y displeased with the contents of the edict, and with the
irregularity committed in sending it first to the provincial parliaments.
Even when the king, yielding to their importunity, by a supplementary
"declaration," interpreted the provision of the edict relative to the
attendance of royal officers upon the reformed services, as applicable
only to the bailiffs, seneschals, and other minor magistrates, and
strictly prohibited the attendance of the members of parliament and other
high judicatories,[9] the counsellors, instead of proceeding to the
registry of the obnoxious law, returned a recommendation that the
intolerant Edict of _July_ be enforced![10] It was not possible until
March to obtain a tardy assent to the reception of the January Edict into
the legislation of the country, and then only a few of the judges
vouchsafed to take part in the act.[11] The delay served to inflame yet
more the passions of the people.
[Sidenote: New conference.]
Scarcely had the edict which was to adjust the relations of the two
religious parties been promulgated, when a new attempt was made to
reconcile the antagonistic beliefs by the old, but ever unsuccessful
method of a conference between theologians. On the twenty-eighth of
January a select company assembled in the large council-chamber of the
royal palace of St. Germain, and commenced the discussion of the first
topic submitted for their deliberation--the question of pictures or images
and their worship. Catharine herself was present, with Antoine of Navarre
and Jeanne d'Albret, Michel de l'Hospital, and other members of the
council. On the papal side appeared the Cardinals of Bourbon, Tournon, and
Ferrara, and a number of less elevated dignitaries. Beza and Marlorat were
most prominent on the side of the reformed. The discussion was long and
earnest, but it ended leaving all the disputants holding the same views
that they had entertained at the outset. Beza condemned as idolatrous the
practice of admitting statues or paintings into Christian churches, and
urged their entire removal. The Inquisitor De Mouchy, Fra Giustiniano of
Corfu, Maillard, dean of the Sorbonne, and others, attempted to refute his
positions in a style of argument which exhibited the extremes of profound
learning and silly conceit. Bishop Montluc of Valence,[12] and four
doctors of theology--Salignac, Bouteiller, D'Espense, and Picherel--not
only admitted the flagrant abuses of image-worship, but drew up a p
|