta
ch
tracconta
that
tracconta
that
tracconta
ch
tracconta
that
tracconta
ch
tracconta
ch
tracconta
that
tracconta
that
tracconta
ch
tracconta
that
tracconta
ch
tracconta
ch

cedimento per la nomina dei vescovi (processo informativo)

l'assimilazione del diritto particolare al *Ius commune* creato dal Concilio, che modificava in non meno di 250 luoghi il diritto medievale delle Decretali. In modo particolare nella Spagna e in Germania i Capitoli cattedrali si posero alla soppressione delle cessioni e alla restrizione dei diritti degli arcidiaconi. Molte diocesi non ebbero seminari per il clero che nel corso del sec. XVII e alcune solo nel sec. XVIII. Dalle proibizioni di unire nelle mani di uno solo più vescovati si concessero in Germania molte volte dispense in favore dei principi delle case di Asburgo e di Wittelsbach per interessare queste dinastie alla difesa di territori minacciati. Ciò non ostante rimane ben fermo che il Concilio di T. è il più grande Concilio riformatore nella storia della Chiesa e che il Papato mediante la convocazione di esso e la sua attuazione ha aumentato straordinariamente il suo influsso sui popoli. Il Concilio non poté impedire che in seguito sorgessero le grandi controversie sulla efficacia della Grazia (la cosiddetta questione molinista) o sull'attrattismo. La dottrina sulla Chiesa e sul primato del papa, che non furono definite nel Concilio, vennero discusse accanitamente più tardi, finché il Concilio Vaticano pose fine alle dottrine gallicane, febbriane ed episcopastiche. Tutti gli sforzi di parte protestante di rivedere, in un nuovo Concilio, in favore della Unione, le decisioni dottrinali, naufragarono necessariamente di fronte al carattere infallibile delle decisioni di fede. Quanto grande, poi, sia stato l'influsso sulla formazione della Chiesa e sull'arte cristiana è un argomento che deve ancora venir illustrato in ulteriori ricerche. - Vedi tavv. XLVII-XLIX.

**

**Fonti:** I'd. uff. dei decreti, curata da Paolo Manuzio, Roma 1564; la migliore rist. con una scelta delle dichiarazioni della S. Congr. del Conc. per E. L. Richter-F. Schulte, Lipsia 1853; J. Le Plat, *Monum. ad histor. Conc. Trid. potiss. illustr. spectantia*, 7 voll., Vol. 1781-87; A. Theiner, *Acta genuina SS. Conc. Trid.*, 2 voll., Zagabria 1874, prima, ma imperfetta ed. dei processi verb.; *Concilium Tridentinum. Diariorum, actorum, epist., tractatum nova coll., ed. Soc. Goceres.*, finora 12 voll., Friburgo in Br. 1901-50, in 4 divisioni; I. Diari, ed. da S. Merkle, vol. I (1901); cf. H. Lennarz, in *Gregorianum*, 15 (1934), p. 573 segg.; vol. II (1911); vol. III, 1 (1931). 2. *Atti: vol. IV (1904)*, ed. da St. Ehses: preistor. e processi verb. fino al 4 febbr. 1546; V (1911), ed. St. Ehses proc. verb. fino alla traslaz.; vol. VI, ed. Th. Freudenberger; processi verb. del periodo bolognese; vol. VII (1919), ed. St. Ehses: 1561-17 sett. 1562; vol. IX (1924) ed. St. Ehses: fino alla confirmazione. 3. *Lettere*, ed. G. Buschhell, vol. X (1916), 1545-47; XI (1937) 1547-52. 4. *Trattati*, vol. XII (1930), ed. V. Schweitzer: 1521-47; vol. XIII, parte 1 (1937), ed. H. Jedin: 1547-62. - La corrisp. dei legati durante l'ult. periodo 1561-63 è edita da J. Susta, *Die Röm. Curie und das Trient. Conc. unter Pius IV.*, 4 voll., Vienna 1904-14; lett. importanti del card. Gonzaga al suo nipote a Roma e viceversa sono pubblici da G. Drei in *Arch. Soc. rom. di st. patria*, 40 (1917), pp. 205-45; 41 (1918), pp. 171-222; *Arch. st. parmense*, 17 (1917), pp. 185-242; 18 (1918), pp. 29-143; H. Jedin, *Krisis und Wendepunkt des Trient. Konz., 1562-63; Die neuentdeckt. Geheimberichte des Bisch. Gualterio V. VITERBO, DIOCESI DI. Karl Borromeaus*, Würzburg 1941; C. M. Abad, *Das Memoir. del b. Juan de Avila, inéd. para el Conc. de T.*, Comillas 1945; id., *Ultimos inéd. extensos del b. J. de Avila*, ivi 1950. Delle pubblicazioni più antiche di fonti sono ancora da consultare: J. Pogiani, *Epist. et orat.*, ed. H. Lagomarsini, 4 voll., Roma 1756-62; L. Morandi, *Monum. di varia letter. tratti dai manoscr. di L. Beccadelli*, 3 parti, Bologna 1797-1801; H. Grisar, *J. Laynez disputat. Trident.*, 2 voll., Innsbruck 1886; Lett. degli oratori e di ves. spagn. nella *Collecion de docum. inéd. para la hist. de España*, 9 (1846) e 98 (1891); per quelle degli oratori dell'Imp. cf. Th. Sickel, *Zur Gesch. des C. V. T.*, Vienna 1872.

**Studi:** STORIA GENERALE; P. Sarpi, *Ist. del Conc. Trid.*, Londra 1619; ed. crit. di G. Gambarin, 3 voll., Bari 1935; P. Sforza Pallavicino, *Ist. del Conc. di T.*, 2 voll., Roma 1656-57; la migliore ed. di A. M. Zaccaria, 6 voll., ivi 1792-99; P. Richard, "Trento, Arcidiocesi di - La celebre mensola dell'organo di Vinc. Grandi (1534). Trento, chiesa di S. Maria Maggiore".

**Le Conc. de T.*, 2 voll., Parigi 1930-31; L. Cristiani, L'Eglise à l'époque du Conc. de T.*, ivi 1948; K. Eder, *Gesch. der Kirche im Gattaler des konfession. Absolutismus*, Vienna 1949; H. Jedin, *Stor. del Conc. di T.*, I, Brescia 1949; id., Kath. Reformation oder Gegenreformation?, Lucerna 1948; I. Rogger, *Le Nazioni al Conc. di Tr. 1545-52*, Roma 1952; Pastor, V-VII. Collezioni di studi speciali: *Il Conc. di T. Riv. commem. del IV centen., diretta da P. Paschini, 6 fasc., Trento 1942-47; vari autori, *Studia Trientina*, in *Gregorianum*, 26 (1946); vari autori, *Il IV Centen. del Conc. di T.*, Confer. alla Univ. Catt. del S. Cuore, Milano 1946; P. Cherubelli, *I contributi degli Ordini relig. al C. di T.*, Firenze 1946; id., *La Bibbia e il Conc. di T.*, Roma 1947; vari autori, *Con-tributi alla storia del Conc. di T. e della Controriforma*, Firenze 1946; *Il Concilio de T.*, Esposic. e investig. por collaborad. de Rastón y Fe, Madrid 1945. Numeri speciali sono stati dedicati al Conc. nel 1945, anche dai segg. period. spagnoli: *Estudios ecclesiasticos, Miscel. Comillas, Vedrad y Vida, Rev. de Espiri-tudialad, Apostolado sacerdotal. G. Schreiber, *Das Weltkonzil von Trient*, 2 voll., Friburgo 1951. Sulla partecipazione delle sin-gole Nazioni: J. de Castro, *Portugal no Conc. de T.*, 6 voll., Lisboa 1944-46; J. Gofii Gaztambide, *Los Navarros en el Conc. de T. y la reforma trid. en la dioc. de Pamplona*, Pamplona 1947; R. Burgos, *España en T.*, Madrid 1941 (divulgativo); P. Leturia, *Perché la Chiesa ispano-americana non fu rappresentata a T.*, in *Il Conc. di T.*, 1 (1912), n. 1, pp. 35-43; H. Jedin, *Die deut-schen Teilnehmer am K. von Trient*, in *Tübinger Th. Quartalschr.*, 12 (1941), pp. 228-61; 123 (1942), pp. 21-37; molti studi sulla rappresentanza delle singole diocesi tedesche a T. e quelle degli Ordini religiosi nel vol. II di Schreiber, *Das Weltkonzil.*, cit. sulla partecipazione degli Ordini religiosi in specie: A. Walz, *Eliseo dei Padri domen. nel Conc. di T.*, in *Angelicum*, 22 (1945). *Episcop. di Padri domen. nel Conc. di T.*, in *Angelicum*, 22 (1945). *Episcop. di S. R. Varsco*, *I Frati Minori al Conc. di T.*, in *Arch. Principe. hist.*, 41 (1948), e 42 (1949), anche separatamente, in *Quaracchi 1949*; D. Gutierrez, *Los Augustinos en el Conc. de T.*, in *Ciudad de Dios*, 158 (1946), pp. 385-499; S. Seiger, *Carme-lita in Conc. Trident.*, in *Anal. Ord. Carmelit.*, 12 (1944), pp. 147-66. T. al tempo del Conc.: C. Giuliani, *T. al tempo del Conc.*, in *Arch. Trentino*, 1-3 (1882-84); H. Swoboda, *Trient u. die kirchl. Renaissance*, 3 ed., Vienna 1915; A. Galante, *T. e il Conc. Trid.*, Roma 1922.

**Primo periodo:** *Dzer. septem priorum sess. Conc. Trid. nub. Paulo III Pont. Max. ex autogr. A. Massarelli hic photot. recus, ed. St. Kuttner (Washington 1945), con import. introduz. sulla stor. del testo dei decreti; A. González Palencia-E. Mele, *Vida y obras de Don Diego Hurtado de Mendoza*, 3 voll., Madrid 1941-43; H. Jedin, *G. Seripando*, 2 voll., Würzburg 1937; K. D. Schmidt, *Studien zur Gesch. des K. V. T.*, Tubinga 1925; A. Machle, *Der Kanon der bibl. Bücher u. das K. V. T.*, Friburgo 1929; W. Koch, *Der auth. Charakter der Vulg. im Lichte der Trident. Konzilsverhandl.*, in *Tüb. Th. Quartalschr.*, 96 (1914), pp. 401 segg.; 542 segg.; 97 (1915), p. 225 segg.; 529 segg.; R. Draguet, *La Màitre louvainiste Driedo, inspirateur du dècr. de Trente sur le Vulg.*, in *Misc. hist. A. De Mayer*, II, Lovainio 1946, pp. 836-845; S. Muñoz Iglesias, *El decret. Trid. sobre la Vulg. y su inter-prete. por los teol. del siglo XVI*, in *Estud. bibl.*, 5 (1946), pp. 137-169; J. Rainer, *Entstehungsgesch. der Trident. Predigtreformdrek.*, in *Zeitschr. für kath. Theol.*, 39 (1915), pp. 256-317; A. All-ger, *Das Konz. V. T. und das theol. Studium*, in *Hist. Jahrb.*, 52 (1932), pp. 313-39; W. Koch, *Das Trident. Konzilsdokret de peccato originali*, in *Tüb. Th. Quartalschr.*, 95 (1913), pp. 430-

450, 532-64; 96 (1914), pp. 101-23. Quanto al decreto sulla giustificazione, importanti i voti finora sconosciuti pubblicati da J. Olazard: Nuevos docum. trident. sobre la justific. in Arch. Teol. Granada, 12 (1949), pp. 161-330; H. Rückert, Die Rechtfertigungslehre auf dem Trid. Konz., Bonn 1925; E. Stakemeier, Glaube u. Rechtfertigung, Friburgo in Br. 1937; id., Der Kampf der Augustin auf dem Trident., Paderborn 1937; V. Heynck, Der Anteil des Konzilistheol. Andreas de Vega O.F.M. an dem ersten. amt. Entwurf des Trient. Rechtfertigungsdekr., in Franz. Stud. 33 (1951), pp. 49-81; E. A. Stakemeier, Das K. V. T. über die Heiliggewissheit, Heidelberg 1947; V. Heynck, Das Votum des Generals der Konvent., B. Costacciaro, vom 26. Nov. 1546 über die Gennedergewissheit, in Franz. Stud., 31 (1949), pp. 274-303, 350-95; P. Hörger, Conc. Trid. de necessitate baptismi doctrina in der. de iustificat., in Antonianum, 17 (1942), pp. 193-222, 269-302.

BOLOGNA E SECONDO PERIODO: L. Carcereri, Il Conc. di T. dalla traslaz. a Bologna alla sospens., Bologna 1910; Th. Freud, Der berger, Der Kampf um die radikale Abschaffung der Stolgebührenden der Bologna. Periode des Trient. Konz., in Münch. Theol. Zeitschrift, 1 (1950), pp. 40-53; V. Heynck, Contrario vera. Zur Kontro. über den Begriff der contritio vera auf der Bologna. Tagung des Trient. Konz. in Franz. Stud., 33 (1951), pp. 137-79; C. Erdmann, Die Wiedereröffnung des Trient. Konz. durch Julius III., in Quellen u. Forsch., 20 (1928), pp. 238-317; J. Birkner, Die Aktion des Trient. Konz. für die zweite Tagungsperiode unter Papst Julius III., ibid., 29 (1938-39), pp. 279-311; id., Kard. M. Ceresentius, in Rom. Quartalschr., 43 (1935), pp. 267-85; F. Cavallera, L'interpretat. du chap. VI de st Jean, in Rev. d'hist. eccl. (1909), pp. 687-709; id., Le décret du Conc. de T. sur la pénitentia et l'exort. onction, in Bull. de litt. eccl., 1923, pp. 277-97 con onthinua. 2 fin. anno 1938; C. Costant, Concessio à l'Allemagne de la Comm. sous les deux espèces, 2 voll., Parigi 1923; H. Jardin, Ein span. Epilog zur zweiten Tagungsperiode des K. V. T., in Gregorianum, 31 (1950), pp. 100-13; id., Kirchenreform u. Konstellationen 1550-59, in Hist. Jahrb., 54 (1934), pp. 401-31.