_________________________________________________________________ Title: The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume 4: Clandestinity-Diocesan Chancery Creator(s): Herbermann, Charles George (1840-1916) Print Basis: 1907-1913 Rights: From online edition Copyright 2003 by K. Knight, used by permission CCEL Subjects: All; Reference LC Call no: BX841.C286 LC Subjects: Christian Denominations Roman Catholic Church Dictionaries. Encyclopedias _________________________________________________________________ THE CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA AN INTERNATIONAL WORK OF REFERENCE ON THE CONSTITUTION, DOCTRINE, DISCIPLINE, AND HISTORY OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH EDITED BY CHARLES G. HERBERMANN, Ph.D., LL.D. EDWARD A. PACE, Ph.D., D.D. CONDE B PALLEN, Ph.D., LL.D. THOMAS J. SHAHAN, D.D. JOHN J. WYNNE, S.J. ASSISTED BY NUMEROUS COLLABORATORS IN FIFTEEN VOLUMES VOLUME 4 Clandestinity to Diocesan Chancery New York: ROBERT APPLETON COMPANY Imprimatur JOHN M. FARLEY ARCHBISHOP OF NEW YORK _________________________________________________________________ Clandestinity Clandestinity (in Canon Law) Strictly speaking, clandestinity signifies a matrimonial impediment introduced by the Council of Trent (Sess. XXIV, c. i) to invalidate marriages contracted at variance with the exigencies of the decree "Tametsi", commonly so called because the first word of the Latin text is tametsi. The decree reads: "Those who attempt to contract matrimony otherwise than in the presence of the parish priest or of another priest with leave of the parish priest or of the ordinary, and before two or three witnesses, the Holy Synod renders altogether incapable of such a contract, and declares such contracts null and void." The Council of Trent did not transmit any historical record of this question. While upholding the validity of clandestine marriages "as long as the Church does not annul them", the council asserts that "for weighty reasons the holy Church of God always abhorred and prohibited them" (Sess. XXIV, De reformatione matrimonii). That this sentence strikes the keynote of unending antipathy on the part of the Church towards clandestine marriages can be gathered by a brief review of the historical attitude of the Church. In the fifth chapter of his Epistle to Polycarp, St. Ignatius intimates how men and women about to marry should enter wedlock with the bishop's consent, so that their marriage may be in the Lord (Ante-Nicene Fathers, I, 100). Tertullian writes that matrimonial unions contracted without the intervention of ecclesiastical authority are liable to be judged tantamount to fornication and adultery (De pudicitiâ, iv, in Migne, P. L., II, 987). In another passage he extols the happiness of that union which is cemented by the Church, confirmed by oblation, sealed with blessing, which angels proclaim, and which the Father in heaven ratifies (Ad uxorem, in Migne, P. L., II, 9). The thirteenth canon of the so-called Fourth Council of Carthage requires parties contracting marriage to be presented to a priest of the Church by their parents or bridal attendants in order to receive the blessing of the Church (Hefele, History of the Councils, II, 412). Whatever may be the age of this canon, the custom therein enjoined had previously won the approval of St. Ambrose, who earnestly sought to have all marriages sanctified by the priestly pall and benediction (Epistle xix to Vigilius, in Migne, P. L., XVI, 984). The Code of Justinian bears evidence to the influence which this imperial legislator wielded to secure the public celebration of marriage according to some legitimate form ("Novellæ", or New Constitutions, xxii, lxiv, cxvii). In the ninth century the Emperor Basil gave the force of written law to a widely observed custom of having a priest assist at marriages to bless and crown the married parties. Not long after, Leo the Philosopher declared that marriages celebrated without a priest's blessing were worthless. The replies of Pope Nicholas I (863) to the Bulgarians, the Pseudo-Isidorian Decretals, as well as the "Decretum" of Burchard and that of Gratian embody ample evidence to prove that, during the ninth century and thereafter,the public celebration of nuptials was prescribed and clandestine marriage condemned. Though Gratian alleges forged decretals to show the prohibition of clandestine marriages, it must be granted that he faithfully records the usage of his age concerning the validity of such marriages. Though Alexander III (1159-1181) maintained the validity of clandestine marriage when no other impediment intervened, he obliged parties contracting such marriages to undergo penance, and suspended for three years any priest assisting thereat. (Wernz, Jus Decretalium, IV, title III, no. 516.) Another step in advance was made when Innocent III, in the Fourth Lateran Council (1215), inaugurated the proclamation of the banns. Finally, a turning-point in the history of this question was reached when the Council of Trent enacted the "Tametsi" as a measure destined to check abuses and to safeguard the sacredness of the marriage contract. The principal elements of this decree pertained to the sentence of nullification affecting marriages of Christians failing to enter wedlock in the presence of the parish priest or his legitimate representative and in that of two or more witnesses; to the ways and means of publishing the decree; and to the penalty awaiting transgressors thereof. A succinct comment concerning these points will elucidate the purport of the decree. In the first place, to attain the desired end more effectually, the Council of Trent decreed a singular method of promulgation. It ordered that the decree should be published in every parish, and that it should take effect only after thirty days from its publication. When a parish comprised many churches, publication in the parochial church was sufficient. The term "parochial church" comprehends missions attended by priests on whom the faithful depend for the ministrations of religion (Cong. of the Inquisition, 14 November, 1883). Publication of the decree in churches situated in such missions had the force of law. A new publication was not necessary when a newly-organized parish results from the dismemberment of a parish wherein the law already obtained. On the contrary, if a parish subject to the law should be united to one hitherto exempt, the former would remain bound by the law and the latter retain its immunity (Cong. of Inquis., 14 Dec., 1859). For obvious reasons, the vernacular should be used in publishing the decree. The use of Latin would, according to the principles of canon law, render the act illicit but not invalid (Gasparri, Tractatus Canonicus de Matrimonio, II, v, 119). The publication would be worthless unless the decree were made known to the faithful as a Tridentine law or as an ordinance emanating from the Holy See. While one publication sufficed to induce obligation, the council suggested repeated publication during the first year of tenure. This publication might be made whenever a congregation assembled in church. The decree was sometimes published in a parish to bind parishioners speaking one language to the exclusion of those using a different tongue. Sometimes the law was intended to oblige none but Catholics residing within the parish lines. In a parish entirely Catholic, wherein heretics settled after the law was duly promulgated, the obligation applied to all, Catholics and heretics. In such cases the "Tametsi" declared null heretical marriages or clandestine mixed marriages (Pius VIII, 26 March, 1830). In a non-Catholic district containing only a few Catholic parishes, the marriage of a Protestant with another Protestant, or the clandestine marriage of a Protestant with a Catholic, would be valid although the number of Catholics in the neighbourhood should so increase as to warrant the actual publication of the decree (Pius VII to Napoleon I, 27 June, 1805; Cong. of Inquisition, 24 November and 29 November, 1852). Finally, populations once largely Catholic in whose parishes the decree was published might be supplanted by non-Catholics. Though canonists are not unanimous in their verdict regarding the application of the law in such conditions, Gasparri, among others, holds that in such cases the law would not bind non-Catholics. For this was, says he, the case when Benedict XIV issued his Declaration for Holland (Gasparri, op. cit., II, v, 202). After these general considerations concerning the promulgation of this decree, it may not be amiss to note where the decree was actually published. In the United States this law was published in the province of New Orleans; in the province of San Francisco, together with Utah, except that part bordering the Colorado River; in the province of Santa Fé, except the northern part of Colorado; in the Diocese of Indianapolis; in St. Louis, St. Genevieve, St. Charles (Missouri), St. Ferdinand, Kaskaskia, French Village, and Prairie du Rocher. In Europe, the decree was published in Italy and adjacent islands; in the ecclesiastical province of the Upper Rhine; in Ireland, France, Spain, Portugal, Austria, German Empire (Pius X, 18 January, 1906), Poland, Belgium, Rotterdam, Geneva (Zitelli, Apparatus Juris Eccles., I, 428), and Malta (Cong. Inquis., 18 March, 1884). It is no easy matter to give accurate specifications for regions outside Europe and the United States (Lehmkuhl, Theologia Moralis, II, 563). The decree was not published in England, Scotland, Norway, Sweden, Denmark (Zitelli, op. cit., I, 430). In some localities circumstances paved the way towards a partial promulgation of the decree (Zitelli, op. cit., I, 437). Furthermore, although the decree might have been promulgated, the action of legitimate authority could limit its binding force. Thus Benedict XIV terminated the controversy concerning the marriages of heretics in Holland. The fact that many Dutch Catholics had abjured their faith paved the way for questioning the application of the decree already promulgated in that country. To solve this difficulty Benedict XIV ruled that henceforth heretical or mixed marriages, clandestinely contracted, would be valid, provided no other impediment intervened. This declaration was subsequently extended to other localities in which the Tridentine decree was not promulgated until heretics had organized their own congregations in such places. In this way the declaration of Benedict XIV found application in Canada, Trinidad, the dioceses of the United States with the exception of the San Francisco province, the German Empire, Belgium, Russian Poland, the Malabar Coast, the Coromandel Coast, Constantinople and suburbs, Diocese of Warsaw, Archdiocese of Bombay, Diocese of Culm, Duchy of Cleves, Pondicherry, Maastricht, and the suburb of St. Peter near Maastricht. It may be well to note here the way in which the term heretic is to be understood in this declaration. It comprehended individuals baptized in the Catholic Church, but who subsequently adopted the tenets of some sect: Catholics who had reached the years of discretion and had been alienated from their Faith by the influence of Protestants whose religion they thereafter professed; apostates who allied themselves with some sect; heretics professing no religion whatever (Gasparri, op. cit., II, v, 208). Whenever the requirements of this decree were reduced to practice owing to legitimate usage, no further promulgation was necessary to render the measure effective (Cong. of Holy Office, 1 May, 1887). The decree once published in any parish, could be set aside by revocation on the part of the Holy See. It could also be abrogated by contrary usage or desuetude. Thus, Pius VII, in a letter to the Archbishop of Mainz, 8 October, 1803, decided that marriages contracted before a Protestant minister are valid where the Tridentine decree has lapsed into desuetude. In like manner, the Congregation of the Holy Office decided that the "Tametsi" had passed into desuetude in Japan (11 March, 1806). At the same time the Holy See repeatedly declared that the "Tametsi" did not lose its binding force in a given place because heretics residing there declined to observe it, no matter how long they refused to abide by its requirements (Cong. of Holy Office, 6 July, 1892). Regarding the subjects of this law, it is necessary to note that the decree invalidating clandestine marriages was both local and personal (Cong. of Holy. Office, 14 December, 1859). In its local application the law comprehended all who contracted marriage in any place where the decree had been duly promulgated, whether they were residents, aliens, travellers, transients, or persons having no fixed abode, because those who come from an exempt territory are obliged to recognize and observe universal laws. Moreover, since jurists claim that territory governs contracts, it follows that residents, aliens, travellers, transients, and those without fixed abode, must observe laws circumscribing contracts in the place where such contracts are made. A decision of the Holy Office, dated 25 January, 1900, gave new weight to this accepted axiom of canonists. On account of the personal element embodied in this decree, the obligation of observing it applied to those thereunto subjected where-ever they might chance to be. For this reason parties having a domicile or quasi-domicile in a district where the law held remained liable to its obligation as often as they betook themselves to an exempt territory to evade the law. Those whose sole or whose chief object in such case was to enter wedlock, were considered guilty of evading the law. However, where one of the contracting parties had acquired a domicile or quasi-domicile in an exempt territory, their marriage, if contracted there, would be valid because the privilege enjoyed by one was here communicable to the other (Benedict XIV, De Synodo, VI, vi). The better to complete this explanation, a word concerning the terms domicile and quasi-domicile is necessary. An ecclesiastical domicile involves two elements, namely, residence in a particular parish and an intention of abiding there for the greater part of a year. This intention is gauged by external acts whose manifestation marks the actual acquisition of a domicile which is retained thereafter notwithstanding protracted absence, provided the intention of returning perseveres. In like manner residence in a parish and an intention of dwelling there during a considerable portion of the year denote the elements giving consistency to a quasi-domicile. Hence, an individual may be domiciled in one parish and acquire a quasi-domicile in another. Six months' sojourn in the same parish entitled parties to invite the pastor of that parish to assist at their nuptials. Nevertheless, in answer to a petition made by the Fathers of the Third Plenary Council of Baltimore, the Holy See (22 May, 1886) granted for the United States to parties moving from a parish where the "Tametsi" obtained to another parish and residing there for a full month, the privilege of a quasi-domicile so far as the matrimonial contract was concerned. Nor would the privilege be forfeited in case the contracting parties should pass thirty days in such a place in order to enter wedlock there (Putzer, Commentarium in Facultates Apostolicas, no. 49). Although the decree involved a personal element, clandestine marriages were valid as often as the observance of the law was physically or morally impossible, provided such impossibility was general and continued for a month (Cong. of Inquis., 1 July, 1863; 14 November, 1883). Parties whose circumstances led them to profit by this interpretation of the law were obliged to seek the nuptial blessing at their earliest convenience, and to see that their marriage was entered in the proper register (Cong. of Inquis., 14 November, 1883). To the pastor of either contracting party belonged the right of officiating at their nuptials. Vicars appointed to exercise the functions of pastor with the fullness of the pastoral ministry enjoyed the same right so long as they held office (Cong. of Inquis., 7 Sept., 1898). The Roman pontiff alone could counteract the exercise of this pastoral prerogative. The presence of the pastor in the capacity of witness satisfied the requirements of the Tridentine decree even though he was not formally invited for that purpose (Cong. of Inquis., 17 Nov., 1835). The consent of those about to marry had to be signified in the presence of the pastor and other witnesses required by the decree. Since the sovereign pontiff enjoys universal jurisdiction in the Church, he could validly assist at any marriage whatever. Cardinals had no longer the right of assisting at marriages in their titular churches. Legates of the Holy See were qualified to assist at marriages contracted within the confines of their legation. Bishops might minister at marriages in any portion of their respective dioceses. According to Gasparri (op. cit., II, v, 154), an archbishop might exercise this right for the subjects of his suffragans provided he visited their dioceses according to the requirements of canon law. To a vicar-general was accorded the right of officiating at any marriage in the diocese. Those in whom this right was vested were at liberty to delegate another priest to act in their stead. Such delegation might be special or general. As often as the delegation was special, little danger of invalidity was feared. On the contrary, when general jurisdiction is transmitted to delegates, the Holy See questions, not so much validity, as legitimacy of action. Hence, the Congregation of the Council (20 July, 1889) reproved the conduct of those parish priests who habitually interchanged the faculty of assisting at the marriages of their respective subjects, because such methods tended to render the "Tametsi" ineffectual so far as the presence of the parish priest is concerned. At the same time this Congregation (18 March, 1893) and the Congregation of the Inquisition (9 November, 1898) approved general delegation within judicious limits. Notification of his commission to assist at nuptials had to be given directly to the delegate, either by the individual authorizing him to act or by a messenger specially chosen for this purpose (Sanchez, De Matrimonio, disp. xxvi, no. 8). The commission might be granted orally or in writing. No priest would be justified in presuming permission to assist at marriages. So strict was this rule that a pastor had no power to ratify marriages whose invalidity was superinduced in this way. In like manner, the Congregation of the Inquisition (7 September, 1898) decided that the ordinary faculties granted by bishops to priests, empowering them to administer the sacraments, did not qualify them to assist at marriages. Sanchez (op. cit., disp. xxxv, no. 20) claims that tacit notification would be sufficient to justify a priest to assist at nuptials. Besides the parish priest, at least two witnesses were required for the validity of a marriage contract. The use of reason and the possibility of actually testifying render any individual capable of exercising this particular function (Benedict XIV,De Synodo, xxiii, no. 6). The simultaneous presence of the pastor and witnesses was necessary to comply with the requirements of the "Tametsi" (Sanchez, op. cit., disp. xli, no. 3). Parish priests or others officiating at marriages without the necessary number of witnesses, or witnesses assisting without the pastor, rendered themselves, together with the contracting parties, liable to severe punishment at the hands of the bishop. Moreover, a parish priest, or any other priest, whether regular or secular, assisting without the pastor's consent at nuptials of parties belonging to his parish was suspended from priestly functions until absolved by the bishop of the pastor whose rights had been disregarded. NEW LEGISLATION ON CLANDESTINE MARRIAGE Through the decree "Ne Temere," issued 2 August, 1907, by the Congregation of the Council, in conjunction with the pontifical commission for the new canonical code, important modifications have been made regarding the form of betrothal and of marriage. This decree was issued to render easier for the universal Church the substantial form of matrimony, to prevent more efficiently the too numerous, hasty, and clandestine marriages, and to make it easier for ecclesiastical courts to decide as to the existence or non-existence of a previous engagement to marry (see ESPOUSALS). With the exception in regard to Germany noted below, this legislation went into effect at Easter (19 April), 1908, and is thenceforth binding on all Catholics throughout the world, any contrary law or custom being totally abolished. According to this decree, marriages of Catholics are henceforth null unless celebrated before a duly qualified priest (or the bishop of the diocese) and at least two witnesses. The same is true of marriages in which either of the parties is or has been a Catholic. The law, however, does not bind those who are not and never have been Catholics. Priests charged with the care of souls in the territory where a marriage is contracted, or any approved priest whom one charged with the care of souls or whom the bishop of the diocese delegates, are qualified to assist at nuptials. Marriages contracted in a parish, district, or diocese, other than the one to which the contracting parties belong, are valid so long as the pastor of the place or his delegate assists at such marriages. However, priests are forbidden to assist at such marriages unless one of two conditions is verified. Either, one of the parties must have resided a month in the territory where the marriage occurs, or else, one of the parties must have obtained the permission of the priest or bishop under whose jurisdiction such a party resides. In cases of serious necessity such permission is not required. The following conditions are enjoined by the decree" Ne Temere", not for the validity of the marriages of Catholics, but to bring them into complete conformity with the demands of right order. Marriages ought to be celebrated in the parish of the bride. If the contracting parties wish to marry elsewhere, they must ask the pastor of the place, or some priest authorized by him or by the bishop, to assist at the marriage, and one of the parties must have resided there for a month. When parties find this procedure inconvenient, one of them must obtain permission from his or her parish priest or bishop to contract marriage elsewhere. In such cases the parties will be obliged to give the necessary assurance regarding their freedom to marry, and to comply with the usual conditions for receiving the Sacrament of Matrimony. When parties have no fixed abode and are travelling throughout the country, they can enter wedlock only before a priest authorized by the bishop to assist at their marriage. The Sacred Congregation of the Council declared (11 February, 1908) that the dispensations granted in the Bull "Provida" of 18 January, 1906, for Germany will still remain in force. According to this Bull, while Catholic marriages in Germany were made subject to the decree "Tametsi", mixed marriages and those of Protestants among themselves were exempted. (See MARRIAGE; PARISH PRIEST; DOMICILE.) Canones et Decreta Sacrosancti Œcumenici Concilii Tridentini (Rome, 1893); Decretum, "Ne Temere" (2 August, 1907); GASPARRI, Tractatus Canonicus de Matrimonio (Paris, 1904); WERNZ, Jus Decretalium (Rome, 1904), IV; OJETTI, Synopsis Rerum Moralium et Juris Pontificii (Prato, 1904); ZITELLI, Apparatus Juris Ecclesiastici (Rome, 1903); SMITH, Elements of Ecclesiastical Law (New York, 1887), I; DUCHESNE, Christian Worship (London, 1904); FEIJE, De imped. et disp. matrim. (4th ed., Louvain, 1893); JODER, Formulaire matrimonial (4th ed., Paris, 1897); BASSIBEY, De la clandestinité dans le mariage (Paris, 1903); LAURENTIUS, Institutiones juris eccl. (Freiburg, 1903) 443-51; TAUNTON, The Law of the Church (London, 1906). For a commentary on the decree "Ne Temere," see McNICHOLAS in Amer. Ecclesiastical Review (Philadelphia, February, 1908); O'NEILL, ibid. (April, 1908), and CRONIN, The New Matrimonial Legislation (Rome, 1908). J. D. O'NEILL. St. Clare of Assisi St. Clare of Assisi Cofoundress of the Order of Poor Ladies, or Clares, and first Abbess of San Damiano; born at Assisi, 16 July, 1194; died there 11 August, 1253. She was the eldest daughter of Favorino Scifi, Count of Sasso-Rosso, the wealthy representative of an ancient Roman family, who owned a large palace in Assisi and a castle on the slope of Mount Subasio. Such at least is the traditional account. Her mother, Bl. Ortolana, belonged to the noble family of Fiumi and was conspicuous for her zeal and piety. From her earliest years Clare seems to have been endowed with the rarest virtues. As a child she was most devoted to prayer and to practices of mortification, and as she passed into girlhood her distaste for the world and her yearning for a more spiritual life increased. She was eighteen years of age when St. Francis came to preach the Lenten course in the church of San Giorgio at Assisi. The inspired words of the Poverello kindled a flame in the heart of Clare; she sought him out secretly and begged him to help her that she too might live "after the manner of the holy Gospel". St. Francis, who at once recognized in Clare one of those chosen souls destined by God for great things, and who also, doubtless, foresaw that many would follow her example, promised to assist her. On Palm Sunday Clare, arrayed in all her finery, attended high Mass at the cathedral, but when the others pressed forward to the altar-rail to receive a branch of palm, she remained in her place as if rapt in a dream. All eyes were upon the young girl as the bishop descended from the sanctuary and placed the palm in her hand. That was the last time the world beheld Clare. On the night of the same day she secretly left her father's house, by St. Francis's advice and, accompanied by her aunt Bianca and another companion, proceeded to the humble chapel of the Porziuncula, where St. Francis and his disciples met her with lights in their hands. Clare then laid aside her rich dress, and St. Francis, having cut off her hair, clothed her in a rough tunic and a thick veil, and in this way the young heroine vowed herself to the service of Jesus Christ. This was 20 March, 1212. Clare was placed by St. Francis provisionally with the Benedictine nuns of San Paolo, near Bastia, but her father, who had expected her to make a splendid marriage, and who was furious at her secret flight, on discovering her retreat, did his utmost to dissuade Clare from her heroic proposals, and even tried to drag her home by force. But Clare held her own with a firmness above her years, and Count Favorino was finally obliged to leave her in peace. A few days later St. Francis, in order to secure Clare the greater solitude she desired, transferred her to Sant' Angelo in Panzo, another monastery of the Benedictine nuns on one of the flanks of Subasio. Here some sixteen days after her own flight, Clare was joined by her younger sister Agnes, whom she was instrumental in delivering from the persecution of their infuriated relatives. (See AGNES, SAINT, OF ASSISI.) Clare and her sister remained with the nuns at Sant' Angelo until they and the other fugitives from the world who had followed them were established by St. Francis in a rude dwelling adjoining the poor chapel of San Damiano, situated outside the town which he had to a great extent rebuilt with his own hands, and which he now obtained from the Benedictines as a permanent abode for his spiritual daughters. Thus was founded the first community of the Order of Poor Ladies, or of Poor Clares, as this second order of St. Francis came to be called. The history of the Poor Clares will be dealt with in a separate article. Here it suffices to note that we may distinguish, during the lifetime of St. Clare, three stages in the complicated early history of the new order. In the beginning St. Clare and her companions had no written rule to follow beyond a very short formula vitae given them by St. Francis, and which may be found among his works. Some years later, apparently in 1219, during St. Francis's absence in the East, Cardinal Ugolino, then protector of the order, afterwards Gregory IX, drew up a written rule for the Clares at Monticelli, taking as a basis the Rule of St. Benedict, retaining the fundamental points of the latter and adding some special constitutions. This new rule, which, in effect if not in intention, took away from the Clares the Franciscan character of absolute poverty so dear to the heart of St. Francis and made them for all practical purposes a congregation of Benedictines, was approved by Honorius III (Bull, "Sacrosancta", 9 Dec., 1219). When Clare found that the new rule, though strict enough in other respects, allowed the holding of property in common, she courageously and successfully resisted the innovations of Ugolino as being entirely opposed to the intentions of St. Francis. The latter had forbidden the Poor Ladies, just as he had forbidden his friars to possess any worldly goods even in common. Owning nothing, they were to depend entirety upon what the Friars Minor could beg for them. This complete renunciation of all property was however regarded by Ugolino as unpractical for cloistered women. When, therefore, in 1228, he came to Assisi for the canonization of St. Francis (having meanwhile ascended the pontifical throne as Gregory IX), he visited St. Clare at San Damiano and pressed her to so far deviate from the practice of poverty which had up to this time obtained at San Damiano, as to accept some provision for the unforeseen wants of the community. But Clare firmly refused. Gregory, thinking that her refusal might be due to fear of violating the vow of strict poverty she had taken, offered to absolve her from it. "Holy Father, I crave for absolution from my sins", replied Clare, "but I desire not to be absolved from the obligation of following Jesus Christ". The heroic unworldliness of Clare filled the pope with admiration, as his letters to her, still extant, bear eloquent witness, and he so far gave way to her views as to grant her on 17 September, 1228, the celebrated Privilegium Paupertatis which some regard in the light of a corrective of the Rule of 1219. The original autograph copy of this unique "privilege"--the first one of its kind ever sought for, or ever issued by the Holy See--is preserved in the archive at Santa Chiara in Assisi. The text is as follows: "Gregory Bishop Servant of the Servants of God. To our beloved daughters in Christ Clare and the other handmaids of Christ dwelling together at the Church of San Damiano in the Diocese of Assisi. Health and Apostolic benediction. It is evident that the desire of consecrating yourselves to God alone has led you to abandon every wish for temporal things. Wherefore, after having sold all your goods and having distributed them among the poor, you propose to have absolutely no possessions, in order to follow in all things the example of Him Who became poor and Who is the way, the truth, and the life. Neither does the want of necessary things deter you from such a proposal, for the left arm of your Celestial Spouse is beneath your head to sustain the infirmity of your body, which, according to the order of charity, you have subjected to the law of the spirit. Finally, He who feeds the birds of the air and who gives the lilies of the field their raiment and their nourishment, will not leave you in want of clothing or of food until He shall come Himself to minister to you in eternity when, namely, the right hand of His consolations shall embrace you in the plenitude of the Beatific Vision. Since, therefore, you have asked for it, we confirm by Apostolic favour your resolution of the loftiest poverty and by the authority of these present letters grant that you may not be constrained by anyone to receive possessions. To no one, therefore, be it allowed to infringe upon this page of our concession or to oppose it with rash temerity. But if anyone shall presume to attempt this, be it known to him that he shall incur the wrath of Almighty God and his Blessed Apostles, Peter and Paul. Given at Perugia on the fifteenth of the Kalends of October in the second year of our Pontificate." That St. Clare may have solicited a "privilege" similar to the foregoing at an earlier date and obtained it vivâ voce, is not improbable. Certain it is that after the death of Gregory IX Clare had once more to contend for the principle of absolute poverty prescribed by St. Francis, for Innocent IV would fain have given the Clares a new and mitigated rule, and the firmness with which she held to her way won over the pope. Finally, two days before her death, Innocent, no doubt at the reiterated request of the dying abbess, solemnly confirmed the definitive Rule of the Clares (Bull, "Solet Annuere", 9 August, 1253), and thus secured to them the precious treasure of poverty which Clare, in imitation of St. Francis, had taken for her portion from the beginning of her conversion. The author of this latter rule, which is largely an adaptation mutatis mutandis, of the rule which St. Francis composed for the Friars Minor in 1223, seems to have been Cardinal Rainaldo, Bishop of Ostia, and protector of the order, afterwards Alexander IV, though it is most likely that St. Clare herself had a hand in its compilation. Be this as it may, it can no longer be maintained that St. Francis was in any sense the author of this formal Rule of the Clares; he only gave to St. Clare and her companions at the outset of their religious life the brief formula vivendi already mentioned. St. Clare, who in 1215 had, much against her will been made superior at San Damiano by St. Francis, continued to rule there as abbess until her death, in 1253, nearly forty years later. There is no good reason to believe that she ever once went beyond the boundaries of San Damiano during all that time. It need not, therefore, be wondered at if so comparatively few details of St. Clare's life in the cloister "hidden with Christ in God", have come down to us. We know that she became a living copy of the poverty, the humility, and the mortification of St. Francis; that she had a special devotion to the Holy Eucharist, and that in order to increase her love for Christ crucified she learned by heart the Office of the Passion composed by St. Francis, and that during the time that remained to her after her devotional exercises she engaged in manual labour. Needless to add, that under St. Clare's guidance the community of San Damiano became the sanctuary of every virtue, a very nursery of saints. Clare had the consolation not only of seeing her younger sister Beatrix, her mother Ortolana, and her faithful aunt Bianca follow Agnes into the order, but also of witnessing the foundation of monasteries of Clares far and wide throughout Europe. It would be difficult, moreover, to estimate how much the silent influence of the gentle abbess did towards guiding the women of medieval Italy to higher aims. In particular, Clare threw around poverty that irresistible charm which only women can communicate to religious or civic heroism, and she became a most efficacious coadjutrix of St. Francis in promoting that spirit of unworldliness which in the counsels of God, "was to bring about a restoration of discipline in the Church and of morals and civilization in the peoples of Western Europe". Not the least important part of Clare's work was the aid and encouragement she gave St. Francis. It was to her he turned when in doubt, and it was she who urged him to continue his mission to the people at a time when he thought his vocation lay rather in a life of contemplation. When in an attack of blindness and illness, St. Francis came for the last time to visit San Damiano, Clare erected a little wattle hut for him in an olive grove close to the monastery, and it was here that he composed his glorious "Canticle of the Sun". After St. Francis's death the procession which accompanied his remains from the Porziuncula to the town stopped on the way at San Damiano in order that Clare and her daughters might venerate the pierced hands and feet of him who had formed them to the love of Christ crucified--a pathetic scene which Giotto has commemorated in one of his loveliest frescoes. So far, however, as Clare was concerned, St. Francis was always living, and nothing is, perhaps, more striking in her after-life than her unswerving loyalty to the ideals of the Poverello, and the jealous care with which she clung to his rule and teaching. When, in 1234, the army of Frederick II was devastating the valley of Spoleto, the soldiers, preparatory to an assault upon Assisi, scaled the walls of San Damiano by night, spreading terror among the community. Clare, calmly rising from her sick bed, and taking the ciborium from the little chapel adjoining her cell, proceeded to face the invaders at an open window against which they had already placed a ladder. It is related that, as she raised the Blessed Sacrament on high, the soldiers who were about to enter the monastery fell backward as if dazzled, and the others who were ready to follow them took flight. It is with reference to this incident that St. Clare is generally represented in art bearing a ciborium. When, some time later, a larger force returned to storm Assisi, headed by the General Vitale di Aversa who had not been present at the first attack, Clare, gathering her daughters about her, knelt with them in earnest prayer that the town might be spared. Presently a furious storm arose, scattering the tents of the soldiers in every direction, and causing such a panic that they again took refuge in flight. The gratitude of the Assisians, who with one accord attributed their deliverance to Clare's intercession, increased their love for the "Seraphic Mother". Clare had long been enshrined in the hearts of the people, and their veneration became more apparent as, wasted by illness and austerities, she drew towards her end. Brave and cheerful to the last, in spite of her long and painful infirmities, Clare caused herself to be raised in bed and, thus reclining, says her contemporary biographer "she spun the finest thread for the purpose of having it woven into the most delicate material from which she afterwards made more than one hundred corporals, and, enclosing them in a silken burse, ordered them to be given to the churches in the plain and on the mountains of Assisi". When at length she felt the day of her death approaching, Clare, calling her sorrowing religious around her, reminded them of the many benefits they had received from God and exhorted them to persevere faithfully in the observance of evangelical poverty. Pope Innocent IV came from Perugia to visit the dying saint, who had already received the last sacraments from the hands of Cardinal Rainaldo. Her own sister, St. Agnes, had returned from Florence to console Clare in her last illness; Leo, Angelo, and Juniper, three of the early companions of St. Francis, were also present at the saint's death-bed, and at St. Clare's request read aloud the Passion of Our Lord according to St. John, even as they had done twenty-seven years before, when Francis lay dying at the Porziuncula. At length before dawn on 11 August, 1253, the holy foundress of the Poor Ladies passed peacefully away amid scenes which her contemporary biographer has recorded with touching simplicity. The pope, with his court, came to San Damiano for the saint's funeral, which partook rather of the nature of a triumphal procession. The Clares desired to retain the body of their foundress among them at San Damiano, but the magistrates of Assisi interfered and took measures to secure for the town the venerated remains of her whose prayers, as they all believed, had on two occasions saved it from destruction. Clare's miracles too were talked of far and wide. It was not safe, the Assisians urged, to leave Clare's body in a lonely spot without the walls; it was only right, too, that Clare, "the chief rival of the Blessed Francis in the observance of Gospel perfection", should also have a church in Assisi built in her honour. Meanwhile, Clare's remains were placed in the chapel of San Giorgio, where St. Francis's preaching had first touched her young heart, and where his own body had likewise been interred pending the erection of the Basilica of San Francesco. Two years later, 26 September, 1255, Clare was solemnly canonized by Alexander IV, and not long afterwards the building of the church of Santa Chiara, in honour of Assisi's second great saint, was begun under the direction of Filippo Campello, one of the foremost architects of the time. On 3 October, 1260, Clare's remains were transferred from the chapel of San Giorgio and buried deep down in the earth, under the high altar in the new church, far out of sight and reach. After having remained hidden for six centuries--like the remains of St. Francis--and after much search had been made, Clare's tomb was found in 1850, to the great joy of the Assisians. On 23 September in that year the coffin was unearthed and opened, the flesh and clothing of the saint had been reduced to dust, but the skeleton was in a perfect state of preservation. Finally, on the 29th of September, 1872, the saint's bones were transferred, with much pomp, by Archbishop Pecci, afterwards Leo XIII, to the shrine, in the crypt at Santa Chiara, erected to receive them, and where they may now be seen. The feast of St. Clare is celebrated throughout the Church on 12 August; the feast of her first translation is kept in the order on 3 October, and that of the finding of her body on 23 September. The sources of the history of St. Clare at our disposal are few in number. They include (1) a Testament attributed to the saint and some charming Letters written by her to Blessed Agnes, Princess of Bohemia; (2) the Rule of the Clares, and a certain number of early Pontifical Bulls relating to the Order; (3) a contemporary Biography, written in 1256 by order of Alexander IV. This life, which is now generally ascribed to Thomas of Celano, is the source from which St. Clare's subsequent biographers have derived most of their information. PASCHAL ROBINSON St. Clare of Montefalco St. Clare of Montefalco Born at Montefalco about 1268; died there, 18 August, 1308. Much dispute has existed as to whether St. Clare of Montefalco was a Franciscan or an Augustinian; and while Wadding, with Franciscan biographers of the saint, contends that she was a member of the Third Order of St. Francis, Augustinian writers, whom the Bollandists seem to favour, hold that she belonged to their order. It seems, however, more probable to say that St. Clare, when she was still a very young girl, embraced the rule of the Third Order of St. Francis (secular), together with her older sister and a number of other pious young maidens, who wore the habit of the Third Order of St. Francis and followed that particular mode of life in community which their piety and fervour suggested. When later, however, they became desirous of entering the religous state in its strict sense, and of professing the three vows of religion, they petitioned the Bishop of Spoleto for an approved rule of life; and, the Third Order of St. Francis (regular) not being then in existence as an approved religious institute, the bishop imposed upon them in 1290 the rule of the Third Order (regular) of St. Augustine. From her very childhood, St. Clare gave evidence of the exalted sancity to which she was one day to attain, and which made her the recipient of so many signal favours from God. Upon the death of her older sister in 1295, Clare was chosen to succeed her in the office of abbess of the community at Santa Croce; but it was only in obedience to the command of the Bishop of Spoleto that she could be prevailed upon to accept this new dignity. Kind and indulgent towards others, she treated herself with the most unrelenting severity, multiplying her fasts, vigils, and other austeri ties to such an extent that at one time her life was even feared for. To these acts of penance she added the practice of the most profound humility and the most perfect charity, while the suffering of her Redeemer formed the continual subject of her meditation. Shortly after the death of St. Clare, inquiry into her virtues and the miracles wrought through her intercession was instituted, preparatory to her canonization. It was not, however, until several centuries later that she was canonized by Pope Leo XIII in 1881. STEPHEN M. DONOVAN Blessed Clare of Rimini Blessed Clare of Rimini (Chiara Agolanti), of the order of Poor Clares, born at Rimini in 1282; died there 10 February, 1346. Deprived at an early age of the support and guidance of her parents and of her pious husband, Clare soon fell a prey to the dangers to which her youth and beauty exposed her, and began to lead a life of sinful dissipation. As she was one day assisting at mass in the church of the Friars Minor, she seemed to hear a mysterious voice that bade her say a Pater and an Ave at least once with fervour and attention. Clare obeyed the command, not knowing whence it came, and then began to reflect upon her life. Putting on the habit of the Third Order of St. Francis, she resolved to expiate her sins by a life of penance, and she soon became a model of every virtue, but more especially of charity towards the destitute and afflicted. When the Poor Clares were compelled to leave Regno on account of the prevailing wars, it was mainly through the charitable exertions of Clare that they were able to obtain a convent and means of sustenance at Rimini. Later, Clare herself entered the order of Poor Clares, along with several other pious women, and became superioress of the convent of Our Lady of the Angels at Rimini. She worked numerous miracles and towards the close of her life was favoured in an extraordinary manner with the gift of contemplation. Her body now reposes in the cathedral of Rimini. In 1782 the cult of Blessed Clare was approved by Pius VI, who permitted her feast to be celebrated in the city and Diocese of Rimini on the tenth of February. STEPHEN M. DONOVAN William Clark William Clark English priest, date of birth unknown, executed at Winchester, 29 Nov., 1603. He was educated at Douai College, which he entered 6 August, 1587. Passing to the English College at Rome in 1589, He was ordained priest and returned to Engla nd in April, 1592. Active in the disputes between the seculars and the Jesuits on the appointment of Blackwell as archpriest, he was one of thirty-three priests who signed the appeal against Blackwell dated from Wisbeach Castle, 17 November, 1600. Conse quently he was included in the attack which Father Persons made against the characters of his opponents. When Clement VIII declared in favour of the appellant clergy (5 October,1602) and restored to them their faculties, an attempt was made, but in vain, to exclude Clark from participation in the privilege. At this time he was in the Clink prison. On Low Sunday he was discovered preparing to say Mass in the prison and was placed in still closer confinement. Shortly after this he became connected with the mysterious conspiracy known as the "Bye Plot". He was committed to the Gatehouse, Westminister, thence to the Tower, and finally to the Castle at Winchester. Nothing was proved against him in relation to the plot save various practices in favour of Catholic interests; nevertheless he was condemned to death 15 November, and executed a fortnight later. He protested that his death was a kind of martyrdom. He is the author of "A Replie unto a certain Libell latelie set foorth by Fa. Parsons", ect. (16 03, s.l.). G.E. HIND Claudia Claudia (Klaudia), a Christian woman of Rome, whose greeting to Timothy St. Paul conveys with those of Eubulus, Pudens, Linus, "and all the brethren" (II Tim., iv, 21). Evidently, Claudia was quite prominent in the Roman communtiy. The Linus mentioned in the text is identified by St. Irenaeus (Adv. haer., III, iii, 3) with the successor of St. Peter as Bishop of Rome; and in the "Apost. Const." VII, 46, he is called the son of Claudia, Linos ho Klaudias, which seems to imply that Claudia was at least as well known as Linus. It has been attempted to prove that she was the wife of Pudens, mentioned by St. Paul; and, further, to identify her with Claudia Rufina, the wife of Aulus Pudens who was the friend of Martial (Martial, Epigr., IV, 13; XI, 54). According to this theory Claudia would be a lady of British birth, probably the daughter of King Cogidubnus. Unfortunately there is not sufficient evidence to make this identification more than possibly true. W.S. REILLY Claudianus Mamertus Claudianus Mamertus (The name Ecdicius is unauthorized). A Gallo-Roman theologian and the brother of St. Mamertus, Bishop of Vienne, d. about 473. Descended probably from one of the leading families of the country, Claudianus Mamertus relinquished his worldly goods and embraced the monastic life. He assisted his brother in the discharge of his functions, and Sidonius Apollinaris describes him as directing the psalm-singing of the chanters, who were formed into groups and chanted alternate verses, whilst the bishop was at the altar celebrating the sacred mysteries. "Psalmorum hic modulator et phonascus ante altaria fratre gratulante instructas docuit sonare classes" (Epist., IV, xi, 6; V, 13-15). This passage is of importance in the history of liturgical chant. In the same epigram, which constitutes the epitaph of Claudianus Mamertus, Sidonius also informs us that this distinguished scholar composed a lectionary, that is, a collection of readings from Sacred Scripture to be made on the occasion of certain celebrations during the year. According to the same writer, Claudianus "pierced the sects with the power of eloquence", an allusion to a prose treatise entitled "On the State of the Soul" or "On the Substance of the Soul". Written between 468 and 472, this work was destined to combat the ideas of Faustus, Bishop of Reii (Riez, in the department of Basses-Alpes), particularly his thesis on the corporeity of the soul. Plato, whom he perhaps read in Greek, Porphyry, and especially Plotinus and St. Augustine furnished Claudianus with arguments. But his method was decidedly peripatetic and fore tokened Scholasticism. Even his language had the same characteristics as that of some of the medieval philosophers: hence Claudianus used many abstract adverbs in ter (essentialiter, accidenter, etc.; forty according to La Broise). On the other hand he revived obsolete words and, in a letter to Sapaudus of Vienne, a rhetorician, sanctioned the imitation of Nævius, Plautus, Varro, and Gracchus. Undoubtedly his only acquaintance with these authors was through the quotations used by grammarians and the adoption of their style by Apuleius, whose works he eagerly studied. Of course this tendency to copy his predecessors led Claudianus to acquire an entirely artificial mode of expression which Sidonius, in wishing to compliment, called a modern antique (Epist., IV, iii, 3). Besides the treatise and the letter from Claudianus to Sidonius Apollinaris, found among the letters of the latter (IV, ii). Some poetry has also been ascribed to him, although erroneously. For instance, he has been credited with the "Pange, lingua", which is by Venantius Fortunatas (Carm., II, ii); "Contra vanos poetas ad collegam", a poem recommending the choice of Christian subjects and written by Paulinus of Nola (Carm., xxii); two short Latin poems in honour of Christ, one by Claudius Claudianus (Birt ed., p. 330; Koch ed., p. 248) and the other by Merobaudus (Vollmer ed., p. 19), and two other Greek poems on the same subject, believed to be the work of Claudius Claudianus. Two facts assign Claudianus Mamertus a place in the history of thought: he took part in the reaction against Semipelagianism, which took place in Gaul towards the close of the fifth century and he was the precursor of Scholasticism, forestalling the system of Roscellinus and Abelard. The logical method pursued by Claudianus commanded the esteem and investigation of Berengarius of Tours, Nicholas of Clairvaux, secretary to St. Bernard, and Richard de Fournival. SIDONIUS APOLLINARIS, Epistulæ, IV, iii, si, V, ii; Gennadius, GENNADIUS, De Viris illustribus, 83; R. DE LA BROISE, Mamerti Claudiani vita eiusque doctrina de anima hominis (Paris, 1890); the best edition is by ENGELBRECHT in the Corpus scriptorum ecclesiasticorum latinorum of the Academy of Vienna (Vienna, 1887); for supplementary information cf. CHEVALIER, Repertoire des sources historiques du moyen-age, Bio-bibliographie (Paris, 1905), II, 2977. PAUL LEJAY Claudiopolis (Bithynia) Claudiopolis A titular see of Asia Minor. It was a city in Cilicia Tracheia or Byzantine Isauria. The old name is perhaps Kardabounda; under Claudius it became a Roman colony, Colonia Julia Augusta Felix Ninica Claudiopolis. None of its coins are known. It was situated at the lower end of the central Calycadnus valley, before the river enters the narrow gorge which conducts it to the coast lands. Laeke (Journal of a Tour in Asia Minor, 107 sq.) has identified it with Mut, the chief village of a caza in the vilayet of Adana, a view which has since been confirmed by epigraphical evidence (Hogarth, Supplem. Papers, Royal Geogr. Society, 1893, III, 651). It was a suffragan of Seleuceia. Only six bishops are mentioned by Lequien (II, 1027); the first, Ædesius, was present at Nicaea in 325; the last John, was present at Constantinople in 533, and is probably identical with the prelate who was a friend of Severus in 508-11 (Brooks, The Sixth Book of the Select Letters of Severus, II, 4, 7, 11). In the tenth century Claudiopolis is mentioned by Constantine Porphyrogenitus (Them., xxxvi), as one of the ten cities of Isaurian Decapolis. It figures still in the "Notitiae episcopatuum" in the twelfth or thirteenth century. Mut has about 900 inhabitants, and exhibits vast ruins. Ramsay, Asia Minor, passim; Ruge in Pauly-Wissowa, Real-Encyk., III, 2662; Headlam, Eccl. Sites in Isauria. in Soc. For The Promotion Of Hellenic Studies, Supplem. Papers, I, 22 sq.; Cuinet, Turquie d'Asie, II, 78. S. PÉTRIDÈS Claudiopolis Claudiopolis A titular see of Bithynia, in Asia Minor. Strabo (XII, 4, 7) mentions a town, Bithynium (Claudiopolis), celebrated for its pastures and cheese. According to Pausanias (VIII, 9) it was founded by Arcadians from Mantinea. As is shown by its coins, it was commonly called Claudiopolis after Claudius. It was the birthplace of Antinous, the favourite of Hadrian, who was very generous to the city; afterwards his name was added to that of Claudius on the coins of the city. Theodosius II (408-50) made it the capital of a new province, formed at the expense of Bithynia and Paphlagonia, and called by him Honorias in honour of the Emperor honorius. Claudiopolis was the religious metropolis of the province (so in all "Notitiae episcopatuum"). Lequien (I, 567) mentions twenty titulars of the see to the thirteenth century; the first is St. Autonomus, said to have suffered martyrdom under Diocletian; we may add Ignatius, a friend and correspondent of Photius. The Turkish name for Claudiopolis is Bolou or Boli. It is now the chief town of a sanjak in the vilayet of Castamouni, with 10,000 inhabitants (700 Greeks, 400 Armenians, few Catholics). The town is on the Filias Sou (River Billaeus). There are no important ruins, but many ancient fragments of friezes, cornices, funeral cippi, and stelae. Texier, Asie Mineure, 149; Perrot, Galatie et Bithynie, 42-45; Cuinet, Turrquie d'Asie, IV, 508 sq.; Smith, Dict. of Gr. and Rom. Geogr. (London, 1878), s.v. Bithynium. S. PÉTRIDÈS Francisco Saverio Clavigero Francisco Saverio Clavigero Born at Vera Cruz, Mexico, 9 September, 1731; d. at Bologna, Italy, 2 April, 1787. At the age of seventeen he entered the Society of Jesus. Father José Rafael Campoi, S.J., at the College of St. Peter and St. Paul in Mexico, directed his attention to the valuable collection of documents on Mexican history and antiquities deposited there by Siguenza y Gongora, and he became an enthusiastic investigator in these fields. When the Jesuits were expelled from Mexico in 1767, Father Clavigero went to Bologna, where he founded a literary academy and pursued diligently his documentary studies in Mexican aboriginal history. He complied there his "Historica antica del Messico (Cesena, 1780), in opposition to the works of De Pauw, Raynal, and Robertson. While the "Historia antica" is the principal work of Clavigero, he had already published in Mexico several writings of minor importance. After his death there appeared "Storia della California", less appreciated but still not to be neglected by students. The "Ancient History of Mexico" made considerable impression and met with great favor. Following the book of the Cavaliere Boturini he included a list of sources, paying particular attention to the Indian pictographs, on tissue and other substances, forming part of the Boturini collection, and increasing the list by specimens then extant in various parts of Europe. The catalogue of Indian writers is also taken from Boturini, as Clavigero is careful to state. While materially enlarged since then, and though much additional information has been gained, his catalogue always remains of value. Finally he added a history of the conquest of Mexico. While other Jesuit writers on America, who wrote after the expulsion of the order, like Molina for instance, have maintained in their books an attitude of dignified impartiality, Clavigero has not been able to conceal his resentment for that measure. He does not allude to it, but criticizes the conquerors harshly, extolling at the same time, beyond measure, the character and culture of the Indians. The writings of de Pauw, Adair, and Robertson are severely criticized. The two former have, in their hypercritical tendencies, gone entirely too far in denying to the Indians of certain kind and degree of polity, but Robertson was much more moderate, hence nearer the truth, and more reliable than Clavigero himself. The later is an unsafe guide in American ethnology, on the account of his exaggeration of the culture of the Mexican sedentary tribes. But the systematic arrangement of his work, his style, and the sentimental interest taken in the conquered peoples insured to his book a popular sympathy that for a long time controlled the opinions of students as well as of general readers. The "Storia antica del Messico" was translated into English by Cullen (London, 1787); there is a German translation of the English version (Leipzig, 1789); Spanish editions (London, 1826; Mexico 1844 and 1853). Beristain de Souza, Biblioteca hispano-americana septentrional (Mexico, 1816 and 1883); Diccinario universal de Historia y Geografia (Mexico, 1853). AD. F. BANDELIER Christopher Clavius Christopher Clavius Christoph Clau, mathematician and astronomer, whose most important achievement related to the reform of the calendar under Gregory XIII; born at Bamberg, Bavaria, 1538; died at Rome, 12 February, 1612. The German form of his name was latinized into "Clavius". He entered the Society of Jesus in 1555 and his especial talent for mathematical research showed itself even in his preliminary studies at Coimbra. Called to Rome by his superiors as teacher of this branch of science at the well-known Collegium Romanum, he was engaged uninterruptedly there until his death. the greatest scholars of his time, such men as Tycho Brahe, Johann Kepler, Galileo Galilei, and Giovanni Antonio Magini, esteemed him highly. He was called the "Euclid of the sixteenth century"; and even his scientific opponents, like Scaliger, said openly that they would rather be censured by a Clavius than praised by another man. There has, however, been no lack of persistent disparagement of Catholic scholars even down to our own times; and therefore much that is inexact, false, and mythical has been put into circulation about Clavius, as for example that he was originally named "Schlüssel" (clavis, "key"), that he was appointed a cardinal, that he met his death by the thrust of a mad bull, etc. His relations with Galilei, with whom he remained on friendly terms until his death, have also been often misrepresented. The best evidence of the actual achievements of the great man is presented by his numerous writings, which at the end of his life he reissued at Mainz in five huge folio volumes in a collective edition under the title, "Christophori Clavii e Scoietate Jesu opera mathematica, quinque tomis distributa". The first contains the Euclidian geometry and the "Spheric" of Theodosius (Sphaericorum Libri III); the second, the practical geometry and algebra; the third is composed of a complete commentary upon the "Sphaera" of Joannes de Sacro Bosco (John Holywood), and a dissertation upon the astrolabe; the fourth contains what was up to that time the most detailed and copious discussion of gnomonics, i.e. the art of constructing all possible sun-dials; finally, the fifth contains the best and most fundamental exposition of the reform of the calendar accomplished under Gregory XIII. Many of these writings had already appeared in numerous previous editions, especially the "Commentarius in Sphaeram Joannis de Sacro Bosco" (Rome, 1570, 1575, 1581, 1585, 1606; Venice, 1596, 1601, 1602, 1603, 1607, Lyons, 1600, 1608, etc.); likewise the "Euclidis Elementorum Libri XV" (Rome 1574, 1589, 1591, 1603, 1605; Frankfort 1612). After his death also these were republished in 1617, 1627, 1654, 1663, 1717, at Cologne, Frankfort, and Amsterdam, and were even translated into Chinese. In his "Geometria Practica" (1604) Clavius states among other things a method of dividing a measuring scale into subdivisions of any desired smallness, which is far more complete than that given by Nonius and must be considered as the precursor of the measuring instrument named after Vernier, to which perhaps the name Clavius ought accordingly to be given. The chief merit of Clavius, however, lies in the profound exposition and masterly defence of the Gregorian calendar reform, the execution and final victory of which are due chiefly to him. Cf. "Romani calendarii a Gregorio XIII restituti explicatio" (Rome, 1603); "Novi calendarii Romani apologia (adversus M. Maestlinum in Tubingensi Academiâ mathematicum)" (Rome, 1588). Distinguished pupils of Clavius were Grienberger and Blancanus, both priests of the Society of Jesus. ADOLF MÜLLER Claudius Clavus Claudius Clavus (Or NICHOLAS NIGER.) The latinized form of the name of the old Danish cartographer Claudius Claussön Swart, born in the village of Salling, on the Island of Fünen, 14 September, 1388; date of death unknown. He was the first man to make a map of North-Western Europe, which, moreover, included the first map of Greenland. He was apparently an ecclesiastic. In the course of his frequent journeys he went to Italy, where in 1424 he aroused much interest among the Humanists of Rome by announcing that in the Cistercian monastery of Soroe, near Roeskilde, he had seen three large volumes which contained the "Ten Decades" of Livy; according to his own statement he had read the titles of the chapters (decem Livii decades, quarum capita ipse legisset). Through his intercourse with the Humanists he became acquainted with the maps and descriptions of Ptolemy, and was thus led to supplement the work of Ptolemy by adding to it a chart and description of the North-West country. Clavus first turned his knowledge of Scandinavia and Greenland to account in the geographical drawing and description which has been preserved in the Ptolemy manuscript of 1427 of Cardinal Filiaster. The manuscript is now in the public library of Nancy. Descriptions of it have been repeatedly given by Waitz, Nordenskjold, Storm and others. The facsimile of Clavus's map and his description of the parts contained, which were published by Nordenkiold and Storm, show that he gave Greenland and Iceland the correct geographical position, namely, west of the Scandinavian Peninsula. Far more important, however, for the history of cartography is the second map and description of North-Western Europe and Greenland that Clavus produced. As yet, unfortunately, the original of this work has not been found, nor does any copy contain both the map and the description. This second map has been preserved in the works of the German cartographers, Donnus Nicholas Germanus and Henricus Martellus Germanus, who lived at Florence in the second half of the fifteenth century. Until recently, second descriptive text belonging to the map has only been known by the citations of Schoner and Friedlieb (Irenicus); the complete text was not known until it was found by Bjornbo in two codices in the imperial library at Vienna. Bjornbo's discovery is especially important as it is now certain that Claudius Clavus was actually in Greenland and that he claims to have pushed his journey along the west coast as far as 70°10' N. lat. Another fact that lends importance to this discovery is that an explanation has at last been found for the incomprehensible names on the old maps of Greenland. Local names in Greenland and lceland, so entirely different from those that appear in the Icelandic sagas, for a long time served the defenders of the zeni as an argument that the map of Greenland was the work of the elder Zeno. It is now clear from the list of names given by Clavus that the Icelandic names on the map are not the real designations of places, but merely the names of Runic characters. In the same manner, when he came to Greenland, Claudius Clavus used the recessive words of the first stanza of an old Danish folk-song, the scene of which is laid in Greenland, to designate the headlands and rivers that seemed to him most worthy of note as he sailed from the north-east coast of coast. In the linguistic form of the words the dialect of the Island of Fünen is still evident. The discovery also makes clear how the younger Zeno was able to add to the forged story of a journey made in 1558 a comparatively correct map of the northern countries, and how he came to make use of the lines beginning: Thaer boer eeynh manh ij eyn Groenenlandz aa etc., which run in English: There lives a man on Greenland's stream, And Spieldebodh doth he be named; More has he of white herrings Than he has pork that is fat. From the north drives the sand anew. The second map of Clavus exercised a great influence on the development of cartography. As Clavus in drawing his map of North-Western Europe and Greenland made use of all authorities to be had in his time, e.g. Ptolemy's portolanos (marine maps) and itineraries, so the map-makers of succeeding centuries adopted his map, either directly or indirectly: thus, in the fifteenth century, Donnus Nicholas Germanus and Henricus Martellus; in the sixteenth century, Waldseemuller, Nicolò Zeno, Rusclli, Moletius, Ramusio, Mercator, Ortelius; in the seventeenth century, Hondius, Blaeu, and others; in the eighteenth century, Homann and his successors. It is evident that scarcely any other map has exerted so permanent an influence as of Greenland by Claudius Clavus, "the first cartographer of America". JOSEPH FISCHER James Clayton James Clayton Priest, confessor of the faith, b. at Sheffield, England, date of birth not know; d. a prisoner in Derby gaol, 22 July, 1588. He was the son of a shoemaker, and, being apprenticed to a blacksmith for seven years, spent his leisure hours in educating himself, giving special attention to the study of Latin. His studies led him to embrace the Catholic religion, and he was sent to the English College at Reims (1582), where he was ordained priest in 1585, and immediately returned to England to labour in his native county. Four years later, while visiting the Catholic prisoners in Derby gaol, he was apprehended and condemned to death for exercising his priestly office. His brothers pleaded for his pardon and his execution was delayed, though he was still kept a prisoner. Prison life brought on a sickness of which he died. FOLEY, Records S.J. (London, Roehampton, 1875-1879), III, 47, 230, 802, Douay Diaries, ed. KNOX (London, 1878), 12,29,184, 186, 200, 205, 262, 296; ELY, Certain Brief Notes, etc. (Paris, 1603), 206. G.E. HIND Clazomenae Clazomenae A titular see of Asia Minor. The city had been first founded on the southern shore of the Ionian Sea (now Gulf of Smyrna), about 15 miles from Smyrna; it was one of the twelve cities of the Ionian Confederation, and reached the acme of its importance under the Lydian kings. After the death of Croesus its inhabitants, through fear of the Persians, took refuge on the island opposite their town (today St. John's Isle), which was joined to the mainland by Alexander the Great; the pier has been restored and is yet used as means of communication between the modern Vourla and the island, on which there is now an important quarantine hospital. Clazomenae is the birthplace of the philosophers Hermotimus and Anaxagoras. The see was a suffragan Ephesus. Lequien (I, 729) mentions two bishops: Eusebius, present at Ephesus and chalcedon, in 431 and 451; and Macarius, at the Eighth Ecumenical Council, in 869. When Smyrna was raised to the rank of a metropolis (perhaps as early as the sixth century) Clazomenae was attached to it, as is shown by Parthey's "Notitiae", 3 and 10. In 1387 it was given again to Ephesus by a synodal act of the patriarch Nilus (Miklosich and Müller, "Acta Patriarchatus Constantinopol.", II, 103). After this date there is no apparent trace of its history; nothing remains of the city except the ancient pier. S. PÉTRIDÈS Clean and Unclean Clean and Unclean The distinction between legal and ceremonial, as opposed to moral, cleanness and uncleanness which stands out so prominently in Mosaic legislation (q.v.). Jan van Cleef Jan Van Cleef A Flemish painter, b. in Guelderland in 1646, d. at Ghent, 18 December, 1716. He was a pupil of Luigi Primo (Gentile) and Gaspard de Craeyer. When Craeyer died, Cleef was commissioned to complete his master's work in the churches and to finish the cartoons for the tapestry ordered by Louis XIV. The churches and convents in Flanders and Brabant are rich in his paintings. He was a splendid draughtsman, a good colourist celebrated for his management of drapery and for his charming portrayal of children's heads and the attractive faces of his women. In a school pre-eminent in portraiture Jan held a high place. He accomplished a vast amount of work, all showing the influence of his masters and tending more to Italian than Flemish methods. His favourite subjects were Scriptural and religious, and his treatment of them was simple and broad. His masterpiece, "Nuns Giving Aid during the Plague", in the convent of the Black Nuns, at Ghent, rivals the work of Van Dyck. For bibliography, see CLEEF, Joost Van. LEIGH HUNT Joost van Cleef Joost van Cleef (JOSSE VAN CLEVE). The "Madman", a Flemish painter born in Antwerp c. 1520, died c. 1556. He was one of twenty van Cleefs who painted in Antwerp, but whether the well-known Henry, Martin, and William (the younger) were kin of his cannot be determined. Of his father, William (the elder), we know only that he was a member of he Antwerp Academy, which body Joost joined. Joost was a brilliant and luminous colourist, rivalling, in this respect, the Italians, whose methods he followed. Severity and hardness of outline somewhat marred his otherwise fine draughtsmanship. Portraiture in the sixteenth century was represented by Joost van Cleef; and Kugler places him, artistically, between Holbein and Antonio Moro, his "Portrait of a Man" in Munich (Pinakotheck) being long attributed to Holbin. He painted in France, England, and Germany. The celebrated portrait painter of Cologne, Bruyn, was a pupil. Imaging himself unappreciated, he went to Spain and was presented to Phillip II by Moro, the court painter. Because Henry VIII, according to English authorities chose Titian's pictures in preference to his, van Cleef became infuriated, and his frenzy later developed into permanent insanity. The French contend that it was Philip, in Spain, who gave Titian the preference. The most distressing feature of Joost insanity was that he retouched and ruined his finished pictures whenever he could gain access to them, and his family finally had to place him under restraint. Beautiful altar-pieces by van Cleef are found in many Flemish churches, notably "The Last Judgment" (Ghent). Perhaps the most celebrated of his works is the "Baccus" (Amsterdam), whose young face is crowned with prematurely grey hair. "A Virgin" (Middleburg) is noteworthy as having a charming landscape for the background, a combination rare in those days. Other works are: "Portrait of the Painter and his wife", at Windor Castle; "Portrait of a Young Man", at Berlin; and "Portrait of a Man", at Munich. LEIGH HUNT Martin van Cleef Martin Van Cleef A Flemish painter, born at Antwerp in 1520; died in 1570; was the son of the painter William (the younger William) and was throughout his life closely associated with his brother Henry, who exerted great influence over his artistic career. Deschamps asserts that Martin and Joost were brothers, but the majority of writers on Flemish art agree that Joost was the son of the elder William. Martin studied under Franz Floris, "the incomparable Floris", and at first exhibited a strong predilection for landscape work. Later on, however, persuaded by Henry, devoted himself wholly to figure-painting. Historical subjects were his favourites, but he also achieved great success in genre painting. The latter has been stigmatized as vulgar and suggestive, but while coarse, and reflecting the peasant life of the Flemings, it differed but little in this respect from canvases of the great Dutchmen. After a few early attempts in large compositions after the Italian manner of Floris, he painted small pictures only, and these with great spirit and thorough technic. His work is delicate and refined in treatment, harmonious in colour, and excellent in draughtsmanship. Martin van Cleef painted in the landscapes the figures of many eminent contemporaries, Gilles and Franz Floris among them, and he continually collaborated with his brother Henry in that way. Henry reciprocated and added to Martin's s figure-pieces landscape backgrounds charming in colour and design, and harmonizing well with the rest of the picture. On many of his works Martin painted, as a mark, a small ape -- playing thus on his name -- and in consequence is frequently called the "Master of the Ape". He was admitted to the Antwerp Academy, and in 1551 became a member of the St. Luke's Guild of Artists. He never travelled from his native Flanders, and died of gout at the age of fifty, leaving four sons -- all of them painters. LEIGH HUNT Mathieu-Nicolas Poillevillain de Clemanges Mathieu-Nicolas Poillevillain de Clémanges (Or CLAMANGES) A French Humanist and theologian, b. in Champagne about 1360; d. at Paris between 1434 and 1440. He made his studies in the College of Navarre at Paris, and in 1380 received the degree of Licentiate, later on that of Master of Arts. He studied theology under Gerson and Pierre d'Ailly, and received the degree of Bachelor of Theology in 1393. He had begun to lecture at the university in 1391 and was appointed its rector in 1393, a position he filled until 1395. The Church was then agitated by the Western Schism, and three methods were proposed to re-establish peace: compromise, concession, and a general council. From 1380 to 1394 the University of Paris advocated a general council. In 1394 another tendency was manifest; i.e. both Boniface IX and Clement VII were held responsible for the continuance of the schism, and their resignations decreed to be the means of obtaining peace. To this end a letter was written to King Charles VI by three of the most learned masters of the university, Pierre d'Ailly, Gilles des Champs, and Clémanges. The two first prepared the content, to which Clémanges gave a Ciceronian elegance of form. The letter was unsuccessful, and the university was ordered to abstain from further discussion. Clémanges, forced to resign the rectorship of the university, then became canon and dean of Saint-Clodoald (1395), and later on canon and treasurer of Langres. The antipope Benedict XIII, who admired his Latin style, took him for his secretary in 1397, and he remained at Avignon until 1408, when he abandoned Benedict because of the latter's conflict with Charles VI. Clémanges now retired to the Carthusian monastery of Valfonds and later to Fontain-du-Bose. In these two retreats he wrote his best treatises, "De Fructu eremi" (dedicated to Pierre d'Ailly), "De Fructu rerum adversarum", "De novis festivitatibus non instituendis", and "De studio theologico", in which latter work he exhibits his dislike for the Scholastic method in philosophy. In 1412 he returned to Langres, and was appointed Archdeacon of Bayeux. His voice was heard successively at the Council of Constance (1414), and at Chartres (1421), where he defended the "liberties" of the Gallican Church. In 1425 he was teaching rhetoric and theology in the College of Navarre, where, most probably, he died. Clémanges is also credited with the authorship of the work "De corrupto Ecclesiae statu", first edited by Cordatus (possibly Hutten) in 1513, a violent attack on the morality and discipline of the contemporary Church; hence he is sometimes considered a Reformer of the type of Wyclif and Hus. Schubert, however, in his book "Ist Nicolaus von Clémanges der Verfasser des Buches De corrupto Ecclesiae statu?" (Grossenhain, 1882; Leipzig, 1888) has shown that, although a contemporary, Clémanges was not the author of the book. His works were edited in two volumes by J. Lydius, a Protestant minister of Frankfort (Leyden, 1613). His letters are in d'Achery (below) I, 473 sqq. J.B. DELAUNAY Charles Clemencet Charles Clémencet Benedictine historian, b. at Painblanc, in the department of Côte-d'Or, France, 1703; d. at Paris, 5 August, 1778. Clémencet entered the Congregation of Saint-Maur at an early age; for a short time he was lector of rhetoric at Pont-le-Voy, but, on account of his great abilities, was soon called to Paris. Here he took part in almost all of the important literary labours of his congregation, showing a marked preference for historical research. At first his superiors commissioned him to edit the "bibliotheca" (Myriobiblion) of Photius. Clémencet soon retired from this task and devoted all his powers to a chronological work for which Dantine, another member of the congregation, had made the preparatory studies. This chronology, Clémencet's principal work, had the very prolix title: "l'art de vérifier les dates où faits historiques des chartes, des chroniques, et anciens monuments depuis la naissance de Jésus-Christ, par le moyen d'une table chronologique, ou l'on trouve les années de Jésus-Christ et de l'Ere d'Espagne, les Indictions, le Cycle pascal, les Pâques de chaque année, les Cycles solaires et lunaires. Avec un Calendrier perpétuel, l'Histoire abrégée des conciles, des papes, des empereurs romains, grecs, français, allemands et tures; des rois de France, d'Espagne et d'Angleterre, d'Ecosse, de Lombardie, de Sicile, de Jérusalem, etc., des duccs de Bourgogne, de Normandie, de Bretagne; des Comtes de Toulouse, de Champagne et de Blois par des religieux bénédictins de la congrégation de Saint Maur" (Paris, 1750). The work was compiled with extraordinary industry, and contains, as the title shows, a large amount of historical material. In its judgment of persons and facts, however, it betrayed a strong bias to Jansenism and Gallicanism, and was, consequently, frequently attacked, one opponent in particular being the Jesuit Patouillet. The assertion was made, and not without reason, that the title out to read: "L'art de vérifier les dates et falsifier les faits". Clémencet also wrote volumes X and XI, issued at Paris, 1756 and 1759, of the monumental work "Histoire littéraire de la France". The volumes prepared by Clémencet are a rich collection of authorities and are of importance not only for the literary history of France but also for the history of the development of all the nations of the Middle Ages. It was intended that he should edit volume XII of the "Histoire littéraire", preparing for it the life of St. Bernard of Clairvaux, but he gave up the undertaking and wrote instead an independent work entitled: "Histoire des vies et écrits de Saint-Bernard et de Pierre le Vénérable" (Paris, 1773). His strong predilection for Jansenism is shown in two of his writings, namely: "Histoire générale de Port-Royal depuis la reforme de cette abbaye jusqu'à son entiere destruction (10 vols., Amsterdam, 1755-1757), and "Conferences de la Mère Angélique de Saint-Jean, Abbesse de Port-Royal" (3 vols., Utrecht, 1760). Of the former of these two works only the first half could be published, as the second part contained too strong a defence of Jansenism. On account of his leaning to Jansenism, Clémencet was a bitter opponent of the Jesuits. He attacked them in several exceedingly sharp pamphlets and worked for the suppression of the Society. Among his literary labours should also be mentioned his share in an excellent edition of the works of St. Gregory of Nazianzus. Prudentius Maranus, another member of the Congregation of Saint-Maur, had begun the task. Clémencet issued the first volume under the title: "Gregorii Theologi opera quae extant omnia" (Paris, 1778). This edition is still valuable and far surpasses all the earlier editions. PATRICIUS SCHLAGER Franz Jacob Clemens Franz Jacob Clemens A German Catholic philosopher, b. 4 October, 1815, at Coblenz; d. 24 February, 1862, at Rome. After spending some time in an educational institutional at Metz, he entered, at the age of sixteen, the Jesuit College of Fribourg, Switzerland, attended the Gymnasium at Coblenz, and thence passed to the University of Bonn. In 1835 he matriculated at the University of Berlin, where he devoted special attention to the study of philosophy and received the doctorate in philosophy (1839). At the end of a literary journey through German and Italy, he became, in 1843, instructor in philosophy at the University of Bonn, and taught there with great success until 1856. In 1848 he was elected a member of the Frankfort Parliament, and attended, at Mainz, the first General Congress of German Catholics, at which he suggested the foundation of the St. Vincent de Paul Society in Germany. In 1856 he was appointed professor of philosophy in the Academy of Munster. So great was his popularity as a teacher at Bonn that, when he removed to Munster, he was followed by some seventy students. The attendance at his lectures in the Westphalian capital was an extraordinarily large one; but his health failed after a few years. In 1861, upon the advice of his physicians, he sought relief in a southern climate; he died at Rome in the beginning of the following year and was buried at the Gesù. Clemens was a layman of sound Catholic principles, who ably defended the Church even on theological questions. He published his first great work, "Giordano Bruno und Nikolaus von Cusa", in 1847, at Bonn. He also wrote in defence of the Holy Coat of Trier, "Der heilige Rock zu Trier und die protestantische Kritik" (1845), against Gildemeister and von Sybel. His other principal writings were connected with two controversies in which he became involved. His book, "Die speculative Theologie A. Günthers" (Cologne, 1853), a clear demonstration of the contradiction between Catholic doctrine and the views of Günther, elicited answers from Professors Baltzer and Knoodt, to which Clemens replied. His "De Scholasticorum sententiâ, philosophiam esse theologiae ancillam, commentatio" (Münster, 1856) treated of the subordinate position which philosophy should occupy in regard to theology. It brought him into conflict with Professor Kuhn of Tübingen, against whom he published, in defence of his position: "Die Wahrheit etc." (Münster, 1860) and "Über das Verhältniss, etc." (Mainz, 1860). Der Katholic (1862), I, 257-80; Lit. Handweiser (1862), 88-89; Stockl in Allg. deut. Biog. (Leipzig, 1876), IV, 315-17; Dublin Rev. (1862-63), LII, 417-18). N.A. WEBER Clemens Non Papa Clemens non Papa (Jacques Clement). Representative of the Flemish or Netherland School of music of the sixteenth century; d. 1558. All that is known with reasonable certainty of his life is that he preceded Nicolas Gombert (1495-1570) as choirmaster at the court of Charles V. An indication of his fame is his nickname non Papa, given to distinguish him from the contemporaneous Pope Clement VII (1523-34). While his style is always noble and fluent, he shows the fault of his time and school of elaborating contrapuntal forms at the expense of a clear and distinct declamation of the text. Clemens was, nevertheless, one of the chief forerunners of Palestrina and Orlandus Lassus, who alone were able to overshadow him. Some of his more important works are: ten masses, one for six, five for five, and four for four voices, published by Petrus, Phalesius at Louvain (1555-80), a large number of motets, and four volumes of "Souter Liedekens", that is psalms set to familiar Netherland melodies, published by Tylmann Susato at Antwerp (1556-57). Ambros, Gesch. der Musik (Leipzig, 1881); Riemann, Handbuch der Musikgeschichte (Leipzig, 1907). JOSEPH OTTEN Pope St. Clement I Pope St. Clement I Pope Clement I (called CLEMENS ROMANUS to distinguish him from the Alexandrian), is the first of the successors of St. Peter of whom anything definite is known, and he is the first of the "Apostolic Fathers ". His feast is celebrated 23 November. He has left one genuine writing, a letter to the Church of Corinth, and many others have been attributed to him. I. THE FOURTH POPE According to Tertullian, writing c. 199, the Roman Church claimed that Clement was ordained by St. Peter (De Praescript., xxxii), and St. Jerome tells us that in his time "most of the Latins" held that Clement was the immediate successor of the Apostle (De viris illustr., xv). St. Jerome himself in several other places follows this opinion, but here he correctly states that Clement was the fourth pope. The early evidence shows great variety. The most ancient list of popes is one made by Hegesippus in the time of Pope Anicetus, c. 160 (Harnack ascribes it to an unknown author under Soter, c. 170), cited by St. Epiphanius (Haer., xxvii, 6). It seems to have been used by St. Irenaeus (Haer., III, iii), by Julius Africanus, who composed a chronography in 222, by the third- or fourth-century author of a Latin poem against Marcion, and by Hippolytus, who see chronology extends to 234 and is probably found in the "Liberian Catalogue" of 354. That catalogue was itself adopted in the "Liber Pontificalis". Eusebius in his chronicle and history used Africanus; in the latter he slightly corrected the dates. St. Jerome's chronicle is a translation of Eusebius's, and is our principal means for restoring the lost Greek of the latter; the Armenian version and Coptic epitomes of it are not to be depended on. The varieties of order are as follows: 1. Linus, Cletus, Clemens (Hegesippus, ap. Epiphanium, Canon of Mass). Linus, Anencletus, Clemens (Irenaeus, Africanus ap. Eusebium). Linus, Anacletus, Clemens (Jerome). 2. Linus, Cletus, Anacletus, Clemens (Poem against Marcion), 3. Linus, Clemens, Cletus, Anacletus [Hippolytus (?), "Liberian Catal."- "Liber. Pont."]. 4. Linus, Clemens, Anacletus (Optatus, Augustine). At the present time no critic doubts that Cletus, Anacletus, Anencletus, are the same person. Anacletus is a Latin error; Cletus is a shortened (and more Christian) form of Anencletus. Lightfoot thought that the transposition of Clement in the "Liberian Catalogue" was a mere accident, like the similar error "Anicetus, Pius" for "Pius Anicetus", further on in the same list. But it may have been a deliberate alteration by Hippolytus, on the ground of the tradition mentioned by Tertullian. St. Irenaeus (III, iii) tells us that Clement "saw the blessed Apostles and conversed with them, and had yet ringing in his ears the preaching of the Apostles and had their tradition before his eyes, and not he only for many were then surviving who had been taught y the Apostles ". Similarly Epiphanius tells us (from Hegesippus) that Clement was a contemporary of Peter and Paul. Now Linus and Cletus had each twelve years attributed to them in the list. If Hippolytus found Cletus doubled by an error (Cletus XII, Anacletus XII), the accession of Clement would appear to be thirty-six years after the death of the Apostles. As this would make it almost impossible for Clement to have been their contemporary, it may have caused Hippolytus to shift him to an earlier position. Further, St. Epiphanius says (loc. cit.): "Whether he received episcopal ordination from Peter in the life-time of the Apostles, and declined the office, for he says in one of his epistles 'I retire, I depart, let the people of God be in peace', (for we have found this set down in certain Memoirs), or whether he was appointed by the Bishop Cletus after he had succeeded the Apostles, we do not clearly know." The "Memoirs" were certainly those of Hegesippus. It seems unlikely that he is appealed to only for the quotation from the Epistle, c. liv; probably Epiphanius means that Hegesippus stated that Clement had been ordained by Peter and declined to be bishop, but twenty-four years later really exercised the office for nine years. Epiphanius could not reconcile these two facts; Hippolytus seems to have rejected the latter. Chronology The date intended by Hegesippus is not hard to restore. Epiphanius implies that he placed the martyrdom of the Apostles in the twelfth year of Nero. Africanus calculated the fourteenth year (for he had attributed one year too little to the reigns of Caligula and Claudius), and added the imperial date for the accession of each pope; but having two years too few up to Anicetus he could not get the intervals to tally with the years of episcopate given by Hegesippus. He had a parallel difficulty in his list of the Alexandrian bishops. Hegesippus Africanus (from Eusebius) Interval Real Dates A.D. Linus 12 Nero 14 12 Nero 12 66 Cletus 12 Titus 2 12 Vesp 10 78 Clemens 9 Dom 12 (7) Dom 10 80 Euaristus 8 Trajan 2 (10) Tajan 2 99 Alexander 10 Trajan 12 10 Trajan 10 107 Sixtus 10 Hadrian 3 (9) Hadrian 1 117 Telesphorus 11 Hadrian 12 (10) Hadrian 11 127 Hyginus 4 Anton 1 4 Anton 1 138 Pius 15 Anton 5 15 Anton 5 142 Anicetus Anton 20 Anton 20 157 If we start, as Hegesippus intended, with Nero 12 (see last column), the sum of his years brings us right for the last three popes. But Africanus has started two years wrong, and in order to get right at Hyginus he has to allow one year too little to each of the preceding popes, Sixtus and Telesphorus. But there is one inharmonious date, Trajan 2, which gives seven and ten years to Clement and Euaristus instead of nine and eight. Evidently he felt bound to insert a traditional date -- and in fact we see that Trajan 2 was the date intended by Hegesippus. Now we know that Hegesippus spoke about Clement's acquaintance with the Apostles, and said nothing about any other pope until Telesphorus, "who was a glorious martyr." It is not surprising, then, to find that Africanus had, besides the lengths of episcopate, two fixed dates from Hegesippus, those of the death of Clement in the second year of Trajan, and of the martyrdom of Telesphorus in the first year of Antoninus Pius. We may take it, therefore, that about 160 the death of St. Clement was believed to have been in 99. Identity Origen identifies Pope Clement with St. Paul's fellow-labourer, Phil., iv, 3, and 80 do Eusebius, Epiphanius, and Jerome -- but this Clement was probably a Philippian. In the middle of the nineteenth century it was the custom to identity the pope with the consul of 95, T. Flavius Clemens, who was martyred by his first cousin, the Emperor Domitian, at the end of his consulship. But the ancients never suggest this, and the pope is said to have lived on till the reign of Trajan. It is unlikely that he was a member of the imperial family. The continual use of the Old Testament in his Epistle has suggested to Lightfoot, Funk, Nestle, and others that he was of Jewish origin. Probably he was a freedman or son of a freedman of the emperor's household, which included thousands or tens of thousands. We know that there were Christians in the household of Nero (Phil., iv, 22). It is highly probable that the bearers of Clement's letter, Claudius Ephebus and Valerius Vito, were of this number, for the names Claudius and Valerius occur with great frequency in inscriptions among the freedmen of the Emperor Claudius (and his two predecessors of the same gens) and his wife Valeria Messalina. The two messengers are described as "faithful and prudent men, who have walked among us from youth unto old age unblameably", thus they were probably already Christians and living in Rome before the death of the Apostles about thirty years earlier. The Prefect of Rome during Nero's persecution was Titus Flavius Sabinus, elder brother of the Emperor Vespasian, and father of the martyred Clemens. Flavia Domitilla, wife of the Martyr, was a granddaughter of Vespasian, and niece of Titus and Domitian; she may have died a martyr to the rigours of her banishment The catacomb of Domitilla is shown by existing inscriptions to have been founded by her. Whether she is distinct from another Flavia Domitilla, who is styled "Virgin and Martyr", is uncertain. (See FLAVIA DOMITILLA and NEREUS AND ACHILLEUS) The consul and his wife had two sons Vespasian and Domitian, who had Quintilian for their tutor. Of their life nothing is known. The elder brother of the martyr Clemens was T. Flavius Sabinus, consul in 82, put to death by Domitian, whose sister he had married. Pope Clement is rep resented as his son in the Acts of Sts. Nereus and Achilleus, but this would make him too young to have known the Apostles. Martyrdom Of the life and death of St, Clement nothing is known. The apocryphal Greek Acts of his martyrdom were printed by Cotelier in his "Patres Apost." (1724, I, 808; reprinted in Migne, P. G., II, 617, best edition by Funk, "Patr. Apost.", II, 28). They relate how he converted Theodora, wife of Sisinnius, a courtier of Nerva, and (after miracles) Sisinnius himself and four hundred and twenty-three other persons of rank. Trajan banishes the pope to the Crimea, where he slakes the thirst of two thousand Christian confessors by a miracle. The people of the country are converted, seventy-five churches are built. Trajan, in consequence, orders Clement to be thrown into the sea with an iron anchor. But the tide every year recedes two miles, revealing a Divinely built shrine which contains the martyr's bones. This story is not older than the fourth century. It is known to Gregory of Tours in the sixth. About 868 St. Cyril, when in the Crimea on the way to evangelize the Chazars, dug up some bones in a mound (not in a tomb under the sea), and also an anchor. These were believed to be the relics of St. Clement. They were carried by St. Cyril to Rome, and deposited by Adrian II with those of St. Ignatius of Antioch in the high altar of the basilica of St. Clement in Rome. The history of this translation is evidently quite truthful, but there seems to have been no tradition with regard to the mound, which simply looked a likely place to be a tomb. The anchor appears to be the only evidence of identity but we cannot gather from the account that it belonged to the scattered bones. (See Acta SS., 9 March, II, 20.) St. Clement is first mentioned as a martyr by Rufinus (c. 400). Pope Zozimus in a letter to Africa in 417 relates the trial and partial acquittal of the heretic Caelestius in the basilica of St. Clement; the pope had chosen this church because Clement had learned the Faith from St. Peter, and had given his life for it (Ep. ii). He is also called a martyr by the writer known as Praedestinatus (c. 430) and by the Synod of Vaison in 442. Modern critics think it possible that his martyrdom was suggested by a confusion with his namesake, the martyred consul. But the lack of tradition that he was buried in Rome is in favour of his having died in exile. The Basilica The church of St. Clement at Rome lies in the valley between the Esquiline and Coelian hills, on the direct road from the Coliseum to the Lateran. It is now in the hands of the Irish Province of Dominicans. With its atrium, its choir enclosed by a wall, its ambos, it is the most perfect model of an early basilica in Rome, though it was built as late as the first years of the twelfth century by Paschal II, after the destruction of this portion of the city by the Normans under Robert Guiscard. Paschal II followed the lines of an earlier church, on a rather smaller scale, and employed some of its materials and fittings The marble wall of the present choir is of the date of John II (533-5). In 1858 the older church was unearthed, below the present building, by the Prior Father Mulooly, O. P. Still lower were found chambers of imperial date and walls of the Republican period. The lower church was built under Constantine (d. 337) or not much later. St. Jerome implies that it was not new in his time: "nominis eius [Clementis] memoriam usque hodie Romae exstructa ecclesia custodit" (De viris illustr., xv). It is mentioned in inscriptions of Damasus (d. 383) and Siricius (d. 398). De Rossi thought the lowest chambers belonged to the house of Clement, and that the room immediately under the altar was probably the original memoria of the saint. These chambers communicate with a shrine of Mithras, which lies beyond the apse of the church, on the lowest level. De Rossi supposed this to be a Christian chapel purposely polluted by the authorities during the last persecution. Lightfoot has suggested that the rooms may have belonged to the house of T. Flavius Clemens the consul, being later mistaken for the dwelling of the pope; but this seems quite gratuitous. In the sanctuary of Mithras a statue of the Good Shepherd was found. II. PSEUDO-CLEMENTINE WRITINGS Many writings have been falsely attributed to Pope St. Clement I: 1. The "Second Clementine Epistle to the Corinthians", discussed under III. 2. Two "Epistles to Virgins", extant in Syriac in an Amsterdam MS. of 1470. The Greek originals are lost. Many critics have believed them genuine, for they were known in the fourth century to St. Epiphanius (who speaks of their being read in the Churches) and to St. Jerome. But it is now admitted on all hands that they cannot be by the same author as the genuine Epistle to the Corinthians. Some writers, as Hefele and Westcott, have attributed them to the second half Or the second century, but the third is more probable (Harnack, Lightfoot). Harnack thinks the two letters were originally one. They were first edited by Wetstein, 1470, with Latin translation, reprinted by Gallandi, "Bibl. vett. Patr.", I, and Migne, P. G., I. They are found in Latin only in Mansi, "Concilia", I, and Funk "Patres Apost.", II. See Lightfoot, "Clement of Rome" (London, 1890), I Bardenhewer, "Gesch. der altkirchl. Litt." (Freiburg im Br., 1902), I; Harnack in "Sitzungsber. der k. preuss. Akad. der Wiss." (Berlin, 1891), 361 and "Chronol." (1904), II, 133. 3. At the head of the Pseudo-Isidorian decretals stand five letters attributed to St. Clement. The first is the letter of Clement to James translated by Rufinus (see III); the second is another letter to James, found in many MSS. of the "Recognitions". The other three are the work of Pseudo-Isidore (See FALSE DECRETALS.) 4. Ascribed to Clement are the "Apostolical Constitutions", "Apostolic Canons", and the "Testament of Our Lord", also a Jacobite Anaphora (Renaudot, Liturg. Oriental. Coll., Paris, 1716, II; Migne, P.G., II). For other attributions see Harnack, "Gesch. der altchr. Lit." I, 777-80. The "Clementines' or Pseudo-Clementines. (q.v.) III. THE EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS The Church of Corinth had been led by a few violent spirits into a sedition against its rulers. No appeal seems to have been made to Rome, but a letter was sent in the name of the Church of Rome by St. Clement to restore peace and unity. He begins by explaining that his delay in writing has been caused by the sudden calamities which, one after another, had just been falling upon the Roman Church. The reference is clearly to the persecution of Domitian. The former high reputation of the Corinthian Church is recalled, its piety and hospitality, its obedience and discipline. Jealousy had caused the divisions; it was jealousy that led Cain, Esau, etc., into sin, it was jealousy to which Peter and Paul and multitudes with them fell victims. The Corinthians are urged to repent after the example of the Patriarchs, and to be humble like Christ himself. Let them observe order, as all creation does. A curious passage on the Resurrection is somewhat of an interruption in the sequence: all creation proves the Resurrection, and so does the phoenix, which every five hundred years consumes itself, that its offspring may arise out of its ashes (23-6). Let us, Clement continues, forsake evil and approach God with purity, clinging to His blessing, which the Patriarchs so richly obtained, for the Lord will quickly come with His rewards, let us look to Jesus Christ, our High-Priest, above the angels at the right hand of the Father (36). Discipline and subordination are necessary as in an army and in the human body, while arrogance is absurd for man is nothing. The Apostles foresaw feuds, and provided for a succession of bishops and deacons; such, therefore cannot be removed at pleasure. The just have always been persecuted. Read St. Paul's first epistle to you, how he condemns party spirit. It is shocking that a few should disgrace the Church of Corinth. Let us beg for pardon- nothing is more beautiful than charity; it was shown by Christ when He gave His Flesh for our flesh, His Soul-for our souls; by living in this love, we shall be in the number of the saved through Jesus Christ, by Whom is glory to God for ever and ever, Amen (58). But if any disobey, he is in great danger; but we will pray that the Creator may preserve the number of His elect in the whole world.--Here follows a beautiful Eucharistic prayer (59-61). The conclusion follows: "We have said enough, on the necessity of repentance, unity, peace, for we have been speaking to the faithful, who have deeply studied the Scriptures, and will understand the examples pointed out, and will follow them. We shall indeed be happy if you obey. We have sent two venerable messengers, to show how great is our anxiety for peace among you" (62-4). "Finally may the all-seeing God and Master of Spirits and Lord of all flesh, who chose the Lord Jesus Christ and us through Him for a peculiar people, grant unto every soul that is called after His excellent and holy Name faith, fear, peace, patience, long-suffering, temperance, chastity, and soberness, that they may be well-pleasing unto His Name through our High Priest and Guardian. Jesus Christ, through whom unto Him be glory and majesty, might and honour, both now and for ever and ever, Amen. Now send ye back speedily unto us our messengers Claudius Ephebus and Valerius Bito, together with Fortunatus also, in peace and with joy, to the end that they may the more quickly report the peace and concord which is prayed for and earnestly desired by us, that we also may the more speedily rejoice over your good order. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you and with all men in all places who have been called by God and through Him, through whom is glory and honour, power and greatness and eternal dominion, unto Him, from the ages past and for ever and ever. Amen." (64-5.) The style of the Epistle is earnest and simple, restrained and dignified, and sometimes eloquent. The Greek is correct, though not classical. The quotations from the Old Testament are long and numerous. The version of the Septuagint used by Clement inclines in places towards that which appears in the New Testament, yet presents sufficient evidence of independence; his readings are often with A, but are less often opposed to B than are those in the New Testament; occasionally he is found against the Septuagint with Theodotion or even Aquila (see H. B. Swete, Introd. to the 0. T. in Greek, Cambridge 1900). The New Testament he never quotes verbally. Sayings of Christ are now and then given, but not in the words of the Gospels. It cannot be proved, therefore, that he used any one of the Synoptic Gospels. He mentions St. Paul's First Epistle to the Corinthians, and appears to imply a second. He knows Romans and Titus, and apparently cites several other of St. Paul's Epistles. But Hebrews is most often employed of all New Testament books. James, probably, and I Peter, perhaps, are referred to. (See the lists of citations in Funk and Lightfoot, Westcott and Zahn on the Canon, Introductions to Holy Scripture, such as those of Cornely, Zahn, etc., and "The New Test. in the Apost. Fathers", by a Committee of the Oxford Society of Hist. Theology, Oxford, 1906.) The tone of authority with which the letter speaks is noteworthy, especially in the later part (56, 58, etc.): "But if certain persons should be disobedient unto the words spoken by Him through us let them understand that they will entangle themselves in no slight transgression and danger; but we shall be guiltless of this sin" (59). "It may, perhaps, seem strange", writes Bishop Lightfoot, "to describe this noble remonstrance as the first step towards papal domination. And yet undoubtedly this is the case." (I, 70.) Doctrine There is little intentional dogmatic teaching in the Epistle, for it is almost wholly hortatory. A passage on the Holy Trinity is important. Clement uses the Old Testament affirmation "The Lord liveth", substituting the Trinity thus: "As God liveth, and the Lord Jesus Christ liveth and the Holy Spirit -- the faith and hope of the elect, so surely he that performeth", etc. (58). Christ is frequently represented as the High-Priest, and redemption is often referred to. Clement speaks strongly of justification by works. His words on the Christian ministry have given rise to much discussion (42 and 44): "The Apostles received the Gospel for us from the Lord Jesus Christ; Jesus Christ was sent from God. So then Christ is from God, and the Apostles from Christ. Both [missions] therefore came in due order by the will of God..... So preaching everywhere in country and town, they appointed their first-fruits, having proved them by the Spirit, to be bishops and deacons for those who should believe. And this in no new fashion, for it had indeed been written from very ancient times about bishops and deacons; for thus saith the Scripture: 'I will appoint their bishops in justice and their deacons in faith"' (a strange citation of Is., lx, 17). . . . "And our Apostles knew through our Lord Jesus Christ that there would be strife over the name of the office of bishop. For this cause therefore, having received complete foreknowledge, they appointed the aforesaid persons, and afterwards they have given a law, so that, if these should fall asleep, other approved men should succeed to their ministration." Rothe, Michiels (Origines de l'episcopat, Louvain, 1900, 197), and others awkwardly understand "if they, the Apostles, should fall asleep". For epinomen dedokasin, which the Latin renders legem dederunt, Lightfoot reads epimonen dedokasin, "they have provided a continuance ". In any case the general meaning is clear, that the Apostles provided for a lawful succession of ministers. Presbyters are mentioned several times, but are not distinguished from bishops. There is absolutely no mention of a bishop at Corinth, and the ecclesiastical authorities there are always spoken of in the. plural. R. Sohm thinks there was as yet no bishop at Corinth when Clement wrote (so Michiels and many other Catholic writers; Lightfoot leaves the question open), but that a bishop must have been appointed in consequence of the letter; he thinks that Rome was the origin of all ecclesiastical institutions and laws (Kirchenrecht 189). Harnack in 1897 (Chronol., I) upheld the paradox that the Church of Rome was so conservative as to be governed by presbyters until Anicetus; and that when the list of popes was composed, c. 170, there had been a bishop for less than twenty years; Clement and others in the list were only presbyters of special influence. The liturgical character of parts of the Epistle is elaborately -discussed by Lightfoot. The prayer (59-61) already mentioned, which reminds us of the Anaphora of early liturgies, cannot be regarded, says Duchesne, "as a reproduction of a sacred formulary but it is an excellent example of the style of solemn prayer in which the ecclesiastical leaders of that time were accustomed to express themselves at meetings for worship" (Origines du culte chret., 3rd ed., 50; tr., 50). The fine passage about Creation, 32-3, is almost in the style of a Preface, and concludes by introducing the Sanctus by the usual mention of the angelic powers: "Let us mark the whole host of the angels, how they stand by and minister unto His Will. For the Scripture saith: Ten thousand times ten thousand stood by Him, and thousands of thousands ministered unto Him, and they cried aloud: Holy holy, holy is the Lord of Sabaoth; all creation is full of His glory. Yea, and let us ourselves then being gathered together in concord with intentness of heart, cry unto Him." The combination of Daniel, Vii, 10, with Is., vi, 3, may be from a liturgical formula. It is interesting to note that the contemporary Apocalypse of St. John (iv, 8) shows the four living creatures, representing all creation, singing the Sanctus at the heavenly Mass. The historical references in the letter are deeply interesting: "To pass from the examples of ancient days, let us come to those champions who lived very near to our time. Let us set before us the noble examples which belong to our generation. By reason of jealousy and envy the greatest and most righteous pillars of the Church were persecuted, and contended even until death. Let us set before our eyes the good Apostles. There was Peter, who by reason of unrighteous jealousy endured not one or two, but many labours, and thus having borne his testimony went to his appointed Place of glory. By reason of jealousy and strife Paul by his example pointed out the prize of patient endurance. After that he had been seven times in bonds, had been driven into exile, had been stoned, had preached in the East and in the West, he won the noble renown which was the reward of his faith having taught righteousness unto the whole world and having reached the farthest bounds of the West; and when he had borne his testimony before the rulers, so he departed from the world and went unto the holy place having been found a notable pattern of patient endurance (5). It is obvious that these two Apostles are mentioned because they suffered at Rome. It seems that St. Paul went to Spain as he intended (Rom., xv, 28) and as is declared by the spurious Acts of Peter and by the Muratorian fragment. "Unto these men of holy lives was gathered a vast multitude of the elect who through many indignities and tortures, being the victims of jealousy, set a brave example among ourselves. By reason of jealousy women being persecuted, after that they had suffered cruel and unholy insults as Danaids and Dircae, safely reached the goal in the race of faith, and received a noble reward, feeble though they were in body" (6). The "vast multitude" both of men and women "among ourselves" at Rome refers to the horrible persecution of Nero, described by Tacitus, "Ann.", XV, xliv. It is in the recent past, and the writer continues: "We are in the same lists, and the same contest awaits us" (7)- he is under another persecution, that of Domitian, covertly referred to as a series of "sudden and repeated calamities and reverses", which have prevented the letter from being written sooner. The martyrdom of the Consul Clement (probably patron of the pope's own family) and the exile of his wife will be among these disasters. Date and authenticity The date of the letter is determined by these notices of persecution. It is strange that even a few good scholars (such as Grotius Grabe, Orsi, Uhlhorn, Hefele, Wieseler) should have dated it soon after Nero. It is now universally acknowledged, after Lightfoot, that it was written about the last year of Domitian (Harnack) or immediately after his death in 96 (Funk). The Roman Church had existed several decades, for the two envoys to Corinth had lived in it from youth to age. The Church of Corinth is called archai (47). Bishops and deacons have succeeded to bishops and deacons appointed by the Apostles (44). Yet the time of the Apostles is "quite lately" and "our own veneration" (5). The external evidence is in accord. The dates given for Clement's episcopate by Hegesippus are apparently 90-99, and that early writer states that the schism at Corinth took place under Domitian (Eusebius, Hist. Eccl., III, xvi, for kata ton deloumenon is meaningless if it is taken to refer to Clement and not to Domitian; besides, the whole of Eusebius's account of that emperor's persecution, III, xvii-xx, is founded on Hegesippus). St. Irenaeus says that Clement still remembered the Apostles, and so did many others, implying an interval of many years after their death. Volkmar placed the date in the reign of Hadrian, because the Book of Judith is quoted, which he declared to have been written in that reign. He was followed by Baur, but not by Hilgenfeld. Such a date is manifestly impossible, if only because the Epistle of Polycarp is entirely modelled on that of Clement and borrows from it freely. It is possibly employed by St. Ignatius, c. 107, and certainly in the letter of the Smyrnaeans on the martyrdom of St. Polycarp, c. 156. The Epistle is in the name of the Church of Rome but the early authorities always ascribe it to Clement. Dionysius, Bishop of Corinth, wrote c. 170 to the Romans in Pope Soter's time: "To-day we kept the holy day, the Lord's day, and on it we read your letter- and we shall ever have it to give us instruction, even as the former one written through Clement" (Eusebius, Hist. Eccl., IV, xxx). Hegesippus attributed the letter to Clement. Irenaeus, c. 180-5 perhaps using Hegesippus, says: "Under this Clement no small sedition took place among the brethren at Corinth and the Church of Rome sent a most sufficient letter to the Corinthians, establishing them in peace, and renewing their faith, and announcing the tradition it had recently received from the Apostles" (III, iii). Clement of Alexandria, c. 200, frequently quotes the Epistle as Clement's, and so do Origen and Eusebius. Lightfoot and Harnack are fond of pointing out that we hear earlier of the importance of the Roman Church than of the authority of the Roman bishop. If Clement had spoken in his own name, they would surely have noted expressly that he wrote not as Bishop of Rome, but as an aged "presbyter" who had known the Apostles. St. John indeed was still alive, and Corinth was rather nearer to Ephesus than to Rome. Clement evidently writes officially, with all that authority of the Roman Church of which Ignatius and Irenaeus have so much to say. The Second Letter to the Corinthians An ancient homily by an anonymous author has come down to us in the same two Greek MSS. as the Epistle of Clement, and is called the Second Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians. It is first mentioned by Eusebius (Hist. Eccl., III, xxxvii), who considered it spurious, as being unknown to the ancients; he is followed (perhaps not independently) by Rufinus and Jerome. Its inclusion as a letter of Clement in the Codex Alexandrinus of the whole Bible in the fifth century is the earliest testimony to a belief in its authenticity; in the sixth century it is quoted by the Monophysite leaders Timothy of Alexandria and Severus of Antioch, and it was later known to many Greek writers. This witness is a great contrast to the very early veneration paid to the genuine letter. Hilgenfeld's theory that it is the letter of Pope Soter to the Corinthians, mentioned by Dionysius in the fragment quoted above, was accepted by many critics, until the discovery of the end of the work by Bryennios showed that it was not a letter at all, but a homily. Still Harnack has again and again defended this view. An apparent reference to the Isthmian Games in ~7 suggests that the homily was delivered at Corinth; but this would be in character if it was a letter addressed to Corinth. Lightfoot and others think it earlier than Marcion, c. 140, but its reference to Gnostic views does not allow us to place it much earlier. The matter of the sermon is a very general exhortation, and there is no definite plan or sequence. Some citations from unknown Scriptures are interesting. The editio princeps of the two "Epistles to the Corinthians" is that of Patrick Young, 1633 (2d ed., 1637), from the famous Codex Alexandrinus (A) of the whole Bible in Greek. A number of editions followed in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries (enumerated by Funk, Gebhardt, and Lightfoot). in the nineteenth we may notice those of C. J. Hefele (Tubingen, 1st ed., 1839), Jacobson (Oxford, 1st ed., 1840, etc.), Dressel (Leipzig, 1857), in the editions of the Apostolic Fathers by these writers. An edition by Bishop J. B. Lightfoot appeared in 1869 (London and Cambridge), one by J. C. M. Laurent in 1870 (Leipzig), and one by 0. von Gebhardt and A. Harnack in 1875 (Leipzig). All these editions are founded on the one MS., which gives both letters incompletely, and not always legibly. On its doubtful readings Tischendorf wrote in 1873 (Clementis Rom. Epistulae, Leipzig), and he gave a so-called facsimile in 1867 (Appendix codicum celeberrimorum Sinaitici et Vaticani, Leipzig). A photographic reproduction of the whole codex was published at the British Museum in 1879. In 1875 the complete text of both Epistles was published by Bryennios at Constantinople, from-a MS. in the Patriarchal library of that city. It was used in Hilgenfeld's "Clementis Romani Epistulae" (2d ed., Leipzig, 1876), in the second edition of Gebhardt and Harnack (1876). In Lightfoot's edition of 1877 (London) a Syriac version was also used for the first time. The MS. was written in 1170, and is in the Cambridge University Library. It has been published in full by R. L. Bensley and R. H. Kennett, "The Epistles of St. Clement to the Corinthians in Syriac" (London,1899). Dr. Funk's "Opera Patrum Apostolicorum" first appeared in 1878-81 (Tubingen). The greut and comprehensive posthumous edition of Lightfoot's "Clement of Rome" (which contains a photographic facsimile of the Constantinople MS.) was published in 1890 (2 vols. London). The Greek text and English translation are reprinted by Lightfoot, "The Apostolic Fathers" (1 vol., London, 1891). In 1878 Dom Germain Morin discovered a Latin translation of the genuine Epistle in an eleventh-century MS. in the library of the Seminary of Namur (Anecdota Maredsolana, 2 vols., "S. Clementis ad Corinthios Epistulae versio antiquissima", Maredsous, 1894). The version is attributed to the second century by Harnack and others. It has been employed to correct the text in Funk's latest edition (1901), and by R. Knopf, "Der erste Clemensbrief" (in "Texte und Unters.", New Series, Leipzig, 1899). Besides Lightfoot's excellent English rendering, there is a translation of the two Epistles in "Ante-Nicene Chr. Lit." (Edinburgh, 1873, I). JOHN CHAPMAN Pope Clement II Pope Clement II (Suidger.) Date of birth unknown; enthroned 25 December, 1046; d. 9 October, 1047. In the autumn of 1046 the King of Germany, Henry III, crossed the Alps at the head of a large army and accompanied by a brilliant retinue of the secular and ecclesiastical princes of the empire, for the twofold purpose of receiving the imperial crown and of restoring order in the Italian Peninsula. The condition of Rome in particular was deplorable. In St. Peter's, the Lateran, and St. Mary Major's, sat three rival claimants to the papacy. (See Benedict IX.) Two of them, Benedict IX and Sylvester III, represented rival factions of the Roman nobility. The position of the third, Gregory VI, was peculiar. The reform party, in order to free the city from the intolerable yoke of the House of Tusculum, and the Church from the stigma of Benedict's dissolute life, had stipulated with that stripling that he should resign the tiara upon receipt of a certain amount of money. That this heroic measure for delivering the Holy See from destruction was simoniacal, has been doubted by many; but that it bore the outward aspect of simony and would be considered a flaw in Gregory's title, consequently in the imperial title Henry was seeking, was the opinion of that age. Strong in the consciousness of his good intentions, Gregory met King Henry at Piacenza, and was received with all possible honours. It was decided that he should summon a synod to meet at Sutri near Rome, at which the entire question should be ventilated. The proceedings of the Synod of Sutri, 20 December, are well summarized by Cardinal Newman in his "Essays Critical and Historical" (II, 262 sqq.). Of the three papal claimants, Benedict refused to appear; he was again summoned and afterwards pronounced deposed at Rome. Sylvester was "stripped of his sacerdotal rank and shut up in a monastery". Gregory showed himself to be, if not an idiota, at least a man miræ simplicitatis, by explaining in straightforward speech his compact with Benedict, and he made no other defence than his good intentions, and deposed himself (Watterich, Vitæ Rom. Pont., I, 76); an act by some interpreted as a voluntary resignation, by others (Hefele), in keeping with the contemporary annals, as a deposition by the synod. The Synod of Sutri adjourned to meet again in Rome 23 and 24 December. Benedict, failing to appear, was condemned and deposed in contumaciam, and the papal chair was declared vacant. As King Henry was not yet crowned emperor, he had no canonical right to take part in the new election; but the Romans had no candidate to propose and begged the monarch to suggest a worthy subject. Henry's first choice, the powerful Adalbert, Archbishop of Bremen, positively refused to accept the burden and suggested his friend Suidger, Bishop of Bamberg. In spite of the latter's protests, the king took him by the hand and presented him to the acclaiming clergy and people as their spiritual chief. Suidger's reluctance was finally overcome, though he insisted upon retaining the bishopric of his beloved see. He might be pardoned for fearing that the turbulent Romans would ere long send him back to Bamberg. Moreover, since the king refused to give back to the Roman See its possessions usurped by the nobles and the Normans, the pope was forced to look to his German bishopric for financial support. He was enthroned in St. Peter's on Christmas Day and took the name of Clement II. He was born in Saxony of noble parentage, was first a canon in Halberstadt, then chaplain at the court of King Henry, who on the death of Eberhard, the first Bishop of Bamberg, appointed him to that important see. He was a man of strictest integrity and severe morality. His first pontifical act was to place the imperial crown upon his benefactor and the queen- consort, Agnes of Aquitaine. The new emperor received from the Romans and the pope the title and diadem of a Roman Patricius, a dignity which, since the tenth century, owing to the uncanonical pretensions of the Roman aristocracy, was commonly supposed to give the bearer the right of appointing the pope, or, more exactly speaking, of indicating the person to be chosen (Hefele). Had not God given His Church the inalienable right of freedom and independence, and sent her champions determined to enforce this right, she would now have simply exchanged the tyrrany of Roman factions for the more serious thraldom to a foreign power. The fact that Henry had protected the Roman Church and rescued her from her enemies gave him no just claim to become her lord and master. Short-sighted reformers, even men like St. Peter Damiani (Opusc., VI, 36) who saw in this surrender of the freedom of papal elections to the arbitrary will of the emperor the opening of a new era, lived long enough to regret the mistake that was made. With due recognition of the prominent part taken by the Germans in the reformation of the eleventh century, we cannot forget that neither Henry III nor his bishops understood the importance of absolute independence in the election of the officers of the Church. This lesson was taught them by Hildebrand, the young chaplain of Gregory VI, whom they took to Germany with his master, only to return with St. Leo IX to begin his immortal career. Henry III, the sworn enemy of simony, never took a penny from any of his appointees, but he claimed a right of appointment which virtually made him head of the Church and paved the way for intolerable abuses under his unworthy successors. Clement lost no time in beginning the work of reform. At a great synod in Rome, January, 1047, the buying and selling of things spiritual was punished with excommunication; anyone who should knowingly accept ordination at the hands of a prelate guilty of simony was ordered to do canonical penance for forty days. A dispute for precedence between the Sees of Ravenna, Milan, and Aquileia was settled in favour of Ravenna, the bishop of which was, in the absence of the emperor, to take his station at the pope's right. Clement accompanied the emperor in a triumphal progress through Southern Italy and placed Benevento under an interdict for refusing to open its gates to them. Proceeding with Henry to Germany, he canonized Wiborada, a nun of St. Gall, martyred by the Huns in 925. On his way back to Rome he died bear Pesaro. That he was poisoned by the partisans of Benedict IX is a mere suspicion without proof. He bequeathed his mortal remains to Bamberg, in the great cathedral of which his marble sarcophagus is to be seen at the present day. He is the only pope buried in Germany. Many zealous ecclesiastics, notably the Bishop of Liège, now exerted themselves to reseat in the papal chair Gregory VI, whom, together with his chaplain, Henry held in honourable custody; but the emperor unceremoniously appointed Poppo, Bishop of Brixen, who took the name of Damasus II. (See Gregory VI; Benedict IX.) Baronius, Annales Eccl., ad ann. 1046, 1047; Lafiteau, La vie de Clément II (Padua, 1752); Will, Die Anfänge der Restauration der Kirche im XI. Jahrhundert (Marburg, 1859); Wittmasnn, Clemens II. in Archiv. f. kathol. Kirchenrecht (1884), LI, 238; Von Reumont, Gesch. d. Stadt Rom (Berlin, 1867), II, 339-44; Artaud de Montor, History of the Roman Pontiffs (New York, 1867); Heinemann, Der Patriziat d. deutschen Könige (Halle, 1887); Hefele, Conciliengesch., IV, 7606-14. James F. Loughlin Pope Clement III Pope Clement III (Paolo Scolari). Date of birth unknown; elected 19 December, 1187; d. 27 March, 1191. During the short space (1181-1198) which separated the glorious pontificates of Alexander III and Innocent III, no less than five pontiffs occupied in rapid succession the papal chair. They were all veterans trained in the school of Alexander, and needed only their earlier youthful vigour and length of reign to gain lasting renown in an age of great events. Gregory VIII, after a pontificate of two months, died on 17 December, 1187, at Pisa, whither he had gone to expedite the preparations for the recovery of Jerusalem; he was succeeded two days later by the Cardinal-Bishop of Palestrina, Paolo Scolari, a Roman by birth. The choice was particularly acceptable to the Romans; for he was the first native of their city who was elevated to the papacy since their rebellion in the days of Arnold of Brescia, and his well-known mildness and love of peace turned their thoughts towards a reconciliation, more necessary to them than to the pope. Overtures led to the conclusion of a formal treaty, by which the papal sovereignty and the municipal liberties were equally secured; and in the following February Clement made his entry into the city amid the boundless enthusiasm of a population which never seemed to have learned the art of living either with or without the pope. Seated in the Lateran, Pope Clement turned his attention to the gigantic task of massing the forces of Christendom against the Saracens. He was the organizer of the Third Crusade; and if that imposing expedition produced insignificant results, the blame nowise attaches to him. He dispatched legates to the different courts, who laboured to restore harmony among the belligerent monarchs and princes, and to divert their energy towards the reconquest of the Holy Sepulchre. Fired by the example of the Emperor Barbarossa and of the Kings of France and England, a countless host of Christian warriors took the road which led them to Palestine and death. At the time of Clement's death, just before the capture of Acre, the prospects, notwithstanding the drowning of Barbarossa and the return of Philip Augustus, still seemed bright enough. The death of the pope's chief vassal, William II of Sicily, precipitated another unfortunate quarrel between the Holy See and the Hohenstaufen. Henry VI, the son and successor of Barbarossa, claimed the kingdom by right of his wife Constanza, the only legitimate survivor of the House of Roger. The pope, whose independence was at an end, if the empire and the Two Sicilies were held by the same monarch, as well as the Italians who detested the rule of a foreigner, determined upon resistance, and when the Sicilians proclaimed Tancred of Lecce, a brave but illegitimate scion of the family of Roger, as king, the pope gave him the investiture. Henry advanced into Italy with a strong army to enforce his claim; an opportune death reserved the continuation of the contest to Clement's successor, Celestine III. By a wise moderation Clement succeeded in quieting the disturbances caused by contested elections in the Dioceses of Trier in Germany and St. Andrews in Scotland. He also delivered the Scottish Church from the jurisdiction of the Metropolitan of York and declared it directly subject to the Holy See. Clement canonized Otto of Bamberg, the Apostle of Pomerania (d. 1139), and Stephen of Thiers in Auvergne, founder of the Hermits of Grammont (d. 1124). JAMES F. LOUGHLIN Pope Clement IV Pope Clement IV (Guido Le Gros). Born at Saint-Gilles on the Rhone, 23 November, year unknown; elected at Perugia 5 February, 1265; d. at Viterbo, 29 November, 1268. After the death of Urban IV (2 October, 1264), the cardinals, assembled in conclave at Perugia, discussed for four monthe the momentous question whether the Church should continue the war to the end against the House of Hohenstaufen by calling in Charles of Anjou, the youngest brother of St. Louis of France, or find some other means of securing the independence of the papacy. No other solution offering itself, the only possible course was to unite upon the Cardinal-Bishop of Sabina, by birth a Frenchman and a subject of Charles. Guido Le Gros was of noble extraction. When his mother died, his father, the knight Foulquois, entered a Carthusian monastery where he ended a saintly life. Guido married, and for a short time wielded the spear and the sword. Then devoting himself to the study of law under the able direction of the famous Durandus, he gained a national reputation as an advocate. St. Louis, who entertained a great respect and affection for him, took him into his cabinet and made him one of his trusted councillors. His wife died, leaving him two daughters, whereupon he imitated his father to the extent that he gave up worldly concerns and took Holy orders. His rise in the Church was rapid; 1256, he was Bishop of Puy; 1259, Archbishop of Narbonne; December, 1261, Cardinal-Bishop of Sabina. He was the first cardinal created by Urban IV (Babel, Hierarchia Catholica, 7). He was in France, returning from an important legation to England, when he received an urgent message from the cardinals demanding his immediate presence in Perugia. Not until he entered the conclave, was he informed that the unanimous vote of the Sacred College had confided into his hands the destinies of the Catholic Church. He was astonished; for only a man of his large experience could fully realize the responsibility of him whose judgment, at this critical juncture, must irrevocably shape the course of Italian and ecclesiastical history for centuries to come. His prayers and tears failing to move the cardinals, he reluctantly accepted the heavy burden, was crowned at Viterbo, 22 February, and, to honour the saint of his birthday, assumed the name of Clement IV. His contemporaries are unanimous and enthusiastic in extolling his exemplary piety and rigorously ascetic life. He had a remarkable aversion to nepotism. His first act was to forbid any of his relatives to come to the Curia, or to attempt to derive any sort of temporal advantage from his elevation. Suitors for the hands of his daughters were admonished that their prospective brides were "children not of the pope, but of Guido Grossus", and that their dowers should be extremely modest. The two ladies preferred the seclusion of the convent. The Neapolitan question occupied, almost exclusively, the thoughts of Clement IV during his short pontificate of 3 years, 9 months, and 25 days, which, however, witnessed the two decisive battles of Benevento and Tagliacozzo (1268), and the execution of Conradin. The negotiations with Charles of Anjou had progressed so far under the reign of Urban IV that it is difficult to see how the pope could now well draw back, even were he so inclined. But Clement had no intention of doing so. The power of Manfred and the insecurity of the Holy See were increasing daily. Clement had already, as cardinal, taken an active part in the negotiations with Charles and now exerted himself to the utmost in order to supply the ambitious but needy adventurer with troops and money. Papal legates and mendicant friars appeared upon the scene, preaching a formal crusade, with the amplest indulgences and most lavish promises. Soldiers were obtained in abundance among the warlike chivalry of France; the great difficulty was to find money with which to equip and maintain the army. The clergy and people failed to detect a crusade in what they deemed a personal quarrel of the pope, a "war hard by the Lateran, and not with Saracens nor with Jews" (Dante, Inf., canto xxvii); though, in reality, Saracens, implanted in Italy by Frederick II, made up the main strength of Manfred's army. Although reduced at times to utter destitution, and forced to pledge everything of value and to borrow at exorbitant rates, the pope did not despair; the expedition arrived, and from the military point of view achieved a brilliant success. Charles, preceding his army, came to Rome by sea, and upon the conclusion of a treaty, by which the liberties of the Church and the overlordship of the Holy See seemed to be most firmly secured, he received the investiture of his new kingdom. On 6 January, 1266, he was solemnly crowned in St. Peter's; not, as he had wished, by the pope, who took up his residence in Viterbo and never saw Rome, but by cardinals designated for the purpose. On 22 February was fought the battle of Benevento, in which Charles was completely victorious; Manfred was found among the slain. Naples opened her gates and the Angevin dynasty was established. Though a good general, Charles had many weaknesses of character that made him a very different ruler from his saintly brother. He was harsh, cruel, grasping, and tyrannical. Clement was kept busy reminding him of the terms of his treaty, reproving his excesses and those of his officials, and warning him that he was gaining the enmity of his subjects. Nevertheless, when a little later, young Conradin, disregarding papal censure and anathemas, advanced to the conquest of what he deemed his birthright, Clement remained faithful to Charles and prophesied that the gallant youth, received by the Ghibelline party everywhere, even in Rome, with unbounded enthusiasm, "was being led like a lamb to the slaughter", and that "his glory would vanish like smoke", a prophecy only too literally fulfilled when, after the fatal day of Tagliacozzo (23 August, 1268), Conradin fell into Charles' merciless hands and was beheaded (29 October) on the marketplace of Naples. The fable that Pope Clement advised the execution of the unfortunate prince by saying "The death or life of Conradin means the life or death of Charles", is of a later date, and opposed to the truth. Even the statement of Gregorovius that Clement became an accomplice by refusing to intercede for Conradin, is equally groundless; for it has been shown conclusively, not only that he pleaded for his life and besought St. Louis to add the weight of his influence with his brother, but, moreover, that he sternly reproved Charles for his cruel deed when it was perpetrated. Clement followed "the last of the Hohenstaufen" to the grave just one month later, leaving the papacy in a much better condition than when he received the keys of St. Peter. He was buried in the church of the Dominicans at Viterbo. Owing to divergent views among the cardinals, the papal throne remained vacant for nearly three years. In 1268, Clement canonized St. Hedwig of Poland (d. 1243). Jordan, Le registres de Clément IV (Paris, 1893, sqq.); Life and Letters in Mansi, XIV, 325; Heidemann, Papst Klemens IV. (Münster, 1903, pt. 1); Hefele, Concilieng. VI, 1-265; HergenrÖther - Kirsch, Kirchengesch., 4th ed. (Freiburg, 1904), II, 566; Priest, Hist. de la Conquéte de Naples par Charles d'Anjou (Paris, 1841); Brayda, La risponsabilitá di Clemente IV e di Carlo X d'Anjou nella morte di Corradino di Soevia (Naples, 1900). James F. Loughlin Pope Clement V Pope Clement V (Bertrand de Got.) Born at Villandraut in Gascony, France, 1264; died at Roquemaure, 20 April, 1314. He was elected, 5 June, 1305, at Perugia as successor to Benedict XI, after a conclave of eleven months, the great length of which was owing to the French and Italian factions among the cardinals. Ten of the fifteen (mostly Italian) cardinals voting elected him. Giovanni Villani's story (Hist. Florent., VIII, 80, in Muratori, SS. RR. Ital., XIII, 417; cf. Raynald, Ann. Eccl., 1305, 2-4) of a decisive influence of Philip the Fair, and the new pope's secret conference with and abject concessions to that king in the forest of Saint-Jean-d'Angély, is quite unhistorical; on the other hand, the cardinals were willing to please the powerful French king whom the late Benedict XI had been obliged to placate by notable concessions, and it is not improbable that some kind of a mutual understanding was reached by the king and the future pope. As Archbishop of Bordeaux, Bertrand de Got was actually a subject of the King of England, but from early youth he had been a personal friend of Philip the Fair. Nevertheless, he had remained faithful to Boniface VIII. The new pope came from a distinguished family. An elder brother had been Archbishop of Lyons, and died (1297) as Cardinal-Bishop of Albano and papal legate in France. Bertrand studied the arts at Toulouse and canon and civil law at Orléans and Bologna. He had been successively canon at Bordeaux, vicar-general of the Archbishop of Lyons (his aforesaid brother), papal chaplain, Bishop of Comminges under Boniface VIII, and eventually Archbishop of Bordeaux, then a difficult office because of the persistent conflict between England and France for the possession of Normandy. The cardinals besought him to come to Perugia and go thence to Rome for his coronation, but he ordered them to repair to Lyons, where he was crowned (14 November, 1305) in presence of Philip the Fair and with great pomp. During the usual public procession the pope was thrown from his horse by a falling wall; one of his brothers was killed on that occasion, also the aged Cardinal Matteo Orsini who had taken part in twelve conclaves and seen thirteen popes. The most precious jewel in the papal tiara (a carbuncle) was lost that day, an incident prophetically interpreted by German and Italian historians, and the next day another brother was slain in a quarrel between servants of the new pope and retainers of the cardinals. For some time (1305- 1309), Pope Clement resided at different places in France (Bordeaux, Poitiers, Toulouse), but finally took up his residence at Avignon, then a fief of Naples, though within the County of Venaissin that since 1228 acknowledged the pope as overlord (in 1348 Clement VI purchased Avignon for 80,000 gold gulden from Joanna of Naples). Strong affection for his native France and an equally influential fear of the quasi-anarchical conditions of Italy, and in particular of the States of the Church and the city of Rome, led him to this fateful decision, whereby he exposed himself to the domination of a civil ruler (Philip the Fair), whose immediate aims were a universal French monarchy and a solemn humiliation of Pope Boniface VIII in return for the latter's courageous resistance to Philip's cunning, violence, and usurpations (Hergenröther). STATES OF THE CHURCH The government of the States of the Church was committed by Clement to a commission of three cardinals, while at Spoleto his own brother, Arnaud Garsias de Got, held the office of papal vicar. Giacomo degli Stefaneschi, a senator and popular chief, governed within the city in a loose and personal way. Confusion and anarchy were prevalent, owing to the implacable mutual hatred of the Colonna and Orsini, the traditional turbulence of the Romans, and the frequent angry conflicts between the people and the nobles, conditions which had been growing worse all through the thirteenth century and had eventually driven even the Italian popes to such outside strongholds as Viterbo, Anagni, Orvieto, and Perugia. No more graphic illustration of the local conditions at Rome and in the Patrimony of Peter could be asked than the description of Nicholas of Butrinto, the historiographer of Emperor Henry VII, on his fateful Roman expedition of 1312 [see Von Raumont, Geschichte der Stadt Rom, Berlin, 1867, II (1), 745-65]. Among the untoward Roman events of Pope Clement's reign was the conflagration 6 May, 1308, that destroyed the church of St. John Lateran, soon rebuilt, however, by the Romans with the aid of the pope. Clement did not hesitate to try the conclusions of war with the Italian state of Venice that had unjustly seized on Ferrara, a fief of the Patrimony of Peter. When excommunication, interdict, and a general prohibition of all commercial intercourse failed, he outlawed the Venetians, and caused a crusade to be preached against them; finally his legate, Cardinal Pélagrue, overthrew in a terrific battle the haughty aggressors (28 August, 1309). The papal vicariate of Ferrara was then conferred on Robert of Naples, whose Catalonian mercenaries, however, were more odious to the people than the Venetian usurpers. In any case, the smaller powers of Italy had learned that they could not yet strip with impunity the inheritance of the Apostolic See, and an example was furnished which the greatest soldier of the papacy, Gil d'Albornoz (q.v.), would better before the century was over. PROCESS OF BONIFACE VIII Almost at once King Philip demanded from the new pope a formal condemnation of the memory of Boniface VIII; only thus could the royal hate be placated. The king wished the name of Boniface stricken from the list of popes as a heretic, his bones disinterred, burned, and the ashes scattered to the winds. This odious and disgraceful step Clement sought to avert, partly by delay, partly by new favours to the king; he renewed the absolution granted the king by Benedict XI, created nine French cardinals out of a group of ten, restored to the Colonna cardinals their places in the Sacred College, and accorded the king titles of church property for five years. Finally, he withdrew the Bull "Clericis Laicos", though not the earlier legislation on which it was based, and declared that the doctrinal Bull "Unam Sanctam" affected in no disadvantageous manner the meritorious French king, and implied for him and his kingdom no greater degree of subjection to the papal see than formerly existed. The pope was also helpful to Charles of Valois, the king's brother, and pretender to the imperial throne of Constantinople, by granting him a two years' tithe of church revenues; Clement hoped that a crusade operating from a reconquered Constantinople would be successful. In May, 1307, at Poitiers, where peace was made between England and France, Philip again insisted on a canonical process for condemnation of the memory of Boniface VIII, as a heretic, a blasphemer, an immoral priest, etc. Eventually, the pope made answer that so grave a matter could not be settled outside of a general council, and the king for a while seemed satisfied with this solution. Nevertheless, he returned frequently and urgently to his proposition. It was in vain that the pope exhibited a willingness to sacrifice the Templars (see below); the merciless king, sure of his power, pressed for the opening of this unique trial, unheard of since the time of Pope Formosus. Clement had to yield, and designated 2 February, 1309, as the date, and Avignon as the place for the trial of his dead predecessor on the shameful charges so long colported about Europe by the Colonna cardinals and their faction. In the document (citation) that called (13 September, 1309) for the witnesses, Clement expressed his personal conviction of the innocence of Boniface, at the same time his resolution to satisfy the king. Though the pope had soon (2 February, 1310) to protest against a false interpretation of his own words, the process was really begun in a consistory of 16 March, 1310, at Avignon. Much delay followed, on one side and the other, apropos chiefly of methods of procedure. Early in 1311, witnesses were examined outside of Avignon, in France, and in Italy, but by French commissaries and mostly on the above-mentioned charges of the Colonna (see BONIFACE VIII). Finally, in February, 1311, the king wrote to Clement abandoning the process to the future council (of Vienne) or to the pope's own action, and promising to cause the withdrawal of the charges; at the same time he protested that his intentions had been pure. One price of these welcome concessions was a formal declaration by Pope Clement (27 April, 1311) of the king's innocence and that of his friends; these representatives of France, the "Israel of the New Alliance", had acted, said the pope, in good faith and with a pure zeal, nor should they fear in the future any canonical detriment from the events of Anagni. William Nogaret was excepted, but on his protestation of innocence, and at the intercession of Philip, a penance was imposed on him and he too received absolution. Only those who detained ecclesiastical property were finally excluded from pardon. The religious zeal of Philip was again acknowledged; all papal acts detrimental to him and his kingdom since November, 1302, were rescinded; the erasures are yet visible in the "Regesta" of Boniface VIII, in the Vatican Archives (see Tosti, "Storia di Bonifazio VIII", Rome, 1886, II, 343-44). This painful situation was closed for Clement V by the Council of Vienne (16 October, 1311), most of whose members were personally favourable to Boniface. It is not certain that the council took up formally the question of the guilt or innocence of Boniface. In their present shape the official Acts of the council are silent, nor do all contemporary writers mention it as a fact. It is true that Giovanni Villani describes Philip and his counsellors as urgent for the condemnation of Boniface by the council, but, he says, the memory of the pope was formally purged from all adverse charges by three cardinals and several jurists; moreover, three Catalonian knights offered to defend with their swords the good name of the Gaetani pope against all comers, whereupon the king yielded, and demanded only that he be declared guiltless of any responsibility for the turn affairs had taken. With the death of his personal enemies, opposition to Boniface diminished, and his legitimacy was no longer denied even in France (Balan, "Il processo di Bonifazio VIII", Rome, 1881). CLEMENT V AND THE TEMPLARS Since the final expulsion (1291) of the crusading forces from the Holy Land, the ecclesiastico-military orders in Europe had aroused much adverse criticism, partly because to their jealousies (Templars, Hospitallers or Knights of St. John, Teutonic Order) was attributed the humiliating defeat, partly because of the vast wealth they had acquired in their short existence. The Templars (so-called from the Temple of Jerusalem, pauperes commilitones Christi Templique Solomonici, i.e. poor fellow-soldiers of Christ and of the Temple of Solomon) were the richest. Their fortress-like monasteries, known as Temples, arose in every European land, and by the end of the thirteenth century sheltered the chief banking- system of Europe; the knights were trusted by popes and kings and by persons of wealth because of their uprightness, the good management of their affairs, and their solid credit based on the countless estates of the order and its widespread financial relations. Already before the accession of Pope Clement, their status was growing perilous; apart from the envy aroused by their riches, accusations of pride, exclusiveness, usurpation of episcopal rights, etc. were raised against them. They had resisted several attempts to unite their order with the Hospitallers, and while it is no longer easy to fix the degree of their popularity with the common people, it is certain that in many quarters of Europe they had aroused the cupidity of princes and the jealousy of many higher ecclesiastics, especially in France; without the co-operation of the latter they could never have fallen in so tragic a manner. Their story is told in full in the article Templars; hence, to avoid repetition, it will suffice to mention here the principal facts. In the first year of the pontificate of Clement V the French king began to demand from the pope the suppression of this ecclesiastical order and to set afoot a campaign of violence and calumny such as had so far succeeded in the case of Boniface VIII. If the pope, as was naturally to be feared, refused finally to yield in the matter of the process against his predecessor's memory, he would surely be glad to buy relief with the sacrifice of the Templars. Owing to the weakness and irresolution of Pope Clement, the royal plan succeeded. After an unsuccessful attempt of the pope (in August, 1307) to unite the Templars and the Hospitallers, he yielded to the demands of King Philip and ordered an investigation of the order, against which the king brought charges of heresy (renunciation of Christ, immorality, idolatry, contempt of the Mass, denial of the sacraments, etc.). Philip, however, did not wait for the ordinary operation of the Inquisition, but, with the aid of his confessor, Guillaume de Paris (the inquisitor of France), and his clever, unscrupulous jurists (Nogaret, de Plaisians, Enguerrand de Marigny) struck suddenly at the whole order, 12 October, 1307, by the arrest at Paris of Jacques de Molay, the Grand Commander, and one hundred and forty knights, followed by the inquisitor's mandate to arrest all other members throughout France, and by royal sequestration of the property of the order. Public opinion was cunningly and successfully forestalled by the aforesaid jurists. It was also falsely made to appear that the pope approved, or was consentingly aware, of the royal action, while the co-operation of French inquisitors and bishops put the seal of ecclesiastical approval on an act that was certainly so far one of gross injustice. While Philip invited the other princes of Europe to follow his example, Clement V protested (27 October) against the royal usurpation of the papal authority, demanded the transfer to his own custody of the prisoners and their property, and suspended the inquisitional authority of the king's ecclesiastic and the French bishops. Philip made an apparent submission, but in the meantime Clement had issued another Bull (22 November) commanding an investigation of the anti-Templar charges in all European countries. (It may be said at once that the results were generally favourable to the order; nowhere, given the lack of torture, were confessions obtrained like those secured in France.) The feeble efforts of Clement to obtain for the order strict canonical justice (he was himself an excellent canonist) were counteracted by the new Bull that dignified and seemed to confirm the charges of the French king, neither then nor later supported by any material evidence or documents outside of his own suborned witnesses and the confessions of the prisoners, obtained by torture or by other dubious methods of their jailers, none of whom dared resist the well-known will of Philip. The alleged secret Rule of the Templars, authorizing the aforesaid charges, was never produced. In the meantime William Nogaret had been busy defaming Pope Clement, threatening him with charges not unlike those pending against Boniface VIII, and working up successfully an anti- Templar public opinion against the next meeting (May, 1308) of the States-General. In July of that year it was agreed between the pope and the king that the guilt or innocence of the order itself should be separated from that of its individual (French) members. The former was reserved to a general council, soon to be convoked at Vienne in Southern France, and to prepare evidence for which, apart from the examinations now going on through Europe, and a hearing before the pope of seventy-two members of the order brought from the prisons of Philip (all of whom confessed themselves guilty of heresy and prayed for absolution), there were appointed various special commissions, the most important of which began its sessions at Paris in August, 1309. Its members, acting in the name and with the authority of the pope, were opposed to the use of torture, hence before them hundreds of knights maintained freely the innocence of the order, while many of those who had formerly yielded to the diocesan inquisitors now retracted their avowals as contrary to truth. When Nogaret and de Plaisians saw the probable outcome of the hearings before the papal commissions, they precipitated matters, caused the Archbishop of Sens (brother of Enguerrand de Marigny) to call a provincial council (Sens was then metropolitan of Paris and seat of the local inquisition tribunal), at which were condemned, as relapsed heretics, fifty-four knights who had recently withdrawn before the papal commissioners their former confessions on the plea that they had been given under torture and were quite false. That same day (12 May, 1310), all these knights were publicly burned at Paris outside the Porte StAntoine. To the end all protested their innocence. There could no longer be any question of liberty of defence; the papal commission at Paris suspended tits sessions for six months, and when it met again found before it only knights who had confessed the crimes they were charged with and had been reconciled by the local inquisitors. The fate of the Templars was finally sealed at the Council of Vienne (opened 16 October, 1311). The majority of its three hundred members were opposed to the abolition of the order, believing the alleged crimes unproven, but the king was urgent, appeared in person at the council, and finally obtained from Clement V the practical execution of his will. At the second session of the council, in presence of the king and his three sons, was read the Bull "Vox in excelsis", dated 22 March, 1312, in which the pope said that though he had no sufficient reasons for a formal condemnation of the order, nevertheless, because of the common weal, the hatred borne them by the King of France, the scandalous nature of their trial, and the probable dilapidation of the order's property in every Christian land, he suppressed it by virtue of his sovereign power, and not by any definitive sentence. By another Bull of 2 May he vested in the Hospitallers the title to the property of the suppressed order. In one way or another, however, Philip managed to become the chief legatee of its great wealth in France. As to the Templars themselves, those who continued to maintain their confessions were set free; those who withdrew them were considered relapsed heretics and were dealt with as such by the tribunals of the Inquisition. It was only in 1314 that the Grand Master, Jacques de Molay and Geoffroy de Charnay, Grand Preceptor of Normandy, reserved to the judgment of the pope, were condemned to perpetual imprisonment. Thereupon they proclaimed the falsity of their confessions, and accused themselves of cowardice in betraying their order to save their lives. They were at once declared relapsed heretics, turned over to the secular arm by the ecclesiastical authority, and were burned that same day (18 March, 1314). Of Pope Clement it may be said that the few measures of equity that appear in the course of this great crime were owing to him; unfortunately his sense of justice and his respect for the law were counterbalanced by a weak and vacillating character, to which perhaps his feeble and uncertain health contributed. Some think he was convinced of the Templars' guilt, especially after so many of the chief members had admitted it to himself; they explain thus his recommendation of the use of torture, also his toleration of the king's suppression of all proper liberty of defence on the part of the accused. Others believe that he feared for himself the fate of Boniface VIII, whose cruel enemy, William Nogaret, still lived, attorney-general of Philip, skilled in legal violence, and emboldened by a long career of successful infamy. His strongest motive was, in all probability, anxiety to save the memory of Boniface VIII from the injustice of a formal condemnation which the malice of Nogaret and the cold vindictiveness of Philip would have insisted on, had not the rich prey of the Temple been thrown to them; to stand for both with Apostolic courage might have meant intolerable consequences, not only personal indignities, but in the end the graver evil of schism under conditions peculiarly unfavourable for the papacy. (See Philip the Fair; Vienne, Council of; Templars.) CLEMENT V AND EMPEROR HENRY VII In pursuance of the vast ambitions of the French monarchy (Pierre Dubois, "De recuperatione terræ sanctæ", ed. Langlois, Paris, 1891), King Philip was anxious to see his brother Charles of Valois chosen King of Germany in succession tot he murdered Adolph of Nassau, of course with a view of obtaining later the imperial crown. Pope Clement was apparently active in favour of Philip's plan; at the same time he made it known to the ecclesiastical electors that the selection of Count Henry of Lützelburg, brother of the Archbishop of Trier, would be pleasing to him. The pope was well aware that further extension of French authority could only reduce still more his own small measure of independence. Though elected, 6 January, 1309, as Henry VII, and soon assured of the papal agreement to his imperial consecration, it was only in 1312 that the new king reached Rome and was consecrated emperor in the church of St. John Lateran by cardinals specially delegated by the pope. Circumstances forced Henry VII to side with the Italian Ghibellines, with the result that in Rome itself he found a powerful Guelph party in possession of St. Peter's and the greater part of the city, actively supported also by King Robert of Naples. The new emperor, after the humiliating failure of his Italian expedition, undertook to compel the Angevin king to recognize the imperial authority, but was crossed by the papal action in defence of King Robert as a vassal of the Roman Church, overlord of the Two Sicilies. On the eve of a new Italian campaign in support of the imperial honour and rights Henry VII died suddenly near Siena, 24 August, 1313. He was the last hope of Dante and his fellow-Ghibellines, for whom at this time the great poet drew up in the "De Monarchiâ" his ideal of good government in Italy through the restoration of the earlier strong empire of German rulers, in whom he saw the ideal overlords of the European world, and even of the pope as a temporal prince. CLEMENT V AND ENGLAND Ambassadors of Edward I assisted at the coronation of Clement V. At the request of King Edward, the pope freed him from the obligation of keeping the promises added to the Charter in 1297 and 1300, though the king afterwards took little or no advantage of the papal absolution. Moreover, to satisfy the king, he suspended and called to the papal court (1305) the Archbishop of Canterbury, Robert of Winchelsea, who had previously suffered much for adhering to the side of Boniface VIII, and whom Edward I was now pursuing with unproved charges of treason. (See Clericis Laicos.) It was only in 1307, after the accession of Edward II, that this great churchman, at the royal request, was permitted by Clement to return from Bordeaux to his See of Canterbury, whose ancient right to crown the kings of England he successfully maintained. Clement excommunicated (1306) Robert Bruce of Scotland for his share in the murder of the Red Comyn, and he deprived of their sees Bishops Lambarton and Wishart for their part in the subsequent national rising of the Scots. The Lords and Commons at the Parliament of Carlisle (1307) exhibited a strong anti- papal temper, apropos, among other complaints, of the granting of rich English benefices to foreigners, and though no positive action followed, the later Statutes of Provisors and Præmunire look back to this event as indicative of English temper. (See Gasquet, "The Eve of the Reformation", essay on "Mixed Jurisdiction", and for other items of English interest the "Regestra" of Clement V, and Bliss, "Calendar of Ecclesiastical Documents relating to England", London, 1893 sqq., Rolls series.) CLEMENT V AND THE CANON LAW He completed the medieval "Corpus Juris Canonici" by the publication of a collection of papal decretals known as "Clementineæ", or "Liber Clementinarum", sometimes "Liber Septimus" in reference tothe "Liber Sextus" of Boniface VIII. It contains decretals of the latter pope, of Benedict XI, and of Clement himself. Together with the decrees of the Council of Vienne it was promulgated (21 March, 1314) at the papal residence of Monteaux near Carpentras. It follows the method of the "Decretals" of Gregory IX and the "Liber Sextus" of Boniface VIII, i.e. five books with subdivision into titles and chapters. As the pope died (20 April) before this collection had been generally published, its authenticy was doubted by some, wherefore John XXII promulgated it anew, 25 October, 1317, and sent it to the University of Bologna as a genuine collection of papal decretals to be used in the courts and the schools. (Laurin, "Introd. in corpus juris canonici", Freiburg, 1889; cf. Ehrle, "Archiv f. Litteratur und Kirchengesch.", IV, 36 sqq.) Clement's official correspondence is found in the nine folio volumes of the Regesta Clementis V (Benedictine ed., Rome, 1885-92); Baluze, Vita paparum Avenionensium (Paris, 1693), I; Raynauld, Ann Eccl., ad ann. 1303-13; Hefele, Conciliengesch. (2d ed.), VI, 393 sqq.; Ehrle, Archiv f. Litt. u. Kirchengesch. (1867-89); Christophe, Hist. de la papaauté pendant le quatorziéme siécle (Paris, 1853), I; Souchon, Papstwahlen von Bonifaz VIII. bis Urban VI. (1888); Rabanis, Clément V et Philippe le Bel (Paris, 1858); Boutaric, La France sous Philippe le Bel (Paris, 1861); Renan, Etudes sur la politique de Philippe le Bel (Paris, 1899); Wenck, Clement V. und Heinrich VII. (1882); Lacoste, Nouvelles études sur Clément V (Paris, 1896); Berchon, Hist. du Pape Clément V (Paris, 1896); Berchon, Hisat. du Pape Clément V (Bordeaux, 1898), and the exhaustive bibliography in Chevalier, Bio-Bibl. For the literature of the Templars, see Templars . It will suffice to mention here: Lavocat, Le procés des frères de l'ordre du Temple (Paris, 1888); SchottmÜller, Der Untergang des TemplerOrdens (1893); Ch. Langlois, Histoire de France, ed. Lavisse (Paris, 1901), III (ii), 174-200; Lea, History of the Inquisition (New York, 1887), III, 238-334; Delaville Le Roulx, La suppression des Templiers in Revue des questions historiques (1890), XLVII, 29; and Grange, The Fall of the Knights of The Temple in Dublin Review (1895), 329-46. Thomas J. Shahan Pope Clement VI Pope Clement VI (Pierre Roger) Born 1291 in the castle of Maumont, departmentof Corrèze, France, elected pope, 7 May, 1342, at Avignon, where he died 6 December, 1352. At the age of ten he entered the Benedictine monastery of La Chaise-Dieu (Haute- Loire), where he made his religious profession. After devoting some time to study at Paris, he graduated as doctor and became professor in that city. Subsequent to his introduction to Pope John XXII by Cardinal Pierre Grouin de Mortemart, he rapidly rose from one ecclesiastical dignity to another. At first prior of Saint-Baudile at Nimes, then Abbot of Fécamp in Normandy, he became Bishop of Arras and Chancellor of France in 1328, was promoted to the Archbishopric of Sens in 1329, and to that of Rouen the following year. In the latter city a provincial council, which promulgated several disciplinary decrees, was held under his presidency in 1335. He was created cardinal (1338) by Benedict XII, whom he succeeded as pontiff. One of the characteristic traits of his policy as head of the Universal Church was his excessive devotion to the interests of France and those of his relatives. His French sympathies impeded his efforts to restore and maintain peace between England and France, although his mediation led to the conclusion of a short general truce (Malestroit, 1343). Most of the twenty-five cardinals whom he crreated were French, and twelve of them were related to him. The King of France was given permission (1344) to Communicate under both kinds. Clement accepted the senatorial dignity offered him as "Knight Roger" by a Roman delegation, which numbered Petrarch as one of its members. He also granted their request for the celebration of a jubilee every fifty, instead of every hundred, years (Bull "Unigenitus", 1343), but declined their invitation to return to Rome. Greater permanency seemed to be assured to the papal residence abroad by his purchase of the sovereignty of Avignon for 80,000 florins from Joanna of Naples and Provence (9 June, 1348). About the same time he also declared this princess innocent of complicity in the murder of her husband. The pope's success in Roman affairs is evidenced by his confirmation of the ephemeral but then unavoidable rule of Cola di Mienzi (20 May to 15 Dec., 1347). His later condemnation of this arrogant tribune was largely instrumental in bringing about his fall from power. Shortly after these events the jubilee year of 1350 brought an extraordinarily large number of pilgrims to the Eternal City. In his attempt to strengthen the Guelph party in Italy the pope met with failure, and was constrained to cede the city of Bologna to the Archbishop of Milan for a period of twelve years. Clement took up with ardour the long-standing conflict between the Emperor Louis the Bavarian and the papacy. The former had offended the religious feelings of many of his adherents by arbitrarily annulling the marriage of Marguerite Maultasch, heiress of Tyrol, and John Henry, Prince of Bohemia. The popular discontent was still further intensified when the emperor authorized his own son to marry the same princess. Louis consequently was ready to make the greatest concessions to the pope. In a writing of September, 1343, he acknowledged his unlawful assumption of the imperial title, declared his willingness to annul all his imperial acts and to submit to any papal penalty, but at the same time wished to be recognized as King of the Romans. Clement demanded as further conditions that no law should be enacted in the empire without papal sanction, that the binding force of Louis's promulgated royal decrees should be suspended until confirmation by the Holy See, that he should depose all bishops and abbots named by himself, and waive all claim to the sovereignty of the Papal States, Sicily, Sardinia, and Corsica. Louis submitted the pope's demands to the consideration of the German princes, at a time when anti-papal feeling ran very high in Germany, as a result of the separation of the Archbishopric of Prague from the ecclesiastical province of Mainz (30 April, 1344). The princes declared them unacceptable, but also spoke of the necessity of electing a new king in place of Louis, whose rule had been so disastrous to the empire. The pope on 7 April, 1346, deposed Henry of Virneburg, Archbishop of Mainz and an ardent partisan of the reigning emperor, and named the twenty-year-old Gerlach of Nassau to the see. On 13 April of the same year he launched a severe Bull against the emperor, in which he requested the electors to give him a successor. Charles of Luxemburg, the pope's candidate and former pupil, was elected King of Germany (11 July, 1346), by his father, John of Bohemia, by Rudolf of Saxony, and the three ecclesiastical electors. Charles IV (1346- 78) substantially accepted the papal demands, but his authority was not immediately recognized throughout Germany. The country was on the verge of civil war, when Louis the Bavarian suddenly died while engaged in a boar-hunt near Munich (11 October, 1347). The opposition of Günther of Schwartzenburg (d. 14 June, 1349) to Charles was but of short duration. Left without a protector, through the death of Louis, William of Occam and the schismatical Friars Minor now made their submission to the pope. About 1344 Clement VI granted the sovereignty of the Canary Islands to the Castilian Prince Louis de la Cerda, on condition that no other Christian ruler had acquired any right to their possession. The new sovereign, who was accorded the title of Prince of Fortunia, agreed to introduce Christianity into the islands and to pay tribute to the Holy See. He could not, however, take effective possession of the territory, which was not permanently converted at this time, even though a special bishop (the Carmelite Bernard) was named for the islands in 1351. the pope's attempts to reunite the Greeks and Armenians with the Roman Church led to no definite results. The East desired not so much a return to doctrinal unity as assistance against the Turks. A crusade against the latter, which was undertaken in 1344, ended in a barren truce. More of a temporal prince than an ecclesiastical ruler, Clement was munificent to profusion, a patron of arts and letters, a lover of good cheer, well-appointed banquets and brilliant receptions, to which ladies were freely admitted. The heavy expenses necessitated by such pomp soon exhausted the funds which the economy of Benedict XII had provided for his successor. To open up new sources of revenue, in the absence of the ordinary income from the States of the Church, fresh taxes were imposed and an ever-increasing number of appointments to bishoprics and benefices was reserved to the pope. Such arbitrary proceedings led to resistance in several countries. In 1343 the agents of two cardinals, whom Clement had appointed to offices in England, were driven from that country. Edward III vehemently complained of the exactions of the Avignon Court, and in 1351 was passed the Statute of Provisors, according to which the king reserved the right of presentation in all cases of papal appointments to benefices. The memory of this pope is clouded by his open French partisanship and by the gross nepotism of his reign. Clement VI was nevertheless a protector of the oppressed and a helper of the needy. His courage and charity strikingly appeared at the time of the Great Pestilence, or Black Death, at Avignon (1348-49). While in many places, numerous Jews were massacred by the populace as being the cause of the pestilence, Clement issued Bulls for their protection and afforded them a refuge in his little State. He canonized St. Ivo of Tréguier, Brittany (d. 1303), the advocate of orphans (June, 1347), condemned the Flagellants, and in 1351 courageously defended the Mendicant friars against the accusations of some secular prelates. Several sermons have been preserved of this admittedly learned pope and eloquent speaker. He died after a short illness, and, according to his desire, was interred at La Chaise-Dieu. In 1562 his grave was desecrated and his remains burned by some Huguenots. Baluze, Vitæ Paparum Avenion. (Paris, 1693), I, 243- 322, 829-925; Christopher, Hist. de la papauté pendant le XIV ^e siècle (Paris, 1853); HÖfler, Die avignonensichen Päpste (Vienna, 1871); MÜntz, L'argent et le luze à la cour pontif. in Rev. des quest. hist. (Paris, 1879), v, 378; Werunsky, Excerpta ex registris Clementis VI et Innocentii VI (Innsbruck, 1885); Idem, Gesch. Karls IV. (Innsbruck, 1889-92); Desprez, Lettres closes patentes et curiales des papes d'Avignon se rapportant à la France, Clément VI (Paris, 1901); BÖhmer, Fontes rerum germanicarum (Stuttgart, 1843, 1868), I, IV; Klicman, Monumenta Vaticana res gestas Bohemicas illustrantia, I, Acta Clementis VI; Gay, Le Pape Clément VI et les affaires d'Orient (Paris, 1904); Kirsch, Die Verwaltung der Annaten unter Klemens VI, in Römische Quartalschrift (1902), 125-51; Hefele- KnÖpfler, Conciliengesch. (Freiburg, 1890), VI, 663-75, passim; Pastor, Gesch. der Päpste (Freiburg, 1901), I, 89-95, passim, tr. Antrobus (London, 1891), I, 85-92; Creighton, Hist. of the Papacy (London, 1892), I, 44-48; BerliÈre, Suppliques de Clèment VI (Paris, 1906), Chevalier, Bio-Bibl. (Paris, 1905), I, 954-55; HergenrÖther- Kirsch, Kirchengesch. (4th ed., 1904), II, 735-37. N.A. Weber Pope Clement VII Pope Clement VII (Giulio de’ Medici). Born 1478; died 25 September, 1534. Giulio de' Medici was born a few months after the death of his father, Giuliano, who was slain at Florence in the disturbances which followed the Pazzi conspiracy. Although his parents had not been properly married, they had, it was alleged, been betrothed per sponsalia de presenti, and Giulio, in virtue of a well-known principle of canon law, was subsequently declared legitimate. The youth was educated by his uncle, Lorenzo the Magnificent. He was made a Knight of Rhodes and Grand Prior of Capua, and, upon the election of his cousin Giovanni de' Medici to the papacy as Leo X, he at once became a person of great consequence. On 28 September, 1513, he was made cardinal, and he had the credit of being the prime mover of the papal policy during the whole of Leo's pontificate. He was one of the most favoured candidates in the protracted conclave which resulted in the election of Adrian VI; neither did the Cardinal de' Medici, in spite of his close connection with the luxurious regime of Leo X, altogether lose influence under his austere successor. Giulio, in the words of a modern historian, was "learned, clever, respectable and industrious, though he had little enterprise and less decision" (Armstrong, Charles V., I, 166). After Adrian's death (14 September, 1523) the Cardinal de' Medici was eventually chosen pope, 18 November, 1523, and his election was hailed at Rome with enthusiastic rejoicing. But the temper of the Roman people was only one element in the complex problem which Clement VII had to face. The whole political and religious situation was one of extreme delicacy, and it may be doubted if there was one man in ten thousand who would have succeeded by natural tact and human prudence in guiding the Bark of Peter through such tempestuous waters. Clement was certainly not such a man. He had unfortunately been brought up in all the bad traditions of Italian diplomacy, and over and above this a certain fatal irresolution of character seemed to impel him, when any decision had been arrived at, to hark back upon the course agreed on and to try to make terms with the other side. The early years of his pontificate were occupied with the negotiations which culminated in the League of Cognac. When Clement was crowned, Francis I and the Emperor Charles V were at war. Charles had supported Clement's candidature and hoped much from his friendship with the Medici, but barely a year had elapsed after his election before the new pope concluded a secret treaty with France. The pitched battle which was fought between Francis and the imperial commanders at Pavia in February, 1525, ending in the defeat and captivity of the French king, put into Charles' hands the means of avenging himself. Still he used his victory with moderation. The terms of the Treaty of Madrid (14 January, 1526) were not really extravagant, but Francis seems to have signed with the deliberate intention of breaking his promises, though confirmed by the most solemn of oaths. That Clement, instead of accepting Charles' overtures, should have made himself a party to the French king's perfidy and should have organized a league with France, Venice, and Florence, signed at Cognac, 22 May, 1526, must certainly have been regarded by the emperor as almost unpardonable provocation. No doubt Clement was moved by genuine patriotism in his distrust of imperial influence in Italy and especially by anxiety for his native Florence. Moreover, he chafed under dictation which seemed to him to threaten the freedom of the Church. But though he probably feared that the bonds might be drawn tighter, it is hard to see that he had at that time any serious ground of complaint. We cannot be much surprised at what followed. Charles' envoys, obtaining no satisfaction from the pope, allied themselves with the disaffected Colonna who had been raiding the papal territory. These last peretended reconciliation until the papal commanders were lulled into a sense of security. Then the Colonna made a sudden attack upon Rome and shut up Clement in the Castle of Sant’ Angelo while their followers plundered the Vatican (20 September, 1526). Charles disavowed the action of the Colonna but took advantage of the situation created by their success. A period of vacillation followed. At one time Clement concluded a truce with the emperor, at another he turned again despairingly to the League, at another, under the encouragement of a slight success, he broke off negotiations with the imperial representatives and resumed active hostilities, and then again, still later, he signed a truce with Charles for eight months, promising the immediate payment of an indemnity of 60,000 ducats. In the mean time the German mercenaries in the north of Italy were fast being reduced to the last extremities for lack of provisions and pay. On hearing of the indemnity of 60,000 ducats they threatened mutiny, and the imperial commissioners extracted from the pope the payment of 100,000 ducats instead of the sum first agreed upon. But the sacrifice was ineffectual. It seems probable that the Landsknechte, a very large proportion of whom were Lutherans, had really got completely out of hand, and that they practically forced the Constable Bourbon, now in supreme command, to lead them against Rome. On the 5th of May they reached the walls, which, owing to the pope's confidence in the truce he had concluded, were almost undefended. Clement had barely time to take refuge in the Castle of Sant’ Angelo, and for eight days the "Sack of Rome" continued amid horrors almost unexampled in the history of war. "The Lutherans", says an impartial authority, "rejoiced to burn and to defile what all the world had adored. Churches were desecrated, women, even the religious, violated, ambassadors pillaged, cardinals put to ransom, ecclesiastical dignitaries and ceremonies made a mockery, and the soldiers fought among themselves for the spoil" (Leathes in "Camb. Mod. History", II, 55). It seems probable that Charles V was really not implicated in the horrors which then took place. Still he had no objection against the pope bearing the full consequences of his shifty diplomacy, and he allowed him to remain a virtual prisoner in the Castle of Sant’ Angelo for more than seven months. Clement's pliability had already given offence to the other members of the League, and his appeals were not responded to very warmly. Besides this, he was sorely in need of the imperial support both to make head against the Lutherans in Germany and to reinstate the Medici in the government of Florence from which they had been driven out. The combined effect of these various considerations and of the failure of the French attempts upon Naples was to throw Clement into the emperor's arms. After a sojourn in Orvieto and Viterbo, Clement returned to Rome, and there, before the end of July, 1529, terms favourable to the Holy See were definitely arranged with Charles. The seal was set upon the compact by the meeting of the emperor and the pope at Bologna, where, on 24 February, 1530, Charles was solemnly crowned. By whatever motives the pontiff was swayed, this settlement certainly had the effect of restoring to Italy a much-needed peace. Meanwhile events, the momentous consequence of which were not then fully foreseen, had been taking place in England. Henry VIII, tired of Queen Catherine, by whom he had no heir to the throne, but only one surviving daughter, Mary, and passionately enamoured of Anne Boleyn, had made known to Wolsey in May, 1527, that he wished to be divorced. He pretended that his conscience was uneasy at the marriage contracted under papal dispensation with his brother's widow. As his first act was to solicit from the Holy See contingently upon the granting of the divorce, a dispensation from the impediment of affinity in the first degree (an impediment which stood between him and any legal marriage with Anne on account of his previous carnal intercourse with Anne's sister Mary), the scruple of conscience cannot have been very sincere. Moreover, as Queen Catherine solemnly swore that the marriage between herself and Henry's elder brother Arthur had never been consummated, there had consequently never been any real affinity between her and Henry but only the impedimentum publicæ honestatis. The king's impatience, however, was such that, without giving his full confidence to Wolsey, he sent his envoy, Knight, at once to Rome to treat with the pope about getting the marriage annulled. Knight found the pope a prisoner in Sant’ Angelo and could do little until he visited Clement, after his escape, at Orvieto. Clement was anxious to gratify Henry, and he did not make much difficulty about the contingent dispensation from affinity, judging, no doubt, that, as it would only take effect when the marriage with Catherine was concelled, it was of no practical consequence. On being pressed, however, to issue a commission to Wolsey to try the divorce case, he made a more determined stand, and Cardinal Pucci, to whom was submitted a draft instrument for the purpose, declared that such a document would reflect discredit upon all concerned. A second mission to Rome organized by Wolsey, and consisting of Gardiner and Foxe, was at first not much more successful. A commission was indeed granted and taken back to England by Foxe, but it was safeguarded in ways which rendered it practically innocuous. The bullying attitude which Gardiner adopted towards the pope seems to have passed all limits of decency, but Wolsey, fearful of losing the royal favour, egged him on to new exertions and implored him to obtain at any cost a "decretal commission". This was an instrument which decided the points of law beforehand, secure from appeal, and left only the issue of fact to be determined in England. Against this Clement seems honestly to have striven, but he at last yielded so far as to issue a secret commission to Cardinal Wolsey and Cardinal Campeggio jointly to try the case in England. The commission was to be shown to no one, and was never to leave Compeggio's hands. We do not know its exact terms; but if it followed the drafts prepared in England for the purpose, it pronounced that the Bull of dispensation granted by Julius for the marriage of Henry with his deceased brother's wife must be declared obreptitious and consequently void, if the commissioners found that the motives alleged by Julius were insufficient and contrary to the facts. For example, it had been pretended that the dispensation was necessary to cement the friendship between England and Spain, also that the young Henry himself desired the marriage, etc. Camapeggio reached England by the end of September, 1528, but the proceedings of the legatine court were at once brought to a standstill by the production of a second dispensation granted by Pope Julius in the form of a Brief. This had a double importance. Clement's commission empowered Wolsey and Campeggio to pronounce upon the sufficiency of the motives alleged in a certain specified document, viz., the Bull; but the Brief was not contemplated by, and lay outside, their commission. Moreover, the Brief did not limit the motives for granting the dispensation to certain specified allegations, but spoke of "aliis causis animam nostram moventibus". The production of the Brief, now commonly admitted to be quite authentic, though the king's party declared it a forgery, arrested the proceedings of the commission for eight months, and in the end, under pressure from Charles V, to whom his Aunt Catherine had vehemently appealed for support as well as to the pope, the cause was revoked to Rome. There can be no doubt that Clement showed much weakness in the concessions he had made to the English demands; but it must also be remembered, first, that in the decision of this point of law, the technical grounds for treating the dispensation as obreptitious were in themselves serious and, secondly, that in committing the honour of the Holy See to Campeggio's keeping, Clement had known that he had to do with a man of exceptionally high principle. How far the pope was influenced by Charles V in his resistence, it is difficult to say; but it is clear that his own sense of justice disposed him entirely in favour of Queen Catherine. Henry in consequence shifted his ground, and showed how deep was the rift which separated him from the Holy See, by now urging that a marriage with a deceased husband's brother lay beyond the papal powers of dispensation. Clement retaliated by pronouncing censure against those who threatened to have the king's divorce suit decided by an English tribunal, and forbade Henry to proceed to a new marriage before a decision was given in Rome. The king on his side (1531) extorted a vast sum of money from the English clergy upon the pretext that the penalties of præmunire had been incurred by them through their recognition of the papal legate, and soon afterwards he prevailed upon Parliament to prohibit under certain conditions the payment of annates to Rome. Other developments followed. The death of Archbishop Warham (22 August, 1532) allowed Henry to press for the institution of Cranmer as Archbishop of Canterbury, and through the intervention of the King of France this was conceded, the pallium being granted to him by Clement. Almost immediately after his consecration Cranmer proceeded to pronounce judgment upon the divorce, while Henry had previously contracted a secret marriage with Anne Boleyn, which marriage Cranmer, in May, 1533, declared to be valid. Anne Boleyn was consequently crowned on June the 1st. Meanwhile the Commons had forbidden all appeals to Rome and exacted the penalties of præmunire against all who introduced papal Bulls into England. It was only then that Clement at last took the step of launching a sentence of excommunication against the king, declaring at the same time Cranmer's pretended decree of divorce to be invalid and the marriage with Anne Boleyn null and void. The papal nuncio was withdrawn from England and diplomatic relations with Rome broken off. Henry appealed from the pope to a general council, and in January, 1534, the Parliament pressed on further legislation abolishing all ecclesiastical dependence on Rome. But it was only in March, 1534, that the papal tribunal finally pronounced its verdict upon the original issue raised by the king and declared the marriage between Henry and Catherine to be unquestionably valid. Clement has been much blamed for this delay and for his various concessions in the matter of the divorce; indeed he has been accused of losing England to the Catholic Faith on account of the encouragement thus given to Henry, but it is extremely doubtful whether a firmer attitude would have had a more beneficial result. The king was determined to effect his purpose, and Clement had sufficient principle not to yield the one vital point upon which all turned. With regard to Germany, though Clement never broke away from his friendship with Charles V, which was cemented by the coronation at Bologna in 1530, he never lent to the emperor that cordial co-operation which could alone have coped with a situation the extreme difficulty and danger of which Clement probably never understood. In particular, the pope seems to have had a horror of the idea of convoking a general council, foreseeing, no doubt, grave difficulties with France in any such attempt. Things were not improved when Henry, through his envoy Bonner, who found Clement visiting the French king at Marseilles, lodged his appeal to a future general council on the divorce question. In the more ecclesiastical aspects of his pontificate Clement was free from reproach. Two Franciscan reforms, that of the Capuchins and that of the Recollects, found in him a sufficiently sympathetic patron. He was genuinely in earnest over the crusade against the Turks, and he gave much encouragement to foreign missions. As a patron of art, he was much hampered by the sack of Rome and the other disastrous events of his pontificate. But he was keenly interested in such matters, and according to Benvenuto Cellini he had excellent taste. By the commission given to the last-named artist for the famous cope-clasp of which we hear so much in the autobiography, he became the founder of Benvenuto's fortunes. (See Cellini, Benvenuto.) Clement also continued to be the patron of Raphael and of Michelangelo, whose great fresco of the Last Judgment in the Sistine Chapel was undertaken by his orders. In their verdict upon the character of Pope Clement VII almost all historians are agreed. He was an Italian prince, a de’ Medici, and a diplomat first, and a spiritual ruler afterwards. His intelligence was of a high order, though his diplomacy was feeble and irresolute. On the other hand, his private life was free from reproach, and he had many excellent impulses, but despite good intention, all qualities of heroism and gtreatness must emphatically be denied him. Pastor, Geschichte der Päpste (Freiburg, 1907), IV, pt. II; Fraiken, Nonciatures de Clément VII (Paris, 1906–); Idem in Mélanges de l'école française de Rome (1906); Gairdner, The New Light on the Divorce of Henry VIII in English Histor. Rev. (1896-1897); Ehses, Römische Dokumente zur Geschichte der Ehescheidung Heinrichs VIII. (Paderborn, 1893); Thurston, The Canon Law of the Divorce in Eng. Histor. Rev. (Oct., 1904); Am. Cath. Quart. (April, 1906); Hemmer in Dict. de théol. cath., in which and in Pastor a fuller bibliography will be found. Herbert Thurston Pope Clement VIII Pope Clement VIII (IPPOLITO ALDOBRANDINI). Born at Fano, March, 1536, of a distinguished Florentine family; died at Rome, 5 March, 1605. He was elected pope 30 January, 1592, after a stormy conclave graphically described by Ranke (Geschichte der ršmischen PŠpste, 9th ed., II, 150 sqq.). In his youth he made excellent progress in jurisprudence under the direction of his father, an able jurist. Through the stages of consistorial advocate, auditor of the Rota and the Datary, he was advanced in 1585 to the dignity of Cardinal-Priest of the Title of St. Pancratius and was made grand penitentiary. He won the friendship of the Hapsburgs by his successful efforts, during a legation to Poland, to obtain the release of the imprisoned Archduke Maximilian, the defeated claimant to the Polish throne. During the conclave of 1592 he was the unwilling candidate of the compact minority of cardinals who were determined to deliver the Holy See from the prepotency of Philip II of Spain. His election was greeted with boundless enthusiasm by the Italians and by all who knew his character. He possessed all the qualifications needed in the Vicar of Christ. Blameless in morals from childhood, he had at an early period placed himself under the direction of St. Philip Neri, who for thirty years was his confessor. Upon Clement's elevation to the papacy, the aged saint gave over this important office to Baronius, whom the pope, notwithstanding his reluctance, created a cardinal, and to whom he made his confession every evening. The fervour with which he said his daily Mass filled all present with devotion. His long association with the Apostle of Rome caused him to imbibe the saint's spirit so thoroughly, that in him St. Philip himself might be said to have ascended the papal chair. Though vast political problems clamoured for solution, the pope first turned his attention to the more important spiritual interests of the Church. He made a personal visitation of all the churches and educational and charitable institutions of Rome, everywhere eliminating abuses and enforcing discipline. To him we owe the institution of the Forty Hours' Devotion. He founded at Rome the Collegio Clementino for the education of the sons of the richer classes, and augmented the number of national colleges in Rome by opening the Collegio Scozzese for the training of missionaries to Scotland. The "Bullarium Romanum" contains many important constitutions of Clement, notably one denouncing duelling and one providing for the inviolability of the States of the Church. He issued revised editions of the Vulgate (1598), the Breviary, the Missal, also the "Cæremoniale", and the "Pontificale". The complicated situation in France presented no insuperable difficulties to two consummate statesmen like Henry of Navarre and Clement VIII. It was clear to Henry that, notwithstanding his victories, he could not peacefully retain the French Crown without adopting the Catholic Faith. He abjured Calvinism 25 July, 1593. It was equally clear to Pope Clement that it was his duty to brave the selfish hostility of Spain by acknowledging the legitimate claims of Henry, as soon as he convinced himself that the latter's conversion was something more than a political manoeuvre. In the autumn of 1595 he solemnly absolved Henry IV, thus putting an end to the thirty years' religious war in France and winning a powerful ally in his struggle to achieve the independence of Italy and of the Holy See. Henry's friendship was of essential importance to the pope two years later, when Alfonso II, Duke of Ferrara, died childless (27 Oct., 1597), and Pope Clement resolved to bring the stronghold of the Este dynasty under the immediate jurisdiction of the Church. Though Spain and the empire encouraged Alfonso's illegitimate cousin, Cesare d'Este, to withstand the pope, they were deterred from giving him aid by Henry's threats, and the papal army entered Ferrara almost unopposed. In 1598 Pope Clement won still more credit for the papacy by bringing about a definite treaty of peace between Spain and France in the Treaty of Vervins and between France and Savoy. He also lent valuable assistance in men and money to the emperor in his contest with the Turks in Hungary. He was as merciless as Sixtus V in crushing out brigandage and in punishing the lawlessness of the Roman nobility. He did not even spare the youthful patricide Beatrice Cenci, over whom so many tears have been shed. (Bertolotti, Francesco Cenci e la sua famiglia, Florence, 1879.) On 17 Feb., 1600, the apostate Giordano Bruno (q.v.) was burned at the stake on the Piazza dei Fiori. The jubilee of 1600 was a brilliant witness to the glories of the renovated papacy, three million pilgrims visiting the holy places. In 1595 was held the Synod of Brest, in Lithuania, by which a great part of the Ruthenian clergy and people were reunited to Rome (Likowski, Union zu Brest, 1094). Although Clement, in spite of constant fasting, was tortured with gout in feet and hands, his capacity for work was unlimited, and his powerful intellect grasped all the needs of the Church throughout the world. He entered personally into the minutest detail of every subject which came before him, e.g., in the divorce between Henry IV and Margaret of Valois, yet more in the great controversy on grace between the Jesuits and the Dominicans (see BAÑEZ, MOLINA). He was present at all the sessions of the Congregatio de auxiliis (q.v.), but wisely refrained from issuing a final decree on the question. Clement VIII died in his seventieth years after a pontificate of thirteen years. His remains repose in Santa Maria Maggiore, where the Borghesi, who succeed the Aldobrandini in the female line, erected a gorgeous monument to his memory. Vita Clem. VIII in LABBE AND COSSART, Coll. Conc., XXI, 1323; WADDING, Vita Clem. VIII (Rome, 1723); VON RANKE, The Roman Popes in the Last Four Centuries (1834-37); PELESZ, Gesch. der Union der ruthenischen Kirche mit Rom (WŸrzburg, 1881); ROSSI, Di una controversia tra la republica di Venezia e Clem. VIII in Archivio Veneto (1889), fasc. 74; SERRY, Hist. controv. de auxiliis (Antwerp, 1709); RƒGNON, Ba–ez et Molina (Paris, 1883); DE MONTOR, Lives of the Roman Pontiffs (New York, 1857). JAMES F. LOUGHLIN Pope Clement IX Pope Clement IX (GIULIO ROSPIGLIOSI) Born 28 January, 1600, at Pistoja, of an ancient family originally from Lombardy; elected 20 June, 1667; d. at Rome, 9 December, 1669. He made a brilliant course of studies at the Roman Seminary, and the University of Pisa, where he received the doctorate in his twenty-third year and was made professor of philosophy. His talents and virtuous life brought him rapid promotion in the Roman Court at a period when Tuscan influence under Tuscan pontiffs was everywhere predominant. He enjoyed the special favour of Urban VIII, like himself fond of literature and poetry, and was made titular Archbishop of Tarsus and sent as nuncio to the Spanish Court. He lived in retirement during the pontificate of Innocent X, who disliked the Barberini and their adherents, but was recalled to office by Alexander VII and by him appointed secretary of state and Cardinal-Priest of the Title of San Sisto (1657). Ten years later, one month after the death of Alexander, Cardinal Rospigliosi was elected to the papacy by the unanimous vote of the Sacred College. He was the idol of the Romans, not so much for his erudition and application to business, as for his extreme charity and his affability towards great and small. He increased the goodwill of his subjects by buying off the monopolist who had secured the macinato, or privilege of selling grain, and as his predecessor had collected the money for the purpose, Clement had the decree published in the name of Alexander VII. Two days each week he occupied a confessional in St. Peter's church and heard any one who wished to confess to him. He frequently visited the hospitals, and was lavish in his alms to the poor. In an age of nepotism, he did little or nothing to advance or enrich his family. In his aversion to notoriety, he refused to permit his name to be placed on the buildings erected during his reign. On 15 April, 1668, he declared blessed, Rose of Lima, the first American saint. On 28 April, 1669, he solemnly canonized S. Maria Maddalena dei Pazzi and St. Peter of Alcantara. He reorganized the Church in Portugal, after that nation had achieved its independence from Spain. By a mild compromise in the affair of French Jansenism, known as the Clementine Peace, (Pax Clementina), he procured a lull in the storm, which, unfortunately, owing to the insincerity of the sectaries, was but temporary. He brought about, as arbiter, the Peace of Aix-la-Chapelle between France and Spain, and gravely admonished Louis XIV against the aggressive career upon which he was setting forth. By strict economy he brought the papal finances into good order, and was able to furnish material aid to Venice for the defence of Crete, then besieged by the Turks. Had the European powers listened to his exhortations, that important island would not have been lost to Christendom. The news of its fall, after a gallant resistance of twenty years, hastened the pope's death. He died after a pontificate of two years, five months, and nineteen days. He ordered his remains to be buried under the pavement of Santa Maria Maggiore, with the simple inscription Clementis IX, Cineres, but his successor, Clement X, erected in his honour the sumptuous monument which stands at the right-hand side of the nave, near the door. The death of the beloved pontiff was long lamented by the Romans, who considered him, if not the greatest, at least the most amiable of the popes. FABRONI, Vita Clem. X, in Vitae Italorum doctrinâ excellentium, II, 1; DE MONTOR, Lives of the Roman Pontiffs (New York, 1867), II; GƒRIN, Louis XIV et Clément IX dans l'affaire des deux mariages de Marie de Savoie (1666-68) in Rev. des quest. hist. (1880). JAMES F. LOUGHLIN Pope Clement X Pope Clement X (EMILIO ALTIERI). Born at Rome, 13 July, 1590; elected 29 April, 1670, and died at Rome, 22 July, 1676. Unable to secure the election of any of the prominent candidates, the cardinals finally, after a conclave of four months and twenty days, resorted to the old expedient of electing a cardinal of advanced years; they united upon Cardinal Altieri, an octogenarian, whose long life had been spent in the service of the Church, and whom Clement IX, on the eve of his death, had raised to the dignity of the purple. The reason a prelate of such transcendent merits received the cardinalate so late in life seems to have been that he had waived his claims to the elevation in favour of an older brother. He protested vigorously against this use of the papal robes as a funeral shroud, but at length was persuaded to accept, and out of gratitude to his benefactor, by ten years his junior, he assumed the name of Clement X. The Altieri belonged to the ancient Roman nobility, and since all but one of the male scions had chosen the ecclesiastical career, the pope, in order to save the name from extinction, adopted the Paoluzzi, one of whom he married to Laura Caterina Altieri, the sole heiress of the family. During previous pontificates the new pope had held important offices and had been entrusted with delicate missions. Urban VIII gave him charge of the works designed to protect the territory of Ravenna from the unruly Po. Innocent X appointed him nuncio to Naples; and he is credited with no slight share in the re-establishment of peace after the stormy days of Masaniello. Under Alexander VII he was made secretary of the Congregation of Bishops and Regulars. Clement IX named him superintendent of the papal exchequer. On his accession to the papacy, he gave to his new kinsman, Cardinal Paoluzzi-Altieri, the uncle of Laura's husband, the office of cardinal nephew, and with advancing years gradually entrusted to him the management of affairs, to such an extent that the biting Romans said he had reserved to himself only the episcopal functions of benedicere et sanctificare, resigning in favour of the cardinal the administrative duties of regere et gubernare. Nevertheless, the Bullarium Romanum contains many evidences of his religious activity, among which may be mentioned the canonization of Sts. Cajetan, Philip Benitius, Francis Borgia, Louis Bertrand, and Rose of Lima; also the beatification of Pope Pius V, John of the Cross, and the Martyrs of Gorcum in Holland. He laboured to preserve the peace of Europe, menaced by the ambition of Louis XIV, and began with that imperious monarch the long struggle concerning the régale, or revenues of vacant dioceses and abbeys. He supported the Poles with strong financial aid in their hard struggle with their Turkish invaders. He decorated the bridge of Sant' Angelo with the ten statues of angels in Carrara marble still to be seen there. To Clement we owe the two beautiful fountains which adorn the Piazza of St. Peter's church near the tribune, where a monument has been erected to his memory. ARISIO, Memorie sulla vita di Clemente X (Rome, 1863); VON REUMONT, Gaesch. d. Stadt Rom (Berlin, 1867), III, ii, 635-36; CERROTI, Bibliografia Romana (Rome, 1893), 226, 563; NOVAES, Elementi della storia de' romani pontefici da S. Pietro fino a Pio VI (Rome, 1821-25); DE MONTOR, History of the Roman Pontiffs (New York, 1867), II. JAMES F. LOUGHLIN Pope Clement XI Pope Clement XI (GIOVANNI FRANCESCO ALBANI). Born at Urbino, 23 July, 1649; elected 23 November, 1700; died at Rome 19 March, 1721. The Albani (q.v.) were a noble Umbrian family. Under Urban VIII the grandfather of the future pope had held for thirteen years the honourable office of Senator of Rome. An uncle, Annibale Albani, was a distinguished scholar and was Prefect of the Vatican Library. Giovanni Francesco was sent to Rome in his eleventh year to prosecute his studies at the Roman College. He made rapid progress and was known as an author at the age of eighteen, translating from the Greek into elegant Latin. He attracted the notice of the patroness of Roman literati, Queen Christina of Sweden, who before he became of age enrolled him in her exclusive Accademia. With equal ardour and success, he applied himself to the profounder branches, theology and law, and was created doctor of canon and civil law. So brilliant an intellect, joined with stainless morals and piety, secured for him a rapid advancement at the papal court. At the age of twenty-eight he was made a prelate, and governed successively Rieti, Sabina, and Orvieto, everywhere acceptable on account of his reputation for justice and prudence. Recalled to Rome, he was appointed Vicar of St. Peter's, and on the death of Cardinal Slusio succeeded to the important position of Secretary of Papal Briefs, which he held for thirteen years, and for which his command of classical latinity singularly fitted him. On 13 February, 1690, he was created cardinal-deacon and later Cardinal-Priest of the Title of San Silvestro, and was ordained to the priesthood. The conclave of 1700 would have terminated speedily with the election of Cardinal Mariscotti, had not the veto of France rendered the choice of that able cardinal impossible. After deliberating for forty-six days, the Sacred College united in selecting Cardinal Albani, whose virtues and ability overbalanced the objection that he was only fifty-one years old. Three days were spent in the effort to overcome his reluctance to accept a dignity the heavy burden of which none knew better than the experienced curialist (Galland in Hist. Jahrbuch, 1882, III, 208 sqq.). The period was critical for Europe and the papacy. During the conclave Charles II, the last of the Spanish Hapsburgs, had died childless, leaving his vast dominions a prey to French and Austrian ambition. His will, making Philip of Anjou, grandson of Louis XIV, sole heir to the Spanish Empire, was contested by the Emperor Leopold, who claimed Spain for his second son Charles. The late king, before making this will, had consulted Pope Innocent XII, and Cardinal Albani had been one of the three cardinals to whom the pontiff had entrusted the case and who advised him to pronounce secretly in its favour. This was at the time unknown to the emperor, else Austria would have vetoed the election of Albani. The latter was finally persuaded that it was his duty to obey the call from Heaven; on 30 November he was consecrated bishop, and on 8 December solemnly enthroned in the Vatican. The enthusiasm with which his elevation was greeted throughout the world is the best evidence of his worth. Even Protestants received the intelligence with joy and the city of Nuremberg struck a medal in his honour. The sincere Catholic reformers greeted his accession as the death-knell of nepotism; for, though he had many relatives, it was known that he had instigated and written the severe condemnation of that abuse issued by his predecessor. As pontiff, he did not belie his principles. He bestowed the offices of his court upon the most worthy subjects and ordered his brother to keep at a distance and refrain from adopting any new title or interfering in matters of state. In the government of the States of the Church, Clement was a capable administrator. He provided diligently for the needs of his subjects, was extremely charitable to the poor, bettered the condition of the prisons, and secured food for the populace in time of scarcity. He won the good will of artists by prohibiting the exportation of ancient masterpieces, and of scientists by commissioning Bianchini to lay down on the pavement of Sta Maria degli Angioli the meridian of Rome, known as the Clementina. His capacity for work was prodigious. He slept but little and ate so sparingly that a few pence per day sufficed for his table. Every day he confessed and celebrated Mass. He entered minutely into the details of every measure which came before him, and with his own hand prepared the numerous allocutions, Briefs, and constitutions afterwards collected and published. He also found time to preach his beautiful homilies and was frequently to be seen in the confessional. Though his powerful frame more than once sank under the weight of his labours and cares, he continued to keep rigorously the fasts of the Church, and generally allowed himself but the shortest possible respite from his labours. In his efforts to establish peace among the powers of Europe and to uphold the rights of the Church, he met with scant success; for the eighteenth century was eminently the age of selfishness and infidelity. One of his first public acts was to protest against the assumption (1701) by the Elector of Brandenburg of the title of King of Prussia. The pope's action, though often derided and misinterpreted, was natural enough, not only because the bestowal of royal titles had always been regarded as the privilege of the Holy See, but also because Prussia belonged by ancient right to the ecclesiastico-military institute known as the Teutonic Order. In the troubles excited by the rivalry of France and the Empire for the Spanish succession, Pope Clement resolved to maintain a neutral attitude; but this was found to be impossible. When, therefore, the Bourbon was crowned in Madrid as Philip V, amid the universal acclamations of the Spaniards, the pope acquiesced and acknowledged the validity of his title. This embittered the morose Emperor Leopold, and the relations between Austria and the Holy See became so strained that the pope did not conceal his satisfaction when the French and Bavarian troops began that march on Vienna which ended so disastrously on the field of Blenheim. Marlborough's victory, followed by Prince Eugene's successful campaign in Piedmont, placed Italy at the mercy of the Austrians. Leopold died in 1705 and was succeeded by his oldest son Joseph, a worthy precursor of Joseph II. A contest immediately began on the question known as Jus primarum precum, involving the right of the crown to appoint to vacant benefices. The victorious Austrians, now masters of Northern Italy, invaded the Papal States, took possession of Piacenza and Parma, annexed Comacchio and besieged Ferrara. Clement at first offered a spirited resistance, but, abandoned by all, could not hope for success, and when a strong detachment of Protestant troops under the command of the Prince of Hesse-Cassel reached Bologna, fearing a repetition of the fearful scenes of 1527, he finally gave way (15 Jan., 1709), acknowledged the Archduke Charles as King of Spain "without detriment to the rights of another", and promised him the investiture of Naples. Though the Bourbon monarchs had done nothing to aid the pope in his unequal struggle, both Louis and Philip became very indignant and retaliated by every means in their power (see Louis XIV). In the negotiations preceding the Peace of Utrecht (1713) the rights of the pope were studiously neglected; his nuncio was not accorded a hearing; his dominions were parcelled out to suit the convenience of either party. Sicily was given to Victor Amadeus II of Savoy, with whom from the first days of his pontificate Clement was involved in quarrels on the subjects of ecclesiastical immunities and appointments to vacant benefices. The new king now undertook to revive the so-called Monarchia Sicula, an ancient but much-disputed and abused privilege of pontifical origin which practically excluded the pope from any authority over the church in Sicily. When Clement answered with bann and interdict, all the clergy, about 3000 in number, who remained loyal to the Holy See were banished the island, and the pope was forced to give them food and shelter. The interdict was not raised till 1718, when Spain regained possession, but the old controversy was repeatedly resumed under the Bourbons. Through the machinations of Cardinal Alberoni, Parma and Piacenza were granted to a Spanish Infante without regard to the papal overlordship. It was some consolation to the much-tried pope that Augustus of Saxony, King of Poland, returned to the Church. Clement laboured hard to restore harmony in Poland, but without success. The Turks had taken advantage of the dissensions among the Christians to invade Europe by land and sea. Clement proclaimed a jubilee, sent money and ships to the assistance of the Venetians, and granted a tithe on all benefices to the Emperor Charles VI. When Prince Eugene won the great battle of Temesvár, which put an end to the Turkish danger, no slight share of the credit was given by the Christian world to the pope and the Holy Rosary. Clement sent the great commander a blessed hat and sword. The fleet which Philip V of Spain had raised at the instigation of the pope, and with subsidies levied on church revenues, was diverted by Alberoni to the conquest of Sardinia; and though Clement showed his indignation by demanding the dismissal of the minister, and beginning a process against him, he had much to do to convince the emperor that he was not privy to the treacherous transaction. He gave a generous hospitality to the exiled son of James II of England, James Edward Stuart, and helped him to obtain the hand of Clementina, John Sobieski's accomplished granddaughter, mother of Charles Edward. Clement's pastoral vigilance was felt in every corner of the earth. He organized the Church in the Philippine Islands and sent missionaries to every distant spot. He erected Lisbon into a patriarchate, 7 December, 1716. He enriched the Vatican Library with the manuscript treasures gathered at the expense of the pope by Joseph Simeon Assemani in his researches throughout Egypt and Syria. In the unfortunate controversy between the Dominican and the Jesuit missionaries in China concerning the permissibility of certain rites and customs, Clement decided in favour of the former. When the Jansenists provoked a new collision with the Church under the leadership of Quesnel, Pope Clement issued his two memorable Constitutions, "Vineam Domini", 16 July, 1705, and "Unigenitus", 10 September, 1713 (see UNIGENITUS; VINEAM DOMINI; JANSENISM). Clement XI made the feast of the Conception of the B.V.M. a Holy Day of obligation, and canonized Pius V, Andrew of Avellino, Felix of Cantalice, and Catherine of Bologna. This great and saintly pontiff died appropriately on the feast of St. Joseph, for whom he entertained a particular devotion, and in whose honour he composed the special Office found in the Breviary. His remains rest in St. Peter's. His official acts, letters, and Briefs, also his homilies, were collected and published by his nephew, Cardinal Annibale Albani (2 vols., Rome, 1722-24). POLIDORI, De vita et rebus gestis Clementis XI libri sex (Urbino, 1724), also in FASSINI, Supplemento to NATALIS ALEXANDER, Historia Ecclesiastica (Bassano, 1778); REBOULET, Histoire de Clément XI (Avignon, 1752); LAFITEAU, Vie de Clément XI (Padua, 1752); BUDER (non-Catholic), Leben und Thaten des klugen und beržhmten Papstes Clementis XI. (Frankfort, 1721); NOVAES, Elementi della storia deÕ sommi pontefici da S. Pietro fino a Pio VI (Rome, 1821-25); LANDAU, Rom, Wien, Neapel wâhrend des spanischen Erbfolgekrieges (Leipzig, 1885); HERGENR…THER-KIRSCH, Kirschengeschichte (4th ed., Freiburg, 1907), III. See also on the Albani, VISCONTI in Famiglie di Roma (I), and VON REUMONT in Beitrâge zur ital. Geschichte, V, 323 sqq., and Gesch. d. Stadt Rom (Berlin, 1867), III, ii, 642 sqq. Cf. ARTAUD DE MONTOR, History of the Roman Pontiffs (New York, 1867), II. JAMES F. LOUGHLIN Pope Clement XII Pope Clement XII (LORENZO CORSINI). Born at Florence, 7 April, 1652; elected 12 July, 1730; died at Rome 6 February, 1740. The pontificate of the saintly Orsini pope, Benedict XIII, from the standpoint of the spiritual interests of the Church, had left nothing to be desired. He had, however, given over temporal concerns into the hands of rapacious ministers; hence the finances of the Holy See were in bad condition; there was an increasing deficit, and the papal subjects were in a state of exasperation. It was no easy task to select a man who possessed all the qualities demanded by the emergency. After deliberating for four months, the Sacred College united on Cardinal Corsini, the best possible choice, were it not for his seventy-eight years and his failing eyesight. A Corsini by the father's side and by the mother's a Strozzi, the best blood of Florence coursed through his veins. Innumerable were the members of his house who had risen to high positions in Church and State, but its chief ornament was St. Andrew Corsini, the canonized Bishop of Fiesole. Lorenzo made a brilliant course of studies, first in the Roman College, then at the University of Pisa, where, after five years, he received the degree of Doctor of Laws. Returning to Rome, he applied himself to the practice of law under the able direction of his uncle, Cardinal Neri Corsini, a ma of the highest culture. After the death of his uncle and his father, in 1685, Lorenzo, now thirty-three years old, resigned his right of primogeniture and entered the ecclesiastical state. From Innocent XI he purchased, according to the custom of the time, for 30,000 scudi (dollars) a position of prelatial rank,and devoted his wealth and leisure to the enlargement of the library bequeathed to him by his uncle. In 1691 he was made titular Archbishop of Nicomedia and chosen nuncio to Vienna. He did not proceed to the imperial court, because Leopold advanced the novel claim, which Pope Alexander VIII refused to admit, of selecting a nuncio from a list of three names to be furnished by the pope. In 1696 Corsini was appointed to the arduous office of treasurer-general and governor of Castle Sant' Angelo. His good fortune increased during the pontificate of Clement XI, who employed his talents in affairs demanding tact and prudence. On 17 May, 1706, he was created Cardinal-Deacon of the Title of Santa Susanna, retaining the office of papal treasurer. He was attached to several of the most important congregations and was made protector of a score of religious institutions. He advanced still further under Benedict XIII, who assigned him to the Congregation of the Holy Office and made him prefect of the judicial tribunal known as the Segnatura di Giustizia. He was successively Cardinal-Priest of S. Pietro in Vincoli and Cardinal-Bishop of Frascati. He had thus held with universal applause all the important offices of the Roman Court, and it is not surprising that his elevation to the papacy filled the Romans with joy. In token of gratitude to his benefactor, Clement XI, and as a pledge that he would make that great pontiff his model, he assumed the title of Clement XII. Unfortunately he lacked the important qualities of youth and physical strength. The infirmities of old age bore heavily upon him. In the second year of his pontificate he became totally blind; in his later years he was compelled to keep his bed, from which he gave audiences and transacted affairs of state. Notwithstanding his physical decrepitude, he displayed a wonderful activity. He demanded restitution of ill-gotten goods from the ministers who had abused the confidence of his predecessor. The chief culprit, Cardinal Coscia, was mulcted in a heavy sum and sentenced to ten years' imprisonment. Clement surrounded himself with capable officials, and won the affection of his subjects by lightening their burdens, encouraging manufacture and the arts, and infusing a modern spirit into the laws relating to commerce. The public lottery, which had been suppressed by the severe morality of Benedict XIII, was revived by Clement, and poured into his treasury an annual sum amounting to nearly a half million of scudi (dollars), enabling him to undertake the extensive buildings which distinguish his reign. He began the majestic façade of St. John Lateran and built in that basilica the magnificent chapel of St. Andrew Corsini. He restored the Arch of Constantine and built the governmental palace of the Consulta on the quirinal. He purchased from Cardinal Albani for 60,000 scudi the fine collection of statues, inscriptions, etc. with which he adorned the gallery of the Capitol. He paved the streets of Rome and the roads leading from the city, and widened the Corso. He began the great Fontana di Trevi, one of the noted ornaments of Rome. In order to facilitate the reunion of the Greeks, Clement XII founded at Ullano, in Calabria, the Corsini College for Greek students. With a similar intent he called to Rome Greek-Melchite monks of Mt. Lebanon, and assigned to them the ancient church of Santa Maria in Domnica. He dispatched Joseph Simeon Assemani to the East for the twofold purpose of continuing his search for manuscripts and presiding as legate over a national council of Maronites. We make no attempt to enumerate all the operations which this wonderful blind-stricken old man directed from his bed of sickness. His name is associated in Rome with the foundation and embellishment of institutions of all sorts. The people of Ancona hold him in well-deserved veneration and have erected on the public square a statue in his honour. He gave them a port which excited the envy of Venice, and built a highway that gave them easy access to the interior. He drained the marshes of the Chiana near Lake Trasimeno by leading the waters through a ditch fourteen miles long into the Tiber. He disavowed the arbitrary action of his legate, Cardinal Alberoni, in seizing San Marino, and restored the independence of that miniature republic. His activity in the spiritual concerns of the Church was equally pronounced. His efforts were directed towards raising the prevalent low tone of morality and securing discipline, especially in the cloisters. He issued the first papal decree against the Freemasons (1738). He fostered the new Congregation of the Passionists and gave to his fellow-Tuscan, St. Paul of the Cross, the church and monastery of Sts. John and Paul, with the beautiful garden overlooking the Colosseum. He canonized Sts. Vincent de Paul, John Francis Regis, Catherine Fieschi Adorni, Juliana Falconieri, and approved the cult of St. Gertrude. He proceeded with vigour against the French Jansenists and had the happiness to receive the submission of the Maurists to the Constitution Unigenitus. Through the efforts of his missionaries in Egypt 10,000 Copts, with their patriarch, returned to the unity of the Church. Clement persuaded the Armenian patriarch to remove from the diptychs the anathema against the Council of Chalcedon and St. Leo I. In his dealings with the powers of Europe, he managed by a union of firmness and moderation to preserve or restore harmony; but he was unable to maintain the rights of the Holy See over the Duchies of Parma and Piacenza. It was a consequence of his blindness that he should surround himself with trusted relatives; but he advanced them only as they proved their worth, and did little for his family except to purchase and enlarge the palace built in Trastevere for the Riarii, and now known as the Palazzo Corsini (purchased in 1884 by the Italian Government, and now the seat of the Regia Accademia dei Lincei). In 1754, his nephew, Cardinal Neri Corsini, founded there the famous Corsini Library, which in 1905 included about 70,000 books and pamphlets, 2288 incunabula or works printed in the first fifty or sixty years after the discovery of printing, 2511 manuscripts, and 600 autographs. Retaining his extraordinary faculties and his cheerful resignation to the end, he died in the Quirinal in his eighty-eighth year. His remains were transferred to his magnificent tomb in the Lateran, 20 July, 1742. FABRONIUS, De vita et rebus gestis Clementis XII (Rome, 1760), also in FASSINI, Supplemento to the Historia Ecclesiastica of NATALIS ALEXANDER (Bassano, 1778); PASSERINI, Genealogia e Storia della famiglia Corsini (Florence, 1858); VON REUMONT, Gesch. d. Stadt Rom (Berlin, 1867), III, iii, 653-55; NOVAES, Elementi della storia de' sommi pontefici (Rome, 1821-25); HERGENR…THER-KIRSCH, Kirchengeschichte (4th ed., Freiburg, 1907) III (bibliography); ARTAUD DE MONTOR, History of the Roman Pontiffs (New York, 1867), II. JAMES F. LOUGHLIN Pope Clement XIII Pope Clement XIII (Carlo della Torre Rezzonico). Born at Venice, 7 March, 1693; died at Rome, 2 February, 1769. He was educated by the Jesuits at Bologna, took his degrees in law at Padua, and in 1716 was ppointed at Rome referendary of the two departments known as the "Signatura Justitiæ" and the "Signatura Gratiæ". He was made governor of Rieti in 1716, of Fano in 1721, and Auditor of the Rota for Venice in 1725. In 1737 he was made cardinal-deacon, and in 1743 Bishop of Padua, where he distinguished himself by his zeal for the formation and sanctification of his clergy, to promote which he held a synod in 1746, and published a very remarkable pastoral on the priestly state. His personal life was in keeping with his teaching, and the Jansenist Abbé Clément, a grudging witness, tells us that "he was called the saint (by his people), and was an exemplary man who, notwithstanding the immense revenues of his diocese and his private estate, was always without money owing to the lavishness of his alms-deeds, and would give away even his linen". In 1747 he became cardinal-priest, and on 6 July, 1758, he was elected pope to succeed Benedict XIV. It was with tears that he submitted to the will of the electors, for he gauged well the force and direction of the storm which was gathering on the political horizon. Regalism and Jansenism were the traditional enemies of the Holy See in its government of the Church, but a still more formidable foe was rising into power and using the other two as its instruments. This was the party of Voltaire and the Encyclopedists, the "Philosophers" as they liked to call themselves. They were men of talent and highly educated, and by means of these gifts had drawn over to themselves many admirers and adherents from among the ruling classes, with the result that by the time of Clement XIII, they had their representatives in power in the Portugese and in all the five Bourbon Courts. Their enmity was radically against the Christian religion itself, as putting a restraint on their licence of thought and action. In their private correspondence they called it the Infâme (the infamous one), and looked forward to its speedy extinction through the success of their policy; but they felt that in their relations with the public, and especially with the sovereigns, it was necessary to feign some kind of Catholic belief. In planning this war against the Church, they were agreed that the first step must be the destruction of the Jesuits. "When we have destroyed the Jesuits", wrote Voltaire to Helvétius in 1761, "we shall have easy work with the Infâme." And their method was to persuade the sovereigns that the Jesuits were the chief obstacle to their Regalist pretensions, and thereby a danger to the peace of their realms; and to support this view by the diffusion of defamatory literature, likewise by inviting the co-operation of those who, whilst blind to the character of their ulterior ends, stood with them for doctrinal or other reasons in their antipathy to the Society of Jesus. Such was the political situation with which Clement XIII saw himself confronted when he began his pontificate. PORTUGAL His attention was called in the first instance to Portugal, where the attack on the Society had already commenced. Joseph I, a weak and voluptuous prince, was a mere puppet in the hands of his minister, Sebastião Carvalho, afterwards Marquis de Pombal, a secret adherent of the Voltairian opinions, and bent on the destruction of the Society. A rebellion of the Indians in the Uruguay Reductions gave him his first opportunity. The cause of the rebellion was obvious, for the natives had been ordered to abandon forthwith their cultivated lands and migrate into the virgin forest. But, as they were under the care of the Jesuit missionaries, Carvalho declared that those must have instigated the natives. Moreover, on 3 September, 1758, Joseph I was shot at, apparently by the injured husband of a lady he had seduced. Pombal held a secret trial in which he pronounced the whole Tavora family guilty, and with them three Jesuit Fathers, against whom the sole evidence was that they had been friends of the Tavoras. Then, on the pretext that all Jesuits thought alike, he imprisoned their superiors, some hundred in number, in his subterranean dungeons, and wrote in the king's name to Rome for permission from the Holy See to punish the guilty clerics. Clement did not see his way to refuse a request backed by the king's assurances that he had good grounds for his charges, but he begged that the accused might have a careful trial, and that the innocent might not be included in a punishment they had not deserved. The pope's letter was written with exquisite courtesy and consideration, but Pombal pronounced it insulting to his master and returned it to the sender. Then he shipped off all the Jesuits from Portugal and its colonies, save the superiors who were still detained in their prisons, and sent them to Civitavecchia, "as a present to the pope", without a penny from their confiscated funds left to them for their maintenance. Clement, however, received them kindly, and provided for their needs. It was to be expected that diplomatic relations would not long continue after these events; they were severed in 1760 by Pombal, who sent back the nuncio, Acciajuoli, and recalled his own ambassador; nor were these relations restored till the next pontificate. Pombal had seen the necessity of supporting his administrative measures by an endeavour to destroy the good name of his victims with the public. For this purpose he caused various defamatory publications to be written, chief among which was the "Brief Relation", in which the American Jesuits were represented as having set up an independent kingdom in South America under their own sovereignty, and of tyrannizing over the Indians, all in the interest of an insatiable ambition and avarice. These libels were spread broadcast, especially through Portugal and Spain, and many bishops from Spain and elsewhere wrote to the pope protesting against charges so improbable in themselves, and so incompatible with their experience of the order in their own jurisdictions. The text of many of their letters and of Clement XIII's approving replies may be seen in the "Appendices" to Père de Ravignan's "Clément XIII et Clément XIV". FRANCE It was to be expected that the Society's many enemies in France would be stimulated to follow in the footsteps of Pombal. The attack was opened by the Parlement, which was predominantly Jansenist in its composition, in the spring of 1761. Taking advantage of the financial difficulties into which the French Jesuits had been driven over the affair of Father Lavalette, they proceeded to examine the constitutions of the Society in which they professed to find grave improprieties, and to demand that, if the Jesuits were to remain in the country, these constitutions should be remodelled on the principle of reducing the power of the general and practically substituting for him a commisioner appointed by the Crown. They also drew up a famous document, named the "Extraits des assertions", made up entirely of garbled extracts from Jesuit writers, and tending to show that their method was to establish their own domination by justifying almost every form of crime and licentiousness, particularly tyrannicide. Louis XV, like Joseph I, had a will enervated by lust, but unlike him, was by no means a fool, and had besides an underlying respect for religion. Thus he sought, in the first instance, to save a body of men whom he judged to be innocent, and for that purpose he referred their constitutions to the French bishops assembled at Paris in December, 1761. Forty-five of these bishops reported in favour of the constitutions, and of the Jesuits being left as they were, twenty-seven or more, not then in Paris, sending in their adhesion; but the king was being drawn the other way by his Voltairian statesmen and Madame de Pompadour, and accordingly preferred the advice of the one bishop who sided with the Parlement, Bishop FitzJames of Soissons. He therefore issued an edict in March, 1762, which allowed the Society to remain in the kingdom, but prescribed some essential changes in their institute with the view of satisfying the Parlement. Clement XIII intervened in various ways in this crisis of the French Jesuits. He wrote to the king in June, 1761, and again in January, 1762, on the former occasion to implore him to stay the proceedings of his Parlement, on the latter to protest against the scheme of setting a French vicar- general, independent of the general in Rome, over the French provinces; it was likewise on this latter occasion that, whilst blaming their general for the compliance of some of his French subjects, he used the famous words "Sint ut sint aut non sint". To the French bishops who wrote to him protesting against the doings of the Parlement, he replied in words of thankfulness and approval, e.g. to the Bishop of Grenoble on 4 April, 1762, and to the Bishop of Sarlat (with special reference to the "Extraits des assertions") on 14 November. 1764; and to the bishops collectively in June, 1762, exhorting them to use all their influence with the king to induce him to resist his evil counsellors. To the arrét of 2 August, 1762, by which the Parlement suppressed the Society in France, and imposed impossible conditions on any of its members wishing to remain in the country, Clement replied by an Allocution of 3 September, in which he protested against the invasion of the Church's rights, and annulled the arréts of the Parlement against the Society. Finally, when the king, weakly yielding to the pressure of his entourage, suppressed the French provinces by his edict of November, 1764, the Holy Father felt it his duty, besought as he was by so many bishops from all parts, to publish the Bull "Apostolicum", of 9 January, 1765. Its object was to oppose to the current misrepresentations of the Society's institute, spiritual exercises, preaching missions, and theology, a solemn and formal approbation, and to declare that the Church herself was assailed in these condemnations of what she sanctioned in so many ways. SPAIN The statesmen who had the ear of Charles III were in regular correspondence with the French Encyclopedists, and had for some years previously been projecting a proscription of the Society on the same lines as in Portugal and France. But this was not known to the public, or to the Jesuits, who believed themselves to have a warm friend in their sovereign. It came then as a surprise to all when, on the night of 2-3 April, 1767, all the Jesuit houses were suddenly surrounded, the inmates arrested and transferred to vehicles ordered to take them to the coast, thence to be shipped off for some unknown destination–forbidden to take anything with them beyond the clothes which they wore. Nor was any other explanation vouchsafed to the outer world save that contained in the king's letter to Clement XIII, dated 31 March. There it was stated that the king had found it necessary to expel all his Jesuit subjects for reasons which he intended to reserve for ever in his royal breast, but that he was sending them all to Civitavecchia that they might be under the pope's care, and he would allow them a maintenance of 100 piastres (i.e. Spanish dollars) a year–a maintenance, however, which would be withdrawn for the whole body, should any one of them venture at any time to write anything in self-defence or in criticism of the motives for the expulsion. The pope wrote back on 16 April a very touching letter in which he declared that this was the cruelest blow of all to his paternal heart, beseeching the king to see that if any were accused they should not be condemned without proper trial, and assuring him that the charges current against the institute and the whole body of its members were misrepresentations due to the malice of the Church's enemies. But nothingh could be extracted from the king, and it is now known that this idea of a royal secret was merely a pretext devised in order to prevent the Holy See from having any say in the matter. Foreseeing the difficulty of so large an influx of expelled religious into his states, Clement felt compelled to refuse them permission to land, and after various wanderings they lhad to settle down in Corsica, where they were joined by their brethren who had been similarly sent away from Spanish America. When, a year and a half later, they were forced to move again, the pope's compassion overcame his administrative prudence, and he permitted them to take refuge in his territory. On the throne of Naples was seated a son of Charles III, and on that of Parma his nephew. Both were minors, and both had Voltairian ministers through whose instrumentality their policy was directed from Madrid. Accordingly the Jesuits in their dominions were similarly banished, and their banishment drew similar remonstrances from the pope. But in the case of Parma there was a complication, for this state having been for centuries regarded as a fief of the Holy See, the pope had felt himself bound to condemn by his Monitorium of 30 January, 1768, some laws passed by the duke to the detriment of the Church's liberties. The Bourbon Courts thereupon united in demanding the withdrawal of the Monitorium, threatening, if refused to deprive the pope by armed force of his territories of Avignon and the Vanaissin in France, and of Benevento and Montecorto in Italy. Finally, on 18, 20, 22 January, 1769, the ambassadors of France, Spain, and Naples presented to him identical notes demanding the total and entire suppression of the Society of Jesus throughout the world. It was this that killed him. He expired under the shock on the night of 2-3 February. In one sense, no doubt, his pontificate was a failure, and he has been blamed for a lack of foresight which should have made him yield to the exigencies of the times. But in a higher sense it was a splendid success. For he had the insight to see through the plausible pretences of the Church's enemies, and to discern the ultimate ends which they were pursuing. He viewed the course of events ever in the light of faith, and was ever faithful to his trust. He always took up sound positions, and knew how to defend them with language conspicuous for its truth and justice, as well as for its moderation and Christian tenderness. His pontificate, in short, afforded the spectacle of a saint clad in moral strength contending alone against the powers of the world and their physical might; and such a spectacle is an acquisition forever. There were other aspects under which Clement XIII had to contend with the prevailing errors of Regalism and Jansenism in France, Germany, Holland, Poland, and Venice, but these by comparison were of minor moment. Among the pernicious books condemned by him were the "Histoire du peuple de Dieu" of the Jesuit Berruyer, the "Esprit" of Helvétius, the "Exposition de la doctrine chrétienne" of Mésenguy, the "Encyclopédie" of D'Alembert and Diderot, and the "De Statu Ecclesiæ" of Febronius. He greatly encouraged devotion to the Sacred Heart, and ordered the Preface of the Blessed Trinity to be recited on Sundays. Barberi and Spetia, Bullarii Romani Continuatio (Rome, 1835); Cordara, Commentarii in DÖllinger, Beitrage zur politischen, kirchlichen und Kulturgeschichte (1882), III; Procés-verbaux du clergé français (1882), VIII; Novaes, Elementi della storia de' sommi pontefici (Rome, 1822), XV; de Montor, Histoire de souverains pontifes romains (Paris, 1851); da Ranke, Die römischen Päpste, III; CrÉtineau- Joly, Clément XIV et les Jésuites (Paris, 1847); Idem, Histoire de la compagnie de Jésus (Paris, 1851), V; Theiner, Histoire du Pontificat de Clément XIV (Paris, 1852); Ravignan, Clément XIII et Clément XIV (Paris, 1854); Ferrer del Rio, Historia del Reinado de Carlos III (Madrid, 1857); DÁvila y Collado, Reinado de Carlos III in CÁnovas de Castillo, Historia General de España (Madrid, 1893); Smith, The Suppression of the Society of Jesus articles in the Month (1902, 1903); Rousseau, Expulsion des Jésuites en Espagne in the Revue des questiones historiques (Jan., 1904). Sydney Smith Clement XIV Pope Clement XIV (Lorenzo–or Giovanni Vincenzo Antonio– Ganganelli). Born at Sant’ Arcangelo, near Rimini, 31 October, 1705; died at Rome, 22 September, 1774. At the death of Clement XIII the Church was in dire distress. Gallicanism and Jansenism, Febronianism and Rationalism were up in rebellion against the authority of the Roman pontiff; the rulers of France, Spain, Naples, Portugal, Parma were on the side of the sectarians who flattered their dynastic prejudices and, at least in appearance, worked for the strengthening of the temporal power against the spiritual. The new pope would have to face a coalition of moral and political forces which Clement XIII had indeed manfully resisted, but failed to put down, or even materially to check. The great question between Rome and the Bourbon princes was the suppression of the Society of Jesus. In France, Spain, and Portugal the suppression had taken place de facto; the accession of a new pope was made the occasion for insisting on the abolition of the order root and branch, de facto and de jure, in Europe and all over the world. The conclave assembled 15 February, 1769. Rarely, if ever, has a conclave been the victim of such overweening interference, base intrigues, and unwarranted pressure. The ambassadors of France (d’Aubeterre) and Spain (Azpuru) and the Cardinals de Bernis (France) and Orsini (Naples) led the campaign. The Sacred college, consisting of forty-seven cardinals, was divided into Court cardinals and Zelanti. The latter, favourable to the Jesuits and opposed to the encroaching secular, were in a majority. "It is easy to foresee the difficulties of our negotiations on a stage where more than three-fourths of the actors are against us." Thus wrote Bernis to Choiseul, the minister of Louis XV. The immediate object of the intriguers was to gain over a sufficient number of Zelanti. D’Aubeterre, inspired by Azpuru, urged Bernis to insist that the election of the future pope be made to depend on his written engagement to suppress the Jesuits. The cardinal, however, refused. In a memorandum to Choiseul, dated 12 April, 1769, he says: "To require from the future pope a promise made in writing or before witnesses, to destroy the Jesuits, would be a flagrant violation of the canon law and therefore a blot on the honour of the crowns." The King of Spain (Charles III) was willing to bear the responsibility. D’Aubeterre opined that simony and canon law had no standing against reason, which claimed the abolition of the Society for the peace of the world. Threats were now resorted to; Bernis hinted at a blockade of Rome and popular insurrections to overcome the resistance of the Zelanti. France and Spain, in virtue of their right of veto, excluded twenty-three of the forty-seven cardinals; nine or ten more, on account of their age or for some other reason, were not papabili; only four or five remained eligible. Well might the Sacred College, as Bernis feared it would, protest against violence and separate on the plea of not being free to elect a suitable candidate. But d’Aubeterre was relentless. He wished to intimidate the cardinals. "A pope elected against the wishes of the Courts", he wrote, "will not be acknowledged"; and again, "I think that a pope of that [philosophical] temper, that is without scruples, holding fast to no opinion and consulting only his own interests, might be acceptable to the Courts". The ambassadors threatened to leave Rome unless the conclave surrendered to their dictation. The arrival of the two Spanish cardinals, Solis and La Cerda, added new strength to the Court party. Solis insisted on a written promise to suppress the Jesuits being given by the future pope, but Bernis was not to be gained over to such a breach of the law. Solis, therefore, supported in the conclave by Cardinal Malvazzi and outside by the ambassadors of France and Spain, took the matter into his own hands. He began by sounding Cardinal Ganganelli as to his willingness to give the promise required by the Bourbon princes as an indispensable condition for election. -- Why Ganganelli? This cardinal was the only friar in the Sacred College. Of humble birth (his father had been a surgeon at Sant' Arcangelo), he had received his education from the Jesuits of Rimini and the Piarists of Urbino, and, in 1724, at the age of nineteen, had entered the Order of Friars Minor of St. Francis and changed his baptismal name (Giovanni Vincenzo Antonio) for that of Lorenzo. His talents and his virtues had raised him to the dignity of definitor generalis of his order (1741); Benedict XIV made him Consultor of the Holy Office, and Clement XIII gave him the cardinal's hat (1759), at the instance, it is said, of Father Ricci, the General of the Jesuits. During the conclave he endeavoured to please both the Zelanti and the Court party without committing himself to either. At any rate he signed a paper which satisfied Solis. Crétineau-Joly, the historian of the Jesuits, gives its text; the future pope declared "that he recognized in the sovereign pontiff the right to extinguish, with good conscience, the Company of Jesus, provided he observed the canon law; and that it was desirable that the pope should do everything in his power to satisfy the wishes of the Crowns". The original paper is, however, nowhere to be found, but its existence seems established by subsequent events, and also by the testimony of Bernis in letters to Choiseul (28 July, and 20 November, 1769). Ganganelli had thus secured the votes of the Court cardinals; the Zelanti looked upon him as indifferent or even favourable to the Jesuits; d’Aubeterre had always been in his favour as being "a wise and moderate theologian"; and Choiseul had marked him as "very good" on the list of papabili. Bernis, anxious to have his share in the victory of the sovereigns, urged the election. On 18 May, 1769, Ganganelli was elected by forty-six votes out of forty-seven, the forty-seventh being his own which he had given to Cardinal Rezzonico, a nephew of Clement XIII. He took the name of Clement XIV. The new pope's first Encyclical clearly defined his policy: to keep the peace with Catholic princes in order to secure their support in the war against irreligion. His predecessor had left him a legacy of broils with nearly every Catholic power in Europe. Clement hastened to settle as many as he could by concessions and conciliatory measures. Without revoking the constitution of Clement XIII against he young Duke of Parma's inroads on the rights of the Church, he refrained from urging its execution, and graciously granted him a dispensation to marry his cousin, the Archduchess Amelia, daughter of Maria Theresa of Austria. The King of Spain, soothed by these concessions, withdrew the uncanonical edict which, a year before, he had issued as a counterblast to the pope's proceedings against the infant Duke of Parma, the king's nephew; he also re-established the nuncio's tribunal and condemned some writings against Rome. Portugal had been severed from Rome since 1760; Clement XIV began his attempt at reconciliation by elevating to the Sacred College Paulo de Carvalho, brother of the famous minister Pombal; active negotiations terminated in the revocation, by King Joseph I, of the ordinances of 1760, the origin and cause of the rupture between Portugal and the Holy See. A grievance common to Catholic princes was the yearly publication, on Holy Thursday, of the censures reserved to the pope; Clement abolished this custom in the first Lent of his pontificate. But there remained the ominous question of the Jesuits. The Bourbon princes, though thankful for smaller concessions, would not rest till they had obtained the great object of their machinations, the total suppression of the Society. Although persecuted in France, Spain, Sicily, and Portugal, the Jesuits had still many powerful protectors: the rulers, as well as the public conscience, protected them and their numerous establishments in the ecclesiastical electorates of Germany, in the Palatinate, Bavaria, Silesia, Poland, Switzerland, and the many countries subject to the sceptre of Maria Theresa, not to mention the States of the Church and the foreign missions. The Bourbon princes were moved in their persecution by the spirit of the times, represented in Latin countries by French irreligious philosophism, by Jansenism, Gallicanism, and Erastianism; probably also by the natural desire to receive the papal sanction for their unjust proceedings against the order, for which they stood accused at the bar of the Catholic conscience. The victim of a man's injustice often becomes the object of his hatred; thus only the conduct of Charles III, of Pombal, Tanucci, Aranda, Moniño can be accounted for. An ever-recurring and almost solitary grievance against the Society was that the Fathers disturbed the peace wherever they were firmly established. The accusation is not unfounded: the Jesuits did indeed disturb the peace of the enemies of the Church, for, in the words of d’Alembert to Frederick II, they were "the grenadiers of the pope's guard". Cardinal de Bernis, now French ambassador in Rome, was instructed by Choiseul to follow the lead of Spain in the renewed campaign against the Jesuits. On the 22nd of July, 1769, he presented to the pope a memorandum in the name of the three ministers of the Bourbon kings, "The three monarchs", it ran, "still believe the destruction of the Jesuits to be useful and necessary; they have already made their request to Your Holiness, and they renew it this day." Clement answered that "he had his conscience and honour to consult"; he asked for a delay. On 30 September he made some vague promises to Louis XV, who was less eager in the fray than Charles III. This latter, bent on the immediate suppression of the order, obtained from Clement XIV, under the strong pressure of Azpuru, the written promise "to submit to His Majesty a scheme for the absolute extinction of the Society" (30 November, 1769). To prove his sincerity the pope now commenced open hostilities against the Jesuits. He refused to see their general, Father Ricci, and gradually removed from his entourage their best friends; his only confidants were two friars of his own order, Buontempo and Francesco; no princes or cardinals surrounded his throne. The Roman people, dissatisfied with this state of things and reduced to starvation by maladministration, openly showed their discontent, but Clement, bound by his promises and caught in the meshes of Bourbon diplomacy, was unable to retrace his steps. The college and seminary of Frascati were taken from the Jesuits and handed over to the bishop of the town, the Cardinal of York. Their Lenten catechisms were prohibited for 1770. A congregation of cardinals hostile to the order visited the Roman College and had the Fathers expelled; the novitiate and the German College were also attacked. The German College won its cause, but the sentence was never executed. The novices and students were sent back to their families. A similar system of persecution was extended to Bologna, Ravenna, Ferrara, Modena, Macerata. Nowhere did the Jesuits offer any resistance; they knew that their efforts were futile. Father Garnier wrote: "You ask me why the Jesuits offer no defence: they can do nothing here. All approaches, direct and indirect, are completely closed, walled up with double walls. Not the most insignificant memorandum can find its way in. There is no one who would undertake to hand it in" (19th Jan., 1773). On 4 July, 1772, appeared on the scene a new Spanish ambassador, Joseph Moniño, Count of Florida Blanca. At once he made an onslaught on the perplexed pope. He openly threatened him with a schism in Spain and probably in the other Bourbon states, such as had existed in Portugal from 1760 to 1770. On the other hand, he promised the restitution of Avignon and Benvento, still held by France and Naples. Whilst Clement's anger was roused by this latter simoniacal proposal, his good, but feeble, heart could not overcome the fear of a widespread schism. Moniño had conquered. He now ransacked the archives of Rome and Spain to supply Clement with facts justifying the promised suppression. Moniño must be held responsible for the matter of the Brief "Dominus ac Redemptor", i. e. for its facts and provisions; the pope contributed little more to it than the form of his supreme authority. Meanwhile Clement continued to harass the Jesuits of his own dominions, perhaps with a view to preparing the Catholic world for the Brief of suppression, or perhaps hoping by his severity to soothe the anger of Charles III and to stave off the abolition of the whole order. Until the end of 1772 he still found some support against the Bourbons in King Charles Emmanuel of Sardinia and in the Empress Maria Theresa of Austria. But Charles Emmanuel died, and Maria Theresa, giving way to the importunate prayers of her son Joseph II and her daughter the Queen of Naples, ceased to plead for the maintenance of the Society. Thus left to himself, or rather to the will of Charles III and the wiles of Moniño, Clement began, in November, 1772, the composition of the Brief of abolition, which took him seven months to finish. It was signed 8 June, 1773; at the same time a congregation of cardinals was appointed to administer the property of the suppressed order. On 21 July the bells of the Gesù rang the opening of the annual novena preceding the feast of St. Ignatius; the pope, hearing them, remarked: "They are not ringing for the saints but for the dead". The Brief of suppression, signed on 8 June, bears the date 21 July, 1773. It was made known at the Gesù to the general (Father Ricci) and his assistants on the evening of 16 August; the following day they were taken first to the English College, then to Castel Sant’ Angelo, where their long trial was commenced. Ricci never saw the end of it. He died in prison, to his last moment protesting his innocence and that of his order. His companions were set free under Pius VI, their judges having found them "not guilty". The Brief, "Dominus ac Redemptor" opens with the statement that it is the pope's office to secure in the world the unity of mind in the bonds of peace. He must therefore be prepared, for the sake of charity, to uproot and destroy the things most dear to him, whatever pains and bitterness their loss may entail. Often the popes, his predecessors, have made use of their supreme authority for reforming, and even dissolving, religious orders which had become harmful and disturbed the peace of the nations rather than promoted it. Numerous examples are quoted, then the Brief continues: "Our predecessors, in virtue of the plenitude of power which is theirs as Vicars of Christ, have suppressed such orders without allowing them to state their claims or to refute the grave accusations brought against them, or to impugn the motives of the pope." Clement has now to deal with a similar case, that of the Society of Jesus. Having enumerated the principal favours granted it by former popes, he remarks that "the very tenor and terms of the said Apostolic constitutions show that the Society from its earliest days bore the germs of dissensions and jealousies which tore its own members asunder, led them to rise against other religious orders, against the secular clergy and the universities, nay even against the sovereigns who had received them in their states". Then follows a list of the quarrels in which the Jesuits had been engaged, from Sixtus V to Benedict XIV. Clement XIII had hoped to silence their enemies by renewing the approbation of their Institute, "but the Holy See derived no consolation, the Society no help, Christianity no advantage from the Apostolic letters of Clement XIII, of blessed memory, letters which were wrung from him rather than freely given". At the end of this pope's reign "the outcry and the complaints against the Society increasing day by day, the very princes whose piety and hereditary benevolence towards it are favourably known of all nations -- our beloved Sons in Jesus Christ the Kings of France, Spain, Portugal, and the two Sicilies -- were forced to expel from their kingdoms, states and provinces, all the religious of this Order, well knowing that this extreme measure was the only remedy to such great evils." Now the complete abolition of the order is demanded by the same princes. After long and mature consideration the pope, "compelled by his office, which imposes on him the obligation to procure, maintain, and consolidate with all his power the peace and tranquillity of the Christian people -- persuaded, moreover, that the Society of Jesus is no longer able to produce the abundant fruit and the great good for which it was instituted -- and considering that, as long as this order subsists, it is impossible for the Church to enjoy free and solid peace", resolves to "suppress and abolish" the Society, "to annul and abrogate all and each of its offices, functions, and administrations". The authority of the superiors was transferred to the bishops; minute provisions were made for the maintenance and the employment of the members of the order. The Brief concludes with a prohibition to suspend or impede its execution, to make it the occasion of insulting or attacking anyone, least of all the former Jesuits; finally it enhorts the faithful to live in peace with all men and to love one another. The one and only motive for the suppression of the Society set forth in this Brief is to restore the peace of the Church by removing one of the contending parties from the battlefield. No blame is laid by the pope on the rules of the order, or the personal conduct of its members, or the orthodoxy of their teaching. Moreover, Father Sydney Smith, S. J. (in "The Month", CII, 62, July 1903), observes: "The fact remains that the condemnation is not pronounced in the straightforward language of direct statement, but is merely insinuated with the aid of dexterous phrasing"; and he contrasts this method of stating grounds for the suppression of the Society with the vigorous and direct language used by former popes in suppressing the Humiliati and other orders. If Clement XIV hoped to stop the storm of unbelief raging against the Bark of Peter by throwing its best oarsmen overboard, he was sorely mistaken. But is unlikely that he entertained such a fallacy. He loved the Jesuits, who had been his first teachers, his trusty advisers, the best defenders of the Church over which he ruled. No personal animosity guided his action; the Jesuits themselves, in agreement with all serious historians, attribute their suppression to Clement's weakness of character, unskilled diplomacy, and that kind of goodness of heart which is more bent on doing what is pleasing than what is right. He was not built to hold his head above the tempest; his hesitations and his struggles were of no avail against the enemies of the order, and his friends found no better excuse for him than that of St. Alphonsus: What could the poor pope do when all the Courts insisted on the suppression? The Jesuit Cordara expresses the same mind: "I think we should not condemn the pontiff who, after so many hesitations, has judged it his duty to suppress the Society of Jesus. I love my order as much as any man, yet, had I been in the pope's place I should probably have acted as he did. The Xompany, founded and maintained for the good of the Church, perished for the same good; it could not have ended more gloriously." It should be noted that the Brief was not promulgated in the form customary for papal Constitutions intended as laws of the Church. It was not a Bull, but a Brief, i. e. a decree of less binding force and easier of revocation; it was not affixed to the gates of St. Peter's or in the Campo di Fiore; it was not even communicated in legal form to the Jesuits in Rome; the general and his assistants alone received the notification of their suppression. In France it was not published, the Gallican Church, and especially Beaumont, Archbishop of Paris, resolutely opposing it as being the pope's personal deed, not supported by the whole Church and therefore not binding on the Church of France. The King of Spain thought the Brief too lenient, for it condemned neither the doctrine, nor the morals, nor the discipline of his victims. The court of Naples forbade its publication under pain of death. Maria Theresa allowed her son Joseph II to seize the property of the Jesuits (some $10,000,000) and then, "reserving her rights", acquiesced in the suppression "for the peace of the Church". Poland resisted a while; the Swiss cantons of Lucerne, Fribourg, and Solothurn never allowed the Fathers to give up their colleges. Two non-Catholic sovereigns, Frederick of Prussia and Catherine of Russia, took the Jesuits under their protection. Whatever may have been their motives, whether it was to spite the pope and the Bourbon Courts or to please their Catholic subjects and preserve for them the services of the best educators, their intervention kept the order alive until its complete restoration in 1804. Frederick persevered in his opposition only for a few years; in 1780 the Brief was promulgated in his dominions. The Jesuits retained possession of all their colleges and of the University of Breslau until 1806 and 1811, but they ranked as secular priests and admitted no more novices. But Catherine II resisted to the end. By her order the bishops of White Russia ignored the Brief of suppression and commanded the Jesuits to continue to live in communities and to go on with their usual work. Clement XIV seems to have approved of their conduct. The empress, in order to set at rest the scruples of the Fathers, engaged in several negotiations with the pope and had her will. In France, too, the persecuted Jesuits were not altogether without friends. Madame Louise de France, daughter of Louis XV, who had entered the Carmelite Order and was, with her sisters, the leader of a band of pious women at the court of her royal father, had worked out a scheme for re-establishing the Jesuits in six provinces under the authority of the bishops. Bernis, however, defeated their good intentions. He obtained from the pope a new Brief, addressed to himself and requesting him to see that the French bishops conformed, each in his diocese, to the Brief "Dominus ac Redemptor". After the death of Clement XIV it was rumoured that he had retracted the Brief of abolition by a letter of 29 June, 1774. That letter, it was said, had been entrusted to his confessor to be given to the next pope. It was published for the first time in 1789, at Zurich, in P. Ph. Wolf's "Allgemeine Geschichte der Jesuiten". Although Pius VI never protested against this statement, the authenticity of the document in question is not sufficiently established (De la Serviére). The first and almost the only advantage the pope reaped from his policy of concessions was the restoration to the Holy See of Avignon and Benevento. These provinces had been seized by the Kings of France and Naples when Clement XIII had excommunicated their kinsman the young Duke of Parma (1768). The restitution, following so closely on the suppression of the Jesuits, seemed the price paid for it, although, to save appearances, the duke interceded with the two kings in favour of the pope, and Clement, in the consistory of 17 January, 1774, took occasion from it to load the Bourbon princes with praises they little deserved. The hostile and schismatical manœ;uvres against the Church continued unabated in many Catholic countries. In France a royal commission for the reformation of the religious orders had been at work for several years, notwithstanding the energetic protests of Clement XIII; without the pope's consent it had abolished in 1770 the congregations of Grandmont and of the exempt Benedictines; it had threatened the Premonstratensians, the Trinitarians, and the Minims with the same fate. The pope protested, through his nuncio to Paris, against such abuses of the secular power, but in vain. The Celestines and the Camaldolese were secularized that same year, 1770. The only concessions Louis XV deigned to make was to submit to Clement the general edict for the reformation of the French religious before its publication. This was in 1773. The pope succeeded in obtaining its modification in several points. In 1768 Genoa had ceded the Island of Corsica to France. At once a conflict arose as to the introduction of "Gallican usages". The pope sent a visitor Apostolic to the island and had the gratification of preventing the adoption of usages in opposition to the Roman practice. Louis XV, however, revenged himself by absolutely refusing to acknowledge the pope's suzerainty over Corsica. Louis XV died in 1774, and one is rather surprised at the eulogy which Clement XIV pronounced in a consistory on "the king's deep love for the Church, and his admirable zeal for the defence of the Catholic religion". He also hoped that the penitent death of the prince had secured his salvation. It may be surmised that he was prompted by a desire to please the king's youngest daughter, Madame Louise de France, Prioress of the Carmelites of SaintDenis, for whom he had always shown a great affection, attested by numerous favours granted to herself and to her convent. During Clement XIV's pontificate the chief rulers in German lands were Maria Theresa, of Austria, and Frederick the Great, of Prussia. Frederick, by preserving the Jesuits in his dominions, rendered the Church a good, though perhaps unintended, service. He also authorized the erection of a Catholic church in Berlin; the pope sent a generous contribution and ordered collections for the same purpose to be made in Belgium, the Rhineland, and Austria. Maria Theresa lived up to the title of Regina Apostolica bestowed on her by Clement XIII. But the doctrines of Febronius were prevalent at her court, and more than once she came into conflict with the pope. She refused to suppress a new edition of Febronius, as Clement XIV requested; she lent a willing ear to the "Grievances of the German nation", a scheme of reforms in the Church making it more dependent on the prince than on the pope; she legislated for the religious orders of her dominions without consulting Rome. She maintained her edict on the religious against all the pope's remonstrances, but withdrew her protection from the authors of the "Grievances", the Electors of Cologne, Mainz, and Trier. She also obtained from Clement in 1770 the institution of a Ruthenian bishop for the Ruthenian Catholics of Hungary. In other parts of Germany the pope had to face similar difficulties. The number and wealth of the religious houses, in some instances their uselessness, and occasionally thier disorders, tempted the princes to lay violent and rapacious hands on them. Numerous houses were to be suppressed in Bavaria for the endowment of the new University of Ebersberg, in the Palatinate the reception of new religious was to be stopped; Clement opposed both measures with success. Westphalia is indebted to him for the University of Münster, erected 27 May, 1773. In Spain Clement approved the Order of the Knights of the Immaculate Conception, instituted by Charles III. The king also desired him to define the dogma of the Immaculate Conception, but France blocked the way. Portugal, whilst it made a certain outward show of goodwill towards Rome, continued to interfere in ecclesiastical affairs and to impose on colleges and seminaries an education more in accord with French philosophism than with the spirit of the Church. At Naples the minster Tanucci hindered the recruitment of religious orders; episcopal acts required the royal placet; the anti- religious press enjoyed high protection. Poland and Russia were another source of deep grief for Clement XIV. Whilst, politically, Poland was preparing its own ruin, the Piarists openly taught the worst philosophism in their schools and refused to have their houses visited by the papal nuncio at Warsaw. King Stanislaus planned the extinction of the religious orders and favoured the Freemasons. The pope was powerless; the few concessions he obtained from Catherine II for the Catholics of her new province were set at naught by that headstrong woman as soon as it suited her politics. Of her own authority she created for the annexed Catholic Ruthenians a new diocese (Mohileff) administered by a bishop (Siestrencewicz) of schismatic temper. Clement XIV had the satisfaction of seeing his nuncio, Caprara, favourably received at the Court of England, and of initiating measures for the emancipation of English Catholics. This turn in the relations between Rome and England was due to the granting of royal honours to the king's brother when he visited Rome in 1772; the same honours being refused to the Pretender. In the East, the Nestorian Patriarch, Mar Simeon, and six of his suffragans, were reunited to Rome. In Rome the pope found little favour with either the Roman patriciate or the Sacred College; none of the many measures he took for the betterment of his people could atone, in their eyes, for his subserviency to the Bourbon Courts and for the suppression of the Jesuits. The last months of his life were embittered by the consciousness of his failures; at times he seemed crushed under the weight of sorrow. On the 10th of September, 1774, he took to his bed, received Extreme Unction on the 21st and died piously on the 22nd of the same month. Many witnesses in the process of canonization of St. Alphonsus of Liguori attested that the saint had been miraculously present at the death-bed of Clement XIV to console and fortify him in his last hour. The doctors, who opened the dead body in presence of many spectators, ascribed death to scorbutic and hæmorrhoidal dispositions of long standing, aggravated by excessive labour and by the habit of provoking artificial perspiration even during the greatest heat. Notwithstanding the doctors' certificate, the "Spanish party" and historical romancers attributed death to poison administered by the Jesuits. The mortal remains of Clement XIV rest in the church of the Twelve Apostles. (See also Society of Jesus.) Bullarium Romanum: Clementis XIV epistolæ et brevia, ed. Theiner (Paris, 1852); Cordara, Memoirs on the suppression of the Jesuits, published by DÖllinger in Beitrage zur politischen, kirchlichen u. Culturgeschichte (Vienna, 1882). -- As to the Lettres intéressantes de Clément XIV, published by the Marchese Caracciolo in 1776, Father Sydney Smith, S. J., says, in a note to one of the articles in The Month (CI, 180, Feb., 1903) referred to below: "There has been much discussion about these letters. The Marchese Caracciolo in his Preface is suspiciously reticent as to the channels through which he obtained them, and gives them in a French translation instead of in the original Italian. On this account, and because it is difficult to believe that some of the contents come from Fra Lorenzo [as Clement XIV was called in religion], many critics have rejected the entire collection as spurious. But da Reutmont thinks (Ganganelli–Papst Clement–seine Briefe und seine Zeit, 1847, Preface 40-42) that it is in substance a genuine collection, though some of the letters are spurious and interpolated. Von Reumont argues very justly that it would hardly be possible to fabricate so many letters, addressed to correspondents most of whom were alive at the time of the publication, and yet impart to them the unity, distinctness, and spontanedity of a living character."– Chretineau Joly, Clément XIV et les Jésuites (Paris, 1847); Le Pape Clément XIV, Lettres au P. Theiner; Masson, Le Cardinal de Bernis (Paris, 1884); Rousseau, Expulsion des Jésuites en Espagne (Paris, 1907); De la ServiÉre in Vacant, Dict. de théol. cath. (Paris, 1907), s. v. Clément XIV; The Dublin Review (1855), XXXIX, 107; Smith, The Suppression of the Society of Jesus, articles in The Month (London, 1902-3), XCIX, C, CI, CII; Ravignan, Clément XIII et Clément XIV (Paris, 1854). J. Wilhelm Caesar Clement Cæsar Clement Date of birth uncertain; died at Brussels 28 Aug., 1626, great-nephew of Sir Thomas More's friend, Dr. John Clement. He was a student at Douai when in 1578 the college was removed to Reims, but was shortly sent to the English College, Rome, being admitted 5th September, 1579. He was ordained priest in 1585, but remained in Rome till Oct., 1587. He took the degree of Doctor of Theology in Italy, probably in Rome itself. Though originally destined for the English mission, he never went to England. but held the important positions of Dean of St. Gudule's, Brussels, and vicar-general of the King of Spain's army in Flanders. He was a great benefactor to all English exiles, especially the Augustinian Canonesses of Louvain. In 1612 he, with the Rev. Robert Chambers, was commissioned from Rome to make a visitation of Douai College so as to put an end to the dissatisfaction with the administration there. (See Dodd, "Church Hist. of Eng.", Tierney ed., V, 3 sqq.) DODD, Church History of England (London, 1737), II, 388; MORRIS, Troubles of our Cath. Forefathers (London, 1872), I, 40, 41, 47, 57; Douay Diaries (London. 1877); FOLEY, Records Eng. Prov. S. J. (London. 1880), VI, 138; GILLOW, Bibl. Dict. Eng. Cath. (London, 1885), I, 497-8; COOPER in Dict. Nat. Biog. (London, 1887). XI, 32; HAMILTON, Chronicles of the English Augustinian Canonesses of Louvain (London, 1904-6). EDWIN BURTON. Francois Clement François Clément A member of the Benedictine Congregation of Saint-Maur and historian; born at Bèze in the department of Côte-d'Or, France, 1714; died at Paris, 29 March, 1793. He made his first studies at the college of the Jesuits at Dijon. Soon after his profession in 1731 his superiors sent him to the monastery of the "Blancs-Manteaux" at Paris to assist in the learned labours of the congregation. To great intellectual gifts Clément added scientific acumen and an unflagging industry which especially fitted him for his task. He knew no fatigue and at night gave barely two or three hours to sleep. He first busied himself with the preparations for volumes XI and XII of the "Histoire littéraire de la France"; these volumes covered the years 1141-1167 and were edited by Clémencet. He then edited, in collaboration with Dom Brial, a fellow-Benedictine, volumes XII and XIII of the work begun by Bouquet in 1738, "Recueil des historiens des Gaules et de la France" (Paris, 1786), or as the title is generally given "Scriptores rerum gallicarum et francicarum". These volumes contain altogether 439 original documents, accompanied by exhaustive introductions, numerous explanatory remarks, and acute critical notes. Clément's chief work is a revised edition of the chronology first issued by Clémencet in one volume, entitled: "L'art de vérifier les dates des faits historiques". The new edition in which the original work appeared in an entirely changed form was published at Paris in 1770. A third edition (Paris, 1783-1787) embraced three folio volumes; in this the original underwent even greater alterations, and the labour on it cost Clément more than ten years of toil. In contrast to Clémencet he treated his matter objectively, and was influenced neither by prejudices against the Jesuits nor by a blind predilection for the Jansenists. His position met with the approval of scholars and he was made a member of the "Académie des Inscriptions". The work is still of value, and it has been well called "the finest memorial of French learning of the eighteenth century". Clément was engaged in the preparation of a fourth and much enlarged edition when a stroke of apoplexy caused his death. The unfinished work was completed by Viton de Saint-Allais and appeared with additional matter in eighteen volumes (Paris, 1818-19). Viton de Saint-Allais also published from the literary remains of Clément the treatise "L'art de vérifier les dates des faits historiques avant l'ère chrétienne" (Paris, 1820). A work of less importance was one begun by Dom Poncet and edited by Clément, entitled: "Nouveaux éclaircissements sur l'origine et le Pentateuque des Samnaritains" (Paris, 1760). Clément's industry in collecting material is shown by the "Catalogus manuscriptorum codicum Collegii Claramontani, quem excipit catalogus domus professæ Parisiensis, uterque digestus et notis ornatus" (Paris, 1764). For information concerning his letters see the "Revue bénédictine", XII, 508. DE LAME, Bibliothéque des écrivains de la congrégation de Saint-Maur, 484. PATRICIUS SCHLAGER. John Clement John Clement President of the College of Physicians and tutor to St. Thomas More's children, born in Yorkshire about 1500; died 1 July, 1572, in the Blocstrate, St. John's parish, Mechlin. Educated at St. Paul's School and Oxford, St. Thomas More admitted Clement as one of his household to help in the education of his children and to assist him in linguistic studies. In 1519 we find Clement at Corpus Christi College, Oxford, when Wolsey constituted him the Rhetoric Reader in the university; later he became professor of Greek there. About 1526 he married the daughter of a Norfolk gentleman, Margaret Gibbs, who lived and studied with More's family. Applying himself to the study of medicine, he was admitted a Fellow of the College of Physicians (1 Feb., 1528), and was chosen by Henry VIII to attend Wolsey when the latter was dangerously ill at Esher (1529). He was consiliarius of the college from 1529 to 1531, in 1547, and again from 1556 to 1558. He held the office of president in 1544, and that of censor in 1555. After the accession of Edward VI he retired to Louvain to escape religious persecution; so obnoxious was he to the Protestant authorities that he was exempted from the general pardon granted by Edward VI. He returned to England in Mary's reign and practised his profession in Essex, but fled abroad again when Elizabeth came to the throne. Mechlin was his last place of exile. He lies buried in the cathedral church of St. Rumbold in that city. He wrote: "Epigrammatum et aliorum carminum liber"; and also translated from Greek into Latin: + (1) "The Epistles of St. Gregory Nazianzen"; + (2) "The Homilies of Nicephorus Callistus concerning the Greek Saints"; + (3) "The Epistles of Pope Celestine I to Cyril, Bishop of Alexandria". DODD, Church History (Brussels, 1737-1742), I, 202; PITS, De Angliœ Scriptoribus (Paris, 1619), 767; WOOD, Athenœ Oxonienses, ed. BLISS (London, 1813-1820), I, 401; ROBINSON, Registers of St. Paul's School (London, s. d.), 19; MUNK, College of Physicians (London, 1878), I, 26. G. E. HIND. Clementines Clementines (Klementia; Clementine Pseudo- Writings) Clementines is the name given to the curious religious romance which has come down to us in two forms as composed by Pope St. Clement I. The Greek form is preserved only in two Manuscripts and consists of twenty books of homilies. The Latin form is a translation made from the Greek by Rufinus, who died in 410. It is called the "Recognitions". Two later epitomes of the Homilies exist also, and there is a partial Syriac translation, embracing Recog. i-iii, and Hom. x-xiv, preserved in two British Museum Manuscripts, one of which was written in the year 411. Some fragments are known in Arabic and in Slavonic. The writings are curious rather than admirable,and their main interest lies in the extraordinary theories which they have been made to support during the nineteenth century. The existence of the Clementine Homilies was first made known in 1572 and 1578 by the Jesuit Turrianus, who was a diligent searcher of libraries. He seems to have found a Manuscript of quite a different version from that which we possess. The first edition was that of G. B. Cotelier, 1672, from the Paris Manuscript, in which the 20th book and part of the 19th are wanting. This was re-edited in 1847 by Schwegler. The complete Vatican Manuscript was first used in Dressel's edition, 1853, reprinted in Migne, P. G., II; another edition by Lagarde, 865. The "Recognitions" are found in numerous Manuscripts, for they were very popular in the Middle Ages: indeed the strange history of Clement and his father Faustus, or Faustinianus, is said to have originated the Faust legend (cf. Richardson, "Papers of Amer. Soc. of Ch. Hist.", VI, 1894). The first edition, by Faber Stapulensis, appeared in 1504; Migne, P. G., I, gives a reprint of Gersdorf's edition of 1838. A new and much-needed edition is expected from E. C. Richardson. To the Homilies are prefixed two letters and an account of the reception of one of them. That from Clement to James was translated by Rufinus at an earlier date than the Recognitions (best edition by Fritzsche, 1873). CONTENTS Large portions of the Homilies (H.) and Recognitions (R.) are almost word for word the same. Yet larger portions correspond in subject and more or less in treatment. Other parts contained only in one of the two works appear to be referred to or presupposed in the other. The two works are roughly of the same length, and contain the same framework of romance. H. was considered to be the original by Neander, Baur, Schliemann, Schwegler, and others. Lehmann thought the first three books of R. to be original, and H. for the remainder. Uhlhorn argued that both were recensions of an earlier book, "Preachings of Peter", R. having best preserved the narrative, H. the dogmatic teaching. Cave, Whiston, Rosenmüller, Ritschl, Hilgenfeld, and others held R. to be the original. It is now almost universally held (after Hort, Harnack, Waitz) that H. and R. are two versions of an original Clementine romance, which was longer than either, and embraced most of the contents of both. Sometimes H., sometimes R., is the more faithful to the archetype. With the eLaborate philosophical and dogmatic discourse which forms the bulk of both works is interwoven a story which, when we consider its date, may he described as positively exciting and romantic. It differs slightly in the two books. The narrative is addressed to St. James, the Bishop of Jerusalem, and is related in the person of Clement himself. He begins by detailing his religious questionings, his doubts about immortality, etc. He hears at Rome the preaching of a man of Judea who relates the miracles of Christ. This man (R.) was Barnabas; Clement defends him from the mob, and follows him to Palestine. (In H., evidently the original form, no name is given. Clement sets out for Palestine, but is driven by storms to Alexandria; there he is directed by philosophers to Barnabas, whom he defends from the mob and follows to Cæsarea.) At Cæsarea Clement hears that Peter is there and is about to hold a disputation with Simon Magus. At Peter's 1odging he finds Barnabas, who introduces him. Peter invites Clement to accompany him from city to city, on his way to Rome, in order to hear his discourses. Clement (so R., or Peter himself, H.) sends a report of this to James, from whom Peter has an order to transmit to him accounts of all his teaching. So far H. i. and R. i., 1-21. Then the two recensions vary. The original order may have been as follows: Clement arises at dawn (H. ii, 1) and finds Peter, who continues to instruct him (2-18, cf. R. ii, 33 and iii, 61). Peter sends for two of his disciples, Nicetas and Aquila, whom he describes as foster-sons of Justa, the Syro-Phœnician woman who was healed by Christ. They had been educated from boyhood by Simon Magus, but had been converted by Zacchæus, another disciple of Peter (19-21). Aquila relates Simon's parentage and his Samaritan origin, and declares that he claims to be greater than the God who created the world (H. ii, 22, R. ii, 7). He had been a disciple of St. John the Baptist, who is represented in H. as the head of a sect of "daily baptizers"; Dositheus succeeded John as head of it, and Simon supplanted Dositheus (23-4). In R. the Baptist has been omitted, and the sect is that of Dositheus. The woman, Helena, whom Simon took about with him, is described (in R. she is called the moon — R. ii, 12, H. ii, 26), and the sham miracles he claimed to do (H. ii, 32, R. ii, 10). He can make himself visible or invisible at will, can pass through rocks as if they were clay, throw himself down from a mountain unhurt, loose himself when bound; he can animate statues, make trees spring up; he can throw himself into the fire without harm, can appear with two faces: "I shall change myself into a sheep or a goat. I shall make a beard to grow upon little boys. I shall ascend by flight into the air, I shall exhibit abundance of gold. I shall make and unmake kings. I shall be worshipped as God, I shall have divine honours publicly assigned to me, so that an image of me shall be set up, and I shall be adored as God." (R. ii, 9.) Next day at noon Zacchæus announces that Simon has put off the promised dispute (H. ii, 35-7, R. ii, 20-1). Peter instructs Clement till evening (H. ii, 38-53). [Probably before this should come a long passage of R. (i, 22-74) in which Peter speaks of Old Testament history (27-41) and then gives an account of the coming of the true Prophet, His rejection, Passion, and Resurrection, and relates the preaching to the Gentiles. The Church at Jerusalem having been governed by James for a week of years, the Apostles return from their travels, and at James's request state what they have accomplished. Caiphas sends to ask if Jesus was the Christ. Here Peter, in a digression, explains why the true Prophet is called Christ and describes the Jewish sects. Then we are told how the Apostles argued before Caiphas, and refuted successively the Sadducees, Samaritans, Scribes, Pharisees, disciples of John, and Caiphas himself. When Peter foretells the destruction of the Temple, the priests are enraged, but Gamaliel quells the tumult, and next day makes a speech. St. James preaches for seven days, and the people are on the point of being baptized, when an enemy (not named, but obviously Simon) excites them against James, who is thrown down the steps of the Temple and left for dead. He is carried to Jericho, with 5000 disciples. On recovering he sends Peter to Cæsarea to refute Simon. He is welcomed by Zacchæus, who relates Simon's doings to him. The author of H. probably thought all this story inconsistent with Acts, and omitted it.] Next morning before dawn Peter arouses his disciples (H. iii, 1, R. ii, 1), who are enumerated (H. ii, 1, R. ii, 1). Peter gives a private preparatory discourse (H.) and then goes out to the public discussion with Simon. Only one day of it is related in H. (iii, 38-57), but the whole matter of the three days is given in R. (ii, 24-70, iii, 12-30, 33-48). But what H. has omitted R. gives largely, though in a different form, in xvi, xvii, xviii, and partly in xix, as another discussion with Simon in Laodicea. It is clear that R. has the original order. Simon, being worsted, flies in the night to Tyre. Peter determines to follow, leaving Zaccæus as bishop at Cæsarea (H. iii, 58-72, R. iii, 63-6). H. adds that Peter remained seven days longer and baptized 10,000 people, sending on Nicetas and Aquila to stay at Tyre with Bernice, daughter of their stepmother, Justa (iii, 73). But R. relates that seven other disciples were sent on, while Clement remained at Cæsarea for three months with Peter, who repeated in private at night the public instructions he gave during the day. All this Clement wrote down and sent to James. In ch. 74 are described the contents of the ten books of these sermons as sent to Jerusalem. H. now makes Clement, Nicetas, and Aquila go on to Tyre. Bernice tells them how Simon has been raising ghosts, infecting the people with diseases, and bringing demons upon them, and has gone to Sidon. Clement has a discussion with Simon's disciple Appion (H. v, 7 — vi, 25). All this is omitted by R., but the same subjects are discussed in R. x, 17-51. Peter goes on northward by Tyre, Sidon, Berytus, and Byblus to Tripolis (H. vii, 5-12). (R. adds Dora and Ptolemais, omitting Byblus, iv, 1.) Peter's discourses to the multitude at Tripolis are detailed in H. viii, ix, x, xi, and in R. (three days only) iv, v, vi, with considerable differences. Clement is baptized (H. xi, 35, R. vi, 15). After a stay of three months he goes through Ortosias to Antaradus (H. xii, 1, R. vii, 1). At this point Clement recounts his history to the Apostle. He was closely related to the emperor. Soon after his birth his mother had a vision that unless she speedily left Rome with her twin elder sons, she and they would perish miserably. His father therefore sent them with many servants to Athens, but they disappeared, and nothing could be learned of their fate. At last, when Clement was twelve years old, his father himself set out upon the search; and he too was no more heard of (H. xii, 9-11, R. vii, 8-10). In the island of Aradus, opposite the town, Peter finds a miserable beggar woman, who turns out to be Clement's mother. Peter unites them, and heals the woman (H. xii, 12-23, R. vii, 11-23). H. adds a discourse by Peter on philanthropy (25-33). The party now leave Aradus (Mattidia, Clement's mother, journeying with Peter's wife) and go by Balaneæ, Palates, and Gable to Laodicea of Syria. Nicetas and Aquila receive them, and hear Clement's story with amazement; they declare themselves to be Faustus and Faustinianus, the twin sons of Mattidia and brothers of Clement. They had been saved on a fragment of wreck, and some men in a boat had taken them up. They had been beaten and starved, and finally sold at Cæsarea Stratton to Justa, who had educated them as her own sons. Later they had adhered to Simon, but were brought by Zacchæus to Peter. Mattidia is now baptized, and Peter discourses on the rewards given to chastity (H. xii, R. vii, 24-38). Next morning Peter is interrupted at his prayers by an old man, who assures him that prayer is a mistake, since all things are governed by genesis or fate. Peter replies (H. xiv, 1-5 — in R. Nicetas); Aquila and Clement try also to refute him (viii, 5 — ix, 33; cf. H. xv, 1-5), but without success, for the old man had traced the horoscope of himself and his wife, and it caine true. He tells his story. Clement, Nicetas, and Aquila guess that this is their father. Peter asks his name and those of his children. The mother rushes in, and all embrace in floods of tears. Faustus is then converted by a long series of discourses on evil and on mythology (R. x, 1-51, to which correspond H. xx, 1-10 and iv, 7 — vi, 25 — the discussion between Clement and Appion at Tyre. The long discussions with Simon before Faustus in H. xvi, xvii, xviii were in their right place in R. as part of the debate at Cæsarea). Simon is driven away by the threats of Cornelius the Centurion, but first he changes the face of Faustus into his own likeness by smearing it with a magic juice, in hopes that Faustus will be put to death instead of himself. Peter frightens away Simon's disciples by what are simply lies, and he sends Faustus to Antioch to unsay in the person of Simon all the abuse Simon has been pouring on the Apostle there. The people of Antioch in consequence long for Peter's coming, and nearly put the false Simon to death. Peter restores him to his proper form, and thenceforth they all live happily. A letter from Clement to James forms an epilogue to H. In it Clement relates how Peter before his death gave his last instructions and set Clement in his own chair as his successor in the See of Rome. James is addressed as "Bishop of bishops, who rules Jerusalem, the holy Church of the Hebrews, and the Churches everywhere". To him Clement sends a book, "Clement's Epitome of the Preachings of Peter from place to place". Another letter, that of Peter to James, forms an introduction. The Apostle urges that the book of his teachings is not to be committed to anyone before initiation and probation. A note follows the letter, relating that James on receipt of the letter called the elders and read it to them. The book is to be given only to one who is pious, and a teacher, and circumcised, and even then only a part at a time. A form of promise (not an oath, which is unlawful) is prescribed for the reader, by heaven, earth, water, and air, that he will take extraordinary care of the writings and communicate them to no one; he invokes upon himself terrible curses in case he should be unfaithful to this covenant. The most curious passage is: "Even if I should come to acknowledge another God, I now swear by him, whether he exist or not." After the adjuration he shall partake of bread and salt. The elders, on hearing of this solemnity, are terrified, but James pacifies them. The whole of this elaborate mystification is obviously intended to explain how the Clementine writings came to be unknown from Clement's time until the date of their unknown author. Many parallels can be found in modern times; Sir Walter Scott's prefaces — the imaginary Mr. Oiled and his friends — will occur to everyone. Nevertheless a good many modern critics accept the "adjuration" with the utmost gravity as the secret rite of an obscure and very early sect of Judaizers. DOCTRINE The central and all-important doctrine of the Clementines is the Unity of God. Though transcendent and unknowable, He is the Creator of the World. Though infinite, He has (according to the Homilies) shape and body, for He is the Archetype of all beauty, and in particular the exemplar after which man was fashioned. He, therefore, even has members, in some eminent way. He is the self-begotten or unbigoted, from whom proceeds His Wisdom like a hand. To His Wisdom He said: "Let us make man", and He is the "Parents" (i. e., Father and Mother) of men. The Homilies also explain that the elements proceed from God as His Child. From them the Evil One proceeded by an accidental mingling. He is therefore not the Son, nor even to be called brother of the Son. God is infinitely changeable, and can assume all forms at will. The Son proceeds from the most perfect of these modifications of the Divine nature and is conceptional with that modification, but not with the Divine nature itself. The Son is not God, therefore, in the full sense, nor has He all the power of God. He cannot change Himself, though He can be changed at will by God. Of the Holy Ghost we learn nothing definite. The whole of this extraordinary teaching is omitted in R., except the accidental generation of the devil. Instead we find a long passage, R. iii, 2-11, in corrupt and unintelligible Latin, preserved also in the early Syriac Manuscripts. Rufinus in his preface tells us that he omitted it, and in his work on the adulteration of the books of Origin he declares that it is so Origin in doctrine that one seems to hear Enemies himself speaking. It is naturally not found in the best Manuscripts of R., but as preserved in many Manuscripts it is an interpolation by some Arian editor, who seems to have translated it, from the original Greek without always understanding the meaning. The doctrine is, as Rufinus says, the Arianism of the second half of the fourth century. The Son is a creature; the Holy Ghost the creature of the Son. Of demons much is said. They have great power over the self-indulgent, and are swallowed with food by those who eat too much. Magic is constantly mentioned, and its use reprobated. Idolatry is argued against at length. The immorality of the Greek stories of the gods is ridiculed, and attempts at mystical explanation are refuted. Various virtues are praised: temperance, kindness or philanthropy, chastity in the married state; asceticism of a most rigorous kind is practised by St. Peter. The introduction after the Deluge of eating meat, according to the Book of Genesis, is violently denounced, as having naturally led to cannibalism. The use of meat is, however, not forbidden as a sin, and is probably permitted as a bad, but ineradicable, custom. There is no trace of any Judaistic observance, for though the letter of Peter and the speech of James allow the books to be given to none who is not "a circumcised believer", this is only a part of the mystification, by which the number of adepts is limited as far as possible. It is now becoming recognized by all critics that the original writings were not intended for the use of baptized Christians of any sect. Most of the latest critics say they are meant for catechumens, and indeed the office of a teacher is highly commended; but it would be more exact to say that the arguments are adapted to the needs of inquiring heathens. Of baptism much is said, but of repentance little. There is little characteristically Christian doctrine to be found; atonement and the sacrifice of the Cross, sin and its penalty, forgiveness, grace, are far to seek. Once the Eucharist is mentioned by name: "Peter broke the Eucharist" (H. xi, 36, R. vi, 15). Christ is always spoken of as "the true Prophet.", as the revealer to men of God, of truth, of the answers to the riddle of life. The writer knows a complete system of ecclesiastical organization. Peter sets a bishop over each city, with priest and deacons under him; the office of bishop is well defined. It was principally this fact which prevented critics of the TUBING School from dating H. and R. earlier than the middle of the second century. The writer was not an Ebonite, since he believes in the pre-existence of the Son, His Incarnation and miraculous conception, while he enjoins no Jewish observances. Antagonism to St. Paul is commonly asserted to be a characteristic of the Clementines. He is never mentioned, for the supposed date of the dialogues is before his conversion, and the writer is very careful to avoid anachronisms. But his Epistles are regularly used, and the grounds for supposing that Simon always or sometimes represents St. Paul are exceedingly feeble. The latest critics, who still admit that St. Paul is occasionally combated, do not attribute this attitude to the Clementine writer, but only to one of some presumed sources. In fact, there is a clear prophetic reference to St. Paul as the teacher of the nations in R. iii, 61. But it is not safe to admit any polemic against. St. Paul's person in any part of the writings, for the simple reason that there is nowhere any trace of antagonism to his doctrines. It seems to be universally held that the Clementines are based upon the doctrines of the Book of Elchasai or Helga, which was much used by the Ebonites. The contents of it were said to have been revealed by an angel ninety-six miles high to a holy man Elchasai in the year 100, and this is gravely accepted by Hilgenfeld and Waitz as its real date. It does not however, seem to have been known until it was brought to Rome about the year 220, by a certain Allahabad of Apia. We know its doctrines from the "Philosophers" and from Epiphanies. It taught a second baptism (in running streams with all the clothes on) for the remission of sins, to be accompanied by an adjuration of seven elements; the same process was recommended as a cure for the bite of mad dogs and for similar evils. This is not particularly like the calling of four (not seven) elements to witness a solemn promise by the side of water (without bathing) in the Clementines. For the rest, Elchasai taught magic and astrology, made marriage compulsory, celebrated the Eucharist with bread and water, caused all believers to be circumcised and to live by the Jewish law, held that Christ was born of a human father. All this is contradictory to the Clementines. The only point of resemblance seems to be that the Homilies represent Christ as having been in Adam and Moses, while Elchasai said He had been frequently incarnate in Adam and since, and would be again. The Clementine writer is fond of pairs of antitheses, or syzygia, such as Christ and the tempter, Peter and Simon. But these have no connexion with any Gnostic or Marcionite antitheses, nor is there any trace of the Gnostic genealogies. He is simply airing his own pseudo-philosophic speculations. Polemic against Marcionism has often been pointed out. But the denial of two Gods, a transcendental God and a Creator, is directed against popular neo-Platonism, and not against Marcion. Again, replies are made to objections to Christianity drawn from immorality or anthropomorphism in the Old Testament, but these objections are not Marcionite. The writer is fond of citing sayings of Christ not found in Scripture. His Scripture text has been analyzed by Hilgenfeld, Waltz, and others. He never cites a book of the N. T. by name, which would be an anachronism at the date he has chosen. EARLY USE OF THE CLEMENTINES It was long believed that the early date of the Clementines was proved by the fact that they were twice quoted by Origen. One of these quotations occurs in the "Philocalia" of Sts. Gregory of Nazianzus and Basil (c. 360). Dr. Armitage Robinson showed in his edition of that work (1893) that the citation is an addition to the passage of Origen made by the compilers, or possibly by a later editor. The other citation occurs in the old Latin translation of Origen on Matthew. This translation is full of interpolations and alterations, and the passage of Pseudo-Clement is apparently an interpolation by the translator from the Arian "Opus imperfectum in Matt." (See Journal of Theol. Studies, III, 436.) Omitting Origen, the earliest witness is Eusebius. In his "Hist. Eccl.", III, xxxviii (a.d. 325) he mentions some short writings and adds: "And now some have only the other day brought forward other wordy and lengthy compositions as being Clement's, containing dialogues of Peter and Appion, of which there is absolutely no mention in the ancients." These dialogues need not have been the complete romance, but may have been an earlier draft of part of it. Next we find the Clementines used by Ebionites c. 360 (Epiphanius, Hær., xxx, 15). They are quoted as the "Periodi" by St. Jerome in 387 and 392 (On Gal., i, 18, and "Adv. Jovin.", i, 26). Two forms of the "Recognitions" were known to Rufinus, and one of them was translated by him c. 400. About 408 St. Paulinus of Nola, in a letter to Rufinus, mentions having himself translated a part or all, perhaps as an exercise in Greek. The "Opus imperfectum" above mentioned has five quotations. It is apparently by an Arian of the beginning of the fifth century, possibly by a bishop called Maximus. The Syriac translation was made before 411, the date of one of the Manuscripts. After this time citations occur in many Byzantine writers, and from the commendation given by Nicephorus Callisti (fourteenth century) we may gather that an orthodox version was current. In the West the translation by Rufinus became very popular, and citations are found in Syriac and Arabic writings. MODERN THEORIES OF ORIGIN AND DATE Baur, the founder of the "Tübingen School" of New Testament criticism, rested his ideas about the New Testament on the Clementines, and his ideas about the Clementines on St. Epiphanius, who found the writings used by an Ebionite sect in the fourth century. This Judæo-Christian sect at that date rejected St. Paul as an apostate. It was assumed that this fourth-century opinion represented the Christianity of the Twelve Apostles; Paulinism was originally a heresy, and a schism from the Jewish Christianity of James and Peter and the rest; Marcion was a leader of the Pauline sect in its survival in the second century, using only the Pauline Gospel, St. Luke (in its original form), and the Epistles of St. Paul (without the Pastoral Epistles). The Clementine literature had its first origin in the Apostolic Age, and belonged to the original Jewish, Petrine, legal Church. It is directed wholly against St. Paul and his sect. Simon Magus never existed; it is a nickname for St. Paul. The Acts of the Apostles, compiled in the second century, have borrowed their mention of Simon from the earliest form of the Clementines. Catholicism under the presidency of Rome was the result of the adjustment between the Petrine and Pauline sections of the Church in the second half of the second century. The Fourth Gospel is a monument of this reconciliation, in which Rome took a leading part, having invented the fiction that both Peter and Paul were the founders of her Church, both having been martyred at Rome, and on the same day, in perfect union. Throughout the middle of the nineteenth century this theory, in many forms, was dominant in Germany. The demonstration, mainly by English scholars, of the impossibility of the late dates ascribed to the New Testament documents (four Epistles of St. Paul and the Apocalypse were the only documents generally admitted as being of early date), and the proofs of the authenticity of the Apostolic Fathers and of the use of St. John's Gospel by Justin, Papias, and Ignatius gradually brought Baur's theories into discredit. Of the original school, Adolf Hilgenfeld may be considered the last survivor (died 1907). He was induced many years ago to admit that Simon Magus was a real personage, though he persists that in the Clementines he is meant for St. Paul. To a priori critics it counts as nothing that Simon holds no Pauline doctrine and that the author shows no signs of being a Judæo-Christian. In 1847 Hilgenfeld dated the original nucleus (Preachings of Peter) soon after the Jewish war of 70; successive revisions of it were anti-Basilidian, anti-Valentinian, and anti-Marcionite respectively. Baur placed the completed form, H., soon after the middle of the second century, and Schliemann (1844) agreed, placing R., as a revision, between 211 and 230. This writer sums up the opinions of his predecessors thus: + R. 2nd century: Sixtus Senensis, Blondellus, Nourri, Cotelerius, Natalis Alexander, Cave, Oudin, Heinsius, Rosenmüller, Flügge, Gieseler, Tholuck, Bretschneider, Engelhardt, Gfrörer. + R. 2nd or 3rd century: Schröck, Stark, Lumper, Krabbe, Locherer, Gersdorf. + R. 3rd century: Strunzius (on Bardesanes, 1710), Weismann (17l8), Mosheim, Kleuker, Schmidt (Kirchengesch.). + R. 4th century: Corrodi, Lentz (Dogmengesch.). + H. 2nd century (beginning): Credner, Bretschneider, Kern, Rothe. + H. 2nd century: Clericus, Beausobre, Flügge, Münscher, Hoffmann, Döllinger, Hilgers; (middle of 2nd) Hase. + H. end of 2nd century: Schröck, Cölln, Gieseler (3rd ed.), Schenkel, Gfrörer, Lücke. + H. 3rd century: Mill, Mosheim, Gallandi, Gieseler (2nd ed.). + H. 2nd or 3rd century: Neander, Krabbe, Baur, Ritter, Paniel, Dähne. + H. 4th century: Lentz. Uhlhorn in his valuable monograph (1854) placed the original document, or Grundsrhrift, in East Syria. after 150; H. in the same region after 160; R. in Rome after 170. Lehmann (1869) put the source (Preaching of Peter) very early, H. and R. i-ii before 160, the rest of R. before 170. In England Salmon set R. about 200. H. about 218. Dr. Bigg makes H. the original, Syrian, first half of second century, R. being a recasting in an orthodox sense. H. was originally written by a Catholic, and the heretical parts belong to a later recension. Dr. Headlam, in a very interesting article, considers that the original form was rather a collection of works than a single book, yet all products of one design and plan, coming from one writer, of a curious, versatile, unequally developed mind. While accepting the dependence on the Book of Elchasai, Dr. Headlam sees no antagonism to St. Paul, and declares that the writer is quite ignorant of Judaism. Under the impression that the original work was known to Origen, he is obliged to date it at the end of the second century or the beginning of the third. In 1883 Bestmann made the Clementines the basis of an unsuccessful theory which, as Harnack puts it. "claimed for Jewish Christianity the glory of having developed by itself the whole doctrine, worship. and constitution of Catholicism, and of having transmitted it to Gentile Christianity as a finished product which only required to be divested of a few Jewish husks" (Hist. of Dogma, I, 310). Another popular theory based upon the Clementines has been that it was the Epistle of Clement to James which originated the notion that St. Peter was the first Bishop of Rome. This has been asserted by no lesser authorities than Lightfoot, Salmon, and Bright, and it has been made an important point in the controversial work of the Rev. F. W. Puller, "Primitive Saints and the Roman See". It is acknowledged that in St. Cyprian's time (c. 250) it was universally believed that St. Peter was Bishop of Rome, and that he was looked upon as the type and origin of episcopacy. Modern criticism has long since put the letter of Clement too tate to allow this theory to be tenable, and now Waitz places it after 220, and Harnack after 260. We shall presently see that it probably belongs to the fourth century. The "Old Catholic" Professor Langen in 1890 elaborated a new theory. Until the destruction of Jerusalem in 135, he says, that city was the centre of the Christian Church. A new pivot was then needed. The Church of the capital made a bold bid for the vacant post of pre-eminence. Shortly after 135 was published the original form of the Clementine romance. It was a Roman forgery, claiming for the Church of Peter the succession to a part of the headship of the Church of James. James indeed had been "bishop of bishops", and Peter's successor could not claim to be more than Peter was among the Apostles, primus inter pares. The Roman attempt was eventually successful, but not without a struggle. Cæsarea, the metropolis of Palestine. also claimed the succession to Jerusalem. The monument of this claim is H., a recension of the Roman work made at Cæsarea before the end of the second century in order to fight Rome with her own weapons. (The intention must be admitted to have been closely veiled.) In the beginning of the third century the metropolis of the Orient, Antioch, produced a new edition, R., claiming for that city the vacant primacy. Langen's view has found no adherents. Dr. Hort complained that the Clementines have left no traces in the eighty years between Origen and Eusebius, but he felt obliged to date them before Origen, and placed the original c. 200 as the work of a Syrian Heixaïte. Harnack, in his "History of Dogma", saw that they had no influence in the third century; he dated R. and H. not earlier than the first half of that century, or even a few decades later. All the foregoing writers presupposed that the Clementines were known to Origen. Since this has been shown to be not proven (1903), Waitz's elaborate study has appeared (1904), but his view was evidently formed earlier. His view is that H. is the work of an Aramæan Christian after 325 (for he uses the word homoousios) and earlier than 411 (the Syriac Manuscript). R. probably after 350, also in the East. But the Grundschrift, or archetype, was written at Rome, perhaps under the syncretistic system of cult in favour at the court of Alexander Severus, probably between 220 and 250. Harnack, in his "Chronologie" (II), gives 260 or later as the date, but he thinks H. and R. may he ante-Nicene. Waitz supposes two earlier sources to have been employed in the romance, the "Preachings of Peter" (origin in first century, but used in a later anti-Marcionite recension) and the "Acts of Peter" (written in a Catholic circle at Antioch c. 210). Harnack accepts the existence of these sources, but thinks neither was earlier than about 200. They are carefully to be distinguished from the well-known second-century works, the "Preaching of Peter" and "Acts of Peter", of which fragments still exist. These are quoted by many early writers, whereas the supposed sources of the Clementines are otherwise unknown and therefore probably never existed at all. A long passage from Pseudo-Bardesanes "De Fato" occurs in R. ix, 19 sqq. Hilgenfeld, Ritschl, and some earlier critics characteristically held that Bardesanes used the Clementines. Merx, Waitz, and most others hold that R. cites Bardesanes directly. Nau and Harnack are certainly right, that R. has borrowed the citation at second hand from Eusebius (Præp. Evang., vi, 10, 11-48, a.d. 313). PROBABLE DATE OF THE CLEMENTINES We now know that the Clementine writer need not have lived before Origen. Let us add that there is no reason to think he was a Judæo-Christian, an Elchasaïte, or anti-Pauline, or anti-Marcionite, that he employed ancient sources, that he belonged to a secretive sect. We are free, then, to look out for indications of date without prejudice. R. is certainly post-Nicene, as Waitz has shown. But we may go further. The curious passage R. iii. 2-11, which Rufinus omitted, and in which he seemed to hear Eunomius himself speaking, gives in fact the doctrine of Eunomius so exactly that it frequently almost cites the Apologeticus" (c. 362-3) of that heretic word for word. (The Eunomian doctrine is that the essence of God is to be unborn, consequently the Son Who is begotten is not God. He is a creature, the first-born of all creation and the Image of God. The Holy Ghost is the creature of the Son.) The agreement with Eunomius's ekthesis pisteos of 381-3 is less close. As the Eunomian passage was found by Rufinus in both the recensions of Clement known to him, we may suppose that the interpolation was made in the original work by a Eunomian about 365-70, before the abridgment R. was made about 370-80. (The word archiepiscopus used of St. James suggests the end of the fourth century. It occurs in the middle of that century in some Meletian documents cited by Athanasius, and then not till the Council of Ephesus, 431.) H. has also a disquisition on the generation of the Son (xvi, 15-18, and xx, 7-8). The writer calls God autopator and autogennetos, and both Mother and Father of men. His idea of a changeable God and an unchangeable Son projected from the best modification of God has been mentioned above. This ingenious doctrine enables the writer to accept the words of the Nicene definition, while denying their sense. The Son may be called God, for so may men be, but not in the strict sense. He is homoousios to Patri, begotten ek tes ousias, He is not treptos or alloiotos. Apparently He is not ktistos, nor was there a time when He was not, though this is not quite distinctly enunciated. The writer is clearly an Arian who manages to accept the formula of Nicea by an acrobatic feat, in order to save himself. The date is therefore probably within the reign of Constantine (died 337), while the great council was still imposed on all by the emperor — say, about 330. But this is not the date of H., but of the original behind both H. and R.; for it is clear that the Eunomian interpolator of R. attacks the doctrine we find in H. He ridicules autopator and autogennetos, he declares God to be unchangeable, and the Son to be created, not begotten from the Father's essence and consubstantial. God is not masculo-femina. It is clear that the interpolator had before him the doctrine of H. in a yet clearer form, and that he substituted his own view for it (R. iii, 2-11). But it is remarkable that he retained one integral part of H.'s theory, viz., the origin of the Evil One from an accidental mixture of elements, for Rufinus tells us (De Adult. libr. Origenis) that he found this doctrine in R. and omitted it. The date of the original is therefore fixed as after Nicæa, 325, probably c. 330; that of H. may be anywhere in the second half of the fourth century. The Eunomian interpolator is about 365-70, and the compilation of R. about 370-80. The original author shows a detailed knowledge of the towns on the Phœnician coast from Cæsarea to Antioch. He was an Arian, and Arianism had its home in the civil diocese of the Orient. He uses the "Præp. Evang." of Eusebius of Cæsarea (written about 313). In 325 that historian mentions the dialogues of Peter and Appion as just published — presumably in his own region; these were probably the nucleus of the larger work completed by the same hand a few years later. Citations of Pseudo-Clement are by the Palestinian Epiphanius, who found the romance among the Ebionites of Palestine; by St. Jerome, who had dwelt in the Syrian desert and settled at Bethlehem; by the travelled Rufinus; by the "Apostolical Constitutions", compiled in Syria or Palestine. The work is rendered into Syriac before 411. The Arian author of the "Opus imperfectum" cited it freely. It was interpolated by a Eunomian about 365-70. All these indications suggest an Arian author before 350 in the East, probably not far front Cæsarea. The author, though an Arian, probably belonged nominally to the Catholic Church. He wrote for the heathens of his day, and observed the stiff and often merely formal disciplina arcani which the fourth century enforced. Atonement, grace, sacraments are omitted for this cause only. "The true Prophet" is not a name for Christ used by Christians, but the office of Christ which the author puts forward towards the pagan world. He shows Peter keeping the evening agape and Eucharist secret from Clement when unbaptized; it was no doubt a Eucharist of bread and vine, not of bread and salt. The great pagan antagonist of the third century was the neo-Platonic philosopher, Porphyry; but under Constantine his disciple Iamblichus was the chief restorer and defender of the old gods, and his system of defence is that which we find made the official religion by Julian (361-3). Consequently, it is not astonishing to find that Simon and his disciples represent not St. Paul, but Iamblichus. The doctrines and practices repelled are the theurgy and magic, astrology and mantic, absurd miracles and claims to union with the Divinity, which characterized the debased neo-Platonism of 320-30. It is not against Marcion but against Plato that Pseudo-Clement teaches the supremacy of the Creator of all. He defends the Old Testament against the school of Porphyry, and when he declares it to be interpolated, he is using Porphyry's own higher criticism in a clumsy way. The elaborate discussion of ancient history, the ridicule cast on the obscene mythology of the Greeks, and the philosophical explanations of a higher meaning are also against Porphyry. The refutation of the grossest idolatry is against Iamblichus. It is perhaps mere accident that we hear nothing of the Clementines from 330 till 360. But about 360- 410 they are interpolated, they are revised and abridged in H., yet more revised and abridged in R., translated into Latin, translated into Syriac, and frequently cited. It seems, therefore, that it was the policy of Julian which drew them from obscurity. They were useful weapons against the momentary resurrection of polytheism, mythology, theurgy, and idolatry. The principal editions have been mentioned above. The literature is so enormous that a selection from it must suffice. Somewhat fuller lists will be found in HARNACK, Chronologie, II, in BARDENHEWER, Patrologie and Geschichte der kirchlichen Litteratur and in CHEVALIER, Répertoire. — SCHLIEMANN, Die Clementinen (1844); HILGENFELD, Die Clem. Recogn. und Hom. nach ihrem Ursprung und Inhalt (Jena, 1848); Kritische Untersuchungen über die Evangelien Justins, der Clem. Hom. und Marcions (Halle, 1850); UHLHORN, Die Hom. und Recogn. des Clemens Romanus (Göttingen, 1854); LEHMANN, Die clementinischen Schriften (Gotha, 1869) LIPSIUS, Quellen der römischen Petrussage (1872) and Apokr. Apostelgeschichte (1887), II; SALMON in Dict. Chr. Biog. (1877); LANGEN, Die Clemensromane (Gotha, 1890): FUNK in Kirchenlex. (1884); BIGG, The Clementine Homilies in Studia Biblica (Oxford, 1890), II; BUSSELL, The Purpose of the World-Process and the Problem of Evil in the Clementine and Lactantian Writings in Studia Biblica (1806), IV; W. C[HAWNER], Index of noteworthy words and phrases found in the Clementine writings in Lightfoot Fund Public. (London, 1893); HORT, Clementine Recognitions (lectures delivered in 1884; pub. London, 1901); MEYBOOM De Clemens Roman (1902); HEADLAM, The Clementine Literature in Journ. Theol. Stud. (1903), III, 41; CHAPMAN, Origer and Pseudo-Clement in Journ. Theol. Stud., III, 436; HILGENFELD, Origenes und Pseudo-Clemens in Zeitschr. für Wiss. Theol. (1903), XLVI, 342; PREUSCHEN In HARNACK, Gesch. der altchristl. Literatur (1893), I, 212; and II, Chronologie, 518; WAITZ, Die Pseudoclementinen in Texte und Unters., New Series, X, 4; CHAPMAN, The Date of the Clementines in Zeitschr. für Neu-Test. Wiss. (1908). An English translation of the Recognitions, by the REV. T. SMITH, D. D., will be found in the Ante-Nicene Library. III, and of the Homilies, ibid., XVII (Edinburgh, 1871-2). JOHN CHAPMAN. Blessed Clement Mary Hofbauer Blessed Clement Mary Hofbauer (JOHN DVORÁK) The second founder of the Redemptorist Congregation, called "the Apostle of Vienna", born at Tasswitz in Moravia, 26 December, 1751; died at Vienna 15 March, 1821. The family name of Dvorak was better known by its German equivalent, Hofbauer. The youngest of twelve children, and son of a grazier and butcher, he was six years old when his father died. His great desire was to become a priest, but his family being unable to give him the necessary education he became a baker's assistant, devoting all his spare time to study. He was a servant in the Premonstratensian monastery of Bruck from 1771 to 1775, and then lived for some time as a hermit. When the Emperor Joseph II abolished hermitages he went to Vienna, where he worked once more as a baker. After two pilgrimages to Rome he again tried a hermit's life (1782-3), this time under the protection of Barnaba Chiaramonti, Bishop of Tivoli, afterwards Pope Pius VII, taking the name of Clement, by which he was ever afterwards known. He once more returned to Vienna, where at length by the generosity of benefactors he was enabled to go to the university and complete his studies; In 1784 he made a third pilgrimage on foot to Rome with a friend, Thaddäus Hübl, and the two were received into the Redemptorist novitiate at San Giuliano on the Esquiline. After a shortened probation they were professed on 19 March, 1785, and ordained priests a few days later. They were sent, towards the end of the same year, to found a house north of the Alps, St. Alphonsus. who was still alive, prophesying their success. It being impossible under Joseph II to found a house in Vienna, Clement and Thaddäus turned to Warsaw, where King Stanislaus Poniatowski, at the nuncio's request, placed St. Benno's, the German national church, at their disposal. Here, in 1795, they saw the end of Polish independence. The labours of Clement and his companions in Warsaw from 1786 to 1808 are wellnigh incredible. In addition to St. Benno's, another large church was reserved for them, where sermons were preached in French, and there were daily classes of instruction for Protestants and Jews. Besides this Clement founded an orphanage and a school for boys. His chief helper, Thaddäus Hübl, died in 1807; In the next year, on orders from Paris, the house at Warsaw and three other houses which Clement had founded were suppressed, anti the Redemptorists were expelled from the Grand Duchy. Clement with one companion went to Vienna, where for the last twelve years of his life he acted as chaplain and director at an Ursuline convent. During these years he exercised a veritable apostolate among all classes in the capital from the Emperor Francis downward. Unable to found a regular house of his congregation, which was however established, as he had predicted, almost immediately after his death, he devoted himself in a special way to the conversion and training of young men. "I know but three men of superhuman energy", his friend Werner had said, "Napoleon, Goethe, and Clement Hofbauer." "Religion in Austria", said Pius VII, "has lost its chief support." Indeed it was to Clement Hofbauer perhaps more than to any single individual that the extinction of Josephinism was due. He was beatified by Leo XIII, 29 January, 1888; (See AUSTRO-HUNGARIAN MONARCHY, II, 129.) His life in German by HARINGER, translated into English by LADY HERBERT (New York, 1883). Another life by O. R. VASSALL PHILLIPS (New York, 1893); BERTHE, Saint Alphonse de Liguori (Paris, 1900), tr. Life of St. Alphonsus de Liguori (Dublin, 1905). J. MAGNIER. Clement of Alexandria Clement of Alexandria (Properly TITUS FLAVIUS CLEMENS, but known in church history by the former designation to distinguish him from Clement of Rome). Date of birth unknown; died about the year 215. St. Clement was an early Greek theologian and head of the catechetical school of Alexandria. Athens is given as the starting-point of his journeyings, and was probably his birthplace. He became a convert to the Faith and travelled from place to place in search of higher instruction, attaching himself successively to different masters: to a Greek of Ionia, to another of Magna Graecia, to a third of Coele-Syria, after all of whom he addressed himself in turn to an Egyptian, an Assyrian, and a converted Palestinian Jew. At last he met Pantaenus in Alexandria, and in his teaching "found rest". The place itself was well chosen. It was natural that Christian speculation should have a home at Alexandria. This great city was at the time a centre of culture as well as of trade. A great university had grown up under the long-continued patronage of the State. The intellectual temper was broad and tolerant, as became a city where so many races mingled. The philosophers were critics or eclectics, and Plato was the most favoured of the old masters. Neo-Platonism, the philosophy of the new pagan renaissance, had a prophet at Alexandria in the person of Ammonius Saccas. The Jews, too, who were there in very large numbers breathed its liberal atmosphere, and had assimilated secular culture. They there formed the most enlightened colony of the Dispersion. Having lost the use of Hebrew, they found it necessary to translate the Scriptures into the more familiar Greek. Philo, their foremost thinker, became a sort of Jewish Plato. Alexandria was, in addition, one of the chief seats of that peculiar mixed pagan and Christian speculation known as Gnosticism. Basilides and Valentinus taught there. It is no matter of surprise, therefore, to find some of the Christians affected in turn by the scientific spirit. At an uncertain date, in the latter half of the second century, "a school of oral instruction" was founded. Lectures were given to which pagan hearers were admitted, and advanced teaching to Christians separately. It was an official institution of the Church. Pantaenus is the earliest teacher whose name has been preserved. Clement first assisted and then succeeded Pantaenus in the direction of the school, about A.D. 190. He was already known as a Christian writer before the days of Pope Victor (188-199). About this time he may have composed the "Hortatory Discourse to the Greeks" (Protreptikos pros Ellenas) It is a persuasive appeal for the Faith, written in a lofty strain. The discourse opens with passages which fall on the ear with the effect of sweet music. Amphion and Arion by their minstrelsy drew after them savage monsters and moved the very stones; Christ is the noblest minstrel. His harp and Iyre are men. He draws music from their hearts by the Holy Spirit: nay, Christ is Himself the New Canticle, whose melody subdues the fiercest and hardest natures. Clement then proceeds to show the transcendence of the Christian religion. He constrasts Christianity with the vileness of pagan rites and with the faint hope of pagan poetry and philosophers. Man is born for God. The Word calls men to Himself. The full truth is found in Christ alone. The work ends with a description of the God-fearing Christian. He answers those who urge that it is wrong to desert one's ancestral religion. The work entitled "Outlines" (Hypotyposeis) is likewise believed to be a production of the early activity of Clement. It was translated into Latin by Rufinus under the title "Dispositiones". It was in eight books, but is no longer extant, though numerous fragments have been preserved in Greek by Eusebius, Oecumenius, Maximus Confessor, John Moschos, and Photius. According to Zahn, a Latin fragment, "Adumbrationes Clementis Alexandrini in epistolas canonicas", translated by Cassiodorus and purged of objectionable passages, represents in part the text of Clement. Eusebius represents the "Outlines" as an abridged commentary, with doctrinal and historical remarks on the entire Bible and on the non-canonical "Epistle of Barnabas" and "Apocalypse of Peter". Photius, who had also read it describes it as a series of explanations of Biblical texts especially of Genesis, Exodus, the Psalms, Ecclesiastes and the Pauline and Catholic Epistles. He declares the work sound on some points, but adds that it contains "impieties and fables", such as the eternity of matter, the creatureship of the Word, plurality of words (Logoi), Docetism, metempsychosis, etc. Conservative scholars are inclined to believe that Photius has thrown the mistakes of Clement, whatever they may have been, into undue relief. Clement's style is difficult, his works are full of borrowed excerpts, and his teaching is with difficulty reduced to a coherent body of doctrine. And this early work, being a scattered commentary on Holy Writ, must have been peculiarly liable to misconstruction. It is certain that several of the more serious charges can rest upon nothing but mistakes. At any rate, his extant writings show Clement in a better light. Other works of his are the "Miscellanies" (Stromateis) and "The Tutor" (Paidagogos). The "Miscellanies" comprise seven entire books, of which the first four are earlier than "The Tutor". When he had finished this latter work he returned to the "Miscellanies", which he was never able to finish. The first pages of the work are now missing. What has been known as the eighth book since the time of Eusebius is nothing more than a collection of extracts drawn from pagan philosophers. It is likely, as von Annin has suggested, that Clement had intended to make use of these materials together with the abridgement of Theodotus (Excerpts from Theodotus and the Eastern School of Valentinus) and the "Eclogae Propheticae". Extracts from the Prophets (not extracts, but notes at random on texts or Scriptural topics) for the continuation of the "Miscellanies". In the "Miscellanies" Clement disclaims order and plan. He compares the work to a meadow where all kinds of flowers grow at random and, again, to a shady hill or mountain planted with trees of every sort. In fact, it is a loosely related series of remaks, possibly notes of his lectures in the school. It is the fullest of Clement's works. He starts with the importance of philosophy for the pursuit of Christian knowledge. Here he is perhaps defending his own scientific labours from local criticism of conservative brethren. He shows how faith is related to knowledge, and emphasizes the superiority of revelation to philosophy. God's truth is to be found in revelation, another portion of it in philosophy. It is the duty of the Christian to neglect neither. Religious science, drawn from his twofold source, is even an element of perfection, the instructed Christian -- "the true Gnostic" is the perfect Christian. He who has risen to this height is far from the disturbance of passion; he is united to God, and in a mysterious sense is one with Him. Such is the line of thought indicated in the work, which is full of digressions. "The Tutor" is a practical treatise in three books. Its purpose is to fit the ordinary Christian by a disciplined life to become an instructed Christian. In ancient times the paedagogus was the slave who had constant charge of a boy, his companion at all times. On him depended the formation of the boy's character. such is the office of the Word Incarnate towards men. He first summons them to be HIS, then He trains them in His ways. His ways are temperate, orderly, calm, and simple. Nothing is too common or trivial for the Tutor's care. His influence tells on the minute details of life, on one's manner of eating, drinking, sleeping, dressing, taking recreation, etc. The moral tone of this work is kindly; very beautiful is the ideal of a transfigured life described at the close. In the editions of Clement "The Tutor" is followed by two short poems, the second of which, addressed to the Tutor, is from some pious reader of the work; the first, entitled "A Hymn of the Saviour Christ" (Hymnos tou Soteros Christou), is, in the manuscripts which contain it, attributed to Clement. The hymn may be the work of Clement (Bardenhewer). or it may be of as early a date as the Gloria in Excesis (Westcott). Some scholars see in the chief writings of Clement, the "Exhortation", "The Tutor", the "Miscellanies", a great trilogy representing a graduated initiation into the Christian life -- belief, discipline, knowledge -- three states corresponding to the three degrees of the neo-Platonic mysteries -- purification, initiation, and vision. Some such underlying conception was doubtless before the mind of Clement, but it can hardly be said to have been realized. He was too unsystematic. Besides these more irnportant works, he wrote the beautiful tract, "Who is the rich man who shall be saved? (tis ho sozomenos plousios). It is an exposition of St. Mark, x, 17-31, wherein Clement shows that wealth is not condemned by the Gospel as intrinsically evil; its morality depends on the good or ill use made of it. The work concludes with the narrative of the young man who was baptized, lost, and again rewon by the Apostle St. John. The date of the composition cannot be fixed. We have the work almost in its entirety. Clement wrote homilies on fasting and on evil speaking, and he also used his pen in the controversy on the Paschal question. Duchesne (Hist. ancienne de l'Eglise, I, 334 sqq.) thus summarizes the remaining years of Clement's life. He did not end his life at Alexandria. The persecution fell upon Egypt in the year 202, and catechumens were pursued with special intent of law. The catechetical school suffered accordingly. In the first two books of the "Miscellanies", written at this time, we find more than one allusion to the crisis. At length Clement felt obliged to withdraw. We find him shortly after at Caesarea in Cappadocia beside his friend and former pupil bishop Alexander. The persecution is active there also, and Clement is fulfillmg a ministry of love. Alexander is in prison for Christ's sake, Clement takes charge of the Church in his stead, strengthens the faithful, and is even able to draw in additional converts. We learn this from a letter written in 211 or 212 by Alexander to congratulate the Church of Antioch on the election Asclepiades to the bishopric. Clement himself undertook to deliver the letter in person, being known to the faithful of Antioch. In another letter written about 215 to Origen Alexander speaks of Clement as of one then dead. Clement has had no notable influence on the course of theology beyond his personal influence on the young Origen. His writings were occasionally copied, as by Hippolytus in his "Chronicon", by Arnobius, and by Theodoret of Cyrus. St. Jerome admired his learning. Pope Gelasius in the catalogue attributed to him mentions Clement's works, but adds, "they are in no case to be received amongst us". Photius in the "Bibliotheca" censures a list of errors drawn from his writings, but shows a kindly feeling towards Clement, assuming that the original text had been tampered with. Clement has in fact been dwarfed in history by the towering grandeur of the great Origen, who succeeded him at Alexandria. Down to the seventeenth century he was venerated as a saint. His name was to be found in the martyrologies, and his feast fell on the fourth of December. But when the Roman Martyrology was revised by Pope Clement VIII his name was dropped from the calendar on the advice of Cardinal Baronius. Benedict XIV maintained this decision of his predecessor on the grounds that Clement's life was little known that he had never obtained public cultus in the Church, and that some of his doctrines were, if not erroneous, at least suspect. In more recent times Clement has grown in favour for his charming literary temper, his attractive candour, the brave spirit which made him a pioneer in theology, and his leaning to the claims of philosophy. He is modern in spirit. He was exceptionally well-read. He had a thorough knowledge of the whole range of Biblical and Christian literature, of orthodox and heretical works. He was fond of letters also, and had a fine knowledge of the pagan poets and philosophers; he loved to quote them, too, and has thus preserved a number of fragments of lost works. The mass of facts and citations collected by him and pieced together in his writings is in fact unexampled in antiquity, though it is not unlikely that he drew at times upon the florilegia, or anthologies, exhibiting choice passages of literature. Scholars have found it no easy task to sum up the chief points of Clement's teaching. As has already been intimated, he lacks technical precision and makes no pretense to orderly exposition. It is easy, therefore, to misjudge him. We accept the discriminating judgment of Tixeront. Clement's rule of faith was sound. He admitted the authority of the Church's tradition. He would be, first of all, a Christian, accepting "the ecclesiastical rule", but he would also strive to remain a philosopher, and bring his reason to bear in matters of religion. "Few are they", he said, "who have taken the spoils of the Egyptians, and made of them the furniture of the Tabernacle." He set himself, therefore, with philosophy as an instrument, to transform faith into science, and revelation into theology. The Gnostics had already pretended to possess the science of faith, but they were, in fact, mere rationalists, or rather dreamers of fantastic dreams. Clement would have nothing but faith for the basis of his speculations. He cannot, therefore, be accused of disloyalty in will. But he was a pioneer in a diffficult undertaking, and it must be admitted that he failed at times in his high endeavour. He was careful to go to Holy Scripture for his doctrine; but he misused the text by his faulty exegesis. He had read all the Books of the New Testament except the Second Epistle of St. Peter and the Third Epistle of St. John. "In fact", Tixeront says, "his evidence as to the primitive form of the Apostolic writings is of the highest value." Unfortunately, he interpreted the Scripture after the manner of Philo. He was ready to find allegory everywhere. The facts of the Old Testament became mere symbols to him. He did not, howerer, permit himself so much freedom with the New Testament. The special field which Clement cultivated led him to insist on the difference between the faith of the ordinary Christian and the science of the perfect, and his teaching on this point is most characteristic of him. The perfect Christian has an insight into "the great mysteries" of man, of nature, of virtue -- which the ordinary Christian accepts without clear insight. Clement has seemed to some to exaggerate the moral worth of religious knowledge; it must however be remembered that he praises not mere sterile knowledge, but knowledge which turns to love. It is Christian perfection that he extols. The perfect Christian -- the true Gnostic whom Clement loves to describe -- leads a life of unalterable calm. And here Clement's teaching is undoubtedly colored by Stoicism. He is really describing not so much the Christian with his sensitive feelings and desires under due control, but the ideal Stoic who has deadened his feelings altogether. The perfect Christian leads a life of utter devotion the love in his heart prompts him to live always in closest union with God by prayer, to labour for the conversion of souls, to love his enemies, and even to endure martyrdom itself. Clement preceded the days of the Trinitarian controveries. He taught in the Godhead three Terms. Some critics doubt whether he distinguished them as Persons, but a careful reading of him proves that he did. The Second Terrn of the Trinity is the Word. Photius believed that Clement taught a plurality of Words, whereas in reality Clement merely drew a distinction between the Father's Divine immanent attribute of intelligence and the Personal Word Who is the Son. The Son is eternally begotten, and has the very attributes of the Father. They are but one God. So far, in fact, does Clement push this notion of unity as to seem to approach Modalism. And yet, so loose a writer is he that elsewhere are found disquieting traces of the very opposite error of Subordinationism. These, however, may be explained away. In fact, he needs to be judged, more than writers generally, not by a chance phrase here or there, but by the general drift of his teaching. Of the Holy Ghost he says little, and when he does refer to the Third Person of the Blessed Trinity he adheres closely to the language of Scripture. He acknowledges two natures in Christ. Christ is the Man-God, who profits us both as God and as man. Clement evidently regards Christ as one Person -- the Word. Instances of the interchange of idioms are frequent in his writings. Photius has accused Clement of Docetism. Clement, however, clearly admits in Christ a real body, but he thought this body exempt from the common needs of life, as eating and drinking, and the soul of Christ exempt from the movement of the passions, of joy, and of sadness. EDITIONS The works of Clement of Alexandria were first edited by P. Victorius (Florence,1550). The most complete edition is that of J. Potter, "Clementis Alexandrini opera quae extant omnia" (Oxford, 1715; Venice, 1757), reproduced in Migne, P.G. VIII, IX. The edition of G. Dindort (Oxford, 1869) is declared unsatisfactory by competent judges. A new complete edition by O. Stahlin is appearing in the Berlin "Griechisehen christlichen Schriftsteller", etc. So far (1908) two volumes have been published: the "Protrepticus" and the "Paedagogus" (Leipzig, 1905), and the "Stromata" (Bks. I -VI, ibid., 1906). The preface to the first volume (pp. 1-83) contains the best account of the manuscripts and editions of Clement. Among the separate editions of his works the following are noteworthy: Hort and Mayor, "Miscellanies", Bk. VII, with English translation (London, 1902); Zahn, "Adumbrationes" in "Forschungen zur Geschiehte des Neutestamentlichen Kanons", III, and "Supplementum Clementinum" (Erlangen, 1884); Köster, "Quis dives salvetur?" (Freiburg, 1893). The last-mentioned work was also edited by P.M. Barnard in "Cambridge Texts and Studies" by W. Wilson (1897), and translated by him in "Early Church Classics" for the S.P.C.K. (London, 1901). For an English translation of all the writings of Clement see Ante-Nicene Christian Library (New York). FRANCIS P. HAVEY St. Clement of Ireland St. Clement of Ireland Also known as CLEMENS SCOTUS (not to be confounded with Claudius Clemens). Born in Ireland, towards the middle of the eighth century, died perhaps in France, probably after 818. About the year 771 he set out for France. His biographer, an Irish monk of St. Gall, who wrote his Acts, dedicated to Charles the Fat (d. 888), says that St. Clement with his companion Albinus, or Ailbe, arrived in Gaul in 772, and announced himself as a vender of learning. So great was the fame of Clement and Ailbe that Charlemane sent for them to come to his court, where they stayed for some months. Ailbe was then given the direction of a monastery near Pavia, but Clement was requested to remain in France as the master of a higher school of learning. These events may have taken place in the winter of the year 774, after Charlemagne had been in Italy. St. Clement was regent of the Paris school from 775 until his death. It was not until 782 that Alcuin became master of the royal school at Aachen, but even the fame of Alcuin in no wise diminished the acknowledged reputation of Clement. No serious writer of today thinks of repeating the legend to the effect that St. Clement was founder of the University of Paris, but, as there is a substratum of truth in most legends, the fact remains that this remarkable Irish scholar planted the mustard seed which developed into a great tree of learning at Paris. Many anecdotes are related of St. Clement's life, especially as regards his success as a teacher of youth. Among his pupils were Bruno, Modestus, and Candidus, who had been placed under his care in 803 by Ratgar, Abbot of Fulda. When Alcuin retired to Tours in 796, his post as rector of the School of the Palace was naturally given to St. Clement. In 803, as an old man, Alcuin wrote from his retirement to Charlemagne, querulously commenting on "the daily increasing infuence of the Irish at the School of the Palace". Alcuin died 19 May 804, and Charlemagne survived till 28 January 814. St. Clement is probably identical with the person of this name who wrote the biography of Charlemagne, but the question has not been definitely settled. Colgan says that he was living in 818, and gives the date of Clement's death as 20 March and the place as Auxerre where he was interred in the church of Saint-Amator. W.H. GRATTAN-FLOOD Maurice Clenock Maurice Clenock (Or Clynog.) Date of birth unknown; died about 1580. He was b. in Wales and educated at Oxford, where he was admitted Bachelor of Canon Law in 1548. During Mary's reign he became almoner and secretary to Cardinal Pole, prebendary of York, rector of Orpington (Kent), and dean of Shoreham and Croydon, and chancellor of the prerogative court of Canterbury. In 1556 he was made rector or Corwen in the Diocese of St. Asaph, and on the death of the Bishop of Bangor in 1558 was nominated to the vacant see, but was never consecrated, owing to the change of religion under Elizabeth. Surrendering all his preferments, he accompanied Bishop Goldwell of St. Asaph to Rome, where they resided in the English hospital, of which Clenock was camerarius in 1567. In 1578 he was made its warden. At the sme time Gregory XIII ordered the hospital to be converted into a college until Englad should return to the Church. The warden was made the first rector of the college by the pope; but Cardinal Allen judged him unfit, thought he described him as "an honest and friendly man and a great advancer of the students' and seminaries' cause" (Letter to Dr. Lewis, 12 May 1579). Depsite his personal good qualities he did not prove a competent ruler. He was accused of unduly favouring his fellow-countrymen at the expense of the English students, who numbered thirty-three as against seven Welshmen. Feeling ran so high that, as Allen wrote, "Mischief and murder had like to have been committed in ipso collegio" (letter cited above). The students, having unsuccessfully appealed to the pope, left the college, and finally the pope, in April, 1579, appointed Father Agazzari, S. J., rector, leaving Dr. Clenock still warden of the hospital. He retired, however, in 1580 to Rouen, where he took ship for Spain, but was lost at sea. In contemporary documents he is frequently referred to as "Dr. Morrice". Dodd, Church History (Brussels, 1737), I, 513, also Tierney's edition (London, 1839), II, 167 sqq.; Kirk, Catholic Miscellany (London, 1826), VI 255; Knox, Historical Introduction to Douay Diaries (London, 1878); Foley, Records Eng. Prov. S.J. (London, 1880), Introduction; Knox Letters and Memorials of Cardinal Allen (London, 1882); Gillow, Bibl. Dict. Eng. Cath. (London, 1885), I, 501; Cooper in Dict. Nat. Biog. (London, 1887), XI 37; Law, Jesuits and Seculars in the Reign of Elizabeth (London, 1889); Sander, Report to Cardinal Moroni in Cath. Record Soc. Miscellanea (London, 1905), I; Parsons, Memoirs in Cath. Record Soc. Miscellanea (London, 1906), II. EDWIN BURTON Cleophas Cleophas According to the Catholic English versions the name of two persons mentioned in the New Testament. In Greek, however, the names are different, one being Cleopas, abbreviated form of Cleopatros, and the other Clopas. The first one, Cleopas, was one of the two disciples to whom the risen Lord appeared at Emmaus (Luke, xxiv, 18). We have no reliable data concerning him; his name is entered in the martyrology on the 25th of September. (See Acta Sanctorum, Sept., VII, 5 sqq.) The second, Clopas, is mentioned in St. John, xix, 25, where a Mary is called Maria he tou Klopa, which is generally translated by "Mary the wife of Clopas". This name, Clopas, is thought by many to be the Greek transliteration of an Aramaic Alphaeus. This view is based on the identification of Mary, the mother of James etc. (Mark, xv, 40) with Mary, the wife of Clopas, and the consequent identity of Alphaeus, father of James (Mark, iii, 18), with Clopas. Etymologically, however, the identification of the two names offers serious difficulties: (1) Although the letter Heth is occasionally rendered in Greek by Kappa at the end and in the middle of words, it is very seldom so in the beginning, where the aspirate is better protected; examples of this, however, are given by Levy (Sem. Fremdwörter in Griech.); but (2) even if this difficulty was met, Clopas would suppose an Aramaic Halophai, not Halpai. (3) The Syriac versions have rendered the Greek Clopas with a Qoph, not with a Heth, as they would have done naturally had they been conscious of the identity of Clopas and Halpai; Alphaeus is rendered with Heth (occasionally Aleph). For these reasons, others see in Clopas a substitute for Cleopas, with the contraction of eo into w. In Greek, it is true, eo is not contracted into w, but a Semite, borrowing a name did not necessarily follow the rules of Greek contraction. In fact, in Mishnic Hebrew the name Cleopatra is rendered by Clopatra, and hence the Greek Cleopas might be rendered by Clopas. See also, Chabot, "Journ. Asiat.", X, 327 (1897). Even if, etymologically, the two names are different they may have been borne by one name, and the question of the identity of Alphaeus and Clopas is still open. If the two persons are distinct, then we know nothing of Clopas beyond the fact recorded in St. John; if, on the contrary, they are identified, Clopas' personality is or may be closely connected with the history of the brethren of the Lord and of James the Less. (See Brethren of the Lord; James The Less.) Schegg, Jakobus der Bruder des Hern (Munich, 1883); Nicoll, Alphaeus and Klopas in The Expositor (1885), 79 sqq; Wetzel, Alphaeus u. Klopas in Theolog. Stud. u. Krit. (1883), 620 sq.; Jaquier in Vig, Dict. de la Bib., s.v. Alphee; also commentaries on John xix, 25. R. BUTIN Mary Claire Lynch Clerestory Clerestory A term formerly applied to any window or traceried opening in a church, e. g. in an aisle, tower, cloister, or screen, but now restricted to the windows in an aisled nave, or to the range of wall in which the high windows are set. Sometimes these windows are very small, being mere quatrefoils or spherical triangles. In Large buildings, however, they are important features both of beauty and utility. The clerestory is especially used in churches where the division into nave and side aisles permits the introduction of light into the body of the church from above the aisle roofs. According to Fergusson's theory, the interior of Greek temples was lighted by a clerestory, similar internally to that found in the great Egyptian temples, but externally requiring such a change of arrangement as was necessary to adapt it to a sloping instead of a flat roof. This seems to have been effected by countersinking into the roof, so as to make three ridges in those parts where the light was admitted, though the regular shape of the roof was retained between these openings. Thus, neither the ridge nor the continuity of the lines of the roof was interfered with. This theory is borne out by all the remains of Greek temples that now exist, and by all the descriptions that have been handed down from antiquity. Simpson, however, regards the theory as extremely improbable. FLETCHER AND FLETCHER, A History of Architecture (London, New York, 1896), 690; GWILT, Encyc. of Arch. (London, 1881), 1648; PARKER, Glossary of Arch. (Oxford, 1850), I. 104; STURGIS, Dict. of Arch. and Building (London, 1904); FERGUSSON, A History of Architecture in all Countries (New York); SIMPSON, A history of Architectural Development (New York, 1905). THOMAS H. POOLE. Cleric Cleric A person who has been legitimately received into the ranks of the clergy. By clergy in the strict sense is meant the entire ecclesiastical hierarchy. Consequently a cleric is one who belongs in some sense to the hierarchy. For this it is necessary that he have received at least the tonsure (see TONSURE). The clergy by Divine right form an order or state which is essentially distinct from that of the laity. (Conc. Trid., Sess. XXIV, De sac. ord., can. i, 6.) Christ did not commit the preaching of the Gospel and the administration of the sacraments to the faithful in general, but to certain carefully defined persons, as the Apostles and seventy-two Disciples. They also received the power of governing the flocks; which power is represented by the Keys, a well-known Oriental symbol for authority. That the distinction between clergy and laity was recognized in New Testament times is plain from St. Paul's statement that the bishops have been placed by the Holy Ghost to rule the Church (Acts, xx, 28), for the right to rule implies a correlative obligation to obey. Presbyters are continually distinguished from the laity throughout the Pualine Epistles. The word cleric (Lat., clericus from clerus) is derived from the Greek kleros, a "lot". In the Septuagint, this word is used in the literal sense quite frequently, though not in its later technical sense. In the First Epistle of St. Peter (v, 3) it is applied to entire body of the faithful. The use of the word in its present restricted meaning occurs, however, as early as the third century. It is found in Tertullian (De idol., c. viii), Origen (Hom. in Jer., xi, 3) and Clement of Alexandria (Quis dives salvetur, c. xlii) in this sense. It is not easy to determine exactly how the word came to have its present determinate meaning. The "Pontificale Romanum" refers to clerics as being those whose "lot" is the Lord Himself, and St. Jerome explicitly derives the name from that fact. These statements do not give us, however, the steps by which kleros, "lot" became "clergy" or "cleric". Probably the best suggested explanation is, that from lot or portion, it came to mean a particular lot or office assigned to some one, and finally the person himself possessing the lot or office. EXTENSION OF MEANING While cleric in its strict sense means one who has received the ecclesiastical tonsure, yet in general sense it is also employed in canon law for all to whom clerical privileges have been extended. Such are the members of religious orders: Monks and nuns, and even lay brothers and novices. It is also applied to tertiaries of the mendicant orders. If they be men, however, they must live in community, but if they be women they many enjoy the privilege even when living at home. Hermits and virgins, or celibates whose vows are approved by the bishop, have likewise clerical immunities. Members of the military religious orders, such as formerly the Knights Templars, and at present the Teutonic Knights and Knights of Malta, rank as clerics. The meaning of the word has been so extended as to include even laics, men or women, who render service to a regular community, such as by begging, provided they wear a clerical dress and reside near the monastery or convent. The privileges enjoyed by thus obtaining the benefit of clergy were once great (see IMMUNITY), and were formerly recognized by secular governments. In modern times, however, these privileges in as far as they were guaranteed by the civil power have been almost entirely swept away in every country of the world. It is only when there is question of favours, or as canonists say, in a favourable sense, that cleric has this wide signification. When there is question of penalties, on the contrary, it becomes so restricted as to mean only the lower orders of the secular clergy. In England in medieval times the term clerk acquired in common parlance the significance of an educated man. CLERICAL RELIGIOUS ORDERS Among the regular orders in the strict sense, namely those whose members have solemn vows, is a large class designated as clerks regular (clerici regulares) because living according to a rule (regula). In contradistinction to the monastic orders, these clerical orders were instituted for the purpose of exercising a ministry similar to that of the secular clerics, by promotion of the Divine worship and procuring the salvation of souls. Their main object is the spiritual and temporal service of their neighbour in educating youth, preaching, serving the sick, etc. Orders of clerks regular were first founded in the sixteenth century. To this class belong the Jesuits, Theatines, Barnabites, and others. Many religious congregations, which are not orders in the strict sense, such as the Passionists and Redemptorists follow a similar mode of life. REGIONARY CLERICS Regionary clerics, who are also called clerici vagantes and acephali, were those who were ordained without title to a special church. They were received into the sacred ministry by the bishops for the purpose of supplying the dearth of the clergy in the outlying districts of the dioceses where no benefices existed. Here they were to act as missionaries and in course of time, if possible, to gather together congregations who would build and endow a church. Many of these clerics became mere wanderers without settled occupation or abode, sometimes supporting themselves by filling temporary chaplaincies in the castles of noblemen. In course of time, numbers of these untitled clerics returned to the settled portions of their dioceses and acted as assistants to such beneficed clergymen as chose to accept their help. Owing to the abuses arising from the unsettled state of these vagrant clerics, the Council of Trent (Sess, XXIII, c. xvi, De ref.) forbade the ordaining in future of any candidate who was not attached to a definite church or pious institute. OBLIGATIONS OF CLERICS (1) They must wear a costume suited to their state. While the common canon law does not determine in every detail what the dress of clerics should be, yet many and various prescriptions on the subject are found in the canons, the pontifical constitutions, and the decrees of councils. These ordain that the clerics are not to wear the dress of laymen. They must abstain from gaudy colours, unbecoming their state. The wearing of the soutane or cassock on all occasions, even in public, is prescribed for clerics living in Rome, and bishops may command the same in their dioceses. In non-Catholic countries, synods generally prescribe that for public use the dress of clerics should be such as to distinguish them from laymen; that is of black or of a sober colour, and that the so-called Roman collar be worn. In private, clergymen are commonly required to wear the soutane. (2) Clerics are forbidden to engage in trade and secular business. In the early ages of the Church, it was allowable to seek necessary sustenance by labour, and that is not forbidden now if the cleric does not receive proper support from ecclesiastical sources. What is specially prohibited is to engage in trade for the sake of gain. The buying and selling, however, which is necessary in the administration of the lands or the goods of a benefice do not fall under the prohibition. Neither is it forbidden to clerics nowadays to place their money out at interest and receive the increment; for this is equivalent, allowing for modern circumstances, to the economic management of the lands of ecclesiastical benefices. Gambling in stocks, however, remains an illicit form of trade for clergymen (Lehmkuhl, Theol. Mor., II, n. 612). (3) There are stringent laws concerning the relations of clerics with persons of the other sex. They must conform to the canons in all that regards allowing females to dwell in their houses. Above all must they avoid associating with those whose moral character causes the least suspicion. (4) Unbecoming amusements are also forbidden to them, such as the frequenting of improper plays and spectacles, the visiting of taverns, indulgence in games of chance, carrying of arms, following the chase, etc. When in the above amusements, however, there is no necessary impropriety, lawful custom and synodal prescriptions may make a participation in them allowable. (5) Clerics are bound to obey their diocesan bishops in all matters determined by the canon law. Various Roman decisions have declared that by his ordinary authority, the bishop cannot oblige clerics to render to him any service not expressed in the canons. While the obligation of obedience is binding on all clerics, it is strengthened for priests by the solemn promise made at ordination, and for all holders of benefices by the canonical oath. The obligation to be subject to the bishop in lawful matters is not, however, a vow. LOSS OF CLERICAL PRIVILEGES Although the sacramental character received in Sacred orders may not be obliterated, yet even the higher orders of clergy may be degraded from their dignity and reduced to what is technically called lay communion. The same holds, of course, likewise for the lower clergy. When, however, a cleric who has received only minor orders or even tonsure, after losing his privileges, has been restored to the clerical state, this restitution, even when solemn, is merely ceremonious and is not considered as a new conferring of tonsure or minor orders. Even minor clerics are therefore considered to have a stable connection with the hierarchical order. See MINOR ORDERS; DEACON; SUBDEACON; PRIEST; HIERARCHY; LAITY. WERNZ, Jus Decretalium (Rome, 1899), II; FERRARIS, Prompta Bibl. (Rome, 1886), II; LAURENTIUS, Inst. Jur. Eccl. (Freiburg, 1903). WILLIAM H.W. FANNING Giovanni Clericato Giovanni Clericato Canonist, born 1633, at Padua; died 1717. He was of English descent, and the name is variously written CLERICATUS, CHERICATO, CHERICATI, and CHIERICATO, probably from CLARK, the original family name. The charity of a pious woman made it possible for him to satisfy his strong inclination for study; and, being raised to the priesthood he came to be considered one of the ablest men of his time in matters of ecclesiastical jurisprudence. Cardinal Barbarigo, whose life he afterwards wrote, made him Vicar-General of the Diocese of Padua. He wrote many works on civil and canon law; his "Decisiones Sacramentales" was published in 1727, and in 1757 in three volumes, and merited the encomiums of Benedict XIV (notific. 32, n. 6). His name is held in honour in Italian ecclesiastical literature. MORÉRI, Gr. Dict. Hist. (Paris, 1759); SBERTI, Memorie (Padua, 1790); TIRABOSCHI, Storia della Lett. Ital. (Milan, 1825). JOHN H. STAPLETON. Clericos Laicos Clericis Laicos The initial words of a Bull issued 25 Feb., 1296, by Boniface VIII in response to an earnest appeal of the English and French prelates for protection against the intolerable exactions of the civil power (see Boniface VIII.) The decree was inserted among the papal decretals and is found in Lib. Sextus, III, tit. 23. After a preamble in which the pope complains that the laity are, and have always been, bitterly hostile to the clergy; that, although they possess no authority over ecclesiastical persons or property, they impose all sorts of heavy burdens on the clergy and seek to reduce them to servitude; that several prelates and other dignitaries of the Church, more fearful of giving offence to their earthly rulers than to the majesty of God, acquiesce in these abuses, without having obtained authority or permission from the Apostolic See; he, therefore, wishing to put an end to these iniquitous proceedings, with the consent of his cardinals and by Apostolic authority decrees that all prelates or other ecclesiastical superiors who under whatsoever pretext or colour shall, without authority from the Holy See, pay to laymen any part of their income or of the revenue of the Church; also all emperors, kings, dukes, counts, etc. who shall exact or receive such payments incur eo ipso the sentence of excommunication from which, except in articulo mortis, no one can absolve them without special faculties from the pope; no privileges or dispensations to be of avail against the decree. The two underlying principles of this Bull, viz. (1) that the clergy should enjoy equally with the laity the right of determining the need and the amount of their subsidies to the Crown, and (2) that the head of the Church ought to be consulted when there was question of diverting the revenues of the Church to secular purposes, were by no means strange or novel in that age of Magnæ Chartæ; and outside of France and England it was accepted without a murmur. But what excited the wrath of the two chief culprits, Philip the Fair and Edward I, was that from its fiery tone, from the express mention of sovereigns, and the grave ipso facto penalties attached, they felt that behind the decree there stood a new Hildebrand resolved to enforce it to the letter. The Bull has been criticized for the unconventional vehemence of its tone, for its exaggerated indictment of the hostile attitude of the laity of all ages towards the clergy, and for its failure to make clear the distinction between the revenues of the purely ecclesiastical benefices and the lay fees held by the clergy on feudal tenure. The unscrupulous advisers of Philip the Fair were quick to take advantage of the pope's hasty language and, by forcing him to make explanations, put him on the defensive and weakened his prestige. For sources and literature, see BONIFACE VIII. James F. Loughlin John Clerk John Clerk Bishop of Bath and Wells; date of birth unknown; died 3 January, 1541. He was educated at Cambridge (B. A., 1499; M A., 1502) and Bologna, where he became Doctor of Laws. When he returned to England he attached himself to Cardinal Wolsey, and much preferment followed. He became Rector of Hothfield, Kent, 1508; Master of the Maison Dieu at Dover, 1509; Rector of Portishead (Somerset) 1513; Ivychurch (Kent), West Tarring (Sussex), and Charlton, all in 1514; South Molton (Devonshire) and Archdeacon of Colohester, 1519; Dean of Windsor and judge in the Court of Star Chamber, 1519. He was also Dean of the King's Chapel. He was useful in diplomatic commissions both to Wolsey and the king. In 1521 he was appointed ambassador to the Papal Court, in which capacity he presented King Henry's book against Luther to the pope in full consistory. He acted as Wolsey's agent in Rome in the conclave on the death of Leo X. He returned to England to be appointed Master of the Rolls in October, 1522, which office he held till 9 October, 1523. When Wolsey resigned the See of Bath and Wells, in 1523, Clerk was appointed bishop in his stead. As bishop-elect he went on another political embassy to Rome, where he received episcopal consecration, 6 December, 1523. He remained in Rome for two years and once more unsuccessfully represented Wolsey's interests at the conclave in which Clement VII was elected pope. He left Rome in November, 1525, but was so useful as a diplomatic agent that he was never long in England, and his diocese was administered by his two suffragan bishops. When the question of the royal divorce was raised Clerk was appointed as one of the queen's counsellors, but Wolsey persuaded him to agree on her behalf that she should withdraw from proceedings at Rome. Afterwards he joined in pronouncing sentence of divorce, and is believed to have assisted Cranmer in works on the supremacy and the divorce. His last embassy was in 1540, to the Duke of Cleves, to explain the king's divorce of Anne of Cleves. On his return he was taken ill at Dunkirk, not without suspicion of poison, but he managed to reach England, though only to die. He lies buried at St. Botolph's, Aldgate, not at Dunkirk, as sometimes stated. Clerk wrote "Oratio pro Henrico VIII apud Leonem pontif. Max. in exhibitione operis regii contra Lutherum in consistonio habitam" (London, 1541), translated into English by T. W. (Thomas Warde?), 1687. Letters and State Papers of Henry VIII (London, 1830-52); CHERBURY, Life and Reign of Henry VIII (London, 1714); HUNT in Dict. of Nat. Biogr., s. v.; DODD, Church Hist. (London, 1737), I, 181-2; COOPER, Athenæ. Cantab. (Cambridge, 1858), I, 77; GILLOW, Bibl. Dict. Eng. Cath. The account of PITTS, De Ang. Scriptoribus (Paris, 1619), is erroneous. EDWIN BURTON. Agnes Mary Clerke Agnes Mary Clerke Astronomer, born at Skibbereen, County Cork, Ireland, 10 February, 1842; died in London, 20 January 1907. At the very beginning of her study she showed a marked interest in astronomy, and before she was fifteen years old she had begun to write a history of that science. In 1861 the family moved to Dublin, and in 1863 to Queenstown. Several years later she went to Italy where she stayed until 1877, chiefly at Florence, studying at the public library and preparing for literary work. In 1877 she settled in London. Her first important article, "Copernicus in Italy", was published in the "Edinburgh Review" (October, 1877). She achieved a wold-wide reputation in 1885, on the appearance of her exhaustive treatise, "A Popular History of Astronomy in the Nineteenth Century". This was at once recognized as an authoritative work. Miss Clerke was not a practical astronomer; in 1888, however, she spent three months at the Cape Observatory as the guest of the director, Sir David Gill, and his wife. There she became sufficiently familiar with spectroscopic work to be enabled to write about this newer branch of the science with increased clearness and confidence. In 1892 the Royal Institution awarded to her the Actonian Prize of one hundred guineas. As a member of the British Astronomical Association she attended its meetings regularly, as well as those of the Royal Astronomical Society. In 1903, with Lady Huggins, she was elected an honorary member of the Royal Astronomical Society, a rank previously held only by two other women, Caroline Herschel and Mary Somerville. Her work is remarkable in a literary as well as in a scientific way. She compiled facts with untiring diligence, sifted them carefully, discussed them with judgment, and suggested problems and lines of future research. All this is expressed in polished, eloquent, and beautiful language. With this scientific temperament she combined a noble religious nature that made her acknowledge "with supreme conviction" the insufficiency of science to know and predict the possible acts of Divine Power. Her works, all published in London, include, "A Popular History of Astronomy in the Nineteenth Century" (1885, 4th revised ed., 1902); "The System of the Stars" (1890; 2nd ed., 1905); "The Herschels and Modern Astronomy" (1895); "The Concise Knowledge Astronomy" -- in conjunction with J. E. Gore and A. Fowler (1898); "Problems in Astrophysics" (1903); "Modern Cosmogonies" (1906). To the "Edinburgh Review" she contributed fifty-five articles, mainly on subjects connected with astrophysics. The articles on astronomers in the "Dictionary of National Biography"; on "Laplace" and some on other astronomers and astronomical subjects in the "Encyclopaedia Britannica"; and on "Astronomy" in The Catholic Encyclopedia were from her pen, as well as numerous contributions to "Knowledge", "The Observatory", the London "Tablet", and other periodicals. The Tablet, files (London, March, 1906; January, 1907); Obituary in Monthly Notices of the R.A.S. (London, 1907); Macpherson in Popular Astronomy (London, March, 1907); The Messenger Magazine (New York, March, 1907). WILLIAM FOX Ellen Mary Clerke Ellen Mary Clerke Sister of preceding, journalist and novelist, b. at Skibbereen, County Cork, Ireland, 1840; d. in London, 2 March 1906. A gifted and accomplished writer, she was for many years an editorial writer for the London "Tablet". Her knowledge of the intricacies of the religious and political problems of Continental Europe was remarkable. A seven years' stay in Italy made her intimately familiar not only with its language and literature, but also with every phase of its public life. She contributed a series of stories, perfect in Italian phrase, idiom, and local colour, to periodicals in Florence. Her pamphlets, "Jupiter and His System" and "The Planet Venus", were valuable additions to the literature of popular astronomy. In 1899 she published "Fable and Song in Italy", a collection of essays and studies and specimens of Italian poetry rendered into English in the original metres. A novel, "Flowers of Fire" (1902), was her last work. WILLIAM FOX Clerks Regular Clerks Regular Canonical Status By clerks regular are meant those bodies of men in the Church who by the very nature of their institute unite the perfection of the religious state to the priestly office, i.e. who while being essentially clerics, devoted to the exercise of the ministry in preaching, the administration of the sacraments, the education of youth, and other spiritual and corporal works of mercy, are at the same time religious in the strictest sense of the word, professing solemn vows, and living a community life according to a rule solemnly approved of by the sovereign pontiff. In the Corpus Juris Canonici the term clerks regular is often used for canons regular, and regular clerks are classed by authors as a branch or modern adaptation of the once world-famous family of regular canons (see CANONS AND CANONESSES REGULAR). This is because of the intimate connection existing between the two; for while separated from the secular clergy by their vows and the observance of a community life and a rule, they form a distinct class in the religious state, the clerical, in opposition to the monastic, which includes monks, hermits, and friars. Clerks regular are distinguished from the purely monastic bodies, or monks, in four ways: + They are primarily devoted to the sacred ministry; not so the monks, whose proper work is contemplation and the solemn celebration of the liturgy. + They are obliged to cultivate the sacred sciences, which, if cultivated by the monks, are yet not imposed upon them by virtue of their state of life. + Clerks regular as clerics must retain some appearance of clerical dress distinct from the habit and cowl of the monk. + And lastly, because of their occupations, they are less given to the practice of austerity which is a distinct feature of the purely monastic life. They are distinguished from the friars in this, that though the latter are devoted to the sacred ministry and the cultivation of learning, they are not primarily priests. Finally, clerks regular differ from canons regular in that they do not possess cathedral or collegiate churches, devote themselves more completely to ministerial work in place of choir-service, and have fewer penitential observances of rule. History The exact date at which clerks regular appeared in the Church cannot be absolutely determined. Regular clerks of some sort, i.e. priests devoted both to the exercise of the ministry and to the practice of the religious life, are found in the earliest days of Christian antiquity. Many eminent theologians hold that the clerks regular were founded by Christ Himself. In this opinion the Apostles were the first regular clerks, being constituted by Christ ministers par excellence of His Church and called by Him personally to the practice of the counsels of the religious life (cf. Suarez). From the fact that St. Augustine in the fourth century established in his house a community of priests, leading the religious life, for whom he drew up a rule, he has ordinarily been styled the founder of the regular clerks and canons, and upon his rule have been built the constitutions of the canons regular and an immense number of the religious communities of the Middle Ages, besides those of the clerks regular established in the sixteenth century. During the whole medieval period the clerks regular were represented by the regular canons who under the name of the Canons Regular or Black Canons of St. Augustine, the Premonstratensians or White Canons, Canons of St. Norbert, etc., shared with the monks the possession of those magnificent abbeys and monasteries all over Europe which, even though they are in ruins, compel the admiration of the beholder. It was not until the sixteenth century that clerks regular in the modern and strictest sense of the word came into being. Just as the conditions obtaining in the thirteenth century brought about a change in the monastic ideal, so in the sixteenth the altered circumstances of the times called for a fresh development of the ever fecund religious spirit in the Church. This development, adapted to the needs of the times, was had in the various bodies of simple clerics, who, desirous of devoting themselves more perfectly to the exercise of their priestly ministry under the safeguards of the religious life, instituted the several bodies which, under the names of the various orders or regular clerics, constitute in themselves and in their imitators one of the most efficient instruments for good in the Church militant to-day. So successful and popular and well adapted to all modern needs were the clerks regular, that their mode of life was chosen as the pattern for all the various communities of men, whether religious or secular, living under rule, in which the Church has in recent times been so prolific. The first order of clerks regular to be founded were the Theatines (q.v.) established at Rome in 1524; then followed the Clerks Regular of the Good Jesus, founded at Ravenna in 1526, and abolished by Innocent X in 1651; the Barnabites (q.v.) or Clerks Regular of St. Paul, Milan, 1530; The Somaschi (q.v.) or Clerks Regular of St. Majolus, Somasca, 1532; the Jesuits or the Society of Jesus, Paris, 1534; the Regular Clerks of the Mother of God, Lucca, 1583; the Regular Clerks Ministering to the Sick, Rome, 1584; the Minor Clerks Regular, Naples, 1588; and the Piarists or Regular Clerks of the Mother of God of the Pious Schools, Rome, 1597. Since the close of the sixteenth century no new orders have been added to the number, though the name Clerks Regular has been assumed occasionally by communities that are technically only religious, or pious, congregations (see CONGREGATIONS, RELIGIOUS). SUAREZ, De Religione, tr. 9: HUMPHREY, Elements of Religious Life (London, 1884); IDEM, The Religious State (London, 1903), II; ANDRE-WAGNER, Dict. de droit canonique (Paris, 1901); VERMEERSCH, De Religious Institutis et Personis (Bruges, 1904), I; WERNZ, Jus Decretalium (Rome, 1899), III; HELYOT, Dict. des ordres religieux (Paris, 1859), ed. MIGNE, III; HEIMBUCHER, Die Orden und Kong. der kath. Kirche (Paderborn, 1907), III. JOHN F.X. MURPHY Clerks Regular of Our Saviour Clerks Regular of Our Saviour A religious congregation instituted in its present form in 1851, at Benoite-Vaux in the Diocese of Verdun, France. The constitutions and spirit of the congregation are those of the Canons Regular of Our Saviour, who were established as a reform among the various bodies of regular canons in Lorraine by St. Peter Fourier, canon of Chamousay in 1623, and confirmed by Urban VIII in 1628. The scope of the reformed order, as outlined in the "Summarium Constitutionum" of St. Peter, was the Christian education of youth and the exercise of the sacred ministry among the poor and neglected. The order flourished exceedingly throughout the Duchy of Lorraine and made its way into France and Savoy; but was completely destroyed by the French Revolution. In 1851 four zealous priests of the Diocese of Verdun, anxious to see revived the apostolic labours of the sons of Fourier, withdrew to the retired shrine of Our Lady of Cenoite-Vaux, and there began a religious life according to the rule given to his canons by St. Peter Fourier. Three years later they received the approbation of the Holy See, which changed their name from Canons Regular, the title of the earlier organization to Clerks Regular. During the next half century the congregation spread and it now numbers several houses, its special work being the education of youth. The members of the congregation are of three grades, priests, scholastics, and lay brothers. Though possessing the title "clerks regular" they are not such in the strict sense of the word, as their vows, though perpetual, are simple, according to the present practice of the Roman authorities of establishing no new institutes of solemn vows. HEIMBUCHER, Die Orden und Kong. der kath. Kirche (Paderborn, 1907), II, 47 sq.; HELYOT, Dict. des ordres religieux, (Paris, 1859), ed. MIGNE, IV. JOHN F.X. MURPHY Clerks Regular of the Mother of God of Lucca Clerks Regular of the Mother of God of Lucca Clerks Regular of the Mother of God of Lucca, a congregation founded by the Blessed Giovanni Leonardi, son of middle-class parents, who was born in 1541 at Diecimo, a small township in the Republic of Lucca, though at that time the chief place of a fief of the same name held by the bishops of Lucca from the republic. At seventeen years of age he was sent to Lucca to learn the apothecary's trade, but having from a tender age been most piously inclined, he, after many difficulties, including the necessity of educating himself, embraced the sacerdotal state, and was ordained 22 December, 1572. His congregation may be said to have begun in 1574. Two or three young laymen, attracted by his sanctity and the sweetness of his character, had gathered round him to submit themselves to his spiritual guidance and help him in the work for the reform of manners and the saving of souls which he had begun even as a layman. Giovanni rented the beautiful little church of Santa Maria della Rosa, and in a quarter close by, something like community life was started. It was here, when it became evident that Giovanni's lay helpers were preparing for the priesthood and that something like a religious order was in process of formation, that a storm of persecution broke out against the devoted founder. The Fathers of the republic seem to have had a real fear that a native religious order, if spread over Italy, would cause the affairs of the little state to become too well known to its neighbours. The persecution, however, was so effective and lasting, that the Blessed Leonardi practically spent the rest of his life in banishment from Lucca, only being now and again admitted by special decree of the Senate, unwillingly extracted under papal pressure. In 1580 Giovanni acquired secretly the ancient church of Santa Maria Cortelandini (popularly known as Santa Maria Nera) which his sons hold to this day. In 1583 the congregation was canonically erected at the instigation of Pope Gregory XIII by Bishop Alessandro Guidiccioni, of Lucca, and confirmed by the Brief of Clement VIII "Ex quo divina majestas", 13 October, 1595. The congregation at this time only took simple vows of chastity, perseverance, and obedience, and was known as the "Congregation of Clerks Secular of the Blessed Virgin". In 1596 Clement VIII nominated the Blessed Giovanni commissary Apostolic for the reform of the monks of the Order of Monte Vergine, and in 1601 the cardinal protector appointed him to carry out a similar work among the Vallombrosans. In 1601 he obtained the church of S. Maria in Portico in Rome. In the same year Cardinal Baronius became protector of the congregation. Giovanni died in Rome 9 October, 1609, aged sixty-eight, and was buried in Santa Maria in Portico. The present church of the congregation in Rome, obtained in 1662, is Santa Maria in Campitelli (called also Santa Maria in Portico) interesting to Englishmen as the first titular church of the Cardinal of York. The body of the founder was removed to this church and lies there under the altar of St. John the Baptist. Giovanni Leonardi was declared Venerable in 1701, and beatified by Pius IX in 1861. Leo XIII, in 1893, caused his name to be inserted in the Roman Martyrology and ordered the clergy of Rome to say his Mass and Office, an honour accorded to no other Blessed in that city except the beatified popes. In 1614 Paul V confided to the congregation the care of the so-called Pious Schools. It is in his Brief "Inter Pastoralis" that the congregation is first called "of the Mother of God", having until then been known by its original name of "Clerks Secular of the Blessed Virgin". The care of these schools being considered outside the scope of the congregation, it was relieved of their charge by the same pontiff in 1617. It was not until 1621 (3 November) that Gregory XV, carrying out what was always in the founder's mind, erected the congregation into a religious order proper by permitting its members to take solemn vows, and it henceforth became the Clerks Regular of the Mother of God. The Blessed Leonardi received many offers of churches during his life, but with a view of conciliating the governing body of the republic thought it better to refuse them. In all its history the order has never had more than fifteen churches, and never more than seven at one time. It was introduced into Naples in 1632, Genoa 1669, and Milan 1709. The only churches of the order now existing are Santa Maria Cortelandini, Lucca; Santa Maria in Campitelli, Rome; Santa Maria in Portico di Chiaja, and Santa Brigida, Naples; the Madonna della Stella Migliano (1902); and the parish church of S. Carlo in Monte Carlo (1873), the only church of the order outside the borders of modern Italy. In the sacristy of Santa Maria Cortelandini is preserved a large portion of a hair-shirt of St. Thomas of Canterbury whose feast is celebrated there with considerable ceremony; in 1908 half of this relic was presented to the Benedictine Abbey of St. Thomas, Erdington, England. The former residence of the clerks, who kept a large boys' school until the suppression in 1867, is now the public library of Lucca. Two of the original companions of the holy founder, Cesare Franciotti and Giovanni Cioni, have been declared Venerable. The order justly enjoys great fame for its learning and its numerous scholars and writers. Suffice it to mention Giovanni Domenico Mansi, editor of the "Councils" and a hundred other works. The arms of the order are azure, Our Lady Assumed into Heaven; and its badge and seal the monogram of the Mother of God in Greek characters. HÉLYOT, Hist. Ord. Rel., especially the Italian version by FONTANA, clerk of this congregation (Lucca, 1738), IV, 268-295; BONANNI, Cat. Ord. Relig., I; MARRACCI, Vita del V. P. Giovanni Leonardi (Rome, 1673); GUERRA, La Vita del B. Giov. Leonardi (Monza, 1895); BARBOSA, Jur. Eccl. Univ., I, xli, 162; Bullar. Rom., III; SARTESCHI, De Scriptoribus Cong. Cler. Matris Dei. MONTGOMERY CARMICHAEL. Diocese of Clermont Diocese of Clermont (CLERMONT-FERRAND; CLAROMONTENSIS) Comprises the entire department of Puy-de-Dôme and is a suffragan of Bourges. Although at first very extensive, in 1317 the diocese lost Haute-Auvergne through the creation of the Diocese of Saint Flourandin 1822 the Bourbonnais, on account of the erection of the Diocese of Moulins. The first Bishop of Clermont was St. Austremonius (Stramonius). (See AUSTREMONIUS.) According to local tradition he was one of the seventy-two Disciples of Christ, by birth a Jew, who came with St. Peter from Palestine to Rome and subsequently became the Apostle of Auvergne, Berry, Nivernais, and Limousin. At Clermont he is said to have converted the senator Cassius and the pagan priest Victorinus, to have sent St. Sirenatus (Cerneuf) to Thiers, St. Marius to Salers, Sts. Nectarius and Antoninus into other parts of Auvergne, and to have been beheaded in 92. This tradition is based on a life of St. Anstremonius written in the tenth century in the monastery of Mozat, where the body of the saint had rested from 761, and rewritten by the monks of Issoire, who retained the saint's head. St. Gregory of Tours, born in Auvergne in 544 and well versed in the history of that country, looks upon Austremonius as one of the seven envoys who, about 250, evangelized Gaul; he relates how the body of the saint was first interred at Issoire, being there the object of great veneration. Clermont counted amongst its bishops a large number of saints, as St. Urbicus (c. 312); St. Leoguntius; St. Illidius (Allyre), who, about 385, cured the daughter of the Emperor Maximus at Trier; the saint's name was given to the petrifying springs of Clermont, and his life was written by Gregory of Tours; St. Nepotianus (died 388); St. Artemius (died about 394); St. Venerandus (Veau, died about 423); St. Rusticus (424-46); St. Namatius (446-62), founder of the Clermont cathedral, where he deposited the relics of Sts. Vitalis and Agricola brought from Bologna; Sidonius Apollinaris (470-79), the celebrated Christian writer who brought to Clermont the priest St. Amabilis; St. Aprunculus (died about 491); St. Euphrasius (491-515); St. Quintianus (died about 527), whose life was written by Gregory of Tours; St. Gallus (527-51), of whom Gregory of Tours was the biographer and nephew; St. Avitus (second half of the sixth century), founder of Notre Dame du Port; St. Cæsarius (c. 627); St. Gallus II (c. 650); St. Genesius (c. 660); St. Præjectus (Prix), historian of the martyrs of Clermont and assassinated at Volvic 25 January, 676; St. Avitus II (676-91); St. Bonitus, intimate friend of Sigebert II (end of seventh century); St. Stabilis (823-60). and St. Sigo (866). Among the Bishops of Clermont should also be mentioned: Pierre de Cros (1301-04), engaged by St. Thomas Aquinas to complete his "Summa"; Etienne d'Albert (1340-42), later Pope Innocent VI (1352-62); Guillaume du Prat (1528-60), founder of the Clermont College at Paris and delegate of Francis I to the Council of Trent; and Massillon, the illustrious orator (1717-42). The Diocese of Clermont can likewise claim a number of monks whom the Church honours as saints, viz: St. Calevisus (Calais, 460-541), a pupil in the monastery of Menat near Riom, whence he retired to Maine, where he founded the Abbey of Anisole; St. Maztius (died 527), founder at Royat near Clermont of a monastery which became later a Benedictine priory; St. Portianus (sixth century), founder of a monastery to which the city of Saint-Pourçain (Allier) owes its origin; St. Etienne de Muret (1046-1124), son of the Viscount of Thiers and founder of the Order of Grandmont in Limousin, and St. Peter the Venerable (1092-1156), of the Montboissier family of Auvergue, noted as a writer and Abbot of Cluny. Several famous Jansenists were natives of Clermont: Blaise Pascal, author of the "Pensées" (1623-62); the Arnauld family, and Soanen (1647-1740), Bishop of Senez, famous for his stubborn opposition to the Bull "Unigenitus". On the other hand the city of Riom was the birthplace of Sirmond, the learned Jesuit (1559-1651), confessor to Louis XIII and editor of the ancient councils of Gaul. Other natives worthy of mention in church history were the Abbé Delille, poet (1738-1813), and Montlosier, the publicist (1755-1838), famous for his memoir against the Jesuits and to whom Bishop Ferou refused ecclesiastical burial. Pope Urban II came to Clermont in 1095 to preside at the organization of the First Crusade; Pope Paschal II visited the city in 1106, Callistus II in 1120, Innocent II in 1130, Alexander III in 1164, and, in 1166, St. Thomas Becket. It was also at Clermont that, in 1262, in presence of St. Louis, the marriage of Philip the Bold and Isabella of Aragon was solemnized. The cathedral of Clermont, dating from the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, is not of equal archæological importance with the church of Notre-Dame du Port, which stands to-day as it was rebuilt in the eleventh century, and is one of the most beautiful of Romanesque churches in the Auvergnese style. One of the capitals in Notre-Dame du Port, ascribed to the eleventh century, is among the most ancient sculptured representations of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin. This cathedral is much frequented as a place of pilgrimage, as are also Notre Dame d'Orcival and Notre Dame de Vassivière at Besse. The "dry mass" (without Consecration or Communion) was celebrated in the Diocese of Clermont as late as the seventeenth century. Before the Law of 1901 was carried into effect, there were in the Diocese: Capuchins, Jesuits, Marists, Fathers of the African Missions, Fathers of the Holy Ghost, and Sulpicians. Several local congregations of women are engaged in teaching, among them being the religious of Notre-Dame de Clermont, founded in 1835, with mother-house at Chamalières; the Sisters of St. Joseph of the Good Shepherd, founded by Massillon in 1723, with mother-house at Clermont; the Sisters of the Heart of the Infant Jesus, mother-house at Lezoux; and the Sisters of Mercy, founded in 1806, with mother-house at Billom. The diocese has the following religious institutions: 2 maternity hospitals, 40 infant schools, 1 school for the blind, 4 schools for deaf mutes, 3 boys' orphanages, 16 girls' orphanages, 2 houses of refuge and of protection, 23 hospitals and hospices, 35 houses for nursing sisters, and 1 insane asylum. Statistics for the end of 1905 (the close of the period under the Concordat) show a population of 529,181, with 54 parishes, 447 succursal parishes (mission churches), and 175 curacies remunerated by the State. GREGORY OF TOURS, Historia Francorum; IDEM, Vitœ Patrum (nine out of twenty being devoted to saints of Auvergne); Gallia Christiana (nova) (1715), II, 222-316, 416-418; Instrumenta, 73-128; RÉSIE, Histoire de L'Eglise d'Auvergne (3 vols., Clermont-Ferrand, 1855); MORIN, L'Auvergne chrét. du premier siècle à 1880 (Roanne, 1880); DUCHESNE, Fastes épiscopaux, I, 20, II, 31-39, 117-22; DESDEVIZES DU DÉSERT, Bibliographie du centenaire des croisades à Clermont-Ferrand (Clermont-Ferrand, 1895); CHEVALIER, Rép. des sources hist., Topo-Bibl., s. v. GEORGES GOYAU. Pope St. Cletus Pope St. Cletus This name is only another form for Anacletus, the second successor of St. Peter. It is true that the Liberian Catalogue, a fourth-century list of popes, so called because it ends with Pope Liberius (d. 366), contains both names, as if they were different persons. But this is an error, owing evidently to the existence of two forms of the same name, one an abbreviation of the other. In the aforesaid catalogue the papal succession is: Petrus, Linus, Clemens, Cletus, Anacletus. This catalogue, however, is the only authority previous to the sixth century (Liber Pontificalis) for distinguishing two popes under the names of Cletus and Anacletus. The "Carmen adv. Marcionem" is of the latter half of the fourth century, and its papal list probably depends on the Liberian Catalogue. The "Martyrologium Hieronymianum" (q. v.) mentions both "Aninclitus" and "Clitus" (23 and 31 December), but on each occasion these names are found in a list of popes; hence the days mentioned cannot be looked on as specially consecrated to these two persons. Apart from these lists, all other ancient papal lists, from the second to the fourth century, give as follows the immediate succession of St. Peter: Linos, Anegkletos, Klemes (Linus, Anencletus, Clemens), and this succession is certainly the right one. It is that found in St. Irenæus and in the chronicles of the second and third centuries. Both Africa and the Orient adhered faithfully to this list, which is also given in the very ancient Roman Canon of the Mass, except that in the latter Cletus is the form used, and the same occurs in St. Epiphanius, St. Jerome, Rufinus, and in many fifth- and sixth-century lists. This second successor of St. Peter governed the Roman Church from about 76 to about 88. The "Liber Pontificalis" says that his father was Emelianus and that Cletus was a Roman by birth, and belonged to the quarter known as the Vicus Patrici. It also tells us that he ordained twenty-five priests, and was buried in Vaticano near the body of St. Peter. There is historical evidence for only the last of these statements. The feast of St. Cletus falls, with that of St. Marcellinus, on 26 April; this date is already assigned to it in the first edition of the "Liber Pontificalis". (See CLEMENT I, SAINT, POPE.) L IGHTFOOT, Apostolic Fathers, Pt. I: St. Clement of Rome (2nd ed., London, 1890), 201-345; D UCHESNE, Liber Pontificalis, I, LXIX-LXX, 2-3, 52-53; H ARNACK, Gesch. der alt-christl. Lit. bis Eusebius, II-I, 144-202; Acta SS., April, III, 409-11; DE S MEDT, Dissertationes selectæ in hist. eccles. (Ghent, 1876), 300-04. J.P. KIRSCH Cleveland Cleveland The Diocese of Cleveland (Clevelandensis), established 23 April, 1847, comprises all that part of Ohio lying north of the southern limits of the Counties of Columbiana, Stark, Wayne, Ashland, Richland, Crawford, Wyandot, Hancock, Allen, and Van Wert, its territory covering thirty-six counties, an area of 15,032 square miles. EARLY HISTORY The Jesuit Fathers Potier and Bonnecamp were the first missionaries to visit the territory now within the limits of Ohio. They came from Quebec in 1749 to evangelize the Huron Indians living along the Vermilion and Sandusky Rivers in Northern Ohio. Two years later they received the assistance of another Jesuit, Father de la Richardie, who had come from Detroit, Michigan, to the southern shore of Lake Erie. Shortly after his arrival he induced a part of the Huron tribe to settle near the present site of Sandusky, where he erected a chapel -- the first place of Catholic worship within the present limits of Ohio. These Hurons assumed the name of Wyandots when they left the parent tribe. Although checked for a time by Father Potier, they took part in the Indian-French War. Soon they became implicated in the conspiracy of Pontiac, in consequence of which the Jesuits were unjustly forced in 1752 to leave the territory of Ohio, Father Potier being the last Jesuit missionary among the Western Hurons. The Indian missions, established and cared for by the Jesuits for nearly three years, had now to depend exclusively on the chance visits of the priests attached to the military posts in Canada and Southern Michigan. Despite the spiritual deprivation which this implied, the Hurons (Wyandots) kept the Faith for many years, although their descendants were ultimately lost to the Church through the successful efforts of Protestant missionaries. After the forced retirement of the Jesuits no systematic efforts were made to continue the missionary work begun by them until 1795, when the Rev. Edmund Burke, a secular priest from Quebec, came as chaplain of the military post at Fort Meigs, near the present site of Maumee. Father Burke remained at the post until February, 1797, ministering to the Catholic soldiers at the fort, and endeavouring though with little success, to Christianize the Ottawa and Chippewa Indians, in the neighbourhood. In the meantime the See of Bardstown was erected (1810), embracing the entire State of Ohio, as well as Michigan and Kentucky. Bishop Flaget sent (1817) the Rev. Edward Fenwick, O.P. (later first Bishop of Cincinnati), from the Dominican monastery at Somerset, Ohio, to attend the few families who had settled in Columbiana and Stark Counties, in the north-eastern part of Ohio. From that time forward he and other Dominican Fathers, especially the Revs. Nicholas D. Young and John A. Hill, continued to visit at regular intervals the Catholic families in that section of Ohio (notably in Columbiana, Stark, Mahoning, and Wayne Counties), then very sparsely settled. It is, therefore, from this period that Catholicity in Northern Ohio really dates its beginning. In the course of time the Dominican Fathers gradually gave up to the secular clergy their pastoral charges in the above-named counties until, in 1842, they withdrew altogether. St. John's, Canton, was their last mission. Meanwhile the central portion of Northern Ohio (Huron, Erie, Sandusky, and Seneca Counties) had received a considerable influx of Catholic immigrants, principally from Germany. Similar conditions were obtaining elsewhere in the State, and the need of more compact organization to minister to growing wants made Cincinnati an episcopal see in 1822, with the entire State for its jurisdiction. Little seems to have been done, however, for the northern part of the State, and but little could be done, as Catholics were so few, until the advent of its second bishop, John B. Purcell. He succeeded (13 Oct., 1833) the saintly Bishop Fenwick, who, while engaged in a confirmation tour, died at Wooster, Ohio (26 September, 1832) of cholera, then raging in Ohio. In 1834 Bishop Purcell commissioned the Redemptorist Fathers, who had just arrived in America, to take charge of the widely scattered German missions then existing in these counties, and to organize others where needed. The Rev. Francis X. Tschenhens, C.SS.R., was the first priest assigned to this task. Later on he was assisted by other members of his community, among them the Revs. Peter Czakert, Francis Haetscher, Joseph Prost, Simon Saenderl, Louis M. Alig, and John N. Neumann (later Bishop of Philadelphia). The Redemptorists remained in Northern Ohio until November, 1842. They were succeeded, January, 1844, by seven Sanguinist Fathers, (the Revs. Francis S. Brunner, M.A. Meier, J. Wittmer, J. Van den Broek, P.A. Capeder, J. Ringele, and J.B. Jacomet), who came from Europe at that time at the solicitation of Bishop Purcell. They settled at St. Alphonsus church, Peru, Huron County, whence they attended all the missions formerly under the care of the Redemptorists. They also accepted charge of the scattered missions in Lorain, Medina, and Wayne Counties, besides attending the Catholic Germans in Cleveland. Their advent was hailed with delight wherever they went, and their priestly labours were signally blessed. Under their vigilant care religion flourished, so that the healthy growth of Catholicity in Northern Ohio may justly, under God, be ascribed in large measure to their untiring zeal and self-sacrifice. The secular clergy are no less deserving of mention, as they, too, laboured in this part of the Lord's vineyard, amid trials and difficulties, often side by side with their brethren of the religious orders, and more often alone in the widespread missions of Northern Ohio. They did yeoman service, blazing the way for those who succeeded them, and laying the foundations for many missions, which have long since developed into vigorous and prosperous congregations. The first of these secular clergy was the Rev. Ignatius J. Mullen of Cincinnati. Between 1824 and 1834 he frequently attended the missions in Stark, Columbiana, Seneca, and Sandusky Counties. Other pioneer secular priests of prominence were the Revs. Francis Marshall (1827), John M. Henni (later Bishop and Archbishop of Milwaukee), resident pastor of Canton (1831-34), Edmund Quinn, at Tiffin (1831-35), William J. Horstmann, at Glandorf (1835-43), James Conlon, at Dungannon (1834-53), Matthias Wuerz, at Canton (1835-45), John Dillon, first resident pastor of Cleveland (1835-36), Basil Schorb, in charge of missions in Stark, Wayne, and Portage Counties (1837-43), Patrick O'Dwyer, second pastor of Cleveland (1836-38), where he built the first church in 1838, Michael McAleer, in Stark and Columbiana Counties (1838-40), Joseph McNamee, at Tiffin (1839-47), Projectus J. Machebeuf (later Bishop of Denver), at Tiffin and Sandusky (1839-51), Amadeus Rappe (later first Bishop of Cleveland), stationed at Maumee for a short time, and then, as first resident pastor, at Toledo (1840-47), Louis de Goesbriand (later Bishop of Burlington, Vermont), at Louisville, Toledo, and Cleveland (1840-53), Peter McLaughlin, resident pastor of Cleveland (1840-46), Maurice Howard, at Cleveland and later at Tiffin (1842-52), John J. Doherty, at Canton (1843-48), John H. Luhr, at Canton, and later at Cleveland (1844-58), John O. Bredeick, founder of Delphos and its first pastor (1844-58), Cornelius Daley, first resident pastor of Akron, and later stationed at Doylestown (1844-47), Philip Foley, at Massillon and Wooster (1847-48). The Rev. Stephen Badin, proto-priest of the thirteen original United States, and the Rev. Edward T. Collins occasionally came from Cincinnati, between 1835 and 1837, to attend the missions in Northern Ohio, the former those of Canton, Fremont, and Tiffin, and the latter those of Dungannon, Toledo, and along the Maumee River. The first permanent church in Northern Ohio was erected near the present village of Dungannon, in 1820, under the direction of the Rev. Edward Fenwick, O.P., the "Apostle of Ohio," and later the first Bishop of Cincinnati. Until 1847 churches of brick or wood were built in the following places: Canton (St. John's, 1823), Chippewa (1828), Randolph, Canal Fulton (1831), Tiffin (St. Mary's, 1832), Glandorf, Navarre, New Riegel (1833), Peru (1834), Louisville, La Porte (1835), Shelby Settlement (1836), McCutchenville (1837), Thompson (1839), Cleveland, East Liverpool (1840), Toledo, Maumee, New Washington, Norwalk (1841), Sandusky (Holy Angels), Landeck, Liberty, Liverpool, Sheffield (St. Stephen's, 1842), Delphos, Massillon (St. Mary's), Akron (St. Vincent's), Fremont (St. Anne's), French Creek (1844), Canton (St. Peter's), Harrisburg, New Berlin, Tiffin (St. Joseph's), Providence (1845), Sherman (1846), Poplar Ridge (1847). From 1922 until October, 1847, Northern Ohio was part of the Diocese of Cincinnati, of which the first bishop was Edward Fenwick (1822-32), and its second bishop, John B. Purcell, who succeeded in October, 1833. He petitioned the Holy See, in 1846, for a division of his jurisdiction, then comprising the entire State of Ohio. The petition was granted (23 April, 1847), by the appointment of the Rev. Louis Amadeus Rappe as the first Bishop of Cleveland, and the assignment to his jurisdiction of "all that part of Ohio lying north of 40 degrees and 41 minutes, N.L." As this division intersected several counties it was changed in January, 1849, to the present limits, as described at the beginning of this article. BISHOPS OF CLEVELAND (1) LOUIS AMADEUS RAPPE, consecrated 10th October, 1847, was born 2 Feb., 1801, at Andrehem, France. He was ordained priest at Arras, France, 14 March, 1829. His cathedral church was St. Mary's on the "Flats," Cleveland, the first, and at that time the only, church in his episcopal city. In November, 1852, he completed the present cathedral, an imposing brick structure of Gothic architecture, still ranking with the many fine churches of the diocese. During his administration of the diocese, which ended in August, 1870, he convoked five diocesan synods (1848, 1852, 1854, 1857, 1868). He established the diocesan seminary (1848), St. John's College, Cleveland (1854), St. Louis College, Louisville (1866); these two colleges, however, being closed a few years later, owing to lack of patronage. Under his direction the following educational and charitable institutions were also established: in Cleveland, the Ursuline Academy; St. Vincent's Orphanage, for boys; St. Mary's Orphanage, for girls (1861); St. Joseph's Orphanage, for girls (1862); Charity Hospital (1865); House of the Good Shepherd (1869); Home for the Aged Poor (1870). In Toledo, Ursuline Academy (1854), St. Vincent's Orphanage (1855); in Tiffin, Ursuline Academy (1863), St. Francis' Asylum and Home for the Aged (1867). He founded the community of Sisters of Charity of St. Augustine (1851), whose work is the care of orphans, waifs, and the sick. In 1869 he introduced into the diocese the Franciscan and Jesuit Fathers, giving to the former the care of St. Joseph's church, Cleveland, and to the latter St. Mary's, Toledo. Wherever possible he insisted on the support of parish schools. He was a strong advocate of total abstinence, which he practised from the time he was a missionary priest in North-Western Ohio until his death. He never spared himself in the discharge of his manifold and exacting duties. By his affability and disinterestedness he gained the love of his people, as also the respect of his fellow-citizens regardless of creed. He resigned his see in August, 1870, and retired to the Diocese of Burlington, Vermont, where he did missionary work almost to the day of his death (8 September, 1877). Between the time of Bishop Rappe's resignation and the appointment of his successor, the Very Rev. Edward Hannin administered the affairs of the diocese. (2) RICHARD GILMOUR, consecrated 14 April, 1872. In November of the same year he convoked the Sixth Diocesan Synod, in which many of the statutes by which the diocese is at present governed were promulgated. It also embodied considerable of the legislature of previous synods, notably that of 1868. This synod made provision for a diocesan fund for the support of the seminary, bishop, etc., and another for the support of sick and disabled priests, by annual assessments on the parishes of the diocese. Among other diocesan statutes published then were those urging anew the support of parochial schools, regulating the financial affairs of parishes, and the manner of electing parish councilmen and of conveying church property. Bishop Gilmour established "The Catholic Universe," its first issue appearing 4 July, 1874. In 1875 he organized "The Catholic Central Association," composed of representatives from all the parishes and church societies in Cleveland; its influence for the betterment of social and religious conditions and for the defence of Catholic interests was soon felt not only in Cleveland, but elsewhere as well, and continued during almost its entire existence of nearly eighteen years. It also proved a tower of strength to its organizer in his forced contention for the civic rights of Catholics, in the face of bitter opposition from bigotry and a hostile press. In 1875 the Catholic school property in Cleveland was placed on the tax duplicate in spite of the decision (1874) of the Supreme Court of Ohio, that such property was not taxable. A suit of restraint was entered by the bishop, and finally carried to the Supreme Court, which reaffirmed its former decision. The present episcopal residence was begun in 1874 and completed two years later. It serves also as the residence of the cathedral clergy. In 1872 the Sisters of St. Joseph, and in 1874 the Sisters of Notre Dame, were welcomed to the diocese. Both communities have flourishing academies in connexion with their convents, besides supplying many parish schools with efficient teachers. The same also is the case with the Ursulines of Cleveland, Tiffin, Toledo, and Youngstown, and the Sisters of the Humility of Mary. The following institutions were established between 1873 and 1891: St. Anne's Asylum and House of Maternity, Cleveland (1873); Ursuline Convent, Youngstown (1874); St. Vincent's Hospital, Toledo (1876); St. Joseph's Franciscan College, Cleveland (1876-80); Convent of Poor Clares (1877); Ursuline Academy, Nottingham (1877); St. Alexis' Hospital, Cleveland (1884); St. Louis' Orphanage, Louisville (1884); Little Sisters of the Poor, Toledo (1885); St. Ignatius' College, Cleveland (1886); St. Joseph's Seminary, for young boys, Nottingham (1886). The diocesan seminary was remodelled and considerably enlarged in 1884-85. A diocesan chancery office was established (1877) for the transaction of the official business of the diocese. In 1878 the first attempt was made to gather historical data in connexion with every parish and institution in the diocese, and in a few years a great mass of matter, covering the history of Catholicity in Northern Ohio and the Diocese of Cleveland as far back as 1817, was collected and is now a part of the diocesan archives. In May, 1882, the Seventh Diocesan Synod was held, which resulted in the legislation at present in force. With the exception of about half a dozen of its 262 statutes, it is in perfect harmony with the decrees of the Third Plenary Council of Baltimore, held in November, 1884. Like his predecessor, Bishop Gilmour made it obligatory on every parish at all financially able to support a parochial school. In consequence, the Diocese of Cleveland has more parochial schools, in proportion to its number of churches and its population, than any other diocese in the United States, and many of its school buildings vie, in size, appointments, and beauty of architecture, with the public-school buildings. With very few exceptions the parish schools are in charge of teachers belonging to male and female religious communities, Bishop Gilmour had an eventful episcopate, lasting nineteen years. He left his strong, aggressive personality indelibly stamped, upon the diocese he had ruled. During the interim between his death (13 April, 1891) and the appointment of his successor, the Rev. Monsignor F.M. Boff was administrator of the diocese. (3) IGNATIUS FREDERICK HORSTMANN, chancellor of the Archdiocese of Philadelphia, was appointed to succeed Bishop Gilmour. Born in Philadelphia, 16 December, 1840, after graduating from the Central High School, he attended St. Joseph's College and then entered the diocesan Seminary. In 1860 he was sent by Bishop Wood to the American College, Rome, where he was ordained priest, 10 June, 1865. In the following year he received the degree of Doctor of Divinity and returning to Philadelphia became a professor in St. Charles's Seminary where he remained eleven years and was then appointed rector of St. Mary's church, Philadelphia. In 1885 he was made chancellor. His consecration as Bishop of Cleveland took place in Philadelphia, 25 February, 1892. He died suddenly of heart disease on 13 May, 1908, while on an official visit to Canton, Ohio. He had proved himself a zealous pastor of souls, a wise and prudent ruler, a fearless defender of truth. Among the noteworthy accomplishments of his episcopate were the founding of Loyola High School, Cleveland (1902); St. John's College, Toledo (1898); and the establishment of the diocesan band of missionaries -- the first in any diocese of the United States. He was foremost in encouraging every missionary movement, and his zeal for Christian education was one of the dominant purposes of his life. He served as a trustee of the Catholic University and in spite of many duties found time to contribute to the "American Catholic Review" and other periodicals and to edit the American edition of "The Catholic Doctrine As Defined by the Council of Trent" and "Potter's Catholic Bible." A few months before he died he asked for an auxiliary bishop, with jurisdiction over the growing foreign population, especially of the Slav races, in the diocese. The Rev. Joseph M. Koudelka, rector of St. Michael's church, Cleveland, was named, 29 Nov., 1907, and consecrated, 25 Feb., 1908, being the first auxiliary bishop of special jurisdiction appointed for the United States. He was born in Bohemia, 15 August, 1852, and emigrated to the United States when sixteen years of age. After making his studies at St. Francis's Seminary, Milwaukee, he was ordained priest, 8 October, 1875. He was for some time editor of "Hlas" (Voice), a Bohemian Catholic weekly paper, and compiled a series of textbooks for Bohemian Catholic schools. RECENT TIMES In 1894 the "St. Vincent's Union," composed of the laity who contribute towards the support of St. Vincent's Orphanage, Cleveland, was organized; and it has proved of great financial assistance to that institution. In 1893 Bishop Horstmann opened the Calvary Cemetery, which covers nearly 250 acres, near the southern limits of Cleveland. About fifty acres of the cemetery's whole area are improved. In 1892 the Cleveland Apostolate was established, an association of secular priests, having for its object the giving of lectures and missions to non-Catholics. Besides making many converts this association has removed much prejudice and brought about a kindlier feeling towards the Church and its members. The Golden Jubilee of the diocese was celebrated, 13 October, 1897. It was a memorable event, observed with great religious pomp in Cleveland, Toledo, and elsewhere. At the bishop's solicitation the Jesuit Fathers of Toledo opened (September, 1898) St. John's College. In the same city a home for fallen women was established (1906) by the Sisters of the Good Shepherd. A fine school building was erected (1906) in connexion with St. Vincent's Asylum, Cleveland, in which the boys have every facility for a thorough education. The diocese is in a prosperous condition, spiritually and financially, and healthy growth is apparent in every direction. CAUSES OF GROWTH The growth of the diocesan population down to 1860 was due chiefly to emigration from Ireland and Germany. Since 1870 it has been receiving other large accessions, but from quite another source. The Slav race, manifold in its divisions, has been pouring in, more notably since 1895. The early immigrants were drawn hither by the market for their labour which the opening of a new country offered. The Irish found employment on public works, such as the construction of canals and railroads; the Germans turned more to agriculture. The various branches of the Slav race are engaged in foundries, mills, and factories, and many are also employed as longshoremen and at common labour. The same holds also for the Italians, of whom there is a large percentage. Nearly all the recent immigration has settled in cities like Cleveland, Toledo, Youngstown, Lorain, and Ashtabula, where employment is had in abundance and at a fair wage. STATISTICS In December, 1907, the clergy numbered 388, of whom 315 were diocesan priests and 73 regulars (Sanguinists, Franciscans, and Jesuits). There were 21 Brothers of Mary and 5 Christian Brothers, teaching in 6 parochial schools. The Sisters (Sanguinists, Ursulines, Sisters of Charity of St. Augustine, Sisters of Notre Dame, Franciscans, Sisters of St. Joseph, Ladies of the Sacred Heart of Mary, Sisters of the Humility of Mary, Grey Nuns, Sisters of the Good Shepherd, Poor Clares, Little Sisters of the Poor, Dominicans, Sisters of St. Agnes, Sisters of Charity, Sisters of Loretto, Felician Sisters, Sisters of St. Benedict, Sisters-Servants of the Immaculate Heart of Mary) number 1141, of whom 684 teach in 138 parochial schools. The parishes with resident pastors number 241; mission churches, 60; parochial schools, 186; attendance, 43,544; 1 diocesan seminary with 96 students; diocesan students in colleges and other seminaries, 45; colleges and academies for boys, 4; attendance, 515 pupils; academies for girls, 11; attendance, 2113 pupils; 9 orphanages and one infant asylum, total number of inmates, 1251; hospitals, 9; homes for the aged, 3; Houses of Good Shepherd, 2. The Catholic population is about 330,000, and is composed of 13 nationalities, exclusive of native Americans, viz., Irish, German, Slovak, Polish, Bohemian, Magyar, Slovenian, Italian, Lithuanian, Croatian, Rumanian, Ruthenian, Syrian. SHEA, Catholic Missions (New York, 1854), 293, and in Catholic Universe (Cleveland, 13 September, 1881); IDEM, Hist. of the Catholic Church in the United States (New York, 1889, 1892); Leben u. Wirken des hochw. Franz Sales Brunner, C.PP.S.; The Catholic Miscellany (Charleston, S.C., 1824-30); The Catholic Telegraph (Cincinnati, 1831-47); HOUCK, A History of Catholicity in Northern Ohio and Diocese of Cleveland (Cleveland, 1902); IDEM, The Church in Northern Ohio (Cleveland, 1889); Reminiscences of the Right Rev. P.J. Machebeuf in the Catholic Universe (18 Oct., 1883, and 31 Jan., 1889); Reminiscences of the Right Rev. Louis de Goesbriand in The Catholic Universe (27 December, 1888.) GEORGE F. HOUCK Josse Clichtove Josse Clichtove (Jodocus Clichtovaeus). A theologian, b. 1472 at Nieuport (Flanders); d. 1543 at Chartres (France). He began his studies at Louvain and went to Paris for his philosophical and theological studies. After receiving the doctorate in theology (1506) he was appointed professor at the Sorbonne. In 1515 he was asked to direct the studies of Louis Guillard, the Bishop-elect of Tournai, and four years later accompanied him to this latter place. After a short stay there, he returned to Paris, and in 1527 to Chartres, whither Guillard had been transferred. He took an active part in the Council of Sens, convoked at Paris by Cardinal Duprat, and he gathered in a volume the various arguments brought forward against the Protestants. A champion of reform in philosophical and theological studies during the earlier part of his life, he devoted himself later almost exclusively to combating the doctrines of Luther. His works are numerous and belong to almost every department of theology and philosophy. He began with commentaries on many Aristotelean treatises: logic, natural philosophy, ethics, arithmetic, and geometry. He also wrote studies on several books of Holy Scripture, edited and commented the writings of some of the Fathers and Doctors of the Church. Among his original works must be mentioned "De verâ nobilitate opusculum" (Paris, 1512); "Elucidatorium ecclesiasticum" (Paris, 1516); "De vitâ et moribus sacerdotum" (Paris, 1519), and several other works of instruction and edification; "Antilutherus" (Paris, 1524); "Propugnaculum ecclesiae adversus Lutheranos" (Paris, 1516); "De Sacramento Eucharistiae contra AEcolampadium" (Paris, 1526); "Compendium veritatum ad fidem pertinentium contra erroneas Lutheranorum assertiones ex dictis et actis in concilio provinciali Senonensi apud Parisios celebrato" (Paris, 1529); "Sermones" (Paris, 1534); "Convulsio calumniarum Ulrichi Veleni quibus S. Petrum nunquam Romae fuisse cavillatur" (Paris, 1535). Clerval, De Judoci Clichtovei. . .vita et operibus (Paris, 1895); Idem in Dict. de theol. cath., III, 236; Van Der Haeghen, Bibliographie des oeuvres de Josse Clichtove in Bibl. Belgica (Ghent, 1888). C.A. DUBRAY William Clifford William Clifford (Alias Mansell), divine, d. 30 April, 1670; he was the son of Henry Clifford, by his wife Elizabeth Thimelby, who as a widow joined the English Augustinian nuns at Louvain, and died, aged about seventy-seven, 3 September, 1642. Through humility Clifford never asserted his right to the Barony of Cumberland. After education and ordination at Douai, he came on the English mission. As vice-president, he helped the English College at Lisbon through difficult times, and became superior of Tournay College (Paris), assigned by Cardinal Richelieu to the English clergy. He evaded being made bishop in 1660, declined in 1670 the presidency of Douai, and closed his life in the Hopital des Incurables in Paris. Clifford's works are: "Christian Rules proposed to a vertuous Soule" (Paris, 1615), dedicated to Mrs Ursula Clifford; "The Spirituall Combat", translated by R.R. (Paris, 1656), dedicated to Abbot Montague; "Little Manual of Poore Man's Dayly Devotion" (2nd edition, Paris, 1670), often reprinted; "Observations upon Kings' Reigns since the Conquest" (MS.); "Collections concerning Chief Points of Controversy" (MS.) Little Manual, 5th ed., preface; Dodd, Church History, III, 297; Gillow, Bibl. Dict. Eng. Catholics, I, 514, s.v.; Idem, Lisbon College, 9 and 189; Cooper in Dict. Of Nat. Biog., s.v.; Chronicle of St. Monica's, Louvain (Edinburgh, 1904), I, 127; Kirk, Biographies (London, 1908), s.v. PATRICK RYAN Diocese of Clifton Clifton (Cliftoniensis). Diocese of England, consisting of Gloucestershire, Somersetshire, and Wiltshire. It was founded by Pius IX when he restored the English hierarchy in 1850. Previously to that the diocese formed part of the Western District, one of the four vicariates established by Innocent XI in 1688, and including Wales and the six south-western counties of England. In 1840 Wales became a separate vicariate, and thenceforth the district consisted of the English counties only. As the vicars Apostolic resided chiefly at Bath in Somerset, when the district was divided into the two dioceses of Clifton and Plymouth, it was fitting that the last Vicar Apostolic of the Western District, Dr. Joseph William Hendren, O.S.F. (1791-1866), consecrated in 1848, should become the first Bishop of Clifton. Thus the diocese is, in a special sense, the representative of the old vicariate. In this capacity the Bishop of Clifton retains possession of the archives of the Western District, one of the most important sources of information for the history of the Church in England from 1780 to 1850. The papers earlier in date perished during the Gordon Riots in 1780. Besides these valuable archives there is at Bishop's House an interesting series of portraits of the vicars Apostolic of the Western District and of the bishops of Clifton. A year after the foundation of the new diocese Dr. Hendren was translated to the See of Nottingham and was succeeded by Dr. Thomas Burgess (1791-1854). On 28 June, 1852, a cathedral chapter, consisting of a provost and ten canons, was erected. On the death of Bishop Burgess, 27 Nov., 1854, there was a long vacancy, and the administration of the diocese was given provisionally to Archbishop Errington, coadjutor to Cardinal Wiseman. This arrangement lasted until Feb., 1857, when the Hon. and Rev. William Joseph Hugh Clifford (1823-1893), son of the seventh Lord Clifford, was appointed bishop, being consecrated by Pope Pius IX in person. His long pontificate lasted for thirty-six years, ending with his death, 14 Aug., 1893. His successor was Dr. William Robert Brownlow (1836-1901), famous as an archaeologist, and whose well-known work on the catacombs, written conjointly with Dr. James Spencer Northcote, is a classical work of reference. Dr. Brownlow died 9 Nov., 1901, and was succeeded by the Rt. Rev. George Ambrose Burton, consecrated 1 May, 1902. The diocese, which is under the patronage of "Our Lady Conceived without Sin" and Sts. Peter and Paul, is divided into six rural deaneries. There are 57 public churches and chapels, besides 24 private chapels belonging to communities. The clergy number about 50 secular priests and about 80 regulars, the latter including the Benedictines of the famous abbey and school at Downside. The Dominicans, Franciscans, Carmelites, Cistercians, and Jesuits are also represented in the diocese. The College of Sts. Peter and Paul, Prior Park, founded by Benedictines and afterwards conducted by secular priests, is now in the hands of the Fathers of the Society of the Holy Ghost. Catholic Directories (1850-1907); Brady, Annals of the Catholic Hierarchy (1877). EDWIN BURTON Jose Climent José Climent Spanish bishop, b. at Castellon de la Plana (Valencia), 1706; d. there 25 Nov., 1781. Distinguished for his charities, educational efforts, eloquence, and exemplary life, he studied and afterwards professed theology at the University of Valencia, laboured for several years as parish priest, and was consecrated Bishop of Barcelona in 1766; he resigned his see in 1775. His episcopal activity was directed to the founding of hospitals, the establishing of free schools, and the diffusion of knowledge among the people by means of low-priced publications. He translated into Spanish several works, among them Fleury's "Moeurs des Israelites et des Chrétiens". His pastoral instructions contributed largely to his fame. That of 1769, on the renewal of ecclesiastical studies, caused him to be denounced to the court of Charles III for having eulogized the Church of Utrecht; but a commission composed of archbishops, bishops, and heads of religious orders, appointed to examine his case, returned a decision favourable to the prelate. The sway he held over his people was shown by his success in quelling a dangerous uprising in Barcelona against military conscription; but this only served still further to render him obnoxious to a suspicious court. He refused, on conscientious grounds, a promotion to the wealthy See of Malaga, and withdrew to his native place. His life was published in Barcelona in 1785. Michaud, Biog. Univers, (Paris, 1843-66). JOHN H. STAPLETON St. Margaret Clitherow St. Margaret Clitherow Martyr, called the "Pearl of York", born about 1556; died 25 March 1586. She was a daughter of Thomas Middleton, Sheriff of York (1564-5), a wax-chandler; married John Clitherow, a wealthy butcher and a chamberlain of the city, in St. Martin's church, Coney St., 8 July, 1571, and lived in the Shambles, a street still unaltered. Converted to the Faith about three years later, she became most fervent, continually risking her life by harbouring and maintaining priests, was frequently imprisoned, sometimes for two years at a time, yet never daunted, and was a model of all virtues. Though her husband belonged to the Established Church, he had a brother a priest, and Margaret provided two chambers, one adjoining her house and a second in another part of the city, where she kept priests hidden and had Mass continually celebrated through the thick of the persecution. Some of her priests were martyred, and Margaret who desired the same grace above all things, used to make secret pilgrimages by night to York Tyburn to pray beneath the gibbet for this intention. Finally arrested on 10 March, 1586, she was committed to the castle. On 14 March, she was arraigned before Judges Clinch and Rhodes and several members of the Council of the North at the York assizes. Her indictment was that she had harboured priests, heard Mass, and the like; but she refused to plead, since the only witnesses against her would be her own little children and servants, whom she could not bear to involve in the guilt of her death. She was therefore condemned to the peine forte et dure, i.e. to be pressed to death. "God be thanked, I am not worthy of so good a death as this", she said. Although she was probably with child, this horrible sentence was carried out on Lady Day, 1586 (Good Friday according to New Style). She had endured an agony of fear the previous night, but was now calm, joyous, and smiling. She walked barefooted to the tolbooth on Ousebridge, for she had sent her hose and shoes to her daughter Anne, in token that she should follow in her steps. She had been tormented by the ministers and even now was urged to confess her crimes. "No, no, Mr. Sheriff, I die for the love of my Lord Jesu", she answered. She was laid on the ground, a sharp stone beneath her back, her hands stretched out in the form of a cross and bound to two posts. Then a door was placed upon her, which was weighted down till she was crushed to death. Her last words during an agony of fifteen minutes, were "Jesu! Jesu! Jesu! have mercy on me!" Her right hand is preserved at St. Mary's Convent, York, but the resting-place of her sacred body is not known. Her sons Henry and William became priests, and her daughter Anne a nun at St. Ursula's, Louvain. Her life, written by her confessor, John Mush, exists in two versions. The earlier has been edited by Father John Morris, S.J., in his "Troubles of our Catholic Forefathers", third series (London, 1877). The later manuscript, now at York Convent, was published by W. Nicholson, of Thelwall Hall, Cheshire (London, Derby, 1849), with portrait: "Life and Death of Margaret Clitherow the martyr of York". It also contains the "History of Mr. Margaret Ward and Mrs. Anne Line, Martyrs". [ Note: St. Margaret Clitherow was canonized by Pope Paul VI in 1970.] BEDE CAMM Clogher Clogher DIOCESE OF CLOGHER (CLOGHERENSIS) A suffragan of Armagh, Ireland, which comprises the County Monaghan, almost the whole of Fermanagh, the southern portion of Tyrone, and parts of Donegal, Louth, and Cavan. It takes its name from Clogher, the seat of the Prince of Oriel, with whose territory the old Diocese of Clogher was, practically speaking, coextensive. The see was founded by St. Patrick, who appointed one of his household, St. Macarten, as first bishop. There does not seem to be any evidence that St. Patrick governed Clogher as a distinct diocese before taking up his residence at Armagh, as is stated by Jocelyn. There is great difficulty in tracing the succession of bishops in Clogher, as indeed in every Irish diocese from the sixth to the eleventh century, on account of the confusion of the bishops with the abbots of the monastic establishments; the difficulty is increased in Clogher in view of the diversity existing between the lists as given in the Irish Annals, and the "Register of Clogher", compiled by Patrick Culin, Bishop of Clogher (1519-34), and Roderick Cassidy, archdeacon of the diocese. The "Register of Clogher" is of very little historical value. In 1241 Henry III ordered that Clogher should be united to Armagh, on account of the poverty of both dioceses, but this was not carried out, though under Bishop David O'Brogan large portions of Tyrone were cut off from Clogher and given to Ardstraw (now united with Derry), while the greater part of the present County Louth, including Dundalk, Drogheda, and Ardee, was taken over by Armagh. In 1535 Bishop Odo, or Hugh O'Cervallan, was appointed to the See of Clogher by Paul III, and on the submission of his patron Con O'Neill to Henry VIII, this prelate seems to have accepted the new teaching and was superseded by Raymond MacMahon, 1546. From his time there are two lines of bishops in Clogher, the Catholic and the Protestant. The apostate Miler Magrath was appointed Protestant bishop by Queen Elizabeth in 1570, but on his promotion to Cashel, resigned Clogher in the same year. Heber or Emer MacMahon (1643-50) took a prominent part in the war of the Irish Confederates, and on the death of Owen Roe O'Neill, was chosen general of the Confederate forces. He was defeated at Scariffhollis near Letterkenny, taken prisoner by Coote, and beheaded at Enniskillen. Owing to the persecutions of the Irish Catholics, Clogher was governed by vicars during the periods 1612-43, 1650-71, 1687-1707, 1713-27. The chapter of Clogher was allowed to lapse, but towards the end of the eighteenth century it was re-established by papal Brief. A very important provincial synod was held at Clones in 1670 by Oliver Plunkett, Archbishop of Armagh (see Moran, Life of Plunkett). The most remarkable shrines of the diocese are at St. Patrick's, Lough Derg, near Pettigo, still frequented by thousands of pilgrims from all parts of the world (see ST. PATRICK'S PURGATORY); Devenish Island in Lough Erne (see McKenna, Devenish, its History and Antiquities, Dublin, 1897); Innismacsaint, also in Lough Erne, where the "Annals of Ulster" were composed; Lisgoole, Clones, and Clogher. The most celebrated works of ancient ecclesiastical art connected with the diocese are the Domnach Airigid, a shrine enclosing a copy of the Gospels, said to have been given by St. Patrick to St. Macarten, and the Cross of Clogher, both of them now in the National Museum in Dublin. The Catholic population of the diocese is 101,162, distributed in forty parishes and ministered to by about 100 priests. JAMES MacCAFFREY Cloister Cloister The English equivalent of the Latin word clausura (from claudere, "to shut up"). This word occurs in Roman law in the sense of rampart, barrier, [cf. Code of Justinian, 1. 2 sec. 4; De officiis Praef. Praet. Africae (1, 27), 1. 4 De officiis mag. officiorum (I, 31)]. In the "Concordia Regularum" of St. Benedict of Aniane, c. xli, sec. 11, we find it in the sense of "case", or "cupboard" (Migne, P.L., CIII, 1057). In modern ecclesiastical usage, clausura signifies, materially, an enclosed space for religious retirement; formally, it stands for the legal restrictions opposed to the free egress of those who are cloistered or enclosed and to the free entry, or free introduction, of outsiders within the limits of the material clausura. I. SYNOPSIS OF EXISTING LEGISLATION The actual legislation distinguishes between religious orders and institutes with simple vows; institutes of men and those of women. (1) RELIGIOUS ORDERS (a) Male Material Clausura. According to the present common law every convent or monastery of regulars must, on its completion, be encloistered. A convent is defined as a building which serves as a fixed dwelling-place where religious live according to their rule. According to the common opinion of jurists (Piat, "'Praelectiones juris Regularis", I, 344, n, 4; Wernz, "Jus Decretalium" 658, n. 479) the houses where only two or three religious dwell permanently, and obseve their rule as they can, are subject to this law; it is not necessary that the religious be in a number which secures them the privilege of exemption from the bishop's jurisdiction. The Congregation of Propaganda seems to have in this opinion its own, in decreeing that, in missionary countries, the law of cloister applies to the religious houses which belong to the mission, and which serve as a fixed dwelling for even two or three regular missionaries of the Latin Rite (Collectanea Propagandae Fidei, Replies of 26 Aug., 1780, and of 5 March, 1787, n. 410 and 412, 1st edit., n. 545 and 587, 2d ed). On the other hand, the law of cloister does not apply to houses which are simply hired by religious, and which cannot therefore he looked upon as fixed and definitive homes, nor to the Villa-houses to which the religious go for recreation on fixed days or for a few weeks every year. Strictly speaking, the whole enclosed space -- house and garden -- ought to be encloistered. Custom, however, allows the erection, at the entrance to the convent, of reception rooms to which women may be admitted. These reception rooms should he isolated from the interior of the convent, and the religious should not have free access to them. The church choir, and even the sacristy, when it is strictly contiguous to the church, are neutral territory, here women may enter, and the religious are free to go thither without special permission. It may be asked whether a strictly continuous material barrier is a necessary part of the clausura. Lehmkuhl (in Kirchenlex., s.v. Clausura) is of the opinion that a door which can be locked should separate the cloistered from the other parts of a house of religious. Passerini, however, thinks (De hominum statibus, III, 461, n. 376) that any intelligible sign suffices, provided it sufflciently indicates the beginning of the cloistered part. And even in the Roman law, the clausurae were sometimes fictitious. Finally, it may be added that it is for the provincial superior to fix the limits of the cloister and the point at which it begins, in comformity with the usages of his order and with the local needs; of course his power is limited by the dispositions of the law. Formal Clausura. Obstacle to the Free Egress of the Religious. The cloistered religious may not go outside their material cloister without permission, still, the religious man who transgresses this prohibition does not incur any ecclesiastical censure. In two cases, however, he would commit a grave sin: if his absence were prolonged (i.e. exceeding two or three days); and if he should go out by night. Going out at night without permission is usually a reserved case. But what constitutes going out by night? The present writer is of the opinion that the common estimation (which may vary in different countries) defines it. It consists in leaving the cloister without a good and serious motive, at a late hour, when people would be surprised to meet a religious outside his monastery. Canonical legislation carefully provides that religious, when not employed in the functions of the sacred ministry, shall reside in monasteries. The Council of Trent had already forbidden them to leave the monastery without permission under pretext of meeting their superiors. If they are sent to follow a university course, they must reside in a religious house. The bishop can and must punish the violators of this law of residence (Sess. XXIV, De Reg. et Mon., c. iv). Certain decrees of reform, primarily intended for Italy alone, but probably extended by usage, specially forbid religious to go to Rome without permission of the superior general. Obstacle to the Entrance of Outsiders Women are strictly forbidden to enter the encloistered portions of a house of male religious. In his "Apostolicae Sedis" (1869), sec. 2, n. 7, Pius IX renewed the sentence of excommunication against violators of this law. This excommunication is absolutely reserved to the Holy See; it affects the women who enter as well as the superior or religious who admits them. The penalty always supposes, of course, a serious sin on the offender's part, but the moralists are very severe in their appreciation of cases. The fact of having just fully crossed the boundary suffices, according to them, for the commission of a serious sin and incurs the penalty. Such severity is comprehensible when a continuous material barrier separates the cloistered and noncloistered parts of the monastery; still, the present writer is rather inclined to exonerate that person from a grievous sin who should just step over the boundary and retire immediately. Where there is no such barrier, somewhat more latitude may be allowed. The law makes exceptions for queens and women of like rank, as, for example, the wife of the president of a republic; such persons may also be accompanied by a suitable retinue. Exception is also sometimes made for notable benefactresses, who must, however, previously obtain a pontifical indult. It should be noted that young girls under twelve do not incur this excommunication, but the religious who should admit them would incur the penalty. It is not certain that young girls under seven come under the law; hence the religious who should admit them would not commit a grave fault or incur the excommunication. (b) Female Material Clausura Those parts of the convent to which the nuns have access are all within the cloister, the choir not excepted. Here the law recognizes no neutral territory. If the convent church be public, the nuns cannot go into those parts accessible to the people. Further, the building should be so constructed that neither the sisters can look outside their enclosure, nor their neighbours see into the court-yards or gardens at the disposal of the sisters. Before establishing a women's convent with cloister, it is the desire of the Holy See -- if it be not a condition of validity -- that the beneplacitum Apostolicum should be obtained; this is a certain obligation for countries, like the United States, which are subject to the Constitution of Leo XIII "Romanos Pontifices", 8 May, 1881. (See also the Letter of 7 Dec., 1901, of the Congregation of Propaganda.) Formal Clausura Obstacle to Egress. Under no pretext may be sisters go outside their cloister without a legitimate cause approved of by the bishop. Such is the legislation of the Council of Trent (Sess. XXV, De. Reg. et Mon. c.v.) St. Pius V. restricting still more this law, recognized only three legitimate causes: fire, leprosy, and contagious malady. Without keeping rigorously to this enumeration, we may say that an analogous necessity is always required in order that the bishop may accord the permission. The nuns who transgress this law incur an excommunication reserved absolutely to the Holy See ("Apost. Sedis", see. 2, n. 6). Obstacle to the Free Entrance of Outsiders. The law is much more severe for female than for male houses; in fact, even women are rigorously excluded from the cloistered parts. The penalty for those who enter and for those who admit or introduce them is the same -- an excommunication absolutely reserved to the Holy See ("Apost. Sed.", sec. 2, n. 6). The penalty affects all those, and only those, who have reached the age of reason. Hence, in spite of the general terms of the law, it seems probable that the sister who should introduce a child under seven would not incur the ecclesistical censure. This regime, however, admits of exceptions; corporal or spiritual needs demand the physician's or the confessor's presence, the garden must be cultivated, the building kept in repair. Hence general permissions are given to doctors, confessors, workmen, and others. The confessor of the nuns has this permission in virtue of his offlce, so also the bishop who must make the canonical visitation, and the regular superior. If the convent be under the jurisdiction of regulars, outsiders who need to enter the cloister probably require only one permission, that of the regular superior, except where custom requires also the permission of the bishop or of his delegate (St. Alph., "Theol. mor." VII, 224). Benedict XIV, Lehmkuhl, and Piat, basing their view on the jurisprudence of the congregation of the Council, hold that the bishops permission is always required. This permission, whether coming from the bishop or from the regular superior, should be in writing, according to the wording of the law; but an oral permission is sufficient to avoid the censure (St. Alph., "Theol. mor.", VII, 223). We may follow the opinion of St. Alphonsus (loc cit), who maintains that when one has an evident reason for entering within the cloister, he avoids both the censure and the sin, even though he have only an oral permission. It should be observed that girl-boarders are subject to this legislation. Hence the solemnly professed nuns who wish to occupy themselves with the education of the young must be provided with a pontifical indult. However, cloistered nuns are not absolutely forbidden all intercourse with the outside world. They may of course receive letters; they may also receive visitors in the convent parlour, provided that they they remain behind the grating, or grille, erected there. For such visits a reasonable cause and a permission from the bishop is usally needed . The permission, however, is not required in case of those who, by virtue of their office, are obliged to have relations with a convent, viz. the ecclesiastical superior, the confessor (for spiritual affairs), the canonical visitor, etc. Except in Advent and Lent, relatives and children are permitted once a week. The conditions for a visit by a male religiou