La France et le concile de Trente (1518-1563)
Institution:
Paris 10Disciplines:
Directors:
Abstract EN:
The counciliar policy of the french kingdom has been caricatured as that of permanent obstruction. But the councils persistence can be explained moreover by the structures of the political scene at that time. The counciliar policy of francis ist oscillated between that of collaboration and that of obstruction. The council was never just a secondary issue, even if the kind hoped to achieve around him a religious concord by means of an assembly of theologians under his control. This concern for control was the only constant in this period of french counciliar politics. Henry ii supported the council that was trasferred to bologna against the wishes of the emperor, whilst he refused its return to trent under julius iii. This "gallican crisis" reveals the limits of religious politics in france. After 1559, the council could be seen as a solution, although nobody ever interprets it in quiet the same fashion. The council helped to bolster up the moral of the party rather than towards the establishment of a concord. As regards the conceptions of the council in france, the decline of conciliarist theology was compensated by an historical conciliarism, which exalted the vertus of these assemblies, and a practice of councils in france itself. This model had to face up to the criticisms of the reform which took up the humanist and gallican themes. Despite these criticisms, trent did have its echo's. Studying the participation of the french in the council, we note their reluctance to attend, and yet also their sociability within it. They reveal their independence towards royal power. Indeed they support the council reforms. Along with the theologians, they clearly refuse all concession to the reform, but strive to maintain their gallican originality.
Abstract FR:
La politique conciliaire du royaume de france a ete caricaturee comme un refus permanent. Mais la duree du concile s'explique surtout par les structures de la vie diplomatique. La politique conciliaire de francois ier oscille entre collaboration et refus. Le concile n'est qu'un enjeu secondaire, meme si le roi espere realiser la concorde religieuse autour de lui, par une assemblee de theologiens qu'il controlerait. Ce souci de controle est la seule constante de la politique conciliaire francaise. Henri ii soutient le concile transfere a bologne contre la volonte de l'empereur, tandis qu'il refuse son retour a trente sous jules iii. Cette "crise gallicane" est revelatrice des limites de la politique religieuse francaise. Apres 1559, le concile peut apparaitre comme une solution. Mais tous ne l'interpretent pas de la meme facon. Le concile renforce l'esprit de parti au lieu d'etablir la concorde. Quant aux conceptions du concile en france, le declin de la theologie conciliariste est compense par un conciliarisme historique, qui exalte les vertus de ces assemblees, et par une pratique conciliaire en france meme. Ce modele doit faire face aux critiques de la reforme, reprenant des themes humanistes et gallicans. Malgre ces critiques, trente rencontre un echo. Etudiant la participation des francais au concile, on peut constater leur mauvaise volonte, mais aussi une sociabilite conciliaire. Ils montrent leur independance a l'egard du pouvoir royal. Ils souscrivent aux reformes conciliaires. Avec les theologiens, ils refusent clairement toute concession a la reforme, mais veulent le respect du particularisme gallican.