BADEN
196
BADEN
and the constitutional decrees of 1807, regulating
the position of the State vnth regard to the Church.
Although the first of these decrees guaranteed to
Catholics a continuance of their diocesan system, the
free exercise of their religion, and the possession and
use of church property, shortly after their promul-
gation a large nmuber of monasteries and charitable
institutions were entirely abolished, others confis-
cated, and still others converted into secular educa-
tional institutions. In place of being organized into
dioceses as formerly. Catholics were placed under
two vicariates (Bruchsal and Constance). A special
board was appointed for the administration of the
temporal affairs of the Church, first known as the
Catholic Kirchensektion (Church Section), and later
as the Catholic Oberkirchenrat (Supreme Ecclesiastical
Council). Despite the personal good will of Grand
Duke Charles Frederick, the spirit of these decrees
was unfavourable to the Catholic Church; the rights
of the State were unduly extended, to the prejudice
of the Church. Worse than the ordinances them-
selves was the way in which they were put into execu-
tion by the Liberal officials of Old Baden, who viewed
the Catholic Church with open hostility. The unjust
treatment of Catholics in the new Grand duchy and
the indignities put upon them were so pronounced
that even Napoleon, as Protector of the Confedera-
tion of the Rhine, in two notes to the Government of
Baden (February and March, 1810) protested against
it. Unfortunately a large part of the Catholic
clergy, who had either been reared in the tenets of
Josephinism, or had fallen into the religious in-
differentism of the times, failed to rally to the neces-
sary defence of the rights of the Church. Even the
highest ecclesiastical dignitaries of the land, as, for
example, Vicar-General Wessenberg, favoured the
tenets of Febronianism and warmly encouraged the
project of a German National Church independent of
Rome. This state of affairs prolonged for years the
negotiations which had been begun with the Holy
See for the reorganization of the Church in Baden.
Finally the Bull "Provida solersque " (16 August,
1821) established the province of the Upper Rhine
(Obcrrheinische Kirchenproviyiz), defined the bounda-
ries of the five dioceses therein comprised (Freiburg,
Fulda, Limburg, Mainz, and Rottenburg), and
assigned Freiburg as the seat of the metropolitan.
In Baden, by the order of the Grand duke, the candi-
date for the archiepiscopal see was elected by free
vote of the assembled deans (1822), but their choice
of Wanker, a professor of theology in Freibm-g, was
condemned by the pope as canonically invalid. It
was only after lengthy negotiations that an agree-
ment was reached; and on 11 April, 1827, Leo XII
promulgated the Bull of erection "Ad Dominici gregis
custodiam; on 16 October, 1827, the deed of founda-
tion was signed; and on 21 October the first arch-
bishop, Bernhard Boll, was consecrated and installed.
Nevertheless a satisfactory adjustment of affairs
had not vet been found. The deed of foundation
contained many provisions contrary to the spirit of
the papal Bull. In marked contrast to the agreement
made with Rome was the church law passed by the
Government 30 January, 1830. True, it ensures to
Catholics the free profession of faith and public exer-
cise of religion, but, on the other hand, to the State
is given an undue amount of power over the Church;
all orders and enactments of any importance proceed-
ing from spiritual authorities must, according to this
law, be submitted to the approval of the civil powers;
it requires that even decrees and dispensations of a
general nature issued by the Church, although con-
cerning matters purely spiritual, must be first in-
spected by the public authorities. It subjects papal
Bulls, Briefs, and dispensations to the placet of the
sovereign, does away with the canonical court of
appeal, grants to clergy and laity, by a usurpation
of spiritual authority, recovu'se to the civil courts,
instead of the higher ecclesiastical courts, etc. The
pope as well as the archbishop entered a protest
against the provisions of this law, so permeated with
the spirit of a national church, but without success.
Although the first archbishops, Bernhard Boll
(1827-36) and his successor, Ignaz Demeter (1836-
42), acceded to the wishes of the Government as
far as their position as Catholic prelates permitted,
all their remonstrances against the interference of
the State and their appeals for a more liberal treat-
ment of the Cliurch were useless. On the contrary,
the Go\-ernment openly favoured movements of a
rationalistic and irreligious nature, even on the part
of professors of theology in the University of Frei-
burg; it allowed the just demands of the archbishop
for adequate disciplinary powers to pass unnoticed,
gave protection to unworthy clerics and those who
had been insubordinate to their ecclesiastical supe-
riors, almost entirely excluded the co-operation of
the Church in the management of Catholic schools and
in the administration of Catliolic church property,
permitted insults to be levelled against the Church
by the Radicals in the Landtag, favoured Rongean-
ism, etc. In spite of this unjust treatment, however,
when, in 1848. the flames of the revolution broke out,
the Archbishop, Hermann von Vicari (1842-68),
and the majority of the Catholic clergy remained
loyal to the rightful sovereign and refused to take
the oath required by the revolutionary regime. In
consideration of this attitude, the Government,
after the victory over the revolutionary forces,
seemed disposed to change its policy; it permitted
the Jesuits to hold missions among the people and
allowed the archbishop greater freedom in the ad-
ministration of chiuch discipline. The change,
however, was not of long duration; soon the old
system of state guardiansliip was again in force.
The four suffragan bishops of the pro\nnce of the Upper Rhine also came into conflict with their re- spective governments in securing freedom for the Catholic Church. To obtain unity of action Arch- bishop Vicari, in compliance with the regulations of the plenary council of the German Catholic episco- pate held at Wiirzburg (1848) summoned his suffra- gans to Freiburg in the spring of 1851. In a memorial addressed to their respective .sovereigns, they de- manded the privilege of training their priests and appointing them \\-ithout outside interference, the free exercise of ecclesiastical discipline among priests and laymen, and the privilege of conducting Catliolic schools, of establishing religious societies and asso- ciations, and of administering church property without hindrance. Having waited in vain for a reply from the Government, the bishops addressed a reminder to the authorities (February, 1852), renewing the demand for the abolition of the state supremacy. Not until 5 March, 1853, did they re- ceive a decision; tills contained tri\"ial concessions, but was adverse on the principal points. The old system of state tutelage was to remain uncondition- ally in force. Thereupon the five bishops recon- vened (.\pril, 1853) in Freiburg and embodied their demands in a .second memorial dated 18 June, setting forth the inadequacy of the concessions granted 5 March, and reserving to themselves the right of taking further measures. While four of the bishops received from their respective authorities more or less far-reaching concessions, a bitter struggle was precipitated in Baden.
Meanwhile, an occurrence in Baden had increased the estrangement to an open rupture between the civil authorities and the archbishop. After the death of Grand Duke Leopold (24 April, 1852), the Govern- ment, i. e. the Oberkirchcnrnt, which in 1845 had taken the place of the Kirchcn.'icklion, ordered the archbishop to have services held for the deceased
