Trento, Archdiocese of

TRENTO, Archdiocese of. - Provincial capital city and, since 1946, of the Trentino-Alto Adige region. The archdiocese comprises the province of T. 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 631,000 are Catholics, distributed in 439 parishes served by 1,129 diocesan priests (of whom 268 are German-speaking); regular priests approx. 575; nuns 2,280. Male religious houses 86; female 264. The archdiocese possesses a theological Seminary at T. and two minor Seminaries (T. and Tirolo: 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 Augustan tenth region: Venetia et Histria. After the fall of the Western Empire it passed under the dominion of Theodoric and of the Byzantines. From 569 it was the seat of a Lombard duchy; under the Carolingians the march of T. formed part of the Italian Kingdom, but in 952 Otto I incorporated it into the German Empire, of which it formed part until 1803. In the Napoleonic period it passed to Austria (1803-1805), then to Bavaria (until 1810), then to the Italian Kingdom (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 until 1751 a suffragan of Aquileia, then of Gorizia (a dependence never recognized by the bishop of T.), from 1772 to 1825 immediately subject to the Holy See, from 1825 to 1920 a suffragan of Salzburg, and from 1920 immediately subject to the Holy See, which in 1929 elevated it to an archiepiscopal see without suffragans.

Legend assigns the foundation of the episcopal see to the Aquileian Sts. 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 (first known bishop Jovinus, second in the list Abundantius, living in 381). The third bishop was St. Vigilius (v.) d. in 400 or 405, who completed the evangelization of the territory and sealed the missionary work with martyrdom. His relations with St. Ambrose (PL 16, 982) and with St. Simplician (PL 13, 549-52) link the Church of Trent with Milan, but in the first decades of the 5th century the diocese is found within the metropolitan organization of Aquileia (v.). With Aquileia the diocese of T. was involved in the schism of the Three Chapters and returned to communion with Rome at the end of the 7th century. Of the bishops of the first millennium, particular mention should be made of Eugippius (6th century), to whom is attributed the enlargement of the sepulchral church of St. Vigilius and the arrangement of his relics.

The Emperor Conrad II in 1027 (according to some, already Henry II in 1004), by donating to the Church of Trent the counties of T., Bolzano and Val Venosta, created the temporal principality of the bishops of T., whose boundaries differ in various points from the diocesan ones. In the 12th century the beneficial influences of the reform of ecclesiastical life made themselves felt also in the territory of Trent: the Benedictine abbey of S. Lorenzo at T. was founded, along with the monasteries of Augustinian Canons Regular of S. Michele all'Adige and of Augia (near Bolzano). 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 struggle the prince-bishops of T. sided with the Emperor and subsequently generally with the Ghibellines. The most flourishing period for the principality was that of Bishop Federico Vanga (1207-18), who consolidated civil power, increased agriculture and the systematic exploitation of the mines (the mining Statute is famous), enlarged and adorned the Cathedral, and reorganized the registration of documents (Codex Vangianus). The policy of Frederick II led to a kind of temporary secularization. Later a long series of exhausting struggles began with the counts of Tirol, who from advocates evolved into effective masters of the principality: the Compacts of 1363 and 1454 and the series of German bishops of the 14th and 15th centuries sealed this evolution. Humanism took hold in the Trentino under the prince bishop Giovanni Hinderbach (1466-86), who enjoyed the confidence of Enea Silvio Piccolomini (later Pius II) and of Nicholas of Cusa (v.). To the bishop and cardinal Bernardo Clesio (v.) (1514-39) the city owes its social reorganization and its architectural renewal, which were later to make it a seat worthy of the Council. After Bernardo Clesio, for more than a hundred years members of the Madruzzo family (v.) governed the Church of Trent: the cardinals Cristoforo, Lodovico, Carlo Gaudenzio and the bishop Carlo Emanuele (d. in 1658). In particular Lodovico and Carlo Gaudenzio were active in the application of the Tridentine decrees in the diocese and in the erection of the seminary. Franciscans, Somaschi, Carmelites and Jesuits took up residence or built new convents in the diocese during this period. The last prince bishop was Pietro Vigilio de Thun (d. in 1800). In the vacancy that followed 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 in 1818 with the addition of the Valsugana and of Primiero (belonging until then to Feltre), of Merano and Val Venosta (until then under Chur), of the deaneries of Fassa, Chiusa, Castelrotto (until then under Bressanone) and of other minor territories. The episcopal mensa and the Cathedral Chapter were in 1818 newly endowed by the Emperor of Austria, who received in turn the right to appoint the new bishops. To the bishops of T. the Emperor of Austria recognized the title of prince, which was later reconfirmed by the Italian government in 1926. The bishops of the nineteenth century, F. X. Luschin von Ebengreut (1823-34), the servant of God Giovanni Nepomuceno de Tschiderer ([v.] 1834-60), Benedetto de Riccabona (1861-79) had to struggle tenaciously against Josephinism and the systems introduced by it: their action contributed to preparing and then to translating into reality the agreements concluded between the Holy See and Austria in the Concordat of 1855. Under the bishops Eugenio Carlo Valussi (1886-1903) and Celestino Endrici (1904-40) there was a notable awakening of the social activity of Catholics, while at the same time the national question presented new and difficult tasks to pastoral care.

Principal monuments. - The Romanesque Cathedral, which rises over the tomb of the patron St. Vigilius, is the work of Comacine masters. Characteristic externally for the development of the Romanesque galleries, for the great rose windows of the transept and of the facade, for the finishing of the apses adjacent to the nearby small castle. Inside, one should note above all the two long flights of stairs cut 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 what remains of the ancient Benedictine abbey, later transformed into a Dominican convent, a hospice of famous 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 ages, it owes its most splendid part to Cardinal Bernardo Clesio, who called artists of great fame to decorate it. In the city, finally, mention should be made of convents and palaces that hosted distinguished personages of the Council: the convents of S. Marco, S. Francesco, S. ma Trinità and the Palaces Thun, Geremia, Alberti Colico, Migazzi, Roccabruna, Salvadori, etc.

Igino Rogger

THE COUNCIL OF TRENT

The Council of T., the nineteenth ecumenical council, took place, with various interruptions, from 1545 to 1563, and was held to refute the errors against the faith spread by the Protestant "reformers" and to promote a reform of ecclesiastical discipline.

1. Antecedents

Although Leo X had already condemned 41 errors of Martin Luther with the bull Exsurge Domine of 15 June 1520, nevertheless the movement of defection created by him had by no means ceased. Already after the interrogation he underwent in Augsburg before Cardinal Thomas De Vio, Luther on 28 Nov. 1518 had appealed from the Pope to a universal Council and had then renewed the appeal on 17 Nov. 1520, following the publication of the bull Exsurge. These two appeals, however, were nothing but procedural moves and, in accordance with the bull Execrabilis of Pius II dated 18 Jan. 1460, were invalid and devoid of juridical effect.

The intention of bringing Luther's case before a universal council is not connected with these two appeals of his, but with the request of the German states, put forward by both Catholics and Protestants at the Diet of Nuremberg in 1523: Luther's case was to be taken up and settled by a "free Christian council in German lands." This Nuremberg formula aroused concerns in Rome, because the Lutherans under the word "free" meant "free from the Pope" and aimed especially at releasing the bishops from their oath of fidelity to the Pontiff, who would thus have been constrained to appear in a certain manner as a party to the case before the judgment of the council; and under the term "Christian" was hidden the demand that the laity, and in particular the princes, be admitted to the council alongside the prelates and with equal authority. The demand, moreover, obstinately maintained even afterward, that the council should assemble in a German city — the names mentioned, among others, being Cologne, Mainz, Strasbourg, Constance, Regensburg — exposed the council to the danger of being subject to the pressure of public opinion, openly favorable to Luther.

When the Diet of Nuremberg in 1524 had to acknowledge that nothing had been done for the convocation of a general council, it proposed a German national council, to be held at Speyer; but Clement VII refused it and the Emperor Charles V ended by prohibiting it. Nor in the following years was a general council reached, because Clement VII — not without well-founded reasons — feared that in it the false doctrine of the fifteenth-century conciliarists concerning the superiority of the council over the pope would resurface and provoke new complications. Moreover, the long war between the Emperor and Francis I, king of France, then divided the two most powerful sovereigns of Christendom into opposing camps. Once peace was 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, gather the council; but he added certain conditions, which rendered the preparatory negotiations with the Lutherans fruitless; France, moreover, was likewise not favorable to the opening of a council, because it foresaw from this an increase in the Emperor's power.

A turn for the better came only when Clement VII's successor, Paul III (1534-49), gave first place in his program of government to the council and to reform. In agreement with the Emperor, who had visited him in Rome on his return from Africa, the Pope, with the bull Ad Dominici gregis curam of 2 May 1536, he convoked for 23 May 1537 a general Council at Mantua for the destruction of errors and heresies, for the reform of morals and for the restoration of peace among the Christian princes. But the German Protestants, united in the Schmalkaldic League, on 24 Feb. 1537 bluntly refused the invitation to take part in the Council. Even more unfavorably still worked the fact of the new war that had broken out between Charles V and Francis I, and the latter refused to permit the French prelates to travel to Mantua. When, moreover, the duke of Mantua himself, Ferdinando Gonzaga, requested from the Pope the formation of a guard corps of five or six thousand men for the safety of the Council, it was prorogued a first time to 1 Nov. 1537, then to 1 May 1538, with its seat, however, at Vicenza. But when the cardinal legates, appointed on 20 March 1538, Lorenzo Campeggio, Giacomo Simonetta and Girolamo Aleandro, appeared in the city on 12 May 1538, they found there only a few prelates. Then, in view of the imminent Peace Congress at Nice, the opening of the Council was again prorogued to 6 Apr. 1539; until the suspensio ad beneplacitum, promulgated by the Pope on 21 May 1539, buried forever the project of the Council of Mantua.

The negotiations for union, which the Emperor then initiated directly with the German Protestants, remained without effect, despite the participation of Cardinal Contarini at the Diet of Regensburg in 1541. The Pope soon took up the plan of the Council again and with the bull Initio nostri huius pontificatus of 22 May 1542 summoned the Council for All Saints' Day of that same year, to be held in the city of T., for which the nuncio Morone had obtained the consent of the German states. But this second summons of the Council also failed, because the King of France, a few weeks later, on 10 July 1542, declared war on the Emperor. Despite the presence in T. of the three cardinal legates, Parisio, Morone and Pole, only ten bishops arrived in that city within the space of six months. Therefore on 29 Sept. 1543 the Council had to be suspended once again.

Only on Sept. 18, 1544, with the peace concluded at Crépy between Charles V and Francis I, was the way finally free for a third convocation of the Council. In a secret article of the peace treaty, the Emperor bound the King to cease the opposition he had maintained until then toward the Council and to give it his adherence. Now the Pope, with the bull Laetare Jerusalem of Nov. 22, 1544, convoked the ecumenical Council for March 15, 1545, to be held once again at T.

2. First Period (1545-47)

On 22 February 1545 the Pope appointed as his legates to the Council Cardinals Giovanni del Monte, Marcello Cervini and Reginald Pole. But although the first two made their entry into T. on 13 March, it was still impossible to think of fixing the day of the opening, because, besides the Bishop of T., Cardinal Cristoforo Madruzzo, only two outside prelates were present: Bishop Sanfelice of La Cava, appointed commissioner of the Council, and the Bishop of Feltre, Tommaso Campeggio. Despite these unpromising beginnings, the Council this time did take place, because in the summer of 1545 an agreement had been concluded between the Pope and the Emperor which silenced, at least temporarily, the misunderstandings and suspicions that had lasted so long between the two heads of Christendom. The Emperor, in fact, had resolved to break the intolerable power of the Schmalkaldic League by force of arms, and the Pope promised financial subsidies and the help of troops for the war. As soon as victory was achieved, the Emperor intended to compel the Protestants to take part in the Council in the hope of thus restoring the unity of the Church.

The Emperor's inadequate military preparations postponed the execution of this great design until the spring of 1546. Nevertheless the Pope had the Council opened on the third Sunday of Advent, 13 December 1545, to prevent the prelates who had arrived at T. in the summer and autumn from leaving the city again. The opening session in the choir of the cathedral of T. was attended, besides the three legates and Cardinal Madruzzo, by 4 archbishops, 21 bishops, 5 generals of religious Orders, 42 theologians and 8 jurists. The sermon for the occasion was delivered by the Minorite Cornelio Musso, Bishop of Bitonto. The first weeks were devoted to preparing a programme of work and to determining the procedural order of the Council. Besides the bishops, only the generals of Orders and the representatives of an entire monastic congregation, for example the Benedictine Congregation of Monte Cassino, had the right to vote, but not individual abbots, nor the procurators of absent bishops. Since the Pope wanted the controversial doctrines to be treated first of all, while the Emperor wished to begin with reforms, a compromise was reached, on the proposal of the Bishop of Feltre, on 22 January 1546, to treat dogma and reform simultaneously. The treatment of dogmatic matters generally followed this order: to the «theologi minores» the legates, who throughout the Council reserved exclusively to themselves the right of proposing, presented a list of Protestant errors concerning a particular subject of Catholic doctrine; the theologians discussed these errors in the so-called «Congregations of the theologians», which prelates with the right to vote could also attend, though they were not obliged to; then the articles to be condemned were presented to the prelates with the right to vote in the «general Congregations» and discussed until the decree had obtained the approval of the majority. The subdivision, introduced at the beginning, of the general Congregation into three classes, each under the direction of a legate, was dropped after the V session. The solemn sessions served solely for the publication of the decrees thus prepared. As for the decrees that had reform as their object, the first stage, that is the discussion in the Congregations of the theologians, did not take place. The secretary of the Council during the three periods of the sessions was Angelo Massarelli.

After having in the II session (7 January 1546) published the decree De modo vivendi et aliis in Concilio servandis, and in the III (4 February 1546) established the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed as the foundation common to all Christians, the Council fixed, in the IV session (8 April 1546), the bases of all future discussions. Not only, as Luther wanted, was Holy Scripture to serve as the source of Revelation, but the apostolic Traditions also were to be accepted « pari pietatis affectu » as the books contained in the canon of Holy Scripture (including the deuterocanonical ones). Against the abuse, moreover, of rejecting the dogmatic proofs drawn from the common Latin version, that is the Vulgate, on the pretext that in some points it was defective, the Vulgate was in the same session declared authentic; by this the Council did not intend to disapprove the study of the original biblical languages, Hebrew and Greek.

In order to raise the theological formation of the clergy, the Council in the V session (17 June 1546) decided on the institution of lectureships in 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 granting of powers for preaching was exactly determined and parish priests were obliged to preach to the people on all Sundays and feast days. The decree on original sin defined, against Luther's doctrine, which placed its essence in concupiscence, remaining as sin in man even after Baptism, that through Baptism the original guilt is wiped out and all that savours of sin (« totum id quod veram et propriam peccati rationem habet »).

On 22 June 1546 the Congregations of the theologians began to discuss the articles on justification, which occupied the Council for six months, not only because this was the central problem of Luther's doctrine, and had never yet been treated by any previous Council, but also because the discussions dragged on at length both out of regard for the Emperor and because of the plan for a transfer of the seat, which even then was already hanging in the air. After the first draft of a decree on justification, presented to the Fathers of the Council on 24 July - which did not come, as was at first believed, from the Franciscan Andrea de Vega - was rejected, the general of the Augustinians, Seripando, at the request of Cardinal Cervini drafted a new decree, in which the doctrinal chapters were distinguished from the canons properly so called. Seripando's draft, even after many corrections, was presented to the general Congregation on 23 September 1546 and remained to the end the basis of the other discussions, although certain particular doctrines of Seripando were combated and rejected by theologians such as Salmerón and Lainez and also by the majority of the Fathers. The care with which the decree on justification was prepared is also illuminated by the fact that on two questions disputed among the theologians of the Council, namely the doctrine of the twofold justice as the foundation of justification and the question of the certainty of Grace (certitudo Gratiae), it was decided to hear the theologians once again, from 15 to 26 October. The decree, promulgated in the VI session of 13 January 1547, which with its 16 chapters and 33 canons is the most extensive dogmatic decree of the whole Council, established against the Protestant doctrine of justification by faith alone (sola fide) and imputation of the justice of Jesus Christ (imputatio iustitiae Christi) that man is not justified before God by faith alone, but after a careful interior preparation (chaps. 5 and 6) receives sanctifying Grace (chaps. 7, 8, 9), which makes him capable of acquiring true merits for heaven (chaps. 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 respectively three, of the Church's seven Sacraments standing (Baptism, the Eucharist, and, with certain limitations, Penance); but he emptied and falsified the very concept of a Sacrament even more; therefore the Council in the VII session (3 March 1547) occupied itself with defining the essence and the sevenfold number of the Sacraments, and to the 13 canons on the Sacraments in general it added another 14 on Baptism and 3 on Confirmation. At the same time it promulgated the reform decree that forbade the accumulation in a single person of several bishoprics or benefices with the care of souls.

3. The transfer of the Council to Bologna (1547-1548) and the return to T. (1551-52)

Immediately after the VII session the Council's work was brusquely interrupted and the VIII session, held on 11 March 1547, decided to transfer the Council from T. to Bologna. A minority composed of 14 imperial prelates headed by Card. Pedro Pacheco voted against this decision and remained in T. in protest, while the majority of the council fathers hastily departed for Bologna. The outbreak of malignant fevers served as the occasion for the transfer; from these the bishop of Capaccio died on 6 March 1547, and which the Council's physician, Girolamo Fracastoro, in an official declaration defined as being of an epidemic nature. In reality the true motive that moved the Legates to provoke the transfer was the desire to escape the pressure of imperial power, which weighed too heavily upon them at T.; they knew that a transfer of the Council onto the soil of the Papal State would please the Pope, yet at that moment they had no express commission from him, but only the generic authorization already issued with the bull of 22 Feb. 1545. For his part, the Emperor saw his great design thwarted by this transfer. Just then he was on the point of bringing the war against the Protestants to a victorious end; on 24 Apr. 1547 in the battle of Mühlberg he defeated the Elector of Saxony and took him prisoner. Now would have been the right moment to compel the Protestants to come to the Council; but the city approved for this by the German States was T., and not Bologna. It was evident that the Protestants would never present themselves in a city of the pontifical States, nor would they ever consider a Council held in that place truly free. Therefore the Emperor refused to approve the transfer to Bologna. Out of regard for him, the Council did indeed continue its work at Bologna, 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 treated at length and minutely the abuses that had arisen in this field, but it did not authoritatively promulgate the decrees it had prepared. The two sessions held at Bologna, the IX of 21 Apr. 1547 and the X of 2 June 1547, issued only decrees proroguing the next session. After the failure of the diplomatic mediation attempted in Dec. 1547 by the cardinal of T., Madruzzo, the Emperor, on 16 Jan. 1548, at Bologna, through his procurators Vargas and Velasco, and on 23 Jan. 1548 at Rome, through his orator Diego Mendoza, raised a formal protest against the transfer. Therefore the Pope reserved to himself, on 1 Feb. 1548, the decision concerning the validity of the transfer and ordered the legates at the Council to suspend its work until further order. The split between the Pope and the Emperor persisted afterwards as well, all the more so since Charles V in the summer of 1548 attempted at the Diet of Augsburg to regulate arbitrarily the ecclesiastical situation of Germany by means of the so-called Interim of Augsburg (v.). The "imperial" bishops who had remained at T. even abstained from sending their deputies to Rome to defend their point of view, so that the trial concerning the validity of the transfer came to nothing. The death of Paul III, on 10 Nov. 1549, put an end to the Bologna episode.

The successor, Julius III, until then president of the Council, already on 14 Nov. 1550 decreed with the bull Cum ad tollenda the return of the Council to T. and fixed its opening for 1 May 1551 (XI session) through Card. Marcello Crescenzi, appointed legate "a latere" and first president, assisted by the archbishop of Siponto, Sebastiano Pighino, and by the bishop of Verona, Luigi Lipomano, as presidents. Still present was a part of the bishops who had remained at T. in 1547. Nevertheless the actual work did not begin until after the XII session (1 Sept. 1551), when a greater number of prelates appeared and the discussions were resumed at the exact point at which they had been interrupted in March 1547, that is, from the sacrament of the Eucharist. Thanks to the preparatory work already done at Bologna, it was possible in a relatively short time to define in the XIII session (11 Oct. 1551), against the spiritualism, or respectively symbolism, of the Swiss reformers Zwingli and Oecolampadius, the doctrine of the real presence of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist, and - against Luther's doctrine of impanation and ubiquity - Transubstantiation.

The following XIV session (25 Nov. 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 furthermore the sacramental nature of Extreme Unction. The parallel reform decrees regulated the order of petitions before ecclesiastical tribunals, the intervention of the authority of the Curia against punishable bishops, the rights and duties of bishops in admitting to Ordinations, in watching over the clergy, and in conferring benefices subject to the right of patronage.

Numerous bishops and theologians from Germany and the Low Countries took part for the first time in the preparation of these decrees. The archbishops of Mainz, Cologne and Trier, who were also prince-electors of the Empire, had intervened; at the XV session (25 Jan. 1552) 14 bishops from the German-speaking territories took part, 10 residential and 4 suffragans. The University of Louvain was represented by the dean of the Faculty of Theology, Ruard Tapper, and by other theologians; among the retinue of the Rhenish electors were Giovanni Gropper, Everardo Billick and Ambrogio Pelargo; among the Spanish theologians Melchior Cano stood out. France was absent; and already the envoy of Henry II, Amyot, had raised a formal protest against the Council in the XII session. For the first and last time envoys and theologians of the German Protestants appeared at T.; first those of the elector Joachim II of Brandenburg, who had previously declared that he accepted the decrees of the Council, and furthermore the envoys of Duke Christopher of Württemberg and of the elector Maurice of Saxony, and, as envoy of the city of Strasbourg, Giovanni Sledano, historian of the Schmalkaldic League. But since all of these not only demanded a safe-conduct broader than the one granted in the XIII session and a postponement of the dogmatic discussions until the arrival of their theologians — Philip Melanchthon too was on his way to T. — but also claimed that the discussions on all the dogmatic decrees published up to then should be taken up again and that the superiority of the Council over the Pope should be proclaimed, all negotiations with them came to nothing. To this situation, already extremely tense in T., an unexpected politico-religious event brought a rapid end: the elector Maurice of Saxony, in league with France, hurled himself against the unarmed Emperor, who was then at Innsbruck, and endangered the safety of the Council as well. Therefore, in the XVI session of 28 Apr. 1552 the suspension was decided and, despite the protests of many Spanish bishops, the Council dissolved.

During the years 1552-54, Julius III thought of putting part of the Tridentine reform decrees into effect by means of a great bull of reform, so as to counter certain aspirations that had arisen in Spain and Portugal, which tended, on their own authority, to put into execution the conciliar reform decrees, which, lacking papal confirmation, still had no juridical force. But the death of the Pope, on 23 March 1555, prevented the plan from being carried out and the bull of reform from being published. His successor Marcellus II (Card. Cervini, formerly legate to the Council) lived too short a time to be able to think of resuming the Council. Nor could Paul IV, who succeeded him and thought of carrying out the ecclesiastical reform by means of a Commission assembled in Rome and then to be broadened into a Council, succeed in putting his plan into practice. In the meantime the German Protestants obtained, with the Peace of Augsburg, formal recognition by the Empire.

4. Third period (1561-63)

Only Pius IV was able, with the bull Ad Ecclesiae regimen, of 29 Nov. 1560, to convoke the Council at T. for the third time. But, whereas the first two periods had been closely connected with Germany and under the influence, at times very strong, of the Emperor, now the impulse for this third resumption came from France. There Calvinism had already gained a foothold under the government of King Henry II, and, after his death, under his successors Francis II and Charles IX it had made, thanks to the indecisive policy of the queen mother

Catherine de' Medici, such great progress that the danger of a defection on the part of France as well was no longer so far off. Now, a universal Council would have countermined the plan of a national Council, dangerous especially in a Gallican France, and would have strengthened the position of the Catholic party, whose leadership was in the hands of the brothers Francis and Charles of Guise. In Germany the invitation to the Council was carried by the nuncios Delfino and Commendone; but not even the Catholic princes and bishops could bring themselves to set out for the Council, on account of the threatening conduct of the Protestants, who for their part, at the meeting held at Naumburg from 20 Jan. to 6 Feb. 1561, again sharply rejected every invitation.

On 14 Feb. 1561 the Pope appointed as legates the cardinals Ercole Gonzaga and Giacomo Puteo, who however never assumed the office because of illness, and added others on 4 March, chosen from among the new cardinals: Girolamo Seripando, Stanislao Hosio, Ludovico Simonetta, and finally also his nephew Marco Sittich of Hohenems. Although Seripando and Gonzaga had already been at T. since 16 Apr. 1561, nevertheless the fluctuating situation of France (Assembly of the clergy at Poissy, Aug.-Sept. 1561), the contrast between the idea of the Spaniards that the Council should be considered a continuation of the preceding sessions, and that of the Emperor and of France who wanted, out of regard for the Protestants, a Council that should appear entirely new, delayed its opening throughout that year. Only the arrival of Card. Simonetta, the Pope's confidant, on 9 Dec. 1561, gave the signal for the true opening, which took place on 18 Jan. 1562 with the relatively numerous participation of 111 prelates with the right to vote (XVII session).

Since the envoys of the emperor Ferdinand I opposed the resumption of the discussions on the sacrifice of the Mass, interrupted in 1552, because this would have brought out the character of continuity of the Council, which they did not want, the Council devoted itself primarily to the reform of the Index librorum prohibitorum (XVIII session of 26 Feb. 1562) and to the granting of a safe-conduct to the Protestants, still not carried out. On 11 March the legates finally presented to the Council 12 articles of reform, at the head of which — despite the backward decree of the VII session — stood the enforcement of the duty of residence of bishops. A minority, composed of Spanish bishops and of imperial and Italian ones, held that the only effective means of compelling residence was a decision of the Council, by which bishops would be obliged to reside in their dioceses by divine right (de iure divino). The majority rejected this solution, because in its opinion it diminished the primatial right of the Pontiff; a part referred the decision to the Pope on 20 Apr. 1562. While the opinion of the minority met with the favour of Cardd. Seripando and Gonzaga, the majority found support in Card. Simonetta and in Rome. The Pope, on 11 May, censured the conduct of the first two legates and ordered that the question of the obligation of residence be postponed. The consequence was a grave crisis of confidence both on the part of the legates and on the part of the «ultramontanes». After two fruitless sessions (the XIX of 14 May and the XX of 5 June 1562) the Council resumed its activities on 6 June, when Card. Gonzaga, who had already offered his resignation to Rome, promised the discussion on residence combined with that on Order.

In the XXI session of 16 July 1562 the decree on the use of the Eucharist could be issued, 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 of the kinds. But the decision concerning the practical question whether the request submitted by the Emperor and the Duke of Bavaria to grant, with certain precautions, to the lay subjects the Communion of the chalice (Communio sub utroque specie) should be acceded to was referred in the following session to the Pope. This XXII session of 17 Sept. 1562, after a lively discussion concerning the sacrificial character of the Last Supper, constituted with the decree on justification the most important doctrinal decision of the whole Council. In a decree, which comprised 9 doctrinal chapters and 9 canons, it was defined that the Mass is a true and proper sacrifice of thanksgiving and propitiation and that it can also be offered for the dead and in honor of the saints. Although in the two sessions several reform decrees had also been promulgated on the conferral of Holy Orders, the election of bishops, the supervision of pious foundations, etc., nevertheless the "ultramontanes" did not see in these decrees the full fulfillment of their extensive proposals for reform, presented to the Council in many memorials (Spanish articles of reform of Apr. 1562; imperial libellus of reform of June 1562). There was even a common protest on the part of the envoys of the non-Italian powers accredited to the Council. The opposition grew in strength when, on 13 Nov. 1562, Cardinal of Lorraine, Charles Guise, appeared at T. with 14 French prelates. He soon became the head of the opposition. The partly Gallican and episcopalist conceptions that the French and the majority of the Spaniards, under the leadership of the zealous reformer, the Archbishop of Granada, Peter Guerrero, had upheld in the discussions on the obligation of residence of bishops and on the sacrament of Order in Dec. 1562 and in Jan. 1563, clashed against the lively opposition of the "zealots," who defended the definition on the Primacy of the Council of Florence. The contrasts seemed insurmountable, the negotiations reached a deadlock at the end of Jan. The Cardinal of Lorraine went to the Emperor's Court to complain of the inflexibility of the zealots and of the Pope's conciliar policy. The crisis had reached its height when, on 2 March 1563, Cardinal Gonzaga died, and shortly afterward, on 17 March, Cardinal Seripando as well. Nevertheless the Pope, with a letter entirely in his own hand, of 1 Apr. 1563, succeeded in convincing the most powerful monarch of Christendom, Philip II of Spain, that he did not shrink from a reform of the Church, but rather 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. Morone's diplomatic skill succeeded, through personal negotiations with the Emperor at Innsbruck, in winning first him and then, at T., also the Cardinal of Lorraine over to a compromise, and thereby saved the Council. After 10 months of grave discussions, it was finally possible to issue in the XXIII session of 15 July 1563 the decree on Order, which, however, did not define the debated question of the relation between the Primacy and the bishops. At the same time chap. 1 of the reform decree obliged all bishops, including cardinals, to observe residence, without saying anything about the declaration, requested by the opposition, of the ius divinum of the obligation of residence. In chap. 18 of the same decree, following a decree issued by Cardinal Pole for England, all bishops were ordered to erect seminaries for the clergy.

Toward the end of July 1563 Cardinal Morone presented to the Council a vast program of reform, which in many points seconded the demands of the "ultramontanes," while nevertheless maintaining sufficient regard for the tradition of the Roman Curia. The most important points of this program passed into the reform decrees of the last two sessions, the XXIV of 11 Nov. and the XXV of 3-4 Dec. 1563. Session XXIV, chap. 1, regulates the procedure for the appointment of bishops (informative process); chap. 2 prescribes the regular convocation of provincial and diocesan synods; chaps. 3, 9, 10, the visitation of dioceses. The dogmatic decree of the same session defines the sacramentality of Matrimony; and the celebrated decree Tametsi, added, made the validity of marriage depend on the fact that it be celebrated in the presence of one's own parish priest and of two witnesses; while it declared invalid clandestine marriages, until then only prohibited.

Although the Spanish ambassador, Count Luna, tended to drag out the Council, it was decided to hold the concluding session in the middle of Dec. And lo, on the 1st of the month news reached T. that the Pope was gravely ill. The final session (sess. XXV) was therefore moved up to 3 Dec. It issued the doctrinal decrees on Purgatory and Indulgences, on the cult of the saints, of their relics and of images. A vast reform of the religious Orders gave new foundations to the law of religious, arranging in a new manner the admission of new candidates, the formation of novices, studies, and enclosure. A further reform decree contained, among other things, a chapter on cardinals. Instead the "reform of princes" desired by some bishops, that is a stand against the abuses of the secular arm, was left aside. The Cardinal of Lorraine, at the end of the session, which had dragged on for two days and in which all the decrees of the Council had once again been read over, acclaimed the Pope, the Emperor and all the promoters of the Council. The secretary, Angelo Massarelli, who had held that office for the entire duration, took care that the decrees be signed by all those present. Thus we have the signatures of 199 archbishops and bishops, 7 abbots, 7 generals of Orders and 19 procurators of absent bishops.

5. Confirmation, execution and results of the Council

With the Council of T. the Church gave a twofold answer to the "reform" of Luther, Calvin and Zwingli: 1) with its dogmatic decrees, it authoritatively fixed what Catholic doctrine is; negatively in the canons, which condemn the errors of the innovators; positively in the doctrinal chapters that precede, in many decrees, the canons. Thus the teaching of doctrine, in preaching and in catechesis, but above all in the scientific field of theological controversies, acquired a sure doctrinal basis; the extensive works of Bellarmine and his successors have as their premises the doctrinal decrees of Trent. 2) With its reform decrees the Church opposed to the Protestant "reform," based on false foundations, a Catholic reform, which, building on the efforts at reform already accomplished in the late Middle Ages, was to penetrate gradually into ever wider circles of ecclesiastical life and was finally to restore to the Church the strength to reconquer, in the "Counter-Reformation," vast territories that it had lost. This success, however, was made possible only because the Papacy energetically took into its hands the implementation of the Council and prevented its decrees from remaining a dead letter.

The implementation of the Council began with the confirmation of all the decrees without exceptions and without changes (as would also have been desired in certain circles of the Roman Curia) made by Pius IV on 26 January 1564, first orally and then with the bull Benedictus Deus, dated the same day, but published only on 30 June 1564. And since the bull prohibited any publication of commentaries on the decrees and their authentic interpretation was reserved to the Holy See, the Pope consequently, on 2 August 1564, created, in order to answer any eventual questions and to watch over the observance of the decrees, a commission of cardinals, from which there later developed the S. Congregatio Concilii, which still exists today. On 13 November 1564 a brief summary of the conciliar doctrine was published: the Confessio Fidei Tridentina, and its profession was imposed on all bishops, on the members of cathedral Chapters, and on professors and doctors of universities. Even earlier, on 24 March 1564, the Pope had put into force the Index librorum prohibitorum, prepared at Trent, which, besides the alphabetical list of prohibited books by name, also contained ten general rules. The Catechismus Romanus, likewise already prepared by the Council, and conceived above all as a manual of theology for parish priests, appeared under Pius V in 1566; the Breviarium, revised by commission of the Council, in 1568; the Missale Romanum, reformed, in 1570; the revision of the Vulgate, desired by the Council, came out under Sixtus V (1590), and subsequently under Clement VIII (1592).

But even more important was the fact that the popes, beginning with Paul IV and especially Pius V and Gregory XIII with their successors, committed themselves energetically to ensuring that the decrees were officially published in the individual nations and dioceses and were observed. The official edition of the Tridentine decrees, edited by Paolo Manuzio, was communicated officially to the bishops of the whole world; in Germany it was brought by St. Peter Canisius. The popes' principal care was concentrated on the establishment of seminaries for the clergy, on the carrying out of pastoral visitations, alongside which in various regions of Italy there were also apostolic visitations, and finally on the convocation of provincial and diocesan synods, in which ecclesiastical discipline was regulated according to the norms of the Tridentine reforms. In this St. Charles Borromeo shines as a magnificent example with his activity in the ecclesiastical province and in the diocese of Milan; already in 1565 the Venetian ambassador, Giacomo Soranzo, wrote that he had accomplished «more profit in the court of Rome than all the decrees of the Council together». The great religious Orders adapted their constitutions to the decrees of the Council; as already in 1564 the Dominicans, the Hermits of St. Augustine and the Carmelites in their respective general Chapters of Bologna, Milan and Rome; and in 1570 the Cistercians. Given the close union of State and Church, it was of the greatest importance for the implementation of the Council that the States too accepted its decrees on their part. The Italian princes and the king of Poland accepted them unconditionally; King Philip II of Spain and the governess of the Netherlands, Margaret of Parma, only after long deliberations and with the clause: «saving the royal rights»; the Catholic Swiss cantons too placed restrictions. The emperor Maximilian II and the crown of France, on the other hand, refused to accept them by giving them the force of law. Only after decades of struggles with the parliaments imbued with Gallican ideas did the French bishops accept the Tridentine decrees in general terms in the Assembly of the Clergy of 1615; in these struggles are found the first traces of a historical penetration of the Council. In Germany a similar common act of the bishops did not take place; but the example of zealous bishops, such as Julius Echter of Würzburg, Daniel Brendel of Mainz and others, together with the activity of the pontifical nuncios, such as Ninguarda, Porcia and Gaspare Gropper, brought it about that the Tridentine spirit penetrated there as well.

The implementation of the Council of Trent was neither rapid nor uncontested, nor complete. The whole 18th century is still full of struggles over the validity of the Tridentine decrees and over the assimilation of particular law to the ius commune created by the Council, which modified in no fewer than 250 places the medieval law of the Decretals. Particularly in Spain and in Germany the cathedral Chapters opposed the suppression of exemptions and the restriction of the rights of archdeacons. Many dioceses had seminaries for the clergy only in the course of the 17th century and some only in the 18th century. From the prohibitions against uniting several bishoprics in the hands of one man, dispensations were many times granted in Germany in favor of the princes of the houses of Habsburg and Wittelsbach in order to interest these dynasties in the defense of threatened territories. Nevertheless it remains firmly established that the Council of Trent is the greatest reforming Council in the history of the Church and that the Papacy, through its convocation and its implementation, extraordinarily increased its influence over the peoples. The Council could not prevent the later rise of the great controversies over the efficacy of Grace (the so-called Molinist question) or over attrictionism. The doctrine on the Church and on the primacy of the pope, which were not defined in the Council, were discussed more sharply later, until the Vatican Council put an end to the Gallican, Febronian and episcopalist doctrines. All the efforts on the Protestant side to revise, in a new Council, in favor of the Union, the doctrinal decisions, necessarily foundered before the infallible character of the decisions of faith. How great, moreover, its influence was on the formation of ecclesiastical piety and on Christian art is a subject that must still be illustrated in further research. - See plates XLVII-XLIX.

FONTI: l'ed. uff. dei decr., 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. patiss. illustr. spectantia, 7 voll., Lovanio 1781-87; A. Theiner, Acta genuina SS. Conc. Trid., 2 voll., Zagabria 1872, prima, ma imperfetta ed. dei processi verb.; Concilium Tridentinum. Diariorum, actorum, epist., tractatum nova coll., ed. Soc. Goertes., finora 12 voll., Friburgo in Br. 1901-50, in 4 divisioni: 1. Diarii, ed. da S. Merkle, vol. I (1901); cf. H. Lenner, in Gregorianum, 15 [1934], p. 573 sgg.; vol. II (1911); vol. III, 1 (1931). 2. Atti; vol. IV (1904), ed. da St. Ehse; preistor. e processi verb. fino al 4 febbr. 1546; V (1911), ed. St. Ehse proc. verb. fino alla trasla.; vol. VI, ed. Th. Freudenberger; processi verb. del periodo bolognese; vol. VIII (1919), ed. St. Ehse; 1561-17 sett. 1562; vol. IX (1924) ed. St. Ehse; fino alla confirmaz. 3. Lettere, ed. G. Buschbell, 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. Conz. unter Pius IV., 4 voll., Vienna 1904-14; lett. importanti del card. Gonzaga al suo nipote a Roma e viceversa sono pubbl. 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 wenstdecht. Geheimberichte der Bisch. Gualterio v. Viterbo an den hl. Karl Bermanens, Würzburg 1941; C. M. Abad, Das Memor. 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 pubblicaz. più antiche di fonti sono ancora da consulare: 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. Layne disputat. Trident., 2 voll., Innsbruck 1886; Lett. degli oratori e di vesc. spagn. nella Collecio de docum. inéd. para la hist. de España, 9 (1846) e 98 (1891); per quelle degli oratori dell'Imp. cf. Th. Sickel, Zur Gesch. der C. v. T., Vienna 1872.

STUDIES: GENERAL HISTORY: P. Sarpi, Ist. del Conc. Trid., London 1619; critical ed. by G. Gambarin, 3 vols., Bari 1935; P. Sforza Pallavicino, Ist. del Conc. di T., 2 vols., Rome 1656-57; the best ed. by A. M. Zaccaria, 6 vols., ibid. 1792-99; P. Richard,

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 Zeitalter 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 T., 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 1945-47; vari autori, Studia Tridentina, 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, Contributi alla storia del Conc. di T. e della Controriforma, Firenze 1948; El Concilio de T., Esposic. e investig. por collaborad. de Razon y Fe., Madrid 1945. Numeri speciali sono stati dedicati al Conc. nel 1945, anche dai ssgg. period. spagnoli: Estudios eclesiásticos, Miscel. Comillas, Vedrad y Vida, Rev. de Espiritualidad, Apostolado sacerdotal. G. Schreiber, Das Weltkonzil von Trient, 2 voll., Friburgo 1951. Sulla partecipaz. delle singole Nazioni: J. de Castro, Portugal no Conc. de T., 6 voll., Lisbona 1944-46; J. Gofii Gazzambide, 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 deutsche Teilnehmer am K. von Trient, in Tübinger Th. Quartalschr., 122 (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, Elenco dei Padri domen. nel Conc. di T., in Angelicum, 22 (1945), pp. 31-39; R. Varesco, I Frati Minori al Conc. di T., in Arch. Francisc. hist., 41 (1948), e 42 (1949), anche separatamente, Quaracchi 1949; D. Gutierrez, Los Augustinos en el Conc. de T., in Ciudad de Dios, 158 (1946), pp. 385-499; S. Seiger, Carmelitae 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, 3ª ed., Vienna 1915; A. Galante, T. e il Conc. Trid., Roma 1922.

FIRST PERIOD: Dscr. septem priorum sess. Conc. Trid. sub. Paulo III Pont. Max. ex autogr. A. Massarelli hic photot. recuto, ed. St. Kuttner (Washington 1945), with an important introduction on the history of the text of the decrees; A. González Palencia-E. Mele, Vida y obras de Don Diego Hurtado de Mendoza, 3 vols., Madrid 1941-43; H. Jedin, G. Seripando, 2 vols., Würzburg 1937; K. D. Schmidt, Studien zur Gesch. des K. v. T., Tübingen 1925; A. Maichle, Der Kanon der bibl. Bücher u. das K. v. T., Freiburg 1929; W. Koch, Der auth. Charakter der Vulg. im Lichte der Trient. Konzilsverhandl., in Tüb. Th. Quartalschr., 96 (1914), p. 401 ff., 542 ff.; 97 (1915), p. 225 ff., 529 ff.; R. Draguet, Le Maître louvainiste Driedo, inspirateur du décr. de Trente sur la Vulg., in Misc. hist. A. De Mayer, II, Louvain 1946, pp. 836-854; S. Muñoz Iglesias, El decr. Trid. sobre la Vulg. y su interpret. por los teol. del siglo XVI, in Estud. bibl., 5 (1946), pp. 137-169; J. Rainer, Entstehungsgesch. der Trient. Predigterformdschr., in Zeitschr. für kath. Theol., 39 (1915), pp. 256-317; A. Allgeier, Das Konz. v. T. und das theol. Studium, in Hist. Jahrb., 52 (1932), pp. 313-39; W. Koch, Das Trient. Konzilsdekret. de peccato originali, in Tüb. Th. Quartalschr., 95 (1913), pp. 430-

450, 532-64; 96 (1914), pp. 101-23. Quanto al decreto sulla giustifica, importanti i voti finora sconosciuti pubbl. da J. Olazár: Nuevos docum. trident. sobre la justi. in Arch. Teol. Granad., 12 (1949), pp. 161-330; H. Rüchert, Die Rechtfertigungslehre auf dem Trid. Konz., Bonn 1925; E. Stakemeier, Glaube u. Rechtfertigung, Friburgo in Br. 1937; id., Der Kampf um Augustin auf dem Trident., Paderborn 1937; V. Heynck, Der Anteil des Konzils, Andreas de Vega G.P.M. an dem erst. amt. Entwurf des Trient. Rechtfertigungsdehr., in Franz. Stud., 33 (1951), pp. 49-81; E. A. Stakemeier, Das K. v. T. über die Heilsgewissheit, Heidelberg 1947; V. Heynck, Das Votum des Generals der Konvent., B. Costacciaro, vom 26. Nov., 1948 über die Gnadengewissh., in Franz. Stud., 31 (1949), pp. 274-303, 350-95; P. Hörger, Conc. Trid. de necessitate baptismi doctrina in decr. de tuttificat., in Antonianum, 17 (1942), pp. 193-222, 269-302.

BOLOGNA E SECONDO PERIODO: L. Carcereri, Il Conc. di T. dalla trasla. a Bologna alla sopent., Bologna 1910; Th. Freudenberger, Der Kampf um die radikale Abschaffung der Stolgebühren während der Bologn. Periode des Trient. Konz., in Münch. Theol. Zeitschr., 1 (1950), pp. 40-53; V. Heynck, Contritio vera. Zur Kontrov. über den Begriff der contritio vera auf der Bologn. 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. 338-317; J. Birkner, Die Akten des Trient. Konz. für die zweite Tagungsperiode unter Papst Julius III., ibid., 29 (1938-39), pp. 279-311; id., Kard. M. Crescentius, in Röm. Quartalschr., 43 (1935), pp. 267-85; F. Cavallera, L'interpréta. du chap. VI de st Jean, in Rev. d'hist. eccl., 9 (1909), pp. 687-709; id., Le décret du Conc. de T. sur la pénit. et l'extr. onction, in Bull. de litt. eccl., 1923, pp. 277-97 con continuaz. fino all'anno 1938; C. Costant, Concession à l'Allemagne de la Comm. sous les deux espèces, 2 voll., Parigi 1923; H. Jedin, Ein span. Epilog zur zweiten Tagungsperiode des K. v. T., in Gregorianum, 31 (1950), pp. 100-13; id., Kirchenreform u. Konzilsgedanke 1530-39, in Hist. Jahrb., 54 (1934), pp. 401-31.

TERZO PERIODO: St. Ehses, Die letzte Berufung des Tr. Konz. durch Pius IV., in Festschr. G. v. Hertling, Kempten 1913, pp. 139-162; H. O. Evennett, The Card. of Lorraine and the Counc. of T., Cambridge 1930; B. Chudoba, Las relas. de las dos cortes Habsburguesas ecc., in Bolet. de la Acad. de hist., 103 (1933), II, pp. 297-368; G. Eder, Die Reformvorschläge Ferdinands I. auf dem Trient. Konz., Münster 1911; H. Jedin, La politica conciliare di Cosimo I., in Riv. st. ital., 62 (1950), pp. 345-74, 477-96; L. Prosdocimi, Il progetto di Riforma dei principi al Conc. di T., in Aeum, 13 (1919), pp. 3-64; J. Birkner, Das K. v. T. u. die Reform des Kardinalskolleg. unter Pius IV., in Hist. Jahrb., 52 (1932), pp. 340-55; H. Jedin, Zur Vorgesch. der Regulareureform Trid. Sess. XXV., in Röm. Quartalschr., 44 (1936), pp. 231-81; id., Il tipo ideale di vesc. sec. la riforma catt., Brescia 1930; M. Alonso, El sacrif. eucarist. según el Conc. Trid., Madrid 1929; E. Jamouille, L'unité sacrificielle de la Cène, la Croix et l'Autel au Conc. de T., in Eph. theol. Lov., 22 (1946), pp. 34-69; G. B. da Farnese, Il sacram. dell'Ordine nel periodo preced. la sess. XXIII del C. d. T., Roma 1946; F. Garcia Guerrero, El decr. sobre la residencia de los obispos en la terc. asamblea del Conc. Trid., Granada 1942; L. Castano, Pio IV e la Curia Rom. di fronte al dibattito trid. sulla residenza, in Xenia Plana, Roma 1943, pp. 1939-75; H. Jedin, Das K. v. T. u. die Anfänge der Kirchenmatriheln, in Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung für Rechtsgesch., Kanonist. Abt., 32 (1943), pp. 419-94; id., Entstehung und Tragweite des Trient. Dehr. über die Bilderverehrung, in Tübinger Theol. Quartalschr., 116 (1935), pp. 143-88, 404-29; id., Das K. v. T. u. die Reform der liturg. Bücher, in Eph. lit., 59 (1949), pp. 5-48.

EFFECTS AND SIGNIFICANCE: Pastor, VII-IX; C. Sanchez Aliseda, La doctr. de la Iglesia sobre los semin. deste T. hasta nuestras dias, Granada 1942; E. Mâle, L'art relig. après le Conc. de T., Paris 1932; G. Schreiber, Der Baroch und das Trid., in Weltkonzil (cit.), II, pp. 381-425; K. Weinmann, Das K. v. T. und die Kirchenmusik, Leipzig 1919; K. G. Fellerer, Das Trid. und die Kirchenmusik, in Weltkonzil, II, pp. 447-62; G. Getto, La lettre. acct. e mist. in Ital. nell'età del C. Trid., in Contrib. alla stor. del C. d. T. (cit.), pp. 51-77; J. G. Mayer, Das K. v. T. und die Gegenreform, in der Schweiz, 2 vols., Stams 1901-1903; V. Martin, Le Gallicanisme et la réforme cath., Paris 1919; F. Wilcox, L'introd. des décr. du C. de Tr. dans le Pays-Bas et dans la principauté de Liège, Louvain 1929; H. Jedin, Il significato del C. di T. nella stor. della Chiesa, in Gregorianum, 26 (1946), pp. 117-36.