The conflict with France led to a schism in the college of car dinals, which resulted in the conciliabulum of Pisa. Julius adroitly checkmated the cardinals by convening a general council, which was held in the Lateran. This assembly was also designed to deal with the question of reform, when the pope was summoned from this world (Feb. 20-21, 1513). Of his ecclesiastical achieve ments the bull against simony at papal elections deserves the most honourable mention. Again, by his restoration of the papal State, after the frightful era of the Borgias, Julius became the saviour of the papal power. But this does not exhaust his sig nificance ; he was, at the same time, the renewer of the papal Maecenate in the domain of art. It is to his lasting praise that he took into his service the three greatest artistic geniuses of the time—Bramante, Michelangelo and Raphael—and entrusted them with congenial tasks. Bramante drew out the Ilan for the new cathedral of St. Peter and the reconstruction of the Vatican. On April 58, 15°6, the foundation-stone of the new St. Peter's was laid; 120 years later, on Nov. 18, 1626, Urban VIII. consecrated the new cathedral of the world, on which popes had laboured, in conjunction with the first architects of the day, modifying in many points the grandiose original design of Bramante, and re ceiving the contributions of every Christian land (see VATICAN). Leo X.—As so often occurs in the history of the papacy, Julius II. was followed by a man of an entirely different type—Leo X. (1513-1521). Though not yet 37 years of age, Giovanni de' Medici, distinguished for his generosity, mildness and courtesy, was elevated to the pontifical chair by the adroit manoeuvres of the younger cardinals. His policy—though officially he declared his intention of following in the steps of his predecessor—was at first extremely reserved. His ambition was to play the role of peacemaker, and his conciliatory policy achieved many suc cesses. Thus, in the very first year of his reign, he removed the schism which had broken out under Julius II. As a statesman Leo X. often walked by very crooked paths ; but the reproach that he allowed his policy to be swayed exclusively by his family interests is unjustified. It may be admitted that he clung to his native Florence and to his family with warm affection ; but the really decisive factor which governed his attitude throughout was his anxiety for the temporal and spiritual independence of the Holy See. The conquest of Milan by the French led to a personal interview at Bologna, where the "concordat" with France was concluded. This document annulled the pragmatic sanction of Bourges, with its schismatic tendencies, but at the same time confirmed the preponderating influence of the king upon the Gallican Church—a concession which in spite of its many dubious aspects at least made the sovereign the natural defender of the Church and gave him the strongest motive for remaining Catholic. The war for the duchy of Urbino (1516-17) entailed disastrous consequences, as from it dates the complete disorganization of papal finance. It was, moreover, a contributing cause of the con spiracy of Cardinal Petrucci, the suppression of which was fol lowed (July, 1517) by the creation of 31 new cardinals in one day. This—the greatest of recorded creations—turned the scale once and for all in favour of the papal authority and against the cardinals. The efforts of Leo to promote a crusade, which fall mainly in the years 1517 and 1518, deserve all recognition, but very various opinions have been held as to the attitude of the pope towards the imperial election consequent on the death of Max imilian I. The fundamental motive for his proceedings at that period was not nepotistic tendencies—which doubtless played their part, but only a secondary one—but his anxiety for the moral and temporal independence of the Holy See. For this rea
son Leo, from the very first, entertained no genuine desire for the selection either of Charles V. or Francis I. of France. By playing off one against the other he succeeded in holding both in suspense, and induced them to conclude agreements safeguarding the pope and the Medici. Of the two, the French king appeared the less dangerous, and the result was that Leo championed his cause with all his energies. Not till the eleventh hour, when the election of the Habsburg, to whom he was entirely opposed, was seen to be certain did he give way. He thus at least avoided an open rupture with the new emperor—a rupture which would have been all the more perilous on account of the religious revolution now immi nent in Germany. There the great secession from Rome was brought about by Martin Luther; but, in spite of his striking personality, the upheaval which was destined to shatter the unity of the Western Church was not his undivided work. True, he was the most powerful agent in the destruction of the existing order; but, in reality, he merely put the match to a pile of inflammable materials which had been collecting for centuries. (See REFORMA TION.) A main cause of the cleavage in Germany was the position of ecclesiastical affairs, which—though by no means hopeless—yet stood in urgent need of emendation, and, combined with this, the deeply resented financial system of the Curia. Thus Luther as sumed the leadership of a national opposition, and appeared as the champion who was to undertake the much-needed reform of abuses which clamoured for redress. The occasion for the schism was given by the conflict with regard to indulgences, in the course of which Luther was not content to attack actual grievances, but assailed the Catholic doctrine itself. In June 1518 the canonical proceedings against Luther were begun in Rome ; but, owing to political influences, only slow progress was made. It was not till June 15, 152o, that his new theology was condemned by the bull Exsurge, and Luther himself threatened with excommunication— a penalty which was only enforced owing to his refusal to submit, on Jan. 3, 1521.
The state of Germany, together with the unwise behaviour of Francis I., compelled Leo X. to side with Charles V. against the French king; and the united forces of the empire and papacy had achieved the most brilliant success in upper Italy, when Leo died unexpectedly, on Dec. I, 1521. The character of the first Medicean pope shows a peculiar mixture of noble and ignoble qualities. With an insatiable love of pleasure he combined a certain external piety and a magnificent generosity in his charities. His financial administration was disastrous, and led simply to bankruptcy. On music, hunting, expensive feasts and theatrical performances money was squandered, while, with unexampled optimism, the pope was blind to the deadly earnestness of the times.
As the Maecenas of Science and Literature Leo has been over-praised. The genuine significance of Leo lies rather in the stimulus which lie gave. From this point of view his deserts are undoubtedly great ; and for that reason he possesses an inde feasible right to a certain share in the renown of the papacy as a civilizing agent of the highest rank.
As a patron of art Leo occupies a more exalted plane. In this domain the first place must be assigned to the splendid achieve ments of Raphael, whom the pope entrusted with new and compre hensive commissions—the Stanza dell' incendio, the Logge and the tapestry-cartoons, the originals of the last named being now in London. But, though illuminated by the rays of art, and loaded with the exuberant panegyrics of humanists and poets, the reign of the first Medicean pontiff, by its unbounded devotion to purely secular tendencies and its comparative neglect of the Church herself proved disastrous for the see of St. Peter.