Council of Constance (1414-1418)

A schism that had become insoluble by ordinary means

The schism is born after the papacy's return to Rome and the death of Gregory XI in 1378. The election of Urban VI is contested by some of the cardinals, who elect Clement VII at Fondi. Two obediences then take root durably: Rome and Avignon. For nearly forty years, kingdoms, universities, dioceses, religious orders, and the faithful divide themselves between rival lines.^[7]

The crisis is not a mere quarrel of persons. If two or three men simultaneously claim the See of Peter, every episcopal appointment, every legation, every censure, every benefice, and every diplomatic decision becomes suspect. Saints and theologians in good faith find themselves in opposing obediences, which makes the state of the Church practically untenable.^[8]

The failure of the Council of Pisa

In 1409, the Council of Pisa attempts to depose Gregory XII and Benedict XIII and elects Alexander V. The intention is to restore unity; the result is paradoxical: the two deposed claimants do not withdraw, and the Pisan line adds a third pope. John XXIII then succeeds Alexander V in that line.^[9]

Constance is therefore convoked in a context where ordinary solutions have failed: voluntary resignations are refused or made conditional, political obediences paralyze decisions, and Christendom can no longer wait for one of the claimants to die or yield alone.

Constance, an imperial city on the lake

The council meets at Constance, an imperial city on the shores of Lake Constance. The choice is political and practical: the city lies in the Germanic sphere of Sigismund, King of the Romans, far enough from Rome and Avignon not to appear captured by a single obedience, and central enough to attract the European delegations.^[10]

The acts span 45 sessions, from November 1414 to April 1418. New Advent and the Tanner edition reproduced by EWTN stress one essential point: speaking of the council without distinguishing the periods is misleading. Before 4 July 1415, the assembly operates under the contested authority of John XXIII and then in an emergency situation; from that date onward, Gregory XII reconvenes it through his legate and makes a more solid Catholic reception possible.^[11][12]

Voting by nations

The council adopts an original method: votes are not simply counted per person, but by nations. The first four nations are Italian, French, German, and English; the Spanish nation is added after the arrival of the Castilian and Aragonese delegations in 1416.^[13][14]

This system aims to limit the numerical weight of a single bloc, notably the Italian one, and to force a European decision. It does, however, give the council a very political physiognomy: bishops, theologians, ambassadors, jurists, and princes act within a single space, with sometimes divergent interests.

Sigismund

Sigismund, King of the Romans and later emperor, is not a conciliar father, but he is one of the driving forces of the event. He understands that a lasting pontifical schism also undermines the Christian political order: treaties, alliances, investitures, crusades, universities, and national conflicts all become entangled in the division of obediences.^[15]

His role is ambivalent. Without him, diplomatic pressure on John XXIII and Benedict XIII would probably have failed; but his imperial involvement also reinforces the impression that the crisis can only be resolved by mixing ecclesiastical government with civil power.

John XXIII, Gregory XII and Benedict XIII

John XXIII, born Baldassare Cossa, opens the council in the hope of strengthening the Pisan line. He first promises to resign if his rivals do the same, then flees Constance in March 1415. The council suspends him, tries him, then deposes him on 29 May 1415, not as a legitimate pope deposed by a superior council, but as a claimant whose conduct and position make unity impossible.^[16]

Gregory XII, retrospectively recognized by the Catholic list as the legitimate pope, takes another path. Through his representative Giovanni Dominici, he reconvenes the council on 4 July 1415, then resigns all claims. This voluntary resignation becomes the canonical pivot of the way out of the crisis.^[17]

Benedict XIII, Pedro de Luna, refuses to yield to the very end. After the failure of the Perpignan negotiations and the defection of his main Iberian supporters, the council deposes him on 26 July 1417. He will die at Peñíscola in 1423 while maintaining his claim.^[18]

Unity: obtaining a pope recognized by the whole Latin Church

The heart of the council is the restoration of a single visible head. After the resignation of Gregory XII, the deposition of John XXIII, and the isolation of Benedict XIII, the council can organize an exceptional election. To the cardinals are added thirty deputies of the nations, six per nation, to form an enlarged electoral college.^[19]

On 11 November 1417, this college elects the Roman cardinal Oddone Colonna, who takes the name Martin V. His pontifical coronation on 21 November, then the closing of the council on 22 April 1418, symbolize the effective end of the Western Schism.^[20]

Reform: Frequens and the limits of the programme

The reform of the Church is the other great objective. Many conciliar fathers want to correct the abuses of the Curia, limit taxes, reduce pontifical reservations, regulate benefices, reform clerical morals, and prevent a similar crisis from recurring.^[21]

The most lasting decree is Frequens, adopted at session 39 on 9 October 1417. It provides for the regular holding of general councils: the first five years after Constance, the second seven years later, then a council every ten years. The intuition is simple: frequent councils must prevent heresies, schisms, and institutional distortions.^[22]

This reform remains partial. On 21 March 1418, seven points are adopted; other matters are handled through national concordats. Constance thus achieves more than a symbol, but less than a general refounding of ecclesiastical government.^[23]

The content of the decree

The decree Haec sancta, read in sessions 4 and 5 in the spring of 1415, affirms that the council, representing the Church militant, holds its power immediately from Christ and that everyone, even if he is pope, must obey it in what concerns the faith, the extirpation of the schism, and the reform of the Church.^[24]

This formula is born in an extreme situation: John XXIII has fled, unity is threatened, and the assembly seeks to prevent the council from being dissolved by the disappearance of its own convoker. It serves first of all to maintain common action despite the practical collapse of the authority that had opened it.

The Catholic reception

The difficulty is that the text was later used as an argument for conciliarism, that is, as the thesis that a general council would be superior to the pope in an ordinary way. The Catholic reception rejects this reading. New Advent notes that the five famous articles of the fifth session received no papal confirmation as anti-pontifical doctrine.^[25]

EWTN summarizes the Catholic line by distinguishing the unratified sessions from those following the reconvocation by Gregory XII: Martin V ratifies what was determined "in a conciliar way" in the legitimized council, not a general theory contradicting the primacy of the Apostolic See.^[26]

This point is essential to avoid two symmetrical errors. It would be wrong to deny the historical importance of Constance; it would be equally wrong to make of it a Catholic proof against pontifical primacy. Constance is a crisis-exit council, not an ordinary constitutional model.

Wyclif

Session 8 condemns 45 propositions of John Wyclif. Denzinger reproduces them under numbers 1151-1195. They concern the Eucharist, ecclesiastical authority, the ownership of Church property, religious orders, excommunication, indulgences, and the Roman primacy.^[27]

Several propositions reveal the heart of the conflict: Wyclif denies or weakens the Real Presence, subordinates the authority of prelates to their moral state, contests ecclesiastical property, and directly attacks the Roman function. The council is therefore not dealing only with an isolated English dissident; it reacts to a doctrinal whole capable of overturning the Latin Church sacramentally and juridically.

Jan Hus

The case of Jan Hus is more dramatic. A preacher from Prague, influenced by Wyclif, he arrives at Constance under imperial safe-conduct. He is arrested, tried, refuses the formulas of retraction proposed to him, then is condemned on 6 July 1415 and handed over to the secular arm. His death at the stake sends a shockwave through Bohemia and prepares the Hussite wars.^[28]

We must first read what the safe-conduct actually promised. Issued at Speyer on 18 October 1414, Sigismund's text ordered that Hus be allowed to pass, stop, remain and return freely, without any hindrance or vexation, and that he be allowed to pass toll-free through towns, bridges and territories.^[29] The accusation brought against the council and against Sigismund is therefore serious, and it must be stated without softening: Hus was arrested at Constance on 28 November 1414, then condemned and executed on 6 July 1415, although the written promise also covered free return to Bohemia. The Encyclopaedia Britannica notes it soberly: although the safe-conduct had been promised to him, Hus was arrested, tried for heresy and burned at the stake.^[30] The Bohemians already at the time saw in this arrest a violation of the safe-conduct and a breach of imperial faith.^[31]

The conciliar response is not found in the text of the safe-conduct: it is an argument of jurisdiction, and it must be presented as such. Sigismund, at first irritated by the arrest, declared on 1 January 1415 that he would not prevent the council from proceeding according to the law against persons accused of heresy.^[32] The council then formulated this principle in a decree of session 19, 23 September 1415: notwithstanding the safe-conducts of emperors, kings and others, a competent judge can inquire into a case of heresy.^[33] It is the only verifiable conciliar text on this point. It does not contain the maxim that one should not keep faith with a heretic, and no decree of Constance declares such a rule.^[34]

Denzinger gives 30 condemned propositions under numbers 1201-1230. They concern above all the nature of the Church as the assembly of the predestined, the legitimacy of sinful prelates, papal authority, preaching despite censures, and ecclesiastical obedience.^[35]

The article must not erase the moral complexity of the dossier: the medieval trial, the imprisonment, and the execution strongly shock the contemporary reader. But historically, the council judges not only a moral reform of the clergy; it judges ecclesiological theses that dissolve sacramental and hierarchical authority into an invisible verification of predestination or personal holiness.

Communion under one kind

The decree Cum in nonnullis, session 13 of 15 June 1415, answers the Utraquist demand for obligatory communion under both kinds for the laity. The council recalls that Christ is wholly present under each of the species and that the Latin custom of communicating the laity under the species of bread cannot be declared sacrilegious.^[36]

Denzinger formulates the doctrinal point in clear terms: under the single species of bread, the faithful receive the whole Christ, body, blood, soul, and divinity. This decision will be taken up again in the Hussite conflict, then clarified later by the Council of Trent in its decree on communion under both kinds.^[37][38]

A success in unity

On the level of visible unity, Constance succeeds. The schism opened in 1378 is practically closed in 1417; Martin V can progressively restore Roman authority. The council thus leaves an immense mark: it shows that an almost insoluble institutional crisis can be resolved by a combination of legitimate resignation, diplomatic pressure, canonical procedure, and recognized election.^[39]

This success explains why Constance remains counted among the Catholic ecumenical councils, despite the reservations about certain sessions and certain texts. It is a council received for its work of peace, doctrine, and reform, not for every political or theological opinion expressed within its walls.

A cautious doctrinal reception

Caution concerns above all Haec sancta. The later Catholic tradition does not receive this decree as an ordinary dogmatic definition. Vatican I will on the contrary define the primacy of jurisdiction of the Roman pontiff over the whole Church; Constance therefore cannot be read against this doctrine without breaking the continuity of reception.^[40]

The interest of Constance lies precisely in learning to distinguish a council as a historical event, a council as a juridically legitimate assembly, and a council as the bearer of ratified decisions. In an extreme crisis, these levels can overlap without merging.

A lesson on visible unity

Constance recalls that the unity of the Church is not an abstraction. Without a recognized visible head, dioceses, universities, princes, and the faithful concretely divide. The election of Martin V is therefore not a mere episode of medieval diplomacy: it restores a centre of communion to Latin Christendom.

A warning about badly ordered reforms

The council also shows that a genuine demand for reform can produce ambiguous remedies if it is not ordered to the divine constitution of the Church. Many criticisms of the Curia were real; but the conciliarist temptation to resolve abuses by weakening pontifical primacy carried another crisis in germ.

An indispensable dossier for understanding the Reformation

Finally, Constance indirectly prepares the 16th century. The condemnation of Wyclif, the political and religious martyrdom of Hus in Bohemian eyes, the Hussite wars, the question of ecclesial authority, and the criticism of abuses all announce several themes that the Protestant Reformation will radicalize a century later. Luther himself will be confronted with Hus's legacy during the Leipzig debate.^[41]

• Read Vienna: the preceding council, marked by the Templar affair and several doctrinal decisions.
• Read Florence: the following council, decisive for the Eastern unions.
• Read Sedevacantism: to understand why a crisis of authority does not remove the visibility of the Church.
• Read Responses to Protestantism: several of Constance's debates reappear in the controversies of the 16th century.