CRISTO RAUL.ORG

READING HALL

THE DOORS OF WISDOM

CHAPTER III. Adrian VI as a Reformer and Ecclesiastical Ruler.

Before he reached Italy Adrian had already announced by his words and actions his intention of encountering with all his energy the many and grave disorders in religion. The numerous memorials and offers of advice addressed to him immediately after his election show what high hopes had been set on him as a reformer, and to what an extent his intentions in this respect had been anticipated. A number of these documents have been preserved. They differ much in their value and their contents; but all recognize the existence of grievous abuses.

The “Apocalypsis” of Cornelius Aurelius, Canon of Gouda, is unusually comprehensive and highly rhetorical. This strange document outspokenly describes, in the form of a dialogue, the scandalous lives of the clergy, especially of the Cardinals, the abuses at Rome, with particular reference to those of the Rota, and expresses the confident expectation that reform would proceed from Adrian, of all men the most just, the chastiser of wrongdoers, the light of the world, the hammer of tyrants, the priest of the Most High. As the essential means of restoring discipline the writer calls in burning words for the summoning of a general council such as Adrian himself had already advocated when a professor at Louvain.

A similar standpoint was taken in the memorial of Joannes Ludovicus Vives, the distinguished humanist who, by birth a Spaniard, had, through long years of residence in Louvain and Bruges become almost a Netherlander, and was among the number of Adrian’s friends. With sound Catholic views, Vives, who had distinguished himself by his writings on educational and politico-social subjects, was not blind to the transgressions of the clergy. In a document issued at Louvain in October 1522, he takes as his text the sentence of Sallust, that no Government can be maintained save only by those means by which it was established. Vives requires that the Pope shall, in the sphere of politics, restore the peace of Christendom, and in that of religion institute a radical reform of the clergy. The latter can only be reached by a general council wherein all, even the most hidden and therefore most dangerous evils, must come to light. If other Popes had avoided a general council as though it had been poison, Adrian must not shrink from one. Even if the existing tempest had not broken loose, the assembling of a council, at which the principal matters to be dealt with, would not be theoretical questions but the practical reform of morals, would have been necessary the religious controversy could be relegated to professional scholars and experts. In giving this advice, Vives certainly overlooked the fact that the Lutheran controversy had long since passed from the academic to the popular stage, that the denial of the most important articles of belief would compel any council to declare its mind, and, finally, that the new teachers themselves were demanding a conciliar decision. The best and the most practical advice as regards reform reached Adrian from Rome itself. Two Cardinals, Schinner and Campeggio, there spoke openly and, with an exhaustive knowledge of the circumstances, explained the conditions under which the much-needed reforms could be effected. Schinner’s report, dated the 1st of March 1522, is, unfortunately, only preserved in an abstract prepared for Adrian; this is much to be regretted, for in the fuller document his carefully considered counsels on the political as well as the ecclesiastical situation were imparted in the most comprehensive way. Schinner first of all urges a speedy departure for Rome, otherwise a Legate must be appointed; but in no case should the Sacred College be allowed to represent the Pope. Other suggestions concerned the maintenance of the States of the Church and the restoration of peace to Christendom. As the enemy of France, Schinner advised the conclusion of a close alliance with the Emperor and the Kings of England and Portugal, since the French must be kept at a distance from Italy, otherwise it would be impossible to take any steps against the Turks. To relieve the financial distress, Adrian should borrow from the King of England 200,000 ducats.

“If your Holiness”, he says further, “wishes to govern in reality, you must not attach yourself to any Cardinal in particular, but treat all alike, and then give the preference to the best. On this point more can be said hereafter by word of mouth, as there would be danger in committing such confidential matter to paper.” Trustworthy officials are to be recommended to the Pope in Rome by Schinner and Enkevoirt; for the present his attention is called to Jacob Bomisius as Secretary, and to Johann Betchen of Cologne as Subdatary. Hereupon follows the programme for the reform of the Curia. As regards the reductions in the famiglie of the Cardinals, the Pope is to set a good example by keeping up as small a Court as possible. The sale of offices, especially those of court chaplains and Abbreviators, must be done away with; the number of Penitentiaries and Referendaries reduced; and both these classes, as well as persons employed in the Rota, have fixed salaries assigned to them. The officials of the Rota may receive fees not exceeding, under penalty of dismissal, the sum of two ducats; the same scale to apply to the Penitentiaries; should the latter receive more from the faithful, the surplus shall go to the building fund of St. Peter’s. The Papal scribes are to keep themselves strictly within the limits of the taxes as assessed. The river tax is to be reduced by one-half, whereby an impetus will be given to trade; under no circumstances is this tax any longer to be farmed. The numerous purchasable posts established by Leo X are simply abolished.

The “Promemoria” sent by Cardinal Campeggio to the Pope in Spain called for not less decisive measures; apart from recommendations concerning the States of the Church, this document deals exclusively with the removal of ecclesiastical abuses; here, however, the advice is so uncompromising that it must be distinguished as the most radical programme of reform put forward at this critical time. With a noble candour and a deep knowledge of his subject, he exposes, without palliation, the abuses of the Roman Curia. His position is that of a staunch Churchman; the authority of the Holy See is based on divine institution; if, in virtue of this authority, all things are possible to the Pope, all things are not permissible. Since the source of the evil is to be traced back to the Roman Curia, in the Roman Curia the foundations of reform must be laid.

In the first place, Campeggio desires a reform of Church patronage. A stop must be put to the abuse of conferring benefices without the consent of the patrons; to the plurality of livings, a custom having its origin in covetousness and ambition; to the scandalous system of “commendams”, and finally, to the taxation known as “composition”, an impost which had brought upon the Holy See the odium of princes and had furnished heretical teachers with a pointed weapon of attack. Campeggio points to the absolute necessity of a limitation of the powers of the Dataria, the officials of which were often as insatiable as leeches. The reservation of benefices must be entirely abolished, unless some case of the most exceptional kind should occur; those which were already sanctioned, however, were to be strictly maintained; every opportunity for illicit profit on the part of officials must be cut off. He lays down sound principles with regard to the bestowal of patronage. The personal qualifications of a candidate should be considered as well as the peculiar circumstances of a diocese; foreigners ought not to be preferred to native candidates; appointments should in all cases be given to men of wholly virtuous and worthy character. Special sorrow is expressed over the many conventions, agreements, and concordats with secular princes whereby the greater part of the spiritual rights and concerns of the Holy See have been withdrawn from its authority. Although Campeggio in the very interests of ecclesiastical dignity and freedom recommends the utmost possible restriction of the concessions which earlier Popes had made through greed or ignorance, he is yet careful to exhort great circumspection and moderation in approaching this delicate ground.

In the second place, he denounces the gross abuses arising from the indiscriminate issue of indulgences. On this point he suggests, without qualification, important limitations, especially with regard to the grant of indulgences to the Franciscan Order and the special privileges relating to confession. The approaching year of Jubilee offers a fitting opportunity for sweeping changes in this matter. The rebuilding of St. Peter’s, a debt of honour for every Pontiff, need not be hindered on this account; Christian Princes must be called upon to pay a yearly contribution towards its completion.

In a third section the “Promemoria” considers the general interests of the Christian Church; the return of the Bohemians to unity; the restoration of peace, especially between Charles V and Francis I, in order to promote a crusade against the Turks, in which Russia also must be induced to join; finally, the extirpation of the Lutheran heresy by the fulfilment of the terms of the Edict of Worms.

Campeggio’s memorial also pleads for a thorough reform of the judicial courts. In future, let all causes be referred to the ordinary courts, without any private intervention of the Pope in this domain. The judges of the Rota, where bad, should be replaced by good; the auditors’ salaries should be fixed, and the charges for despatches, which had risen to an exorbitant excess, must be cut down and settled at a fixed scale. Similar reforms are recommended for the tribunal of the Auditor of the Camera. Supplementary proposals are added concerning a reform of the Senate, of the Judges of the Capitol, of the city Governors, Legates, and other officials of the States of the Church. Last of all, means are suggested for alleviating the financial distress. The Cardinal deprecates an immediate suspension of those offices which Leo X had created in exchange for money, since such a proceeding might shake men’s confidence in Papal promises; he advocates a gradual suppression and their exchange for benefices. Further recommendations have reference to the appointment of a finance committee of Cardinals, the sequestration of the first year's rents of all vacant benefices, and the levy of a voluntary tax on the whole of Christendom. Other proposals Campeggio keeps in reserve for oral communication.

Bitter lamentations over Rome as the centre of all evil are also contained in another letter through which Zaccaria da Rovigo endeavoured indirectly to influence Adrian VI. Here the principal abuse inveighed against is the appointment of young and inexperienced men to Church dignities, even bishoprics; this paper, composed at the moment of the Pope’s arrival, also exhorts him to be sparing in the distribution of privileges and indulgences. An anonymous admonition, also certainly intended for Adrian, singles out, as the most important and necessary matter for reform, the episcopal duty of residence in the diocese. Henceforth Cardinals should not receive bishoprics as sources of revenue. Their incomes should be fixed at a sum ranging from 4000 to 5000 ducats, and a Cardinal-Protector should be given to each country. The author advocates a strict process of selection in appointing members of the Sacred College; their number should be diminished, for thereby unnecessary expenditure would be avoided and the respect due to the Cardinalate increased. The importance of appointing good bishops, intending to reside in their sees, is justly enforced. Under pain of eternal damnation, says the writer, the Pope is bound to appoint shepherds, not wolves. As regards the inferior clergy, he lays stress on the necessity for a careful choice of priests anxious for the souls of their people, performing their functions in person, and not by deputy, and faithful in all their duties, especially that of preaching.

By these and other communications Adrian was accurately informed of the true state of things and of the existing scandals, as well as of the means for their removal. Having had experience in Spain of the success of a legitimate Church reform, working from within, he was determined to bring all his energies to bear in grappling with a decisive improvement in Rome itself, on the principle of ancient discipline, and extending this amelioration to the whole Church. He had hardly set foot in Rome before he removed all doubt as to his intentions of reform by appointing Cardinal Campeggio to the Segnatura della Justizia, and nominating Enkevoirt as Datary. He also soon addressed the Cardinals in no uncertain language. In his first Consistory, on the 1st of September 1522, he made a speech which caused general astonishment. He had not sought the tiara, he declared, but had accepted it as a heavy burden since he recognized that God had so willed it. Two things lay at his heart before all others : the union of Christian princes for the overthrow of the common enemy, the Turk, and the reform of the Roman Curia. In both these affairs he trusted that the Cardinals would stand by him, as the relief of Hungary, then sorely threatened by the Sultan, and of the knights of Rhodes, admitted of as little delay as the removal of the grievous ecclesiastical disorders in Rome. Going more closely into the latter question, Adrian cited the example of the Jews, who, when they refused to amend, were constantly visited by fresh judgments. Thus was it with Christendom at that hour. The evil had reached such a pitch that, as St. Bernard says, those who were steeped in sins could no longer perceive the stench of their iniquities. Throughout the whole world the ill repute of Rome was talked of. He did not mean to say that in their own lives the Cardinals displayed these vices, but within their palaces iniquity stalked unpunished; this must not so continue. Accordingly, he implores the Cardinals to banish from their surroundings all elements of corruption, to put away their extravagant luxury, and to content themselves with an income of, at the utmost, 6000 ducats. It must be their sacred duty to give a good example to the world, to bethink themselves of the honour and welfare of the Church, and to rally round him in carrying out the necessary measures of reform.

The Pope, according to a foreign envoy, made use of such strong expressions that all who heard him were astonished; he rebuked the ways of living at the Roman Court in terms of severity beyond which it would be impossible to go. A lively discussion thereupon arose, since, as the Venetian Ambassador declares, there were a score of Cardinals who considered themselves second to none in the whole world. The Pope's strongest complaints were probably aimed at the Rota, where the administration of justice was a venal business. On this point it was decided, most probably on the advice of Schinner, to take prohibitive measures at once ; any Auditor who should in future be guilty of illegality, especially in the matter of fees, was to be liable to peremptory dismissal.

The Curia realized very soon that Adrian was the man to thoroughly carry out his projects of reform. The Cardinals in Curia, who had taken up their residence in the Vatican, were obliged to leave; only Schinner, whose name was identified with the programme of reform, was allowed to remain. To Cardinal Cibo, a man of immoral character, the Pope showed his displeasure in the most evident manner; when he presented himself for an audience, he was not even admitted to his presence. Still greater astonishment was caused when Cardinal Medici, who had carried the Pope's election, was treated in exactly the same way as all the others. To the Cardinals it seemed an unheard-of proceeding that the prohibition to carry weapons should be at once enforced with rigour on members of their own households. A clerk in Holy Orders who had given false evidence in the Rota, was punished by the Pope with immediate arrest and the loss of all his benefices. Unbounded consternation was aroused by the steps taken against Bernardo Accolti, who had been accused of participation in a murder during the vacancy of the Holy See, and had fled from his threatened punishment. The favourite of the court circle of Leo X, who had given him the sobriquet of “the Unique”, was cited to appear instantly for judgment, or, in case of contumacy, to suffer the confiscation of all his property, movable and immovable. “Everyone trembles”, writes the Venetian Ambassador, “Rome has again become what it once was; all the Cardinals, even to Egidio Canisio, a member of the Augustinian Order, have put off their beards”. A few days later, the same narrator reports “The whole city is beside itself with fear and terror, owing  to the things done by the Pope in the space of eight days”.

Already, in the above-mentioned Consistory, on the 1st of September, Adrian had annulled all indults issued by the Cardinals during the provisional government, subsequent to the 24th of January. Soon afterwards the number of the referendaries of the Segnatura, which had been raised by Leo to forty, was reduced to nine; in this matter also Adrian followed the advice of Schinner. At the same time, it was reported that the Pope had commanded the Datary Enkevoirt to appoint no one in future to more than one benefice. When Cardinal Agostino Trivulzio asked for a bishopric on account of his poverty, the Pope asked the amount of his income. When Adrian was informed that this amounted to 4000 ducats, he remarked : “I had only 3000, and yet laid by savings out of that which were of service to me on my journey to Italy”. He also published strong enactments, in the middle of September, against the laxity of public morals in Rome. In Germany, Adrian insisted on the strict observance of the decree of the last Lateran Council that every preacher should be furnished with a special licence by his bishop.

The wholesome fear which had fallen on the Curia was still further increased by the news that Adrian intended to suppress the College of the Cavalieri di San Pietro, and to recall collectively many of the offices bestowed by the deceased Pope. Everyone who had received or bought an official place under Leo X dreaded the loss of position and income. Numberless interests were at stake. Thousands were threatened in their means of existence as Adrian proceeded to divest “ecclesiastical institutions of that financial character stamped upon them by Leo, as if the whole machinery of Church government had been a great banking concern”. In addition to this, the Pope at first held himself aloof as much as possible from the decision of questions of prerogative, and even in matters of pressing importance generally answered with a “Videbimus”—“We shall see”. Not less firm were the Datary Enkevoirt, the private secretary Heeze, and the Netherlander Petrus de Roma, who was responsible for the issue of Papal dispensations. Rome rang with innumerable complaints. The verdict on Adrian was that he carried firmness to excess, and in all matters was slow to act. Among the few who did justice to the conscientiousness of the Pope were Campeggio, Pietro Delfino, and the representative of the Duchess of Urbino, Giovanni Tommaso Manfredi. As early as the 29th of August the last-named had reported: “The Holy Father appears to be a good shepherd; he is one of those to whom all disorder is unpleasing; the whole of Christendom has cause for satisfaction”. On the 8th of September Manfredi repeats his good opinion; even if Adrian is somewhat slow in coming to his decisions, yet, he remarks very justly, it must be taken into consideration that, at the beginning of his reign, a new Pope has to take his bearings. At the end of December the envoy of Ferrara is emphatic in calling attention to the Pope’s love of justice. Leo is certainly aimed at when he says expressly, at the same time, that Adrian is a stranger to dissimulation and a double tongue. Also, in January 1523, Jacopo Cortese praises in the highest terms, to the Marchioness Isabella of Mantua, the tenacious conscientiousness, the justice, and the holy life of the Pope.

The above opinions, however, among which that of the Portuguese Ambassador may, to a certain extent, be included, form an exception. The general verdict was increasingly unfavourable. This we must connect, in the first place, with Adrian’s limited expenditure, in order to relieve the finances which, under Leo, had become so heavily involved. Regardless of the fact that the Pope, face to face with empty coffers and a mountain of debt, had no other course open to him than that of extreme economy, he was soon reviled as a niggard and a miser. The prodigal generosity and unmeasured magnificence of the Popes of the Renaissance had so confused the general standard of opinion that, to an Italian of those days, a homely and frugal Pope was a phenomenon none could understand. Leo X was popular because he piled up debt on debt; his successor was unpopular “because he neither could make money nor wished to make it”. The sharp break with all the traditions of the Medicean reign disappointed the hopes and damaged the private interests of thousands, who now bitterly hated the foreign Pope, and looked with hostility on all his measures. Even in cases where one might with certainty have expected his actions to meet with general approval, they incurred censure. A nephew of Adrian’s, a student at Siena, had come to him in haste; the Pope at once made it clear to him that he ought to return to his studies. Other relations who had come to him on foot, full of the highest expectation, were dismissed after receiving some very slender gifts. The same persons who could not sufficiently blame the Pope for surrounding himself with Netherlanders, now pointed to his sternness towards his own family as the very acme of harshness.

What currency was given to the most unfair criticism of Adrian is shown, not only in the reports of the Imperial Ambassador  who, on political grounds, was bitterly opposed to him, but in those of most of the other envoys. Adrian was not turned aside by the general dissatisfaction with that firmness which had always been one of his characteristics, he set himself with determination to carry out what he saw to be necessary. His programme consisted in, first of all, giving help in the Turkish troubles and secondly, in making headway with his Church reforms his responsibilities towards the States of the Church he placed, for the present, in the background.

The gigantic tasks which he had thus undertaken were made more difficult not merely by the hostility of the Curia and the want of funds, but by a calamity for which also the Pope was not responsible. Early in September 1522 the plague had broken out afresh in Rome. Isolated cases had been reported on the 5th of that month, a season always dreaded on account of its unhealthiness. Later on the pestilence became epidemic, and on the nth the daily death-rate was reckoned at thirty-six. Adrian did not delay in taking the necessary measures. He took care that the spiritual needs of the sick should be attended to under strict regulations; at the same time he endeavoured to check the spread of the disease by forbidding the sale of articles belonging to those who had died of the disorder.

The members of the Curia wished the Pope to abandon the city, now plague-stricken in every quarter. They could remember how even a Nicholas V had thus ensured his safety. Not so the Flemish Pope: with courage and composure he remained steadfast at his post, although the plague gained ground every day. In answer to representations made on all sides that he might be attacked, his reply was, “I have no fear for myself, and I put my trust in God”. Adrian kept to his resolve, although on the 13th of September he was indisposed. It is to be noted that, notwithstanding his ailment, he did not abstain from saying Mass and attending to the despatch of business. The fever, however, had so much increased on the 15th that he was obliged to suspend his daily Mass. As soon as he felt better, he devoted himself again to business, although his physicians implored him to take some rest. Notwithstanding the exertions into which Adrian, in his zeal for duty, threw himself, regardless of the claims of health, he made such improvement that on the 22nd of September his recovery was regarded as complete. He now redoubled his activity, and the audiences were once more resumed. “The Cardinals”, writes an envoy, “besiege the Pope and give him more trouble than all the rest of Christendom put together”. Meanwhile the plague still lasted, and once more the Pope was advised from all quarters to secure the safety of his life by flight, but to their counsels Adrian would not listen; regardless of the danger, on the 28th of September he visited S. Maria del Popolo. The only concessions he at last consented to make were to defer the Consistories, and to permit the affrighted Cardinals to leave Rome. At the end of September the daily death-rate amounted to thirty-five, and the cases of sickness to forty-one.

Cardinal Schinner died on the 1st of October of a fever which had attacked him on the 12th of September. His death was a heavy loss to the cause of reform, of which he had been the eager champion. It was already reported in Germany that the Pope had succumbed to the plague. In the first week of October, under ordinary circumstances the pleasantest month in Rome, the mortality made great strides; on the 8th the death-roll numbered a hundred. All who could took to flight; only the Pope remained. He attended to the Segnatura and even still continued to give audiences; not until two inmates of the Vatican were stricken did he shut himself up in the Belvedere. The Cardinals were directed to apply to the Datary for affairs of pressing importance. On the 10th of October Cardinals Ridolfi and Salviati left Rome, followed on the 13th by Giulio de' Medici and on the 14th by the Imperial Ambassador Sessa. The members of the Curia were of opinion that the Pope ought to do the same at any cost, but found Adrian as irresponsive as ever; he remained in the Belvedere and held audiences at a window. In November even this was given up; of the entire College of Cardinals only three remained in Rome and, at last, one only, Armellini. The Italian officials had almost all taken to flight only the faithful Flemings and some Spaniards refused to leave the Pope.

No diminution in the plague was observable in October, nor yet in November. At the end of the former month there were 1750 infected houses in Rome. Baldassare Castiglione draws a fearful picture of the misery in the city. In the streets he saw many corpses and heard the cries of the sufferers : “Eight out of ten persons whom one meets”, he writes, “bear marks of the plague. Only a few men have survived. I fear lest God should annihilate the inhabitants of this city. The greatest mortality has been among grave-diggers, priests, and physicians. Where the dead have none belonging to them, it is hardly any longer possible to give them burial”. According to Albergati, the confusion had reached such a pitch that the living were sometimes interred with the dead. With the arrival of cold weather in the first half of December signs appeared that the pestilence was on the wane. On the 9th of December the daily sum of deaths was still thirty-three, on the 15th thirty-seven, on the 18th only nine. Since the Cardinals hesitated about returning—on the 10th of December only six had been present in Consistory—the Pope gave orders that they must all return to their places in the Curia. The cases of sickness having very greatly lessened by the end of the year, the Pope resumed his audiences; the fugitive Italians, one by one, returned to Rome and the business of the Curia was once more reopened.

While the plague raged four precious months were lost. It is indeed worthy of our admiration that Adrian, as soon as the greatest danger was over, should have returned immediately to his work of reform. As early as the 9th of December 1522 there appeared a measure of great importance and utility in this direction. All indults granted to the secular power since the days of Innocent VIII concerning the presentation and nomination to high as well as inferior benefices were repealed, thus leaving the Holy See free to provide for the choice of fit persons. Even if this general ordinance were limited to no small extent by the concordats entered into with separate countries, still, it was made known “that the Pope had no intention of stopping at half measures, and that, whenever he found a bad condition of things, he was determined to replace it by a better”. On the 5th of January 1523 Adrian reopened the Segnatura for the first time. He took this opportunity of expressly enjoining that only such persons should receive benefices as were fitted for and worthy of them.

An actual panic was caused in the first months of 1523 by the renewal, in a more circumstantial form, of the report that the Pope was busy with his scheme for abolishing all the new offices created by Leo X and bestowed or sold by him, and for making a great reduction of all officials, especially of the scribes and archivists. In the beginning of February a Congregation of six Cardinals was in fact appointed in order to draw up proposals with regard to the recently made Leonine appointments. Adrian had now brought himself into complete disfavour with the ecclesiastical bureaucracy—of all bureaucracies the worst. It gave rise to astonishment and displeasure when Adrian, in the beginning of April 1523, dismissed most of the Spaniards in his service from motives of economy and soon afterwards made further reductions in his establishment. If strong expression had before this found vent in the Curia on the subject of Adrian’s parsimony, or, as they preferred to call it, his miserliness, now indignation knew no bounds. According to the Ferrarese envoy, no Pope had ever received so much abuse as Adrian VI. Prelates and Cardinals accustomed to the pomp and luxury of the Leonine period found a continual stumbling-block in the asceticism and simplicity of Adrian's life. The contrast was indeed sharp and uncompromising. While Leo loved society and saw much of it, delighted in state and ceremony, in banquets and stage plays, his successor lived with a few servants in the utmost possible retirement; he never went abroad save to visit churches, and then with a slender retinue. He gave his support, not to poets and jesters, but to the sick and poor.

It was a moment of the greatest importance for the Papal schemes of reform when, in March 1523, Dr. John Eck, a staunch supporter of loyal Catholic opinion in Germany, came to Rome. The cause of his visit was certain matters of ecclesiastical policy in the Duchy of Bavaria, which were happily settled through the advances of Adrian VI. Amid the interests of his sovereign Eck was not unmindful of the welfare of Christendom; both the question of the Turkish war and that of reform were thoroughly discussed in his interviews with the Pope. Eck's notes have been preserved;  they form an important contribution to the history of Church reform at this time.

Eck thoroughly reviews the situation. Not only the rapid spread of the Lutheran teaching even in South Germany, but also the grievous harm wrought within the Church itself, was known to him down to the smallest detail. In the existing political situation of Europe he did not, in the first place, hope much from a general council quite as little, he thought correctly, would be gained by a mere condemnation of the heretical doctrines. In agreement with the most enlightened men of the age, above all with the Pope, he calls for comprehensive reform in Rome itself. He unsparingly discloses the abuses there existing, especially in the matter of indulgences he points out that there is a crying necessity for a substantial reduction in the different classes of indulgence;  he also wishes to see some limit set to the bestowal of faculties to hear confessions.

Eck draws an equally interesting and repulsive picture of the doings of the benefice-hunters and their countless tricks and artifices. He remarks with truth that, since many of these men came from Rome, the odium they incurred recoiled on the Holy See. On this point he implores Adrian without reserve to take decisive measures; the system of pluralities had been the source of abuses profoundly affecting the life of the Church. Eck especially recommends the diminution of pensions and expectancies and the entire abolition of commends and incorporations. If Eck’s proposals with regard to indulgences and the system of patronage command our entire approval, not so entirely satisfactory are his suggestions for a reform of the Penitentiary. The complete removal of the taxes on dispensations goes too far; in order to produce an effect he exaggerates in many particulars. On the other hand, he speaks to the point in dealing with the misuse of the so-called lesser excommunication, the laxity in giving dispensations to regulars in respect of their vows and habit, and the too great facility with which absolutions were given by the confessors in St. Peter's. A thorough reform of the Penitentiary officials and of the whole system of taxation was certainly necessary.

Eck made extensive proposals for a reform of the German clergy, the need of which he attributes to the unfortunate neglect of the decrees of the last Lateran Council. With a minute attention to detail, he here gives his advice concerning the conduct of the bishops, prelates, and inferior clergy, the system of preaching, diocesan government, and the excessive number of festivals. For a realization of his projects for the reform of the Curia, Eck hopes great things from the German Pope, whom he also counsels to pledge himself to convoke a general council. Eck also recommends the issue of a fresh Bull against Luther and his chief followers, the suppression of the University of Wittenberg, the appointment of visitors for each ecclesiastical province, furnished with Papal authority and that of the ruler of the country, and lastly, the restoration of the ancient institution of diocesan and provincial synods, for the summoning of which and their deliberations he makes extensive suggestions; these synods are to form an organizing and executive centre for the systematized struggle with the innovators.

We have, unfortunately, no authentic information in detail as to the attitude of Adrian towards this comprehensive programme of reform, nor as to the more immediate course of the conferences on the question of indulgences. One thing only is certain, that although the capitulations of his election afforded Adrian an opportunity for approaching the subject directly, yet the difficulties were so great that he did not venture on any definite step. If he did not here anticipate the decision of the council which it was his intention to summon, yet, in practice, he proceeded to issue indulgences most sparingly.

Not less serious were the obstacles to be met with when Adrian began his attempts to reform the Dataria. It was soon shown that salaries only could not take the place of the customary fees without introducing laxity of discipline besides, the abolition of fees for the despatch of Bulls and the communication of Papal favours could not take effect, at a time of such financial distress, without great loss to the already exhausted exchequer, still chargeable, irrespective of these minor sources of revenue, with the remuneration of the officials. Thus the Pope saw himself forced in this department also, to leave things, provisionally, for the most part as they were; nevertheless, he kept close watch over the gratuities of the Dataria in order to keep them within the narrowest possible limits.

Still more injurious to the cause of reform than the difficulties referred to was the growing peril from the Turks, which made increasing claims on Adrian's attention. “If Adrian, in consequence of the fall of Rhodes, had not been occupied with greater concerns, we should have seen fine things”, runs the report of a Venetian unfriendly to reform. Excitement in the Curia ran high when Adrian withdrew a portion of their income from the Cavalieri di San Pietro, the overseers of corn, and others who had bought their places under Leo X. The Pope excused himself for these hard measures on the plea that, in order to satisfy all, he was forced to a certain extent to make all suffer. The charges of greed and avarice were now openly brought against him in the harshest terms, and the total ruin of the city was proclaimed as inevitable. On the 25th of February 1523 one of these officials, whose means of subsistence was threatened by Adrian’s course of action, tried to stab the Pope, but the vigilance of Cardinal Campeggio baulked this attempt made by one whose mind had become deranged.

Neither by dangers of this kind nor by the piteous complaints which assailed him from all sides could Adrian be diverted from his path. Where it was possible he took steps against the accumulation of livings, checked every kind of simony, and carefully watched over the choice of worthy men for ecclesiastical posts, obtaining the most accurate information as to the age, moral character, and learning of candidates; moral delinquencies he punished with unrelenting severity. He never made any distinction of persons, and the most powerful Cardinals, when they were in any way blameworthy, received the same treatment as the humblest official of the Curia.

In the beginning of February 1523 thirteen Cardinals complained of the small importance attached by Adrian to the Sacred College, since he limited their prerogatives and in all matters consulted only his confidants, Teodoli, Ghinucci, and Enkevoirt. The Pope answered that he was far from intending any disrespect towards the dignities and rights of the Cardinalate; the reason why his choice of confidential advisers had lain elsewhere than with them was that he had never before been in Rome, and that during the time of the plague he had not been able to become acquainted with the members of their body.

In the despatches of Ambassadors the chief complaint is directed against his parsimony and his dilatory method of transacting business. As regards the first point, the complaints were not justified, but as to the second, they were not altogether groundless. Even when allowance is made for exaggeration on the part of the numerous malcontents, there can still be no doubt that unfortunate delays arose in the despatch of business. The officials of Leo X who had most experience in drafting documents were either dead or had left Rome. Since Adrian took no pains to make good this deficiency, intolerable delay often occurred in the preparation of deeds and papers. Moreover, business was often performed in a slovenly way; it was expressly stated that the persons appointed by the Pope were not only few in number but for the most part ill-acquainted with affairs and naturally slow; in addition, occupants of important posts, such as Girolamo Ghinucci, the acting Auditor of the Camera, caused delays by an exaggerated scrupulosity. The Datary Enkevoirt also was very dilatory; he often kept Cardinals waiting for two or three hours, and even then they were not sure of admission.

Adrian’s intense dislike of the motley crew of officials belonging to his predecessor was undoubtedly connected with the fact that many of them were persons of irregular life. That such elements should have been expelled from the Curia is cause for commendation, but it was a deplorable mistake when Adrian quietly acquiesced in the withdrawal of such an eminent man as Sadoleto, an enthusiast for reform and one ready to render the cause willing service. “The astonishment in Rome”, writes Girolamo Negri in March 1523, “is general. I myself am not astonished, for the Pope does not know Sadoleto”. Negri on this occasion repeats the saying then current in the city, “Rome is no longer Rome”. He adds with bitterness: “Having escaped from one plague, we have run into another and a worse. This Pope of ours knows no one. No one receives tokens of his grace. The whole world is in despair. We shall be driven again to Avignon or to the furthermost ocean, Adrian’s home; if God does not help us, then all is over with the Church’s monarchy, in this extremity of danger”.

In a later letter Negri, like Berni, corrects his at first wholly unfavourable impressions. He asserts that the Pope raises extraordinary difficulties in conferring any graces. This reluctance proceeds from his ignorance of Roman life and from distrust of his surroundings, but also from his great conscientiousness and fear of doing wrong. When the Pope grants favours, though they may be few, they are in the highest degree just: he does nothing contrary to rule, which, to a court accustomed to every gratification, is certainly displeasing. Cicero’s remark on Cato might be applied to the Pope : “He acts as though he were living in some republic of Plato’s, and not among the dregs of Romulus”. This expression indicates with precision an undoubted weakness in the character of Adrian. Gifted by nature with high ideals, he only too often judged others by himself, set before them the most lofty vocations, and attributed the best intentions even to the least worthy men. The many disappointments which he was thus bound to experience made him in consequence too distrustful, unfriendly and even hard, in circumstances where such feelings were misplaced.

The majority of the Sacred College were men of worldly life, and severity towards them in general was certainly justified. But Adrian distinguished too little between the worst, the bad and the good elements among them. With none of the Cardinals was he on confidential terms; even Schinner, Campeggio, and Egidio Canisio, who as regards the reform question were thoroughly at one with him, were never on an intimate footing. How unnecessarily rough the Pope could be is shown by an incident at the beginning of his Pontificate which the Venetian Ambassador has put on record. It was then the custom to hand over the Neapolitan tribute amid great ceremony. Cardinal Schinner presumed to call the Pope’s attention to this pageant. At first Adrian made no reply, and when the Cardinal again urged him to appear at the window, Adrian flatly gave him to understand that he was not to pester him. If he thus treated a fellow-countryman and a man of kindred aspirations, it can be imagined how it fared between him and the worldly Italians.

In course of time, however, Adrian seems to have perceived that he must come into touch with his Italian sympathizers if he was to carry out effectually his ever­widening projects of reform. He therefore summoned Gian Pietro Caraffa and his friend Tommaso Gazzella to Rome with the avowed object of strengthening the cause of reform. Both had apartments assigned to them in the Vatican. Unfortunately we do not know the precise date of this important invitation, nor have we any further information as to the results of the visit ; we can only infer from Giovio that the summons was sent towards the end of the pontificate, when Adrian's plans for the reform of the corrupt city were taking a yet wider range; special measures involving the severest punishments were to be taken against blasphemers, scoffers at religion, simonists, usurers, the “New Christians” of Spain (Marani), and corrupters of youth.

That the coming of so strong and inflexible a man as Caraffa could only add to Adrian’s unpopularity in Rome admits of no doubt. The general dissatisfaction found utterance in bitter satire and invective. What insults, what infamous and senseless accusations were permitted is shown by the notorious “Capitolo” of Francesco Berni which appeared in the autumn of 1522. It combines in itself all the contempt and rage which the strong and upright Pontiff with his schemes of reform, his foreign habits, and his household of foreigners provoked in the courtiers of Leo X. The talented prince of burlesque poets has here produced a satire which ranks as one of the boldest in the Italian literature of that age. It is a masterpiece of racy mendacity breathing hatred of the foreigner, of the savage set down amid artistic surroundings, of the reformer of men and manners. But the hatred is surpassed by the studiously displayed contempt for the “ridiculous Dutch-German barbarian”.

Against such ridicule, deadly because so laughable, the Pope was powerless. When he forbade, under the severest penalties, the feast of Pasquino on St. Mark’s day 1523 and its pasquinades, the measure was useless: for satire is like the Lernaean hydra with its crop of heads. The public were determined to take the Pope on his ludicrous side, and the story ran that Adrian had only desisted from having Pasquino’s statue flung into the Tiber because he was assured that, like frogs in water, he would make a greater noise than before.

Almost all contemporary accounts make it clear that the mass of public opinion in Rome was very ill-disposed towards the foreign Pope. Even critics who recognized his good and noble qualities thought him too much the Emperor's friend, too penurious, too little of the man of the world. An instructive instance of this is given in a letter of the Mantuan agent Gabbioneta of the 28th of July 1523 in which—an exception to the Italian chroniclers of those days—he to a certain extent does justice to Adrian's good qualities. Gabbioneta describes the Pope’s majestic appearance; his countenance breathes gentleness and goodness; the impression he gives is that of a religious. In tones of grief Gabbioneta deplores the change that he has seen come over the animated and light-hearted court of Leo X. “Rome is completely altered, the glory of the Vatican has departed; there, where formerly all was life and movement, one now hardly sees a soul go in or out”. The deserted state of the Papal palace is also accounted for in other ways, though the change had taken place gradually. For months Adrian had been forced, owing to the danger of the plague, to seclude himself in the Vatican and keep entirely apart from the life of the city. Always a great lover of solitude, this cloistered existence had so delighted the serious-minded Pope that he determined later on to adhere to it as much as possible. In this resolve he was strengthened by those around him, for they found it to their advantage that Adrian should see as few people as possible. Another inducement was the fear of poison, by which from the first the Pope had been haunted. In January 1523 it was even believed that a conspiracy to murder him had been detected. By occurrences such as these Adrian’s original distrust of most Italians was only intensified. He therefore continued to be waited on, by preference, by his own countrymen, whom he was satisfied that he knew thoroughly.

The complaint of Adrian’s inaccessibility was combined with another, that of his excessive confidence in those about him. There must have been some ground for the imputation when it is raised by such an enthusiastic partisan of the Pope as Ortiz. Some of those in his more immediate circle did not deserve the confidence placed in them by Adrian. From the reports of the Imperial Ambassador Sessa it is only too plain that many who were nearest to the Pope’s person were very open to bribes; this was especially true of the secretary Zisterer, a German. What Sessa also reports concerning the Pope’s confidential friends, especially his allegation of Enkevoirt’s dependence on Cardinals Monte and Soderini, is not confirmed from other quarters. There is no doubt that Enkevoirt, now as always, had the greatest influence with Adrian, and that from the beginning this was a cause of friction between the former and Ruffo Teodoli. In consequence the latter lost for a considerable time his position of confidence;  as, however, he was an excellent man of affairs, his absence was perceptibly felt, and all the more so because Adrian was very often unlucky in the choice of his officials. Blasio Ortiz attributes the delays in the transaction of business which were so generally found fault with to the slackness and dilatoriness of the officials, since Adrian personally did more hard work than any other Pontiff before him. That in spite of this the despatch of affairs was very protracted, was also owing to Adrian's extreme conscientiousness, which often went the length of pedantry. The Pope attempted to attend to all kinds of business in person, especially spiritual matters, without discriminating between what was important and what was not. This devotion to duty, which made him sacrifice himself to public affairs, was so great that his early death was thought by some to have been caused by over-exertion in one already advanced in years and exposed to an unaccustomed climate.

The shortness of Adrian's pontificate—it lasted one year and eight months—was the primary cause why the movement of Church reform produced such meagre positive results. As the period of delay in Spain and of the plague in Rome can hardly be taken into account, the duration of his actual government was shorter still. Quite irrespective of his own idiosyncrasies and his advanced age, it is therefore not surprising that, among the new as well as arduous conditions in which, by an almost marvellous turn of events, he was placed, he was unable to strike any very deep roots. He had come to Rome a total stranger, and such he remained until his death; therefore, for the execution of his noble intentions and great plans hie was more or less dependent on the Italians with whom he was never able to find genuine points of contact. The circumstance that his knowledge of their language was always inadequate not only led to great misunderstandings, but also made an interchange of ideas impossible. A stranger, surrounded by intimates of foreign birth, the Flemish Pope could not make himself at home in the new world which he encountered in Rome. Just as Adrian was beginning to recognize the disadvantages inherent in his isolated position, and was making the attempt to ally himself with the Italian party of reform, and also to devise some improved and accelerated methods of business, he was seized by the illness of which he died. But even if his reign had lasted longer the Pope would with difficulty have reached the full solution of his great tasks. The proper machinery for the accomplishment of his measures of reform was wanting. Moreover, the difficulties inherent in the very nature of the case were too vast, the evils too great, the force of deeply rooted conditions—which in a naturally conservative atmosphere like that of Rome had a twofold strength—too powerful, and the interests at stake too various to permit of the great transformation which was necessary being accomplished within the limits of a single Pontificate. The accumulated evils of many generations could only be healed by a course of long and uninterrupted labour.

Adrian, who had sometimes found himself driven by exceptional and weighty reasons to relax the stringency of the ecclesiastical laws, perceived with grief in hours of depression that all his work would be but fragmentary. “How much does a man’s efficiency depend”, he often said, “upon the age in which his work is cast”. On another occasion he said plaintively to his friend Heeze, “Dietrich, how much better it went with us when we were still living quietly in Louvain”. At such times he was sustained only by the strong sense of duty which was always a part of his nature. Providence, he was strongly convinced, had called him to the most difficult post on earth, therefore he braced himself unflinchingly for the task, and devoted himself, heedless of his failing health,^ to all the obligations of his office until the shadows of death closed around him.

If Adrian is judged only by the standard of success, no just verdict will be given. The significance of his career lay not in his achievements, but in his aims. In this respect it is to his undying credit that he not only courageously laid bare the scandals in the Church and showed an honest purpose of amending them, but also with clear understanding suggested the right means to be employed, and with prompt determination began reform at the head.