Advertisement

The Johns Hopkins Press of Baltimore

American Journal of Mathematics. Edited by Frank Morley, A. Cohen, Associate Editor, with the coöperation of Charlotte A. Scott, A. B. Coble, and other mathematicians. Quarterly. 8vo. Volume XLVI in progress. $6 per volume. (Foreign postage, twenty-five cents.)

American Journal of Philology. Edited by C. W. E. Miller, with the coöperation of M. Bloomfield, H. Collitz, T. Frank, W. P. Mustard, and D. M. Robinson. Quarterly. 8vo. Volume XLV in progress. $5 per volume. (Foreign postage, fifty cents.)

American Journal of Psychiatry. E. N. Brush, C. M. Campbell, George H. Kirby, A. M. Barrett, and H. Douglas Singer, Editors. Quarterly. 8vo. Volume IV in progress. $5 per volume. (Foreign postage, fifty cents.)

Hesperia. Hermann Collitz and James W. Bright, Editors. Twenty-one numbers have appeared.

Johns Hopkins Hospital Reports. 8vo. Volume XXI in progress. $5 per volume. (Foreign postage, fifty cents.)

Johns Hopkins Studies in Romance Literatures and Languages. D. S. Blondheim, Gilbert Chinard and H. C. Lancaster, Editors. 8vo. Two numbers have appeared.

Johns Hopkins University Circular, including the President’s Report, Annual Register, and Catalogue of the School of Medicine. Nine times a year. 8vo. $1 per year.

Johns Hopkins University Studies in Education. E. F. Buchner, Editor. 8vo. Nine numbers have appeared.

Johns Hopkins University Studies in Geology. E. B. Mathews, Editor. 8vo. Five numbers have appeared.

Johns Hopkins University Studies in Historical and Political Science. Under the direction of the Departments of History, Political Economy, and Political Science. 8vo. Volume XLII in progress. $5 per volume.

Modern Language Notes. J. W. Bright, Editor-in-Chief, G. Gruenbaum, W. Kurrelmeyer and H. C. Lancaster. Eight times yearly. 8vo. Volume XXXIX in progress. $5 per volume. (Foreign postage, fifty cents.)

Reports of the Maryland Geological Survey. Edited by E. B. Mathews.

Terrestrial Magnetism and Atmospheric Electricity. L. A. Bauer, Editor. Quarterly. 8vo. Vol. XXIX in progress. $3.50 per volume. (Foreign postage, 25 cents.)

The Eclogues of Baptista Mantuanus. By W. P. Mustard. 156 pp. $1.50.

The Piscatory Eclogues of Jacopo Sannazaro. By W. P. Mustard. 94 pp. $1.25.

The Eclogues of Faustus Andrelinus and Joannes Arnolletus. By W. P. Mustard. 123 pp. $1.50.

The Eclogues of Antonio Geraldini. By W. P. Mustard. 84 pp. $1.50.

Martial, the Epigrammatist and Other Essays. By K. F. Smith. Edited by W. P. Mustard. 180 pp. $2.

West Florida Controversy, 1798-1813. By I. J. Cox. 702 pp. $3.

An Outline of Psychobiology. By Knight Dunlap. 145 pp. 84 cuts. $2.50.

The Life and Stories of the Jaina Savior Pārçvanātha. By M. Bloomfield. 256 pp. $3.00.

American Citizenship and Economic Welfare. By J. H. Hollander. 132 pp. $1.25.

Public Health and Insurance: American Addresses. By Sir Arthur Newsholme. 284 pp. $2.50.

China at the Conference. By W. W. Willoughby. 435 pp. $3.00.

Tables of √1—r² and 1—r² for use in Partial Correlation and in Trigonometry. By J. R. Miner. 50 pp. $1.50.

Vector Analysis and the Theory of Relativity. By F. D. Murnaghan. 136 pp. $2.75.

Father Tabb: A Study of His Life and Works. By F. A. Litz. 303 pp. 8vo. $2.50.

Institute for Government Research Publications, Washington.

A complete list of publications sent on request.

THE REFORMATION IN POLAND

Some Social and Economic Aspects

SERIES XLII

No. 4

JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY STUDIES
IN
Historical and Political Science
Under the Direction of the
Departments of History, Political Economy, and
Political Science

THE REFORMATION IN POLAND
Some Social and Economic Aspects
BY

PAUL FOX, Ph. D.

BALTIMORE
THE JOHNS HOPKINS PRESS
1924

Copyright 1924 by
THE JOHNS HOPKINS PRESS

J. H. FURST CO., PRINTERS, BALTIMORE

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PREFACE

In the foreword to his book on “The Reformation in Germany,” Prof. Henry C. Vedder makes this statement: “The great religious struggle of the sixteenth century was only a phase of the social revolution then going on in Europe and effecting a transformation of all its institutions. Momentous economic changes were the underlying cause of political and religious movements.… The external events of the Reformation have been told before with substantial accuracy; what is now needed is illumination of the facts by the light of this new knowledge.”

The present study on the Reformation in Poland attempts to gather together material of social and economic nature and to point out that the underlying causes of the rise and spread of the Reformation in Poland were chiefly social and economic rather than religious, or even purely political. Viewed in this light, the rapid rise and the phenomenal growth of the Polish Reformation, as well as its almost complete collapse in the course of the following century, become quite intelligible. Had the movement had its roots in deep religious convictions, it would have survived the changes in social institutions, but, having been inspired and stimulated in its early development by economic motives, it lost its dynamic force with changed economic conditions by the end of the sixteenth century.

Owing to the fact that the writer has had access to only a part of the great abundance of source material bearing on this subject, the study does not pretend to be exhaustive. However, it has the merit of being the first attempt to portray the development of the Polish Reformation in the light of economic causes, and in the judgment of the writer the conclusions here reached and the interpretation given the movement are essentially sound.

In this place the writer wishes to express his indebtedness to Dr. John M. Vincent, Professor of European History at Johns Hopkins University, for his encouragement in the prosecution of this study and for his valuable suggestions and criticisms, and to Miss Mary C. Stokes, of the Historical Department in the University, for her careful reading of the manuscript before its going to press.

THE REFORMATION IN POLAND
Some Social and Economic Aspects

CHAPTER I

Development of the Reformation in Poland

The Background of the Polish Reformation.—The Reformation found in Poland a fertile soil and a congenial atmosphere for its spread and growth.

To begin with, the attitude of the Polish princes was one of independence. They had from early times carefully guarded and vigorously defended their royal rights and prerogatives against the church’s pretensions and efforts at usurpation of power. When, for instance, Stanislaus Szczepanowski, bishop of Cracow, encouraged by Gregory VII’s triumph over Henry IV, attempted to make Gregory’s policy prevail in Poland by placing himself at the head of the disaffected powerful Polish aristocracy, to whom a strong executive power was distasteful, and who desired to dethrone the reigning king and to enthrone his weak subservient brother, Boleslaus the Bold (1058-1080) did not hesitate to put the rebellious bishop promptly to death.[1] When Archbishop Henry Kietlicz, under the influence of Innocent III (1198-1216), determined to introduce the Gregorian reforms into Poland at any cost, Wladislaus, surnamed Langshanks (1202-1206), resolutely opposed the move even at the cost of his throne.[2] Again, when the Polish clergy opposed a change in the payments of tithes, from payments in kind to payments in money, Boleslaus the Bald, of Silesia, ordered the imprisonment of Thomas, bishop of Breslau, together with one of his canons, had them put in stocks, and though the archbishop of Gnesen excommunicated Boleslaus and the Pope ordered the archbishops of Gnesen and Magdeburg to proclaim a crusade against him, Boleslaus did not yield until Thomas made peace with the prince by paying a fine of 2000 silver marks and by agreeing to payments of tithes in money.[3] And when later the bishop of Breslau opposed the levying of a tax on the clergy for the benefit of the prince’s treasury, Boleslaus’ son, Henry, now prince of Silesia, exiled the recalcitrant bishop. Though excommunicated for this act by the archbishop of Gnesen, he did not permit the bishop’s return until after five years of exile, the bishop finally yielding and submitting to the tax.[4]

Besides these instances, there were others. Leszek the Black (1279-1288) was at odds with the bishop of Cracow, Paul of Przemankow. The bishop, an implacable enemy of the king, conspired against the king, incited the aristocracy against him, and caused even an invasion of Little Poland by the Lithuanians and the Jadźwings. The king dispersed the invaders, confiscated the bishop’s property, and imprisoned him in the Castle of Sieradz, putting him in stocks. It was only when the Pope threatened Leszek with excommunication that the king liberated the imprisoned bishop.[5] In the fourteenth century Casimir the Great (1333-1370) imposed a tax on episcopal property. The Polish high clergy resented that, and excommunicated the king. Casimir ordered the priest, who brought the bull of excommunication to him, to be seized and drowned in the Vistula River. And since Casimir was a powerful and popular ruler, the clergy took due warning, and desisted from further provocative steps.[6] Moreover, it is worthy of note that while in Germany the right of investiture was surrendered as early at 1122 by the Concordat of Worms, in Poland the princes defended and retained the right as late as 1206.[7] And in the second half of the fifteenth century, taking advantage of the existing schism in the church at that time, they again regained it, and made it a permanent and indisputable prerogative of the Polish crown.[8] Even such a loyal son of the church as Sigismund the Old (1506-1548) did not allow the Pope to interfere with his right in this particular. When at the beginning of Sigismund’s reign the Pope deliberately nominated a candidate for the bishopric of Płock, the king refused to accept the papal nominee, stating that he would never consent to such violation of the country’s laws by allowing anyone else to nominate the kingdom’s senators. Again, when later in Sigismund’s reign Pope Hadrian VI was delaying his approval of the king’s nomination of Leszczyński to the bishopric of Posen, Sigismund notified the Vatican that the Pope’s refusal to comply with his just wishes might result in unpleasant consequences to the Holy See; whereupon the Vatican at once approved Leszczyński’s nomination to the bishopric of Posen.[9]

An equal measure of independence characterized the Polish high clergy in respect to its relation to the Vatican. Prince Wladislaus II (1138-1146), striving to establish a strong unified and centralized government in defiance of the provisions of his father’s will, which divided the kingdom among four of his sons, aroused the opposition of the aristocracy and of the clergy, to whom a strong centralized government was very unpalatable. James of Żnin, archbishop of Gnesen, as leader of the opposition, excommunicated the stubborn ambitious prince, and forced him to abdicate. Wladislaus appealed his case to Conrad III, emperor of Germany, and to the Pope. Both of them responded, the emperor with a military expedition and the Pope with a legate. When on arrival in Poland the Pope’s legate, Cardinal Guido, was unable to secure a return of the throne to Wladislaus, he excommunicated the opponents, and placed the country under an interdict. The Polish bishops, however, paid no attention to the legate’s excommunication and interdict; and Wladislaus, though supported by the Pope, had to remain in exile until his death in 1159.[10] Wladislaus, surnamed Langshanks (1202-1206), in his opposition to the Gregorian reforms, upon which Pope Innocent III insisted, had the support of many high church dignitaries among the Polish clergy. Philip, bishop of Posen, for instance, refused to promulgate in his diocese the papal interdict, under which Archbishop Kietlicz was instructed to place the country.[11] To what extent the Polish clergy disregarded papal decrees may be seen from the fact that though Pope Gregory VII (1073-1085) decreed a general enforcement of celibacy among the Roman clergy, marriage among the clergy of Poland, according to the historian Długosz, was still generally common as late as the close of the twelfth and the first quarter of the thirteenth century.[12] It is quite instructive to note that even such high church dignitaries as John Łaski and James Uchański, both archbishops and primates of Poland, the first from 1510 to 1531 and the second from 1562 to 1578, were very unfavorably disposed toward the Vatican. As bishop and secretary of state, Łaski declined to support the Pope’s project of forming a league against the Turks. As archbishop of Gnesen and primate of Poland, he worked for the emancipation of his archbishopric from Rome to such an extent as to alarm not only his enemies, but even his friends and the king himself.[13] Uchański’s orthodoxy and loyalty to Rome had been long under suspicion at the Vatican; so much so that when Sigismund Augustus (1548-1572) appointed him to the bishopric of Chełm, the Pope did not ratify the appointment for several years, and when the king promoted Uchański to the bishopric of Kuyavia, the Pope refused to sanction the promotion altogether. This served only to estrange Uchański from the Vatican still more, and led him, especially on his elevation to the archbishopric of Gnesen, to entertain plans and to advocate the advisability of calling a National Synod and of withdrawing the Church of Poland from the jurisdiction of Rome.[14] When the papal legate, Commendoni, dreading such a consequence, urged the Vatican to forbid, contrary to the decisions of the Council of Trent, the holding of Provincial Synods in Poland for fear that one of them might at any time be turned into a National Synod, the Polish bishops rose in protest against it in the senate of the Diet, going even so far as to declare that the king, and not the Pope, was their overlord and judge.[15]

The people, too, manifested the same spirit of independence in their attitude toward the church, whenever occasion demanded. In the eleventh century they arose in rebellion against the oppression of both state and church, particularly the church, owing to the foreign character of its clergy and their burdensome exactions. They demolished churches and monasteries, drove out the priests and the monks, and reverted to paganism.[16] In the struggles of the state with the papacy for supremacy the people generally supported the state. This explains the boldness and self-confidence of the Polish rulers, with which they successfully opposed the pretensions of the papacy much longer than the German emperors.[17] The papal anathema, hurled against recalcitrant princes and shaking the very foundations of Western thrones, fell in Poland without causing much disturbance or harm.

Another factor, which in a large measure prepared the soil for the spread of the Reformation in Poland, was humanism.[18] The new turn in literature and philosophy reached Poland early in the fifteenth century, and found many friends both among the laity and among the clergy.[19] One of the most distinguished Polish humanists was John Ostrorog (1402-1501), a doctor of both laws from the University of Erfurt and a strong advocate of the supremacy of the state over the church. In his dissertation, “Monumentum pro reipublicae ordinatione congestum,” Ostrorog wrote in 1473:

The Polish king recognises nobody’s supremacy save that of God; instead of assuring the new Pope of his obedience he will sufficiently fulfill his duty if he congratulate him, and at the same time remind him that he should rule the church justly. It is below the dignity of the king to write to the Pope with humility and humbleness.… The clergy should help bear the burdens of the state as well as other citizens; there is no need of being indignant when the king orders the melting of church utensils for public needs. The church has gold not for the purpose of keeping it, but for the purpose of helping the needy. All payments for the benefit of the Pope should be abolished. Poland needs all the funds she can spare for war with invaders and for the preservation of domestic order and peace. The proclamation of jubilee papal bulls as well as fees for funerals, marriages, etc., should be prohibited. The king should nominate the bishops. In order to decrease the number of idlers, the establishment of monasteries in cities should be restricted, the admission for foreigners to them prohibited, and sermons in the German language diminished in number.[20]

“Such were the predominant sentiments of the time,” says Dr. Lewinski-Corwin, “in true keeping with the teachings of humanism, which spread in Poland through constant contact with Germany and Italy, in the principles of which several generations preceding the Reformation had been reared, and in accordance with which they shaped their views and opinions.”[21]

The condition of the Polish church and the character of the Polish clergy in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, too, were favorable to the spread of Reformation ideas in Poland. Lorkiewicz characterizes the Polish church and the Polish clergy of this period thus:

The church, which by its calling and its nature, should be the guardian of the oppressed, the defender of the weak against the strong, the moral guide of men, and the regulator of social conditions, had allied itself with those social factors which sap the very life-blood of society, offering it in exchange only a form without content, a body without a soul. It had become a ballast, not such as steadies the easy movement of a light vessel, but such as threatens the storm-tossed ship with certain destruction. The clergy, if it is fit to use such unpalatable comparison, was at this time like an old church beggar, who, having said the prayers that had been paid for, had nothing more pressing to do than to hurry and in a particular and characteristic manner waste the alms he had received.[22]

The Polish clergy led as dissolute a life as did the clergy elsewhere in Europe. The Polish bishops were far more interested in their incomes, their social standing, and in their political influence than in religion and morals. The indignation of the nobles, therefore, at the freedom the clergy enjoyed from taxation and other burdens was intense. They were strongly opposed to church tithes and to ecclesiastic jurisdiction, and resented papal interference in matters of state.[23]

Pre-Reformation Reform Movements.—Into this receptive Polish soil the seed of religious reform had been sown from time to time for nearly four hundred years; and as it grew and developed, though greatly hindered from time to time, it helped to create an atmosphere favorable to the main religious reform movement of the sixteenth century. The followers of Peter Waldo, persecuted in Italy, sought safety in other countries. As early as 1176 some of them found refuge in Bohemia, and others settled in Poland, near Cracow.[24] Here they spread their master’s teachings, and found many adherents both among the Czechs and among the Poles. Polish chronicles record the names of a number of Waldensian Poles.[25] In time these Waldensians must have become sufficiently numerous and active; for Pope John XXII found it imperative to appoint in 1326 a special Inquisitor for Poland in the person of Peter of Kolomea, a Dominican,[26] and in 1330 the Inquisition discovered that there were many Poles and Czechs visiting the Waldensian churches in Italy and making liberal contributions to them.[27]

Wyclif’s influence reached Poland by way of Bohemia through the Masters of the University of Prague, who at the Polish king’s request became the reorganizers of the University of Cracow.[28] Andrew Gałka, a professor in the University of Cracow, an ardent admirer of Wyclif and a diligent student of his works, wrote a poem in which he praised the English reformer, and denounced the priests as servants of the German emperor and his Antichrist, who suppressed the truth and taught the common people falsehoods.[29] For this poem and for having Wyclif’s works in his possession he was expelled from the University and imprisoned. He escaped, however, from his imprisonment, and sought the protection of Boleslaus of Silesia, whence he carried on an extensive correspondence, justifying his position and urging his readers to read Wyclif’s works.[30]

Owing to the existence of close political and intellectual relations[31] between Bohemia and Poland in the fifteenth century, Hussitism found easy access to the latter country, and attracted many followers and sympathizers from among the Poles. Its anti-German, anti-papal, and nationalistic character found a responsive chord in their hearts. Huss and his ideas met with great favor on the part of many of them. At the Council of Constance the Polish lay representatives sided with the Bohemian delegation, and loyally defended Huss and his cause to the last. A number of powerful Polish aristocratic families, like Spytek of Melsztyn, Abraham of Zbonsz, Dersław of Rytwian, and others, became ardent supporters and defenders of Hussitism.[32] Abraham of Zbonsz harbored and protected Hussite preachers in his possessions for years in spite of the fact that he was excommunicated for this offense by the bishop of Posen.[33] Hussitism was spreading in Poland to such an extent as to cause alarm among the church authorities. The archbishop of Gnesen, Nicholas Tromba, called a synod to assemble at Kalisz, at which it was decided to apprehend suspected heretics and to deliver them into the hands of ecclesiastical tribunals.[34] Cardinal Zbigniew Oleśnicki used his influence with the king, and secured from him the Edict of Wieluń (1424). By this edict the new teachings were declared to be deadly errors of heretics, contemptible to God, detrimental to the Christian faith, enervating to the body politic, inflammatory of perverse hearts, and should be repulsed and kept out of the country, if need be, by the sword. Heretics, protectors of heretics, and heretical suspects were to be regarded as traitors, and were to be punished by death. Those coming from Bohemia and entering Poland were to be examined by Inquisitors, and if suspected of heresy, they were to be detained. Polish subjects, whatever their class or condition, visiting or residing in Bohemia, were to return to their country by next Ascension Day; and if they failed to do so, they were to be regarded as heretics, subject to punishment as heretics. Obstinate heretics were to be punished by confiscation of property in favor of the crown treasury,[35] and neither the offenders themselves nor their posterity were to be admitted to any public office or to any official honors. And Polish merchants were forbidden to export anything to the heretics of Bohemia.[36]

In spite of this drastic edict, intended to check the spread of Hussitism in Poland, the Bohemian Hussites sent some of their emissaries to Cracow in 1427 for the purpose of conducting religious discussions. The Polish historian Długosz, who was Cardinal Oleśnicki’s secretary, reports that such a discussion, in which the Hussite representatives and the Roman Catholic doctors of the University of Cracow participated, was actually held in the city of Cracow in 1431, in the presence of the king, and characteristically adds that the heretics were vanquished, but would not admit it.[37]

On January 30, 1433, due again to Cardinal Oleśnicki’s influence, another royal edict was issued against the heretics. Its intention was to lend effectiveness to ecclesiastical excommunications by providing for seizures by the starostas[38] of the property of excommunicated church offenders, who had been under the ban of the church for more than a year without effort to have it lifted.[39]

It seems that even this measure did not materially help to keep the Hussite heresy in check. After the death of Wladislaus Jagiello in 1434 the Hussites were strong enough to offer some opposition to the regency of Cardinal Olesńicki; for he and his party entered into a pact of confederation at Korczyn on April 25, 1438, for the purpose of acting together to subdue any possible political or religious disturbance.[40] To counteract this, the opposition, headed by Spytek of Melsztyn, the acknowledged leader of the Hussites, entered into a similar pact on the third of May of the year following. This step on the part of the Hussites led to a clash between the two confederated parties, resulting in Spytek’s death, confiscation of his property, and in the ruin of the Spytek family.[41]

That all these measures were ineffective to check the spread of Hussitism in Poland is further evident from the fact that Casimir Jagiello (1447-1492), the king who restored to the Polish crown the right of investiture, lost to the Pope in 1206, issued in 1454 an order to the civil authorities in the dioceses of Gnesen, Posen, Włocław, and Płock to the effect that they cooperate with the appointed inquisitors in running down heretics.[42] It must not be supposed, however, that Casimir Jagiello was a zealous defender of the Roman Church and a determined opponent of Hussitism. In 1462 he entered into an alliance with the excommunicated Hussite king, George Podjebrad of Bohemia, and maintained the alliance in the face of strong inducements as well as threats from the Catholic party to break it. When the Pope in his opposition to Podjebrad had gone so far as to attempt a crusade against the Hussites in Poland, Casimir sternly prohibited the proclamation of it.[43] In the western parts of Poland the traces of Hussitism were so deep that as late as 1500 the nobility of Great Poland demanded the cup at communion.[44] The work of the Hussites was reenforced by demands for reform, made by loyal sons of the Church of Rome, who had caught the spirit of Hussitism. Two men, both professors of theology at the University of Cracow, though at different times, Matthew of Cracow and James of Paradyż, became especially conspicuous within the Polish Roman Catholic Church in the fifteenth century for their advocacy of reform. Matthew of Cracow was born in 1330 of a family of town clerks (Stadtschreiber). Having received his preparatory education in his home town, he went to study theology at the University of Prague, where he took all the University degrees one after another, and finally in 1387 became professor of theology. In 1394 he went as professor of theology to the University of Heidelberg, and in 1396 he was made rector of that University. In 1397 he was called to Cracow for the purpose of reorganizing the University, founded in 1364 by Casimir the Great.

The University of Prague made an indelible impression upon him, and to its influence he felt that he owed everything. His conception of the church and his views of church matters were likewise the product of the University of Prague. And Matthew became not only a theologian, but also a reformer. While at the University of Cracow, he published in 1404 a pamphlet under the title, “De squaloribus curiae Romanae.” In it, as well as in his sermons, lectures, and other writings, he condemned simony, defended the superiority of church councils over the Pope, severely criticized the existing form of religion as a mere semblance of Christianity, held the stupidity of church theologians responsible for the decline of scriptural religious faith, and demanded reforms.[45]

As the spirit of the University of Prague made Matthew of Cracow, so the spirit of Matthew’s theology made James of Paradyż. Born about 1380, James entered the monastic Order of the Cistercians at Paradyż at the age of twenty. In 1420 he was studying at the University of Cracow, from which in 1432 he received its highest degree, namely that of Doctor of Decretals, or of Theology. In 1431 he participated in the famous public discussion with the Hussites in the king’s presence. Though loyal to the Church of Rome, James nevertheless became an ardent advocate of church reform, particularly of the monastic life. He went so far as to propose the confiscation of monastic property of all monastic orders which had become too worldly. In consequence of this revolutionary proposal, he was forced to leave his Order at Mogila and his chair of theology at the University of Cracow. Accustomed to the discipline of the monastic life, however, he entered the Order of the Carthusians at Erfurt, and continued his labors along the line of church reform both by preaching and by writing until his death in 1464.[46]

That by the beginning of the sixteenth century the ground in Poland was fairly well prepared for the spread of the coming Reformation is made further evident by the character of some of the books published and the opinions circulated in the country at that time. In 1504, for instance, there appeared from the press in Cracow two significant books, “De vero cultu Dei,” and “De matrimonio sacerdotum.” These books contained views decidedly unfavorable to the church, and, as it was to be expected, were condemned by it. In 1515, Bernard of Lublin, writing to Simon of Cracow, expressed the opinion that the Gospel was all-sufficient for faith and practice and that all other precepts of men could be dispensed with.[47]

The Spread of the Reformation in Poland. First Period, 1518-1540: Early Beginnings and Struggles.—The Reformation reached Poland soon after its outbreak in Germany, and spread rapidly. Following lines of least resistance, it penetrated through the established channels of trade and commerce and education into the larger commercial centres, where there was a considerable German element, and into the life of the country aristocracy, which sought knowledge and culture in the universities of Germany.

The first Polish city to feel its influence and to respond to it was the important commercial city of Danzig. In less than a year from the posting of Luther’s theses on the door of the castle church at Wittenberg, Luther’s reform doctrines were preached and championed in Danzig. The man who accepted them and began to preach them publicly was James Knade, a monk and preacher at the Church of St. Peter and St. Paul. Knade renounced his monastic vows, married Anna, the beautiful step-daughter of James Rohboze, a wealthy burgher of Danzig, and, fearlessly opposing Rome and Roman practices, advocated reforms in the church. Being a popular preacher, liked and respected by the people of the city, his activity was very dangerous to the Church of Rome. He was, therefore, seized, by order of the bishop of Kuyavia, tried, found guilty, and imprisoned. Shortly after his imprisonment, he was released, but had to leave the city. He took refuge on the estate of a country gentleman by the name of Krokow, near the city of Thorn, where, protected by his patron, he continued his reform activity without further interference.[48]

Suppressed for a time, the reform movement broke out again four years later with accumulated force. The interval had given the people of Danzig time to think, to form opinions, and to take sides either for or against the Reformation. The year 1522, therefore, found the majority of the people of Danzig in favor of the Reformation. Some, however, wanted to carry it through conservatively, others by radical action. The advocates of conservative reform were drawn from among the well-to-do, and included the city council. The radicals came from the plebeian class, and represented the wishes of the common people. The conservatives favored the dogmatic aspect of the new reform movement, and opposed changes in organization, forms, and practices. The radicals, on the other hand, kept their eyes on the practical aspects of the new ideas, and proposed to carry them out to their logical limit.[49] The leader of the conservative reform party was Dr. Alexander, a Franciscan friar, an eloquent preacher, thoroughly educated and well balanced. The leader of the radical reform party was James Hegge, at first preacher at various churches outside the city wall, then prebendary of St. Mary’s, the largest and most beautiful church in the city, and still later of St. Catherine’s. Hegge was likewise an eloquent and popular preacher and a man of a very practical turn of mind.

While Hegge was the first to come forward in July, 1522, with a fresh attack upon the Church of Rome and its clergy, advocating the necessity of religious and ecclesiastical reforms both in doctrine and in practice, the conservative reform party, headed by Dr. Alexander, was able to control and to guide the movement for some time.[50] At length, however, the control of it passed into the hands of the radicals. These were not satisfied with any half-way measures, like preaching the new doctrines, while still retaining the old forms and practices. They began to demolish all sacred pictures, to clean out the churches of all forms of idolatry, and to give up old practices.[51] Owing to their strength and pressure, the conservative city government was induced to issue a proclamation, freeing all monks and nuns from their monastic vows, forbidding new candidates to enter any monastic order, and restraining all monks from preaching, hearing confessions, soliciting contributions, and visiting homes.[52] Conscious now of its power, the radical reform party went still farther, and demanded a share in politics and in the government of the city, with the result that early in 1525 it finally overthrew the conservative aristocratic city council, and established a popular city government.[53] The new city council closed all monasteries and convents, abolished Roman forms of worship, took possession of all church property, and appointed Lutheran preachers.[54] In its results, then, the Danzig Reformation was not only religious and ecclesiastical, but also social and political.

The accomplished reforms, however, were too thorough-going and too far-reaching to be lasting. The ecclesiastical authorities and the overthrown city council appealed to King Sigismund I (1506-1548) for help. The king, a loyal Catholic, first sent a commission to inquire into the situation and to restore the old order of things. When the insurrectionary city government would not yield to the representatives of the royal commission, the king in person set out for Danzig, accompanied by an armed force, forced the new city government into submission, punished fifteen of the revolutionary lay leaders by ordering them to be beheaded, and restored the former aristocratic city government and the Roman Catholic form of worship.[55]

In reality the king’s intervention restored only the old political order of things. The old religion was restored in outward appearance only, and for the time being as a matter of expedience. At heart the people of Danzig remained thoroughly sympathetic with the new religious teaching and the proposed religious reforms. So did the aristocratic city council now restored again to power as a result of the king’s intervention. With the restoration of the conservatives to power every effort was made to preserve the old forms of worship. At the same time the conservative aristocratic city council saw to it that to the pulpits of all the more important city churches only preachers sympathetic with the new teaching were appointed.[56] Under the leadership of this council and such conservative and tactful men as Dr. Alexander, Urban Ulric, Peter Bischoff, Pancratius Klemme, and Klein, the Reformation in Danzig went forward quietly, and by 1540 became an accomplished fact, not only in spirit, but also in form. This being the case, the king acquiesced.[57]

The Reformation spread rapidly to other West Prussian cities, and was accepted everywhere with enthusiasm. In the city of Thorn, the birth-place of Copernicus, Luther’s doctrines were preached as early as 1520-1521. That they were favorably received and found many adherents may be seen from the following incident. The papal legate Ferrei, having come to Thorn at this time, proceeded publicly to burn Luther’s portrait and some of his writings before the Church of St. John. The residents of the city made an attack on him and his followers, drove them away with stones, and rescued Luther’s picture from the flames.[58] It is more than probable that the ferment the Reformation was causing at Thorn was partly responsible for the publication in that city, July the 24, 1520, of the king’s Thorn Edict, by which the importation of Luther’s writings into the land were forbidden under penalty of confiscation of all property and of exile from the country.[59]

In Braunsberg, the seat of the bishop of Warmya, the Lutheran form of worship was introduced in 1520 without the bishop’s persecution of the innovators. When the cathedral canons upbraided the bishop for his leniency, he laconically replied that Luther based his doctrines on the Scriptures, and that whosoever felt himself capable of refuting them was welcome to undertake the job.[60] Other West Prussian cities, too, felt the force of the new movement, and responded to it in varied degrees. The Reformation struck roots into the West Prussian soil so deeply that even the vigorous suppression of it in Danzig in 1526 and the following reaction through West Prussia were unable to exterminate it.[61]

The attitude of the West Prussian cities toward the Reformation exerted a strong influence on the Duchy of East Prussia, since 1466 a vassal principality of Poland.[62] In 1525, the year when the Reformation resulted in most far-reaching changes in Danzig, Albert Hohenzollern, Grand Master of the Order of the Teutonic Knights, left the Roman Church, accepted Lutheranism, secularized the possessions of the Order with the consent of the Polish king, and by the Treaty of Cracow of the same year became the secular hereditary ruler of the vassal Duchy of East Prussia with a right to the first seat in the Polish Senate.[63] The Pope and the German emperor naturally protested against this arrangement, but without any effect. Owing to the popularity of the Reformation in West Prussia and the revolution it caused in the city of Danzig, and fearing that a refusal to grant Albert’s request might lead him to bring to a head the reform movement in the whole of Prussia and possibly tear the whole Prussian territory away from the kingdom, Sigismund I preferred to sanction the arrangement described above even at the risk of being suspected of disloyalty to the Church of Rome.[64] In accordance with the agreement made with the Polish crown, Duke Albert commanded, by an edict issued July 6, 1525, that the Holy Gospel, the word of Christ, pure and simple, be preached in his possessions “under the penalty of exile.”[65] At the same time he made every effort to evangelize the population of the Duchy. For this purpose he secured through Bishop Speratus of Pomerania the publication at Wittenberg of Luther’s Shorter Catechism. A copy of this catechism he sent in 1531 by Nipczyc to Chojnicki, archdeacon of Cracow, who read it eagerly.[66]

The introduction and legalization of the Reformation in East Prussia, one of Poland’s autonomous provinces, exerted a potent influence in favor of the movement’s spread in other parts of the country. Duke Albert became a patron and promoter of the new movement. He established in Königsberg a press, from which thousands of Polish religious pamphlets and books were issued, and a university, in which several generations of Polish Protestant ministers received their education. Thus East Prussia became a place of refuge for reformers and adherents of the new faith, persecuted in other parts of Poland, as well as a training ground for Polish Protestant clergy, and a source of Polish Protestant literature.[67]

In the neighboring Duchy of Mazovia the Reformation did not make much progress. Yet even here it evidently met with some success; for Duke Janusz of Mazovia felt it to be necessary to issue in 1525 at a council assembled in Warsaw an edict, forbidding, under penalty of death and confiscation of all property for the benefit of the ducal treasury, the possession and reading of Luther’s writings in whatever language, the teaching of his doctrines, or any discussion of them with anyone.[68]

Owing to the close proximity of Great Poland to Saxony and Wittenberg, Luther’s reforms reached it quickly. In 1524 King Sigismund found it necessary to dispatch a special emissary in the person of Nicholas Tomicki, starosta of Kościan, to the town of Kościan to suppress the spread of heretical views there, and to call upon the town authorities to assist Tomicki in his mission in every way possible.[69] In the city of Posen, according to Prof. H. Merczyng, Luther’s doctrines were preached publicly from the pulpit of Mary Magdalene’s Church by its preacher, John Seklucyan, in 1525.[70] For this offense Seklucyan was removed from his post by the magistracy of the city at the king’s behest. He found a protector, however, in the powerful magnate Andrew Górka, who sheltered him in his own palace in Posen, and secured for him from the king in the course of time a position as secretary of customs in that city.[71] Seklucyan remained in Posen until 1544, when he removed to Königsberg, where he was very active for a number of years in the preparation and publication of Polish Protestant literature.[72] The Reformation found favor with and protection from some of the most powerful aristocratic families of Great Poland, like the Górkas, Bnińskis, Tomickis, Ostrorogs, and Leszczyńskis.[73] The German reform movement was reenforced in Great Poland by the arrival there in 1548, on their way to East Prussia, of the Bohemian Brethren, exiled from their own country. During their brief stay in Great Poland, under the protection of the Górkas, they made many friends, won a considerable following, and laid the foundation for the Bohemian Brethren Church of Great Poland. Though forced to move on by a royal decree, issued on request of the bishop of Posen, many of them returned later, when conditions had changed, and settled in Posen and other places of Great Poland. By 1557 the Bohemian Brethren had thirty churches in Great Poland, and some of the foremost families, like the Leszczyńskis, Krotowskis, Ostrorogs, Opalińskis, and Tomickis, accepted their form of the Christian faith.[74]

In Little Poland, too, the Reformation was making a good deal of stir among certain classes of the population, and was creating a good deal of uneasiness among its opponents. The new ideas, soon after their appearance in Wittenberg, began also to be circulated in the city of Cracow. Luther’s books were imported into the city in defiance of the Edict of Thorn, were freely circulated and read, and his doctrines were even publicly preached.[75] So popular were Luther’s writings and his ideas in this city, that they caused the king, writing from Grodno, February 15, 1522, to Chancellor Szydłowiecki, to recommend to the City Council of Cracow that it diligently cooperate in the enforcement of the Edict of Thorn.[76] A little more than a year later, March 7, 1523, a new edict was issued in the city of Cracow, in which the king recognized that the penalty provided in the Edict of Thorn had failed to check the circulation of Luther’s books and the spread of his teachings in the capital, and consequently made it more severe. The transgressors of the edict were to be punished not by exile, as heretofore, but by burning at the stake as well as by confiscation of their property.[77] Evidently even this edict failed to accomplish the desired object; for three months later, August 22, 1523, another royal edict appeared. This new edict provided for the search of the homes of the residents of the city of Cracow for heretical books whenever the bishop of Cracow should ask the city magistrates that such search be made. It also provided for the censorship by the rector of the University of all books printed in the city or imported from abroad. Persons in whose possession heretical books were found, or publishers and booksellers who published, imported or sold heretical books, were to be punished according to the provisions of the royal edicts.[78] This edict also calls on other municipalities to adopt similar measures for the stamping out of heresy.

These royal decrees were called forth not by imaginary fear of a non-existent evil, but by actual and steady growth of the Reformation in Poland. There are a number of episcopal court cases on record of persons arrested and tried for heresy. In 1522 the parish-priest of Bienarów, near Bicz, Voyvodship of Cracow, was arrested for praising and sympathizing with Martin Luther. In 1525 sixteen persons were charged in the city of Cracow with professing Luther’s teachings, breaking fast-day regulations, denying the efficacy of prayers for the dead, the existence of purgatory, and the value of confession. These persons were of the lower social class, artisans, organists, singers, etc. In the face of the severe penalties provided for such offenders by the royal edicts, all the accused naturally denied being guilty of the charges. In 1526 there were two cases of priests charged with heresy. One of these was Bartholomew, rector of the school of Corpus Christi in the suburb of Kazimir; the other Matthew of Ropczyce. The latter was sentenced to confinement in the clerical prison at Lipowiec. There was also a case of a book-dealer, called Michael, who was charged with the importation of heretical books; and one of a Bohemian blacksmith charged with denial of Christ’s presence in the consecrated host. In 1530 another book-dealer by the name of Peter was charged with importing Luther’s Catechism. He defended himself by stating that he possessed only six copies of it. On December 10, 1532, four influential citizens of Cracow were charged with professing Lutheranism. A similar case came up the year following. Book-dealers seem to have been the worst offenders and the hardest to deal with. In 1534 two Cracovian book-dealers, Hieronimus Wietor and Philip Winkler, were charged with selling books containing Lutheran doctrines. At the same time similar books were found to be in the possession of Matthew of Opoczyn, rector of the church at Sieciechów. The most significant case on record, however, was that of James of Iłża, preacher of the Church of St. Stephen, Cracow, “artium magistri et collegiati minoris collegii.” James started to preach Luther’s doctrines openly from the pulpit of his church in 1528. When called to account for it, he denied being guilty, and his case was dismissed. But when he continued preaching the heretical doctrines publicly, he was again haled before the bishop’s court. This time he was ordered to retract the Lutheran errors publicly from his pulpit. Instead of doing that James escaped to Breslau. In consequence of that he was at once adjudged and condemned as a heretic.[79]

It is evident that neither royal edicts, nor episcopal court decrees were able to check the spread of the religious reform movement in Poland. The new ideas invaded even the king’s court, and found followers among those nearest to the king and to the queen. Justus Decius, the king’s private secretary, was an admirer of the Reformation and knew Luther personally. Francis Lismanini, an Italian Franciscan, private confessor of Queen Bona, was a most ardent promoter of the new movement.[80]

The spread of the Reformation in Poland is registered not only in the royal edicts, but also in the resolutions and decrees of the ecclesiastical provincial synods. The clergy were not particularly desirous to carry on a war with the religious innovators. At the provincial synods of 1520 and 1522 the Polish hierarchy took no action whatever regarding the new movement. The synod of 1523 did not go beyond reaffirming Leo X’s bull, excommunicating Luther and condemning his teaching, and repeating the king’s edicts which penalized the innovators and the promoters of innovations. Instead of fighting the new movement, the Polish clergy were ready to negotiate with the Protestants and to make concessions. In fact, they went so far as to lay before Pope Clemens VII in 1525, through a special envoy, the Primate’s Chancellor Myszkowski, their hard lot, and to appeal to him to call a general synod together for the purpose of bringing about a restoration of church unity. The Pope, however, engaged at the time in a conflict with the emperor, made only promises and exhorted the Polish clergy to greater religious zeal, at the same time conferring on the primate of Poland full powers to deal with the spreading heresy as circumstances might demand, either to suppress the heresy or to absolve the heretics.[81]

Complying with the Pope’s exhortation, the next provincial synod, assembled at Łęczyca in 1527, adopted more definite and decided measures to combat effectively the spread of the heretical movement. It resolved that every bishop in the diocese appoint an Inquisitor, selected either from the regular or from the secular clergy, who would be on the lookout for heretics, and who would report them to the bishop in order that they might be properly punished.[82] But the synod did not stop with repressive measures. It realized the futility of repression without effective prevention. Therefore, it further resolved to improve the general intellectual character of the Polish clergy. Every bishop was to seek out expert theologians and eloquent preachers, who would be able to instruct the people and to expound to them the Scriptures in a rational and intelligent way. These were to be given appointments especially in places infected with heresy.[83] And that the clergy might not lack for subjects to preach upon, every clergyman was recommended to provide himself with the Scriptures, the Church Fathers, Homilies, and other similar books.[84] Then, too, the synod of that year was especially concerned about the atmosphere of the king’s environment. It resolved that the king be requested to keep a learned preacher at court, to hear him every holy day, and especially during the sessions of the Diet. In this connection the bishop in whose diocese the Diet met was charged to appoint such a preacher for the king, in case the king failed to provide himself with one.[85] The next two synods, of 1530 and of 1532, favored the use of stern measures against the importation of heretical books and against the adherents of heretical doctrines.[86]

But these synodical edicts were no more effective in checking the spread of the Reformation in Poland than were the royal decrees.[87] Instead of intimidating the adherents of the new religious movement, they stimulated them to greater boldness. In 1534 at the provincial diet of Grodzisk the nobility of Great Poland demanded books in the Polish language, particularly the Bible. Every nation has writings in its own language, it asserted; but as for us, the priests want us to be ignorant.[88]

The steady growth of the religious reform movement in Poland led its opponents to the employment of extreme repressive measures. In 1534 the Polish clergy secured from the king an edict, forbidding the Polish nobility to send its youth to any seat of learning known or suspected to be heretical. Those that were at such universities were recalled. If any refused to return, they were to be deprived of all rights and privileges of citizenship. As was to be expected, the edict was ignored. Hence, in 1540, in response to an appeal from the clergy, the king issued a call on the starostas to enforce the aforesaid edict[89] and on the bishops to report any violations of it in order that the recalcitrant parties might be duly punished.[90] By a law of 1538, owing to the tendency of Germans to take up with heretical ideas, only native Poles were to be appointed to abbacies of Polish monastic institutions.[91] Moreover, in 1541 the king went so far as to threaten those receiving and harboring heretical ministers with the loss of all nobility rights and privileges.[92] And to cap the climax, in 1539, Peter Gamrat, bishop of Cracow, ordered Catherine Zalaszowska, an eighty-year old lady, the wife of Melchior Zalaszowski, a member of the Cracow City Council, to be burned, because of her opposition to the adoration of the eucharistic host. The order was carried out, and the old lady was executed.[93]

However, this execution of Catherine Zalaszowska by the ecclesiastical authorities, and the threats of the king of 1540 and 1541, mark both the climax of the opposition and the end of the first period of the religious reform movement in Poland, the period of its early beginnings and defensive struggles. From now on the movement assumes an aggressive attitude.

Second Period, 1540-1548: Growing Aggressiveness.—By 1540 German Lutheranism in Poland became reenforced by Calvinism from Geneva. This new form of the religious reform movement recommended itself more favorably to the Poles because of its non-German origin, its recognition of laymen in church councils, and because it was considered more appropriate for a free republic.[94] Conversions to Calvinism among the higher classes in Poland became now more and more frequent. The relatives of the once famous Bishop and Cardinal Oleśnicki, the Stadnickis, the Sienieńskis, the Firleys, the Jazłowieckis, the Szafraniec family, and other aristocratic families of Little Poland became adherents of Calvinism.[95] The Grand Hetman of Poland, Jan Tarnowski, though not an avowed adherent of Calvinism, yet corresponded with John Calvin,[96] and openly opposed ecclesiastical jurisdiction and Rome’s influence.[97] And in 1539 Calvin dedicated his Commentary on the Mass to the young Crown Prince, Sigismund Augustus.[98]

From now on the religious reform movement became the most important topic of general discussion everywhere and among all intelligent classes of Polish society. The abuses, faults, and shortcomings of the church were being keenly felt and freely talked about. Questions of faith, doctrine, and church dogmas were engaging everybody’s attention, and were discussed on every occasion and at every opportunity. They constituted the main topic of conversation, and sometimes of heated discussion, at dinners, feasts, and social gatherings, particularly if members of the clerical profession were present.[99]

This general interest of the intelligent classes of the Polish people in the Reformation and the free discussion of the very fundamentals on which the existing ecclesiastical system rested were creating a great deal of uneasiness among the higher clergy, and caused them to put forth still more determined efforts in defense of the old faith and the old form of worship, not altogether from religious motives but also from economic and social considerations. The new movement was undermining their material resources as well as their social position and influence.[100] Every effort must, therefore, be made and every means employed to check this movement, if such a thing were possible. Thus at the Synod of Piotrków in 1542 the clergy resolved to demand of the king a strict enforcement of the royal edicts against heresy. It resolved, also, to forbid parents to send their children to heretical schools; to prohibit the reading of heretical books, which many were doing under the pretense of trying to qualify themselves to refute the heresy; to search homes for heretical writings; to enjoin the local authorities to keep a close watch over the booksellers and printers; to seize suspected works; and to punish all transgressors immediately and without delay. The synod of 1544 reaffirmed the stand of the church on these points, taken at the synod of 1542. All these decrees remained largely ineffective, for they needed for their enforcement the cooperation of civil authorities, which, however, could not now readily be obtained, since all the royal edicts and the synodical decrees against heresy violated constitutional rights granted the nobility in the fifteenth century.[101] The synod of 1547 was, therefore, forced to acknowledge the powerlessness of the church to cope with the new movement, and to admit that in many dioceses of Poland even the clergy were seriously affected by the spreading heresy, and that the church was in imminent danger of being swamped by it.[102]

The futility of the decrees of the synod of 1542 becomes still more apparent in the light of the stand of the Polish nobility at the Diet of Cracow the following year. Open aggressiveness and sympathy with the Reformation is here in evidence. The nobility demanded of the king at this Diet and secured (1) the retention within the country for purposes of defense against foreign aggression of the annates paid to the Pope, and (2) the revocation of the unconstitutional edict of 1534, reaffirmed in 1540, forbidding Polish citizens to study, or to educate their children abroad in universities infected with heresy. In compliance with the urgent request of the senators and the deputies the king agreed to send an embassy to the Pope with a petition, which was more a notification than a request, that the annates be allowed to be retained in the country; and should the Pope refuse to agree to that, he was to be at once notified that the annates would not be allowed to be given or exported from the country any more.[103] As to the second point, the edicts forbidding Polish citizens to visit certain places abroad were abrogated, and they were again given full liberty to visit foreign countries for any purpose whatever, provided they were not accompanied by a military retinue, or went to engage in war. But, returning, they were not permitted to import heretical books, or to disseminate among the common people doctrines not accepted by the Roman Catholic Church. Whoever should be found guilty of this offense, was to be prosecuted according to the laws of the kingdom against heretics.[104] This measure reveals a recognition on the part of the king of the impossibility of restraining anyone from personally accepting the new teaching, particularly any of the nobility. The only thing it seeks to guard against is the public dissemination of the new teaching among the common people.

These significant gains stimulated the adherents to the Reformation and its sympathizers to greater and more open activity. The new movement, as has already been noted, had penetrated even into the royal court, and had found followers among those nearest to the king. The environment of the Crown Prince had been strongly saturated with the new ideas, and every effort was made to win the young prince over to the new cause. Two of his preachers began openly to denounce the abuses of the church. They were John Koźmiński, known also as Cosminius, and Lawrence Prasznicki, called also Prasnicius and Discordia. The latter became very well known among the Protestants later on.[105] Their first public attacks on the church and demands for reform were naturally of a general character, and that enabled them to continue their activity at court for some time.

At this time the Protestants began to appeal to the masses of the nation through religious literature, published in the vernacular. The works of Andrew Samuel appeared in the Polish language, and other heretical books, likewise in the language of the people, were freely imported and circulated. Moreover, there were now within the country men who wrote in the spirit of the Reformation in Polish, and had their writings printed. Nicholas Rey, the father of Polish literature, published his first satirical work in 1543. It consisted of a conversation, in which a gentleman, a bailiff, and a priest participated, and in which the author severely rebuked the cupidity of the clergy and the folly of the people for regarding their payment of tithes as the essence of morality and religion and for relying on that for their salvation, while at the same time he pointed out the essential character of faith. The same year there appeared anonymously from the press in Cracow the first Polish catechism published in Poland, in which the new reform doctrines were taught, and which contained also some of Rey’s verses. Other of Rey’s writings followed in 1545, 1546, and 1549. In all of these the writer championed the new doctrines, at first cautiously, but later quite frankly. In 1544 John Seklucyan published his Confession of Faith, and somewhat later his Polish translation of the four Gospels appeared[106] in Königsberg.

This new kind of appeal of the reformers to the people caused the king to issue from Brześć in Lithuania, July 10, 1544, a threatening mandate to the starostas, stirring them up to vigilance and to a strict enforcement of the law. Whoever dared to import, sell, buy, possess, or read such books was to be punished by death.[107]

This mandate was the last of the repressive measures issued by the old king against the Reformation. Owing to his age and without doubt also to a growing conviction of the futility of an attempt to stem the tide of ideas and convictions, especially in the realm of religion, he ceased to combat the movement with edicts and mandates. In this period of relative quiet the reform forces gathered new strength and courage for their great activity in the following reign.[108] This inactivity on the part of the king gave rise to rumors among the opponents of the Reformation that the king was favoring the spreading heresy. These rumors were given color by the king’s Order to the Starostas, issued in Cracow, August 9, 1546, to forbid Polish citizens in the king’s name to take part on either side in the religious war which had broken out in Germany at this time.[109] This order was issued by the king in spite of the fact that Paul III, in a letter, dated July 3, 1546, had urged Sigismund I to take an active part in that war on the side of the forces defending the cause of the church.[110]

At this time too, the reform movement began to make an open breach in the ranks of the Roman clergy. The first notable case was that of John Łaski, known also as John a Lasco, a nephew of the famous Primate of Poland of the same name. John Łaski had spent a number of years in studies abroad, had come into personal touch with the reformers of Wittenberg and Geneva, had accepted the Reformed faith, and in 1542 resigned his prebendary of Gnesen.[111] In 1541 Andrew Samuel, a Dominican monk, brought to Posen by Bishop Branicki, a preacher at Mary Magdalene’s Church and a very learned man and an eloquent speaker, became a Protestant. In 1543 another Dominican monk, John Seklucyan, through whose influence Samuel had been led to accept the new teaching and to preach its doctrines openly, broke with the Church of Rome, and became very active in developing a Polish Protestant literature under the protection and with the aid of Duke Albert of East Prussia.[112] In 1544, again, Stanislaus Lutomirski, a parish priest of Konin, became a Calvinist.[113] Lutomirski’s example led Felix Krzyżak, known also as Cruciger, prebendary of Niedźwiedź, to embrace Calvinism in 1546, and through his influence the magnate Stanislaus Stadnicki was induced to do the same thing. In 1547 James Sylvius, prebendary of Chrzęcice, in the possessions of the Filipowskis, also went over to Calvinism.[114]

Moreover, the close contact of the court clergy, in great degree liberal in matters of religion, with the patriciate of the city of Cracow, for years favorably disposed toward the new religious movement, helped to promote the spread of the new doctrines. Beginning in 1545, frequent secret meetings for purposes of religious and theological discussions were held in the home of the nobleman John Trzycieski, in which members of the upper social classes, the town patriciate, the neighboring szlachta, the court clergy, the canons of the cathedral chapter, and the king’s secretaries participated. Of the townspeople we know the name of one, Wojewódka; of the szlachta, we know names of Trzycieski, Karmiński, James Przyłuski, Filipowski; of the clergy, Francis Lismanini, James Uchański, Zebrzydowski, Adam Drzewicki, and Leonard Słonczewski. The last three became bishops later on, and one of them, Uchański, archbishop and primate of Poland, a strong advocate of a Polish National Church. The promoter and leader of these secret meetings was Francis Lismanini, a Franciscan monk and private confessor of the queen. It was chiefly he who procured and distributed heretical books among the members of this select group, and spread the new religious ideas among his monastic brethren. In these meetings outside visitors, stopping temporarily in the city, also participated. Imbued with the new spirit, the clerical visitors carried the new doctrines wherever they went, and preached them to their hearers.[115] Similar meetings were being held in Posen, of which Samuel and Seklucyan were the product.[116]

The growing interest on the part of the people in the Reformation, the aggressive character of the movement, and the increasing defections among the clergy created consternation among the Polish bishops. These high church dignitaries began now to feel that it was not safe any more to rely on the lower clergy. The synod of 1547, therefore, charged the bishops not to allow any priest to preach without a special permit from the bishop of the given diocese. Bishops that were careless in observing and enforcing this synodical ruling were to be fined 100 “grzywień.”[117]

Third Period, 1548-1573: Triumph and Dominance.—As the Reformation in Poland was steadily gathering strength and growing in influence, King Sigismund I died on Easter Sunday, April 1, 1548, and was succeeded by his son Sigismund Augustus, crowned since 1530 to succeed his father as king of Poland. Sigismund Augustus was a truly religious man, believing sincerely in the fundamentals of the Christian religion, but indifferent to the forms in which they were to be expressed. He adhered to the Church of Rome as the state church in which he had been brought up and to whose forms of worship he had become accustomed. At the same time he associated closely with Protestants, read Protestant books, and took part in discussions on theological questions. Calvin, as we have seen, had dedicated his Commentary on the Mass to him. Among his closest and most intimate friends were Protestants like Nicholas Radziwill the Black, grand hetman of Lithuania and brother-in-law of the young king, and Francis Lismanini, at one time private confessor of the king’s mother.[118]

It is not to be wondered at, therefore, that the Roman See and the Polish clergy were considerably apprehensive of the future of the Catholic Church in Poland, while the Protestants, on the other hand, looked forward with confidence, counting on the support of the young king. Just as soon as the news of the death of the old king reached the Pope, he at once dispatched to Poland a legate in the person of the Abbot Hieronimus Martinengo to carry to the young king his condolences, his congratulations, and his apostolic blessing, and to secure from him assurances of his loyalty to the Church of Rome and of his purpose to follow, in religious matters, in the footsteps of his father. The nuncio arrived in Poland in August, 1548. The king received him cordially, assured him of his respect for the Apostolic See, and advising him not to wait for the meeting of the next Diet, dismissed him.[119]

The Protestants, too, became now very active, preaching their doctrines openly, and holding services on the estates and in the villages of the szlachta. Their forces were strengthened by the arrival in Poland in the summer of 1548 of the Bohemian Brethren. They had been expelled from Bohemia and were on the way to East Prussia, where they were offered the hospitality of Duke Albert. On their arrival in Posen, they were cordially received by the Starosta-General of Great Poland, Andrew Górka, castellan of Posen. During their stay in Posen they preached publicly, and found many followers.[120] Ordered by the king, at the request of Bishop Idźbieński of Posen, to move on, they left; but their brief stay prepared the ground for future work, and established connections which enabled them to return later on.[121]

Scarcely had the bishop of Posen freed the city of the Bohemian Brethren, when he had a new case of heresy to deal with. The prebendary of St. John’s, Andrew Prażmowski, began to preach Calvinistic doctrines from the pulpit of his church. The bishop drove Prażmowski out of his diocese. However, this did not stop Prażmowski’s activity as a Calvinistic preacher. Finding refuge in Radziejów, Kuyavia, and protected there by the powerful magnate, Raphael Leszczyński, voyvoda of Brzezść and starosta of Radziejów, he prepared there the ground for the spread of Calvinism, and laid the foundation for the establishment of the Calvinistic Church in this voyvodship.[122] The same thing was happening in Little Poland, where Lismanini, though now under the ban of the bishop of Cracow, was nevertheless very active, spreading Calvinistic doctrines. Catholic priests one after another began now to leave the Church of Rome, to preach the Reformation doctrines, and to reorganize their churches and the form of worship by doing away with the mass and with pictures and by introducing the cup at communion.[123] Moreover, the aristocracy openly encouraged the spread of Protestantism in their possessions. Calvinistic churches sprang up at Alexandrowice of the Karmińskis, at Chrzęcice of the Filipowskis, at Pińczów of the Oleśnickis, and at Secynin of the Szafraniec family.[124] Karmiński and Filipowski had been members of the secret circle in Cracow, meeting for purposes of discussion of the new ideas.

At the Diet of Piotrków, 1547-1548, the szlachta had in the very first article demanded the preaching of the pure word of God without any human or Roman admixtures. All this, however, had been done rather quietly as yet. But now at the very first Diet, called by the new king to meet in Piotrków again in 1548, questions of religious reform were brought boldly to the front. The szlachta demanded freedom to speak of God freely in every place, which thing the clergy forbade. But when the issue was raised in the Senate, the king replied that to speak of God was the prerogative of the clergy, and that he would follow them.[125]

To such an extent had the reform movement spread, that it became necessary for the Calvinists of Little Poland to establish a better church organization. In effect they held the first synod in 1550 at Pińczów, in the possessions of Nicholas Oleśnicki, a descendant of the famous Bishop and Cardinal Zbigniew Oleśnicki. Shortly thereafter they appointed Felix Krzyżak (Cruciger) of Szczebrzeszyn as superintendent of the Reformed Churches of Little Poland.[126] At the same time the clergy of the Roman Church were becoming more and more restless. Stanislaus Orzechowski, a canon of the cathedral chapter of Przemyśl and a man of noble rank, came out with denunciations of the evils of the church and with threats of marriage. Immediately a number of priests, Martin of Opoczyn, Martin Krowicki, Valentine, prebendary of Krzczonów, and others, proceeded to take wives unto themselves. In spite of their marriages, some of them still held to their charges, and argued for a married clergy.[127] Leonard Słończewski, who had openly criticized the Pope and the clergy while preacher of St. Mary’s, Cracow, now bishop of Kamieniec, preached against Peter’s primacy, the celibacy of the clergy, and their loose moral lives.[128] Maciejowski, bishop of Cracow, though by no means a supporter of the Reformation, yet favored certain reforms, like the cup at communion and a married clergy. Francis Stankar, professor of Hebrew in the University of Cracow, propounded views of the Trinity which were contrary to those held by the church. When charged with heresy and arrested by the bishop, he escaped with the help of the neighboring szlachta, found refuge at Dubieck in the possessions of the magnate Stanislaus Stadnicki, established a school there with five teachers, and continued to disseminate his ideas.[129]

This state of affairs stirred up the bishops to action. John Dziaduski, bishop of Przemyśl, having previously warned Orzechowski, who had married in spite of the warning, proceeded to try him along with some of the other married priests; but fearing interference from the szlachta, he condemned them in their absence without a hearing. Andrew Zebrzydowski, bishop of Cracow, summoned Conrad Krupka to justice; and when Krupka appeared accompanied by a number of friends, the bishop refused to hear him, and condemned him as a heretic without a trial. Orzechowski being a nobleman, his verdict had to be confirmed by the king before it could be executed. The king confirmed the verdict, and forwarded it to Kmita, starosta of Przemyśl for execution. Orzechowski was to be deprived of honor, his possessions were to be confiscated, and he was to be exiled. But Kmita, knowing the feeling of the szlachta in this matter, would not execute the verdict.[130]

In the ecclesiastical attack on Orzechowski, the szlachta saw an attack upon its own special privileges. When Orzechowski appealed his case to the Diet in 1550, the Diet took it up readily. The matter created such a commotion as to cause the Diet to break up without any results.[131] Instead of taking due warning, the bishops proceeded to exercise their authority in a still more high-handed way. In 1551 the bishop of Przemyśl condemned the magnate Stanislaus Stadnicki for protecting heretics. He did this in Stadnicki’s absence, without a trial, and against the protests of Stadnicki’s attorney. The Primate of Poland, Dzierzgowski, archbishop of Gnesen, showed his zeal by condemning as heretics Christopher Lasocki and James Ostrorog, two of the most powerful and distinguished magnates of Great Poland. In all these cases the bishops did not fail to declare distinctly that all the property of a condemned heretic was subject to confiscation.[132] The Polish szlachta, regardless of religious affiliation or sympathies, rose almost to a man in most indignant protests against such high-handed usurpation of power on the part of the hierarchy and against such brutal attacks upon their most fundamental rights. At the provincial diets in the fall of that year, at which delegates were chosen to the next Diet, the szlachta voiced their indignation against the clergy, and instructed the chosen deputies to the Diet of 1552 to protest against ecclesiastical jurisdiction and to demand its abolition.[133]

The Diet of 1552 met at Piotrków toward the end of January. The Chamber of Deputies elected as its president Raphael Leszczyński, starosta of Radziejów, an avowed Calvinist, who during the mass at the opening of the Diet stood in the church with his head covered. He was the chief spokesman of the injured and aggrieved szlachta. When the Chancellor had finished reading the appeal from the throne to consider problems of defense, Leszczyński rose in the name of the Chamber and the szlachta, stating that the Chamber would take no action on any matter until the grievances of the szlachta, arising from the abuse of ecclesiastical jurisdiction were removed. In this attitude the Protestants were supported even by loyal Catholics. In the ensuing debate the bishops were left without any support. The secular senators, among whom were several very influential Protestants, sided with the Chamber of Deputies. The leaders of the opposition to ecclesiastical jurisdiction were: in the Senate, John Tarnowski, castellan of Cracow and grand hetman of Poland, a loyal Catholic; in the Chamber, Raphael Leszczyński, starosta of Radziejów and president of the Chamber, an ardent Calvinist.[134] The struggle resulted in the suspension of ecclesiastical jurisdiction for a year, the szlachta agreeing to pay the customary tithes, the payment of which had in many instances already been stopped.[135]

From 1552 to 1565 the Protestants dominated all the Diets, electing invariably a Protestant as president of the Chamber of Deputies.

The united opposition of the Polish szlachta to the Polish clergy in 1552, the election of an avowed Protestant to the presidency of the Chamber in that year, and the actual, even though temporary, suspension of ecclesiastical jurisdiction,—all this had a most stimulating affect on the religious reform movement in Poland. Felix Krzyżak and Francis Stankar, who had fled to Great Poland from the persecution of Bishop Zebrzydowski in 1551 and had found protection at Ostrorog in the possessions of Stanislaus and James Ostrorog, returned now to resume their work in Little Poland.[136] For this they were now all the better qualified as a result of their acquaintance with the work of the Bohemian Brethren in Great Poland. They began to hold conferences and synods, thereby stimulating the interest and enthusiasm of the Protestants in the reform movement. The Protestant nobles, having the right of recommending candidates for vacant churches within their possessions, made now direct appointments of men sympathetic with the reform movement. In this way into many of the churches the new form of worship was introduced. At the same time many of the nobles began seriously to question the fundamental right of the clergy to tithes, and stopped payment, even though they had agreed in 1552 to continue this practice.[137] They took these bold steps, believing that the young king was with them. They drew that inference from the king’s close intimacy with Lismanini, who was now an avowed Calvinist, and with others equally well known for their heretical sympathies and contacts.[138]

This growing boldness and aggressiveness of the Protestants provoked the clergy to renewed defensive and offensive activity. At the synod of Piotrków in 1554 the clergy were seriously inclined toward conciliatory measures, and after a long debate, finally resolved to invite the dissidents and schismatics to the next synod in an effort to reconcile them with the Mother Church.[139] But they did not stop with that. They further resolved to appeal to the Pope for help; they requested the Vatican to send special legates to Poland to assist the Polish clergy in their struggle against the spreading heresy, and since the agreement of 1552 was now expired, they began to make fresh use of their ecclesiastical jurisdiction. The first one to set the example again was the archbishop of Gnesen, Dzierzgowski, and his first condemnatory verdict fell on Stanislaus Lutomirski, who had left the Church of Rome twelve years before by accepting Calvinism. Here was another clergyman of noble rank condemned by an ecclesiastical tribunal as a heretic, and thus deprived of honor, property, and country. The next one to exercise his jurisdiction was the bishop of Posen, Czarnkowski, who rendered verdicts of heresy against several citizens of that city. Dziaduski, bishop of Przemyśl, continued persecuting heretical preachers in his diocese. These episcopal condemnations, however, were of no effect; for the condemned persons always found protection in the possessions of some powerful magnate, in whose territory only his own jurisdiction prevailed. In consequence of this the bishops resorted sometimes to violence in order to execute their verdicts, though not necessarily with more success. Bishop Zebrzydowski of Cracow, for instance, summoned before his episcopal tribunal Martin Krowicki, who having become a Calvinist, married, left the priesthood, and was residing at Pinczów, in the possessions of Stanislaus Oleśnicki. When Krowicki did not appear, the bishop condemned him without a trial, and planned to seize him by strategy. Krowicki was taken violently, thrown into a wagon, and carried away to the bishop’s prison. But when Oleśnicki was informed of what had happened, he set out in pursuit of Krowicki’s captors, overtook them, drove them away, and rescued the victim.[140]

While the bishops were vainly prosecuting and persecuting the heretics, the Protestants were steadily strengthening their ranks by perfecting their organization and by effecting a very important union of the Calvinists with the Bohemian Brethren of Great Poland. During his temporary retreat in Great Poland in 1551, caused by Bishop Zebrzydowski’s persecution, Felix Krzyżak, superintendent of the Calvinistic churches of Little Poland, became acquainted with the Bohemian Brethren there, and invited them to unite with the Calvinists of Little Poland. After two preliminary conferences between the representatives of both groups, one held in Little Poland at Chrzęcice, in the possessions of Filipowski, and another in Great Poland at Gołuchow, in the possessions of Raphael Leszczyński, a Protestant synod was called together to meet at Koźminek, near Kalisz, in August, 1555, at which time a union between the two above mentioned bodies was effected. The basis of agreement was that each body retain its separate organization and its form of worship, while both were to work toward gradual uniformity in both respects.[141]

The growth of Protestanism and the development of opposition had made the religious question exceedingly acute, and placed it at the Diet of 1555 in the very forefront of problems calling for immediate settlement. The importance of this question was fully recognized by the king himself, who had placed it among the matters to be discussed. Encouraged by the gains made at the Diet of 1552 and provoked by the high-handed repressive measures employed by the bishops, the Protestants planned to make a still more determined stand at this Diet against ecclesiastical Jurisdiction. At the provincial diets they chose, therefore, some of the most powerful magnates and most ardent Protestants, like Leszczyński, Ostrorog, and Marszewski of Great Poland, and Ossoliński, Siennicki, and others of Little Poland, as deputies of the Chamber.[142] The bishops, realizing the seriousness of the impending conflict, came out in force, and were ready to make concessions, if need be.[143] The Diet, called for the 22nd of April, 1555, met in first session on the 28th. As could have been expected, the Chamber again chose a Protestant for its president in the person of Nicholas Siennicki. In his speech of welcome to the king on behalf of the Chamber the next day, Siennicki stated the wishes of the szlachta. In brief, they wanted the abolition of ecclesiastical jurisdiction and full religious liberty. A project of adjustment was, therefore, worked out, having the full approval of the king and the secular members of the Senate, providing: (1) that everyone be at liberty to keep at home or at his church such clergymen as preached the pure Word of God; (2) that these be free to follow their own ritual and ceremonies; (3) that those wishing it be allowed to have the communion administered in both kinds; (4) that priests deprived of their benefices have them restored for the length of their lives, whereupon the lords were to be free to choose such priests as they might wish, or, where the former incumbent was already dead, the nobles could do as they pleased; (5) that all episcopal judgments in religious matters against whomsoever issued be declared null and void; (6) that the clergy be free to marry; (7) that all the clergy, whatever their rank, be declared entitled to their former incomes, according to old customs; (8) that blasphemy against the Trinity and the Eucharist as celebrated by the Roman Church, attacks upon the form of worship of that church, and forcible conversions of Catholics be prohibited; and (9) that all these provisions have the approval and guaranty of the king and be made binding until the restoration of universal peace either by a national or a provincial synod.[144]

By this document Protestanism in Poland would have been placed on a basis of full equality with the Roman faith. But when this bill was presented to the bishops, they promptly rejected it. Thereupon new plans of adjustment were worked out one after another only to be rejected by the bishops. Finally, it was resolved that the king call together on his own authority, at a time most convenient in his judgment, a synod at which the king himself with his council of state should be present. Until then peace should be preserved in the country; ecclesiastical jurisdiction against whomsoever was to be suspended; the execution of all pending ecclesiastical judgments was to be abandoned; and people were to refrain from all blasphemies and disturbances growing out of religious differences.[145] The bishops, however, remained inflexible; they would not yield an inch in spite of the fact that they had considered making concessions. They protested against the suspension of their ecclesiastical jurisdiction, and through the archdeacon of Kalisz, Francis Krasiński, appealed to the Pope for counsel and for help.[146]

Nevertheless, in spite of the bishops’ protests, the decision of the Diet prevailed and remained in force. By it ecclesiastical jurisdiction became suspended until the meeting of a National Synod to be called together at a convenient time by the king, and Protestantism was for the time being legally recognized, receiving full freedom of worship and the legal right to all the church property already in the hands of Protestants. It was not as much as the Protestants had hoped to gain; nevertheless it was a considerable advance and a marked victory for them.

In accordance with his agreement to call a National Synod together to settle the existing religious differences, the king took steps to secure the Pope’s sanction of this move and of several contemplated reforms. He sent Stanislaus Maciejowski, castellan of Sandomir and crown court marshal, to Rome with congratulations to the new Pope, Paul IV, and with the request for his sanction of the following proposed reforms:

1. The mass and all church services to be held in the Polish language;

2. Communion in both kinds;

3. A married clergy; and

4. The calling of a National Synod to settle the existing religious differences and troubles.

The Pope was astonished at the request, and refused to sanction the suggested reforms absolutely. To the fourth point he acceded, but never really intended to keep his promise.[147]

The nature of the proceedings and the decisions of the Diet of 1555 and the proposed religious reforms for which the Polish king asked papal sanction caused the Apostolic See a good deal of concern, and led the Vatican to send at once Louis Alois Lippomano, bishop of Verona, as special legate to Poland. From this time on the Apostolic See kept a special envoy in Poland constantly to watch the course of events. Lippomano was a man without tact, and not at all particular in his choice of means to accomplish his objects. His reputation had preceded him, and his arrival in Poland in October, 1555, stirred up the Protestant element in the population to great indignation. The king received him cordially. But owing to his lack of tact, Lippomano soon lost the king’s favor, and won the ill-will even of good Catholics.[148]

To mend matters, the legate started to exert his influence first on those nearest to the king. He wrote a letter to Nicholas Radziwill the Black, palatine, chancellor, and grand marshal of Lithuania, the most powerful magnate in the Grand Duchy, an ardent Calvinist, whose zeal contributed greatly to the spread of Protestantism in Poland as well as in the Grand Duchy. In this letter Lippomano endeavored to win and convert Radziwill to the Church of Rome. Radziwill, however, could not be won back to the Roman Church. He replied, exposing the unfavorable character of the Catholic clergy, and let this correspondence be published. The publication of this correspondence made Lippomano still more unpopular in Poland, and changed completely whatever friendly attitude the king may have had toward him.[149]

Having failed at court, Lippomano turned now to the bishops to arouse their loyalty and to rekindle their zeal. But here, too, he failed to meet with better success. Many of the bishops were ready to capitulate and to negotiate with the szlachta in order to save their bishoprics and their incomes. Some of them, like Drohojowski, bishop of Kuyavia, and Uchański, bishop of Chełm, were actually favorably disposed toward the reform movement. Others, again, like Zebrzydowski, bishop of Cracow, owing to past association with the reformers, were under constant suspicion. The only men among the Polish hierarchy upon whom the nuncio could rely were the Primate of Poland, Dzierzgowski, and the bishop of Warmya, Hosius; and of these two the primate had to be largely discounted as he had neither the learning nor the ability to be of any help in such a difficult situation. The legate had, therefore, no easy sailing to find support for his plans among the Polish bishops, or to keep them from associating with heretics.[150]

Seeing the fruitlessness of his efforts among the bishops, he turned to the lower clergy, visiting churches, holding conferences with the members of the cathedral chapters and the parish priests. Here he met with better response and greater success. He discovered that the lower clergy were both more loyal and more concerned about the real needs of the church and the remedies to correct existing evils.[151]

In this connection it is of interest to note the independence of the Polish bishops as regards their attitude toward Rome. A provincial synod under the presidency of the papal nuncio was called to meet at Łowicz on September 6, 1556. The Polish bishops wanted to confer in corpore, without the presence of the nuncio, and then to present to him the results of their conference and to get his opinion. The Polish bishops were opposed to permitting the nuncio to exert undue influence on their deliberations, and in this attitude they were supported even by Hosius, the one Polish prelate upon whom the nuncio counted most. The nuncio, however, would not consent to any such procedure in the deliberations. The disagreement became so acute that Bishop Hosius had to act as mediator between his colleagues and the legate. Since the latter would not yield, the bishops finally agreed to confer together in his presence.[152]

If the results of the Diet of 1555 made the Apostolic See vigilant as regards Poland, it is not to be wondered at; for such vigilance was imperative. The Protestants were now more active than ever. The Calvinists of Little Poland energetically developed their work in all the churches occupied by them before the Diet of 1555 and acknowledged by the Diet as theirs in the royal cities, particularly Cracow and Posen, and even in the territories of the royal domain wherever Protestants were found. They founded schools at Pińczów, Secynin, and Koźminek. They were holding frequent synods, and were strengthening and perfecting their internal organization.[153] If the Calvinists of Little Poland were active, so were also the Bohemian Brethren of Great Poland. The number of their followers increased to such an extent that by 1557 a separate senior or superintendent for Great Poland was appointed by the central administrative authority in Moravia.[154] Moreover, to counteract Lippomano’s activity, the Polish Protestants invited to Poland two distinguished reformers, Francis Lismanini and John Łaski. Both of these arrived in the country toward the end of 1556. The first, being a foreigner, the Catholics succeeded in having banished from the country by order of the king, though not until after a good deal of effort.[155] The second, however, being a distinguished native, could not be banished. So he stayed, and worked faithfully, though fruitlessly, for a union of the Lutherans with the other two already united Protestant bodies, the Calvinists of Little Poland and the Bohemian Brethren of Great Poland.[156]

When the new Diet, called for November 25, 1556, assembled in Warsaw, the Protestants were well represented in it. They came out in full force to counterbalance the presence and any possible influence of the papal nuncio on the deliberations of the Diet. The king, being in need of money for a war which was threatening with the Knights of the Sword, had to court the favor of the Chamber in order to get it to vote the necessary contributions for the conduct of the war. The pressing problems before the new Diet were, then, those of defense and of religion. According to the rescript of the preceding Diet, the problem of “egzekucji praw,” or of the execution of laws, a matter similar to the English “quo warranto,” which had come up for consideration at that time and had been postponed until the next Diet, was to be taken up and considered first. However, it was decided to lay this problem aside again until a more opportune time, owing to the more pressing question of adequate finances for the conduct of the coming war. The Chamber was ready to vote the necessary contribution, on condition, however, of a satisfactory settlement of the existing religious differences. Thus the religious question again became the most important, and on its solution depended the success of any program for a proper defense of the country.[157] But no satisfactory solution of the religious problem was in sight. The Chamber, therefore, proposed that, in case a better adjustment of the religious differences was impossible at this time, the decisions of 1555 be continued in force and be more strictly observed. The spiritual lords were most reluctant to give their assent to this proposal. The Chamber, again, threatened that it would not otherwise vote the necessary funds for the conduct of the war. Hence, the king issued an edict, dated January 13, 1557, continuing the religious settlement of 1555 in force during his absence from the country, with the added provision that should anyone in any way violate those decisions, the king would regard such violations as an offense against his person and against his government, would judge the offenders in the king’s courts, and would punish them according to law.[158] Thereupon the Chamber voted the needed contribution.

By this edict the king hoped to placate both of the contending parties. As it happened, the edict did not really satisfy either party. Consequently it was never made public, was not enforced, and was finally recalled. However, if it had been made public, and if it had been enforced, it would have done away with ecclesiastical jurisdiction; for from now on cases of heresy, being regarded as an offense against the king’s person, would have been adjudicated in the king’s courts rather than by ecclesiastical tribunals.[159]

In consequence of this turn of events at the Diet of 1556-1557, the papal legate, Lippomano, immediately left Poland for Rome. There he complained of the lack of religious fervor and zeal on the part of the Polish hierarchy, attributing to their religious indifference the vigorous growth of Protestantism in Poland, and of the king that he was permitting everyone to believe and to worship as he pleased.[160] His complaint of the Polish bishops was not altogether groundless. How little they apparently cared for the spiritual welfare of the church is shown by their attendance at the synod of 1557, which met at Piotrków on May 17. Besides the archbishop of Gnesen, there were present two bishops only, Zebrzydowski, bishop of Cracow, and Uchański, bishop of Chełm. The other bishops were represented by their delegates. Moreover, one of the bishops present, Uchański, asked his colleagues to vote at the next Diet for the introduction into the Polish church of communion of both kinds. But the delegates of the cathedral chapters opposed this suggested innovation most decidedly, and turned it down.[161]

Meanwhile the Reformation was making steady progress, not only in the possessions of the szlachta, but also in cities and among government officials. And owing to the fact that Protestants were now found among senators, starostas, royal court officials, and among the king’s most intimate friends, punishment of heretics was becoming increasingly more difficult.[162] In Little Poland the Calvinistic churches had become so numerous that for administrative purposes they were divided in 1560 into districts, over which superintendents were appointed both clerical and lay,—clerical, to care for the spiritual welfare of the churches, and lay, for the administration of temporal affairs. At the joint synod of the Calvinists and the Bohemian Brethren at Włodzisław, on June 15, 1557, on motion of the distinguished reformer John Łaski, it was decided that steps be taken to effect a union with the Lutherans, such as had previously been effected between the Calvinists of Little Poland and the Bohemian Brethren of Great Poland.[163]

At the Diet of 1558-1559, called at Piotrków for November 20, 1558, the Protestants were again in full control, and for president of the Chamber of Deputies they again elected Nicholas Siennicki, who presided over its deliberations in 1555. The foremost problem before the present Diet was “the execution of laws,” and, of course, inseparably connected with it was that of religion. Growing out of these, there were the further problems of the exemption from military service of the mayors of ecclesiastical villages, ecclesiastical jurisdiction, and the participation of the clergy in royal elections. Bishop Uchański moved in the Senate that problems of religion be set aside until the calling of a national synod, in which both the clergy and the laity would be free to participate. He argued that only such an assembly so composed and gathered for that particular purpose would be able to adjust the troublesome religious differences. The Chamber was willing to set matters of religion aside until a national synod could be called together, but on condition that ecclesiastical jurisdiction, not only in matters of religion, but in all matters, with all cases pending, be suspended. Knowing the seriousness of the situation, yet very reluctant to surrender their jurisdiction, the bishops pledged themselves to use it with utmost care. But the new papal legate, Kamill, bishop of Sutri, refused to countenance any idea of calling a national synod, to which, besides the Roman clergy, the laity and the heretics would be admitted. The Chamber, on the other hand, was equally determined to do away and for good with ecclesiastical jurisdiction in all matters.[164]

Next, in connection with the larger problem of the execution of laws, the Chamber questioned the legality of the exemption from military service of the mayors of ecclesiastical villages. It was found that according to the Code of Casimir the Great the mayors of ecclesiastical villages were required to render military service. The Diets of 1538 and of 1550 confirmed the old law, requiring compliance with its provisions, unless the clergy produced documentary evidence of special privileges of exemption for such cases. The Chamber of 1558, therefore, demanded that the clergy produce the documentary privileges they claimed to possess,[165] but the evidence was not forthcoming.

Thereupon a still more serious question was raised, namely, that concerning the clergy’s participation in royal elections. Since the bishops were ever appealing to canonical law rather than to the law of the land, and since they regarded the interests of the Church of Rome and their loyalty to the Pope of greater importance than the interests of the country and their loyalty to the Polish king, the Chamber through its spokesman, Hieronimus Ossoliński, a Protestant, argued in the Senate in the king’s presence that from such a weighty matter as the election of a Polish king the bishops, whose allegiance is divided, should be excluded.[166]

This proposal capped the climax. It now became fully evident to all that the difficulties had become practically insurmountable, and instead of diminishing they were constantly increasing. The king proposed, therefore, a dissolution of the Diet. His proposal, being acceptable to all parties, was put in effect February 8, 1559.

At this Diet the Protestants had been in indisputable control, and in their struggle with the hierarchy had made considerable advance. They had demanded the abolition of ecclesiastical jurisdiction and the appeal to canonical law, not only in questions of religion, but in all other matters. They had proved that mayors of ecclesiastical villages were subject to military service in time of need, and not exempt from it as the clergy claimed. They had raised the question of the right of the bishops, as representatives of a foreign potentate, to participate in the elections of the Polish king.

In the face of the growing strength and aggressiveness of Protestanism, it is interesting to note the policy of the Catholic Church toward the state, toward its own clergy, and toward Protestanism, as that policy is revealed in the decisions of the synod of 1561. The Polish Catholic clergy fully realized by this time the precarious position of the Catholic Church in Poland, and decided upon conciliatory measures. To show the king their loyalty and generosity, they agreed to make a liberal contribution, 60,000 thalers, to the king’s treasury for purposes of defense. To win the people back to the Mother Church, they resolved on reforms in the life of the Polish episcopate and the abandonment of the persecution of Protestants. The bishops were urged to live more simply, to give more personal attention to the administration of their dioceses, to establish schools, to assist in the education of the sons of the poorer gentry by providing free maintenance for them at their episcopal courts. To reclaim the Protestants, they resolved now to treat them kindly.[167] Even the Vatican adopted a conciliatory attitude toward the Polish government by immediately confirming the king’s appointment to the archbishopric of Gnesen in 1562 of Bishop Uchański, who for years had been a suspected heretic and a persona non grata to the Holy See.[168]

Nevertheless, whenever their incomes were at stake, the Polish bishops were still quick to resort to their ecclesiastical jurisdiction, and to excommunicate those failing to pay their tithes according to the agreement at the Diet of 1555. If the excommunicated person remained under the ban for a year without an effort to have it lifted, his property was to be seized and confiscated. The execution of such episcopal decrees was not easy; for the civil authorities declined to act. And even if there were officials who tried to execute such decrees, they found the task was altogether too difficult to perform. For instance, Lasocki, a well known Arian Protestant, failing to pay his tithes to the cathedral chapter of Cracow, was excommunicated. After a year Chancellor Ocieski, who was at the same time starosta of Cracow, ordered his possessions seized. The Protestant nobility, aroused by this order, came armed, one thousand men strong, to Cracow on May 14, 1561, and refused to allow the seizure of Lasocki’s estate.[169]

This and other similar cases determined the course of action of the Protestant nobility at the Diet of Piotrków, 1562-1563. The Protestants were well represented, and again elected one of their number, Raphael Leszczyński, as president of the Chamber. They protested now, not only against ecclesiastical jurisdiction in matters of heresy and tithing, but also against the edicts issued against heresy by Sigismund I.[170] They appealed to their special privileges received at Czerwińsk in 1422 and at Jedlnia in 1430, guaranteeing them freedom of person and inviolability of property rights, and to the constitution of the Diet of Radom, 1505, which made the royal edicts against heresy unconstitutional. For that constitution, known as “Nihil novi,” explicitly declared that no new fundamental law could be passed without the common consent of the Senate and the Chamber of Deputies.[171] In these matters the Chamber again had the full support of all the temporal peers in the Senate, regardless of creed. As a result of these protests the king issued instructions to the starostas to respect the constitutionally guaranteed privileges of the szlachta. By this act all the edicts against heresy were practically annulled and the execution of judgments of ecclesiastical courts, whether in cases of heresy or in case of failure to pay tithes, was made impossible.

At the next Diet, assembled in Warsaw toward the end of November, 1563, the clergy made a show of presenting their privileges, exempting the mayors of their villages from military service, with the declaration that they were doing it “ad informationem” and not “ad judicum.” The indefiniteness of the documents was apparent. But the Chamber, though predominantly Protestant again with Nicholas Siennicki presiding, was inclined to be conciliatory. It agreed that the clergy should enjoy personal exemption from the so-called “pospolite ruszenie,” or general rising in arms, but it did express the feeling that they should share in the burdens of defense by money contributions. After several consultations with the papal legate, the clergy declared their willingness to make a substantial contribution to the country’s defense at this time, but could not obligate themselves regarding the future; and that they would do this on condition that the law passed at the last Diet virtually doing away with ecclesiastical jurisdiction be repealed and that the Edict of Warsaw of 1557, which had then been expressly recalled by the king as unconstitutional, be enforced. These reservations and conditions were not acceptable. And when the bishops refused to recede from the position they had taken, the king signed a manifesto, imposing a tax of 20 groszen per łan, or 20 groats per hide of land, of which 10 groszen were to come from the tithes.[172] This evoked a veritable furor among the bishops. But it was useless. The king was firm; and from now on to the end of his reign whenever a tax was imposed for purposes of defense, the same proportion was to come from the tithes.[173]

The notable victories achieved by the Protestants over the Roman clergy at the last two Diets opened the way wide to the spread of the Reformation. They also encouraged the szlachta to go still farther in their efforts to emancipate themselves from the power of the clergy. With ecclesiastical jurisdiction practically abolished, the szlachta began now to question the legitimacy of tithes. They were led to this by the insistence of the clergy that the tithes be paid, and by continuing to summon before their courts those who failed to do so and even the starostas who, in compliance with the law of the Diet of 1562-1563, refused to execute the verdicts of their courts. When, therefore, the Diet of 1565 assembled at Piotrków on January 18, the Chamber under the presidency of Nicholas Siennicki wanted to know the ground on which the szlachta was required to pay the tithes and the purposes for which the clergy were using them. And since the clergy was unwilling to share the burden of the country’s defense, the szlachta was disinclined to pay the tithes.[174] The Deputies complained also about the summons served by episcopal courts on the szlachta for non-payment of tithes and on the starostas for refusing to execute episcopal decrees; whereupon the king sanctioned a law making all such summons null and void.[175] This was the last blow administered to the effectiveness of ecclesiastical jurisdiction; and as a result of it the victory of the Protestants was complete.

An idea of the relative strength and influence of Protestantism at this time may be gained from the composition of the Senate in the Diet of 1569, the number of Protestant parishes in the realm, and from a complaint of Peter Skarga, the greatest Jesuit preacher in Poland at the close of the 16th and the beginning of the 17th century. The total number of senatorial seats in the Diet of 1569 was 133. Of these 70 were occupied by Catholics, 15 of whom were bishops, 58 by Protestant dignitaries, 2 by Greek Orthodox senators, and 3 were vacant. Of the total number of senators the Protestants came close to having one-half, and, exclusive of the Catholic bishops, the Protestants outnumbered the Catholic temporal peers by three.[176] The number of Protestant parishes in Poland toward the close of the 16th century, according to Professor Henry Merczyng’s researches and calculations, was about 600, or one-sixth of the total number of Roman Catholic parishes in Poland including Lithuania. The same relative proportion existed between the Protestant and the Catholic szlachta of Poland at this time.[177] That this estimate of Professor Merczyng’s of Protestant strength in Poland at this time is very conservative can be seen from Peter Skarga’s complaint, made at the close of the 16th century, that two thousand Romanist churches had been converted into Protestant places of worship.[178]

To make their strength felt still more politically, the Protestants, including the Lutherans, the Calvinists, and the Bohemian Brethren, entered into a certain form of union at Sandomir, April 14, 1570, known as Consensus Sandomiriensis. By this agreement, while each body retained its organization and form of worship, the three Protestant bodies pledged themselves to preserve peace and harmony among themselves and to act together politically.[179] Due to the political strength of the Protestants, the Polish szlachta entered during the interregnum after the death of Sigismund Augustus into a Pact of Confederation at Warsaw in 1573, by which religious toleration and equality were legally established in the realm, and had to be sworn to by every newly elected king.[180] This marked the climax in the development of the Reformation in Poland.

The causes of this remarkable development of the Reformation movement in Poland were not only political, as previous studies have sufficiently established, but also social and economic. To show this is the purpose of the present study.

[1] Walerjan Krasiński, Zarys dziejów Reformacji w Polsce, Warsaw, 1903, vol. i, p. 26; Wł. Smoleński. Dzieje narodu polskiego, Warsaw, 1904, p. 21.

[2] Smoleński, pp. 30-31; Krasiński, vol. i, pp. 29-30.

[3] Krasiński, vol. i, p. 31.

[4] Ibid., vol. i, pp. 31-32.

[5] Smoleński, pp. 41-42.

[6] Krasiński, vol. i, p. 34.

[7] Smoleński, p. 31.

[8] An interesting and detailed account of this incident is given by Stanislaus Smolka in his Szkice historyczne, Warsaw, 1883, pp. 259-281. See also Eugene Starczewski, Możnowładztwo polskie, Warsaw, 1914, pp. 114-115.

[9] Krasiński, vol. i, pp. 34-36.

[10] Smoleński, pp. 25-26.

[11] Ibid., p. 31; Krasiński, vol. i, p. 30.

[12] Smoleński, p. 31; Krasiński, vol. i, p. 37.

[13] Starczewski, p. 72.

[14] Vincent Zakrzewski, Powstanie i wzrost Ref. w Polsce, Leipzig, 1870, p. 112. When the Roman Inquisition called Uchański to appear before it to give account of himself and to be tried as a heretic, he refused to do so, protesting against being called a heretic before a previous trial (see Zakrzewski, p. 140).

[15] Zakrzewski, pp. 179-180.

[16] Smoleński, p. 19.

[17] Krasiński, vol. i, p. 32.

[18] Smoleński, p. 93.

[19] T. Grabowski, Literatura luterska, Posen, 1920, p. 13. Many of the Polish bishops were great admirers of Erasmus, and they constituted, says Grabowski, the vanguard of the reformers.

[20] See E. H. Lewinski-Corwin, The Political History of Poland, N. Y. 1917, p. 138; Smoleński, pp. 80-81.

[21] Lewinski-Corwin, p. 138.

[22] Antoni Lorkiewicz, Bunt Gdański Roku 1525, Lemberg, 1881, p. 7.

[23] Lewinski-Corwin, p. 137.

[24] Krasiński, vol. i, pp. 37-38.

[25] Artur Górski, Ku czemu Polska szła, 2nd Ed., Warsaw, 1919, p. 55.

[26] August Sokołowski, Dzieje Polski. Wiedeń, 1904, vol. ii, p. 250.

[27] Krasiński, vol. i, p. 38.

[28] Grabowski, p. 6.

[29] “Cantilena vulgaris de Wikleph.” See Piotr Chmielowski, Historja literatury polskiej, vol. i, pp. 77-78.

[30] Ibid., vol. i, p. 78.

[31] The Bohemians or Czechs fought together with the Poles against the Order of Teutonic Knights, and twice offered the Bohemian crown to the Polish King, Wladislaus Jagiello. The Poles and the Lithuanians had separate colleges of their own at the University of Prague, established by Queen Hedwig, and Polish youth resorted to that University in large numbers. Huss corresponded with King Jagiello, and his close associate, Hieronim of Prague, spent some time in Poland, spreading his master’s ideas.

[32] Smoleński, p. 75.

[33] Zakrzewski, pp. 19-20.

[34] Smoleński, p. 75.

[35] This violated fundamental constitutional rights granted the “szlachta” at Czerwińsk in 1422, and therefore could not possibly be enforced. See [Appendix, No. 14]. The term szlachta denotes in its narrow meaning the gentry, in its large and general meaning the Polish nobility as a whole.

[36] Volumina legum, vol. i, p. 38, folio 85. For text see Appendix, No. 1.

[37] Krasiński, vol. i, pp. 50-51.

[38] The starostas were royal administrators and judicial officials similar to the Frankish counts.

[39] Volumina legum, vol. i, fol. 193 ff. See Appendix, [No. 2.]

[40] Ibid., vol. i, fol. 140; Zakrzewski, p. 18. See Appendix, [No. 3.]

[41] Ibid., fol. 141; ibid., pp. 18-19.

[42] Raczyński, Codex diplomaticus Majoris Poloniae, p. 172 ff.; Zakrzewski, p. 20.

[43] Krasiński, vol. i, pp. 54-55.

[44] Górski, p. 117.

[45] Chmielowski, vol. i, pp. 66-70; Grabowski, p. 6.

[46] Chmielowski, vol. i, pp. 70-71.

[47] Lorkiewicz, p. 97; Górski, p. 56.

[48] Lorkiewicz, pp. 32-33.

[49] Ibid., pp. 40-41, 43, 68.

[50] Ibid., pp. 50-51, 58-59.

[51] Ibid., pp. 43, 68.

[52] Ibid., pp. 58-60.

[53] Ibid., pp. 58-75.

[54] Smoleński, p. 94.

[55] Lorkiewicz, pp. 119-148.

[56] Ibid., pp. 153-155.

[57] Ibid., pp. 154-155; Krasiński, vol. i, 81-82.

[58] Krasiński, vol. i, pp. 80-81.

[59] Balzer, Corpus Juris Polonici, vol. iii, pp. 579, 584. Original in Acta Tomiciana, vol. v, fol. 284, ff., and in Friese, Beiträge zur Reformationsgeschichte in Polen, vol. ii, No. 1, p. 36. See [Appendix, No. 4.]

[60] Krasiński, vol. i, p. 81.

[61] Ibid., vol. i, p. 81.

[62] R. N. Bain, Slavonic Europe, Cambridge, 1908, pp. 24-25.

[63] Ibid., p. 59; Lewinski-Corwin, pp. 131-133.

[64] Theiner, Vetera Monumenta Poloniae et Lithuaniae, vol. ii, fol. 429; Lewinski-Corwin, p. 182; Bain, p. 59.

[65] J. Janssen, History of the German People, vol. v, pp. 114-115.

[66] Urkundenbuch zur Reformationsgeschichte des Herzogthums Preussens, Leipzig, 1890, vol. i, p. 337; vol. ii, p. 289.

[67] Zakrzewski, p. 28.

[68] Volumina legum, vol. i, fol. 448, p. 223. For text see [Appendix, No. 5.]

[69] See Edict of Dec. 28, 1524, appendix, [No. 6.]

[70] Krasiński, vol. i, p. 83 n. Dr. Warmiński, however, claims that this date has no documentary support, that we do not know anything certain of Seklucyan until the year 1536. See his Andrzej Samuel i Jan Seklucyan, Posen, 1906, pp. 18-21n., 22.

[71] Krasiński, vol. i, p. 83n.; Warmiński, p. 23.

[72] Warmiński, pp. 19-21.

[73] Smoleński, p. 94; Starczewski, p. 69.

[74] Ludwik Kubala, Stanisław Orzechowski, p. 101 n. 42.

[75] Zakrzewski, p. 24.

[76] Balzer, Corpus juris Polonici, vol. iii, pp. 649-650. See [Appendix, No. 7.]

[77] Ibid., vol. iv, p. 3. See [Appendix, No. 8.]

[78] Ibid., vol. iv, pp. 29-30. See [Appendix, No. 9.]

[79] Krasiński, vol. i, pp. 82-84, Prof. Merczyng’s note.

[80] Zakrzewski, pp. 23-24, 226-227. Roman Pilat, Historja poezji polskiej, Warsaw, 1909, p. 30.

[81] Theiner, vol. ii, fols. 426-429; Zakrzewski, pp. 29-30.

[82] Zakrzewski, p. 30.

[83] Ibid., p. 30.

[84] Ibid., pp. 30-31.

[85] Ibid., p. 31.

[86] Krasiński, vol. i, p. 84.

[87] Zakrzewski, p. 31.

[88] Grabowski, p. 16; Alexander Brückner, Dzieje literatury polskiej, Warsaw, 1908, vol. i, p. 82.

[89] See text of the king’s letter in [Appendix, No. 10.]

[90] Ibid., [No. 11.]

[91] Volumina legum, vol. i, p. 257.

[92] Krasiński, vol. i, p. 85.

[93] Zakrzewski, p. 40; Warmiński, p. 10.

[94] Lewinski-Corwin, p. 139; cf. also David Hannay, Encyclopædia Britannica, vol. xxi, Article “Poland.” Lutheranism penetrated into Poland by 1520, Calvinism by 1534, the Bohemian Brethren by 1548, and the Anabaptists by 1533, preceding the Calvinists by one year (Kubala, Orzechowski, p. 100, n. 23).

[95] See Starczewski, pp. 84-131.

[96] Reformacja w Polsce, vol. i, No. 1, pp. 65-67.

[97] Starczewski, pp. 105-106; L. Kubala, Stanisław Orzechowski, pp. 31-33.

[98] Zakrzewski, p. 41.

[99] Ibid., p. 44.

[100] Ibid.; Smoleński, p. 103.

[101] Krasiński, vol. i, p. 85.

[102] Ibid., vol. i, p. 86.

[103] Quoted by Zakrzewski from the Crown Register for 1543, as the Constitution in the Volumina legum, vol. i, fol. 566 ff. omits that particular provision. See Zakrzewski, pp. 240-241. First instance of the use of Polish. See [Appendix, No. 12].

[104] Zakrzewski, p. 241. See text in [Appendix, No. 12.]

[105] Ibid., p. 47.

[106] Alex. Brückner, Mikołaj Rej. Lemberg, 1922, pp. 17-25; Dzieje lit. pol., Warsaw, 1908, vol. i, p. 102; Zakrzewski, pp. 48-49.

[107] Zakrzewski, p. 242; for text, see [Appendix No. 13.] It is of considerable interest to note the various royal and ecclesiastical measures of Sigismund I’s reign against the Reformation. In 1520, by the Edict of Thorn, the importation and sale of Luther’s works was prohibited; in 1523 censorship and search of residences was introduced; in the same year the heretics of Łęczyca were excommunicated, and in 1527 the synod of Łęczyca renewed the Inquisition; in 1534 the Poles were forbidden to resort to foreign educational institutions; in 1541 the Polish nobles were forbidden to harbor heretics under penalty of deprivation of nobility rights; and in 1544 the Polish clergy abroad were ordered to return home under penalty of deprivation of their benefices (Kubala, Stanisław Orzechowski, p. 100, n. 22).

[108] Zakrzewski, p. 49.

[109] Crown Register, Bk. 70, ZF. fol. 643, cited by Zakrzewski, pp. 242-243.

[110] Raynold, Annales Ecclesiastici ad annum, 1546, No. 97, cited by Zakrzewski, p. 243.

[111] Alex. Brückner, Różnowiercy polscy, Warsaw, 1905, p. 7 ff.; John Fijałek, in Reformacja w Polsce (Reformation in Poland), Quarterly of Reformation Historical Society, Warsaw, 1922, Nos. 5-6, p. 1 ff.; Dalton, John a Lasco.

[112] Warmiński, pp. 3 ff., 42 ff.

[113] Zakrzewski, p. 50.

[114] Ibid., p. 53.

[115] Ibid., pp. 52-58; Roman Pilat, Hist. poezji pol., p. 30.

[116] Warmiński, p. 17.

[117] Zakrzewski, p. 53.

[118] Ibid., p. 56.

[119] Theiner, vol. ii, folios 560, 561, 563-565.

[120] Zakrzewski, p. 59.

[121] Ibid., p. 60.

[122] Ibid.

[123] Ibid.

[124] Ibid.

[125] Brückner, Dz. lit. pol. vol. i, p. 102; Zakrzewski, p. 246, n. 11a.

[126] Jos. Łukaszewicz, Dzieje kościołów wyznania helweckiego, Posen, 1853.

[127] Kubala, Orzechowski, pp. 28-37; Zakrzewski, p. 65.

[128] Brückner, Dz. lit. pol., vol. i, p. 102.

[129] Zakrzewski, p. 61.

[130] Kubala, p. 30.

[131] Zakrzewski, p. 61.

[132] Ibid., pp. 65-66.

[133] Ibid., p. 67.

[134] Kubala, pp. 31-32.

[135] Ibid., pp. 35-37; Zakrzewski, p. 69.

[136] Zakrzewski, p. 69.

[137] Ibid., p. 71.

[138] Ibid., p. 70.

[139] Ibid., pp. 72, 251; Eichhorn Hosius, vol. i, p. 212.

[140] Zakrzewski, pp. 72-73.

[141] Łukaszewicz, Dz. kośc. helw. w Małopolsce, pp. 20-44.

[142] Zakrzewski, p. 75.

[143] Ibid., pp. 75-76.

[144] Ibid., pp. 80-81.

[145] Ibid., pp. 91-92.