 |
|
| A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z |
The Kingdom of Hungary, or "Realm of the Crown of St. Stephen", situated between 14º 25' and 26º 25' E. longitude, and between 44º 10' and 49º 35' N. latitude, includes, besides Hungary Proper andTransylvania, the Kingdom of Croatia-Slavonia and a territory known as the Military Frontier. The total area is 125,430 square miles, of which 16,423 belong to the Kingdom of Croatia-Slavonia. Of a population of 19,254,559 (census of 1900) 51.5 per cent wereCatholics. The population of the capital, Budapest, situated on both sides of the Danube, is about 800,000.
The southern boundary of the kingdom is the River Save, which separates it fromBosnia and Servia as far east as the Rumanian frontier, from which point the artificial boundary ofRumania continues along the south, turning north-east, and then north. On the north lies Galicia; on the northwest, Moravia; on the west LowerAustria,Styria, and Carniola. Some 43,000 square miles are occupied by the Great and the Little Hungarian Alföld, two great plains enclosed by the Alps and the Carpathians. The country is drained by the Danube and its tributaries the Save and Drave, on the right bank, and, on the left, the Theiss, which in its turn receives the waters of the Maros. The chief industry is agriculture (including forestry), which supports nearly 13,000,000persons. The chief crops are wheat and maize. Manufacturing industries employ 12.8 per cent of the wage-earning population. Mining (lignite, pig iron, coal, and gold being the chief items) in 1906 employed 72,290persons and produced a revenue of 116,000,000 Kronen ($23,200,000). Grazing also contributes largely to the national wealth.
Even in the earliest ages the territory of the present Kingdom of Hungary was the abode of various races of men. The remains from prehistoric times show that the country was inhabited when the present Hungarian lowlands were covered by the ocean. Half a century before Christ the Thracians occupied Hungary east of the Danube, while Hungary west of the Danube was the home of Celtic and Illyrian tribes. At the opening of theChristian Era the sway of the Romans extended as far as the Danube; Pannonia formed part of the Roman Empire for 400 years, and Dacia for about 150 years. AfterRome fell, Hungary, like the other provinces, was affected by the migrations. First came the Huns who built up underKing Attila, called "the Scourge of God", the powerful Hunnish Empire. After the empire of the Huns went to pieces German tribes ruled in Hungary for about 100 years, and they were followed by the Avars. During the supremacy of the Avars, a period of over two hundred years, began the migration of the Slavonic tribes. Moravians, Bulgars, Croato-Serbians, and Poles all sought to overthrow the Avars, but their power was not broken untilCharlemagne appeared. The decline of the kingdom of the EastFranks, after the death ofCharlemagne, was favourable to the development of a great Slavonic power, and Swatopluk, ruler of GreatMoravia, thought to establish a permanent Moravian kingdom, but the appearance of the Magyars put an end to these schemes.
There are two opposing theories as to the origin of the Magyars, or native Hungarians. Arminius Vámbéry and his supporters hold to aTurkish origin of the Magyars, while Pál Hunfalvy and his followers place them in the Finno-Ugrian division of languages of a Ural-Altaic stem and look for the original home of the race in the region of the Ural mountains, or the district between the rivers Obi, Irtysh, Kama, and Volga. The presence ofTurkish words in the language is explained by the theory that, after leaving their former home, the Hungarians dwelt for some time nearTurkish tribes, who were undoubtedly on a higher level of civilization, and from whom these words were borrowed. About the middle of the ninth century, when the Byzantine writers first speak of the Hungarians, calling them "Turci", the Hungarians were in Lebedia, in the territory on the right bank of the Don. From this point they carried on their marauding excursions into the district of the Lower Danube and on these expeditions they sometimes advanced intoGermany. Being exposed to attack by the Bisseni, the Hungarians left Lebedia, some returning to the district on the further side of the Volga, while others went towards the west and settled near the Danube, between the Dniester, Sereth Pruth, and Bug Rivers. The Byzantine writers called this region Atelkuzu (Hungarian, Etelköz). While in this neighbourhood the Hungarians undertook an expedition under Arpád in 893 or 894 against Simeon, ruler of the Bulgars. The expedition was successful, but Simeon formed an alliance with the Bisseni, and a fierce attack was made on the Hungarians in which their land was devastated. The Hungarians, therefore, withdrew from this region, went westward, and reached the country where they now live. The date of their entry into Hungary is not certain, apparently it was 895 or 896; neither is the point from which they came positively ascertained. It is not improbable that they entered Hungary from three directions and arrived at different periods. The chronicle of the "anonymous notary of King Béla" (Anonymus Belœ regis notarius) has preserved the history of the first occupation of the country, but modern historical investigation shows that little credence can be given the narrative.
The Magyars settled in the neighbourhood of the Danube, and especially in the district on the farther side, as best suited to their occupation, that of cattle-raising. In this region were founded their first towns, the most important of the country, namely,Gran, Székes-Fehérvar, and Buda. At about the same time, under their leader Arpád (died 907), they began once more their marauding expeditions and attacked the countries west of them; these forays, which went as far asGermany,Italy, andFrance, were continued under Zoltán (907-47), and Taksony (947-72), and did not cease until the land was converted toCatholicism in the reign of Géza. When the Hungarians took possession of the country where they now live, they found a strong SlavonicCatholicChurch already in existence in the western part, in Pannonia, where theChristian Faith had been spread partly by German and partly byItalianpriests. Methodius, the author of the Slavonic liturgy, endeavoured to introduce the use of the new liturgy here also, but with his death (855) these efforts came to an end. Consequently, the Magyars received theirknowledge ofChristianity partly from theCatholic population already existing in the country, and partly from theecclesiastics whom they captured in their marauding expeditions. These forays into the territories farther to the west, which lasted into the tenth century, were a great obstacle to the spread ofChristianity, and at the same time the nationalpride of the Hungarians prevented the acceptance of the religion of the conquered population. Their defeats near Merseburg, in 933, and on the Lech, in 955, put an end to these western expeditions and made the Hungarians more favourable toChristianity.
The opinion that the first efforts for the conversion of the Hungarians were made from Constantinople, because the Magyar commanders Bulcsu and Gyula accepted the Greekfaith at Constantinople, rests, as has beenproved, on the inventions of Byzantine chroniclers. The conversion of the land to theCatholicFaith was effected, in reality, from the west, and the change began in the rulingfamily. Duke Géza, who from 970 had been the sole ruler of Hungary, perceived the danger which threatened Hungary, surrounded as it was byCatholic countries, if it continuedpagan. He saw that, if Hungary persisted in shutting outCatholicism, it would sooner or later be the prey of the neighbouring peoples. His marriage with Adelaide, sister of the Polish Duke Miezco (Mieczyslaw), brought him closer to theChurch, and hisconversion is to be attributed to Adelaide's influence. It was through Adelaide's efforts thatSt. Adalbert,Archbishop ofPrague, came to Hungary and, in 985,baptized Géza and his son Vaik; the latter took the name of Stephen inbaptism. A large number of the most prominent of Géza's retainers and of his people embraced theCatholicFaith at the same time. Evil results arose, however, from the fact that Adalbert did not at once establish anecclesiastical organization for Hungary. Moreover, a large proportion of the newly converted adopted the newfaith only in externals and retained theirheathen customs, offeringsacrifices to the old gods. Yet, notwithstanding all this, the new religion continued to spread among the people.
The actual conversion of the country and itsecclesiastical organization was the work of St. Stephen, son of Duke Géza, who succeeded hisfather in 997. His marriage with Gisela, sister of Duke Henry ofBavaria, gave a powerful impulse to the spread ofCatholicism. FromGermany came large numbers ofpriests, nobles, andknights, who settled in Hungary and aided Stephen in converting the country toChristianity. Many obstacles were encountered, and the new religion was spread by the sword. The advance ofChristianity was regarded as endangering national interests, and the influx of strangers, together with the favour shown these new settlers by the ruler, seemed to set aside the national influences in the government. Consequently, soon after the accession of Stephen, a revolt led by Koppán broke out, but it was quickly suppressed, with the aid of the foreignknights; in this way the reputation both of Stephen and of theChurch was established in the regions on the farther side of the Danube. To show his gratitude for this victory Stephen built themonastery of Pannonhalma (Martinsberg). Stephen's victory was also followed by the coming of large numbers of German, French, andItalianecclesiastics to Hungary, which greatly aided the spread ofChristianity.
Stephen now undertook the task of providing the land with thenecessaryecclesiastical organization. To secure the independence both of the country and of theChurch in his dominions, he petitionedPope Sylvester II, through Abbot Astricus, for the royal dignity and the confirmation of hisecclesiastical acts and ordinances; he also placed his dominion under the protectorate of theHoly See. Sylvester acceded to Stephen's request, sent him a royal crown, and confirmed hisecclesiastical regulations. According to tradition, Stephen also received the title of Apostolic King and Apostolic Legate, theright to have alegate's cross carried before him, and other privileges, but modern investigation has shown that theBull of Pope Sylvester bestowing these honours is aforgery of the seventeenth century. After the return of Abbot Astricus, Stephen wascrowned King of Hungary with the crown sent by thepope atGran, 17 August, 1001. In settling the organization of theChurch he placed at its head theArchdiocese of Gran, giving it as suffragans, Györ (Raab),Veszprém, Pécs (Fünfkirchen), Vácz (Waitzen), and Eger. About 1010 he founded a second archdiocese, that of Kalocsa, which had as suffragans the Dioceses of Bihar,Transylvania, and Marosvár (later Csanád) which was founded in 1038. In this way the land was divided into tendioceses, theArchdiocese of Gran being themetropolitan. TheBenedictines settled in Hungary during this reign, and Stephen founded theBenedictinemonasteries of Pannonhalma (Martinsberg), Zobor, Pécsvárad, Zalavár, and Bakonybél; he also founded numerous otherreligious houses, including theconvent for Greeknuns near Veszprém.
In order to provide for the support of theclergy, Stephen issued edicts concerning churchtithes; heordained that each tenth township should build a church and provide thepriest with suitable land and servants for his support. The king was to supply the churches with all thenecessary equipment, while thebishop selected thepriests and provided the books needed. Thelaws of King Stephen also contain ordinances regarding attendance at Mass, observance of the churchfasts, etc. With the aid of theselaws Stephen brought over almost all of his people to theCatholicFaith, although during this reign measures had often to be taken againstpagan movements among the population — as against his uncle Michael (1003), against theBulgarian prince Kean, and (1025) against Ajton. These revolts, although political in character, were also aimed more or less at theCatholicFaith. Stephen was able to suppress these insurrections, and could, therefore, hope that theChurch would meet with no further antagonism. The confusion andwars over the succession, which followed the death of Stephen, and the stormy reigns of Kings Peter and Aba Samü (1038-46) soon brought about a decline ofChristianity. A part of the nation sank back into the oldheathenism, and in 1046 there was a revolt against theCatholic religion which led to themartyrdom of Bishop Gerhard, who was thrown by the insurgents from the Blocksberg at Buda into the river. The new king, Andrew I (1047-60), either could not or would not act energetically at first, and it was not until after hiscoronation that he took strong measures against those who had fallen away from the Faith. After his death a small part of the population that was stillpagan broke out into revolt, but this rebellion was quickly suppressed by King Béla I (1060-63). The internal disorders during the reigns of King Solomon (1064-74) and King Géza I (1074-77) did great damage to theChristian Faith;ecclesiastical discipline decayed, and many abuses crept into theChurch.
During the reigns ofSt. Ladislaus (1077-95) and Koloman (1095-1114) theChurch was reformed and many ordinances were passed against the prevailing abuses. In particular the synod of Szabolcs (1092) took decided measures against the marriage ofpriests. Marriedpriests, as a special act of grace, were permitted to exercisepriestly functions, but a new marriage was regarded asconcubinage and such unions were to be dissolved. The synod also passed ordinances concerning the indissolubility of marriage and the observance of church festivals andSundays. Other decisions were directed against the still existingpagan manners and customs. After the conquest ofCroatia Ladislaus founded theDiocese of Zágráb (Agram). He transferred thesee of the Archdiocese of Kalocsa to Bács, and that of the Diocese of Bihar, founded by St. Stephen, to Grosswardein (Nagy-Várad). He founded new churches andmonasteries and took measures for the conversion of the Bisseni andSaracens (Ishmaelites) who had settled in Hungary. Ladislaus successfully resisted the invasion of thepagan Cumans. During the reign of Koloman theChurch was largely under the influence of the royal authority. Koloman claimed the investiture of thebishops for himself, madelaws concerning theproperty of the Church,obliged thebishops to perform military service, etc. At a later date, at the synod ofGuastalla, Koloman yielded the right of granting investiture and agreed that the chapters should have freedom in the election ofbishops. The reforms ofGregory VII were also adopted in Hungary. Theclergy were withdrawn from secularjurisdiction, marriage was regarded as valid only when entered into before apriest,celibacy was enforced, and a number of ordinances beneficial to thereligious life were passed.
The chief feature of the reigns of Koloman's successorsStephen II (1114-31), Béla II (1131-41), Géza II (1141-61), and Stephen III (1161-73), was the struggle of Hungary with theByzantine Empire for national independence. Thesewars, however, did not check the growth of theChurch. One of the most important events of this period was the synod atGran (1169). It enacted thatbishops could not be transferred without the consent of thepope, took the administration of vacantdioceses out of the hands of thelaity, and obtained a promise from the king that theproperty of the Church should only be taken in time ofwar and then not without the consent of thebishop. It was in this period that theCistercians,Premonstratensians, and Knights of St. John settled in Hungary; in the thirteenth century these orders were followed by theDominicans andFranciscans. About 1150 Saxon colonists, of theCatholicFaith, settled in upper Hungary and inTransylvania. TheCistercians grew rapidly in Hungary during the reign of Béla III (1173-96) as the king granted the order the same privileges as it enjoyed inFrance. Fresh disorders sprang up in Hungary after the death of King Béla III. King Emeric (1196-1204) was engaged inwar with his brother Andrew, who coveted the throne, until Emeric's death put an end to the fratricidal struggle.
Andrew II (1205-35), who was now king, was soon involved in a struggle with the oligarchy. At his accession he wasobliged to swear to protect the liberties of the land and the independence of the royal dignity. When he failed to observe theseobligations, the nobles forced him to issue the GoldenBull (1222), the Magna Charta of Hungary. This instrument confirmed therights of the nobles and gave them the privilege to take up arms against the king when he failed to observe the conditions here agreed upon, but it did not fulfil the hopes it had raised; its provisions were not carried out, and the disorders continued. Neither did Andrew, who in 1217 took part in an unsuccessfulcrusade to the Holy Land, observe the agreement confirming the liberty ofecclesiastics, and theCatholicChurch saw itself endangered by the continually growing influence exerted over the king by the Ishmaelites andJews. After all warnings to the king had failed, Archbishop Robert ofGran placed Hungary under aninterdict (1232), in order to force the king to put an end to the prevailing abuses and to guard the interests of theChurch. The king promised the correction of the abuses and, especially, to guard the interests of theCatholicChurch, but he was too weak a man for energetic action. His son Béla IV (1235-70) endeavoured to restore order, above all he tried to carry out the provisions of the GoldenBull, but his efforts were interfered with by an invasion of the Tatars, which nearly ruined the country. After the battle near Muhi (1241), they devastated the entire land; thousands of the inhabitants were massacred, hundreds of churches were plundered and razed to the ground, and six of thedioceses were nearly destroyed. Consequently, when the Tatars left the country, King Béla wasobliged to take up the reorganization both ofecclesiastical and secular affairs. The damage suffered was repaired through the self-sacrifice of the royal family and the people; newmonasteries and churches were built, those that had been destroyed were restored, and colonists were brought in to repair the losses in population. These colonists were partlyCatholic Germans andBohemians, and partlypagan Cumans. Those of the Cumans who lived apart from the others were soon converted, but the majority held topaganism and did not becomeChristians until the middle of the fourteenth century.
The last years of the reign of Béla IV were disturbed by a quarrel with theCuria concerning the appointment to the vacantDiocese of Zágráb (Agram), and by the revolt of his son Stephen, who succeeded him. Stephen V reigned only two years (1270-72); he was followed by his son Ladislaus IV (1272-90) who, when he came to the throne, was still a minor. In this reign efforts were made to restore church discipline that had fallen into decay during the disorders of the previous years. For this decline of church discipline and ofecclesiastical conditions thepagan Cumans were largely responsible; they wandered about the land plundering and damaging the churches. The king was on good terms with them and maintained relations with Cumanianwomen; his example was followed by others. It is not surprising that under the circumstances disorders broke out once more in Hungary, and that the authority of theChurch suffered. Philip,Bishop ofFermo, came to Hungary in 1279 aspapal legate and held a great synod at Buda (Ofen), where various decisions were reached concerning the preservation of the interests of theChurch and the restoration of canon law, but the synod was forcibly dissolved by the king, and its members driven away. The appeals made by the Hungarianbishops and theHoly See to the king were in vain; Ladislaus promised, indeed, to act differently, and to reform the disordered political andecclesiastical conditions, but he failed to keep his word. After themurder of Ladislaus, the last of the Arpád dynasty, Andrew III, grandson of Andrew II, became king. During his reign of ten years (1290-1301) he was engaged in a constant struggle with foreign claimants to the throne, and could give no care to the internal andecclesiastical conditions of the country. Rudolf of Hapsburg endeavoured to wrest Hungary from Andrew for his son Albrecht, and the grandson of Stephen V, Charles Martell ofNaples, also claimed it. After the death of the latter, who had the support of theHoly See, his son, Charles Robert, maintained the father's claims, and from 1295 assumed the title of King of Hungary.
After the death of Andrew III a series ofwars broke out over the succession. A part of the people andclergy held to King Wenceslaus, another to Otto, Duke ofBavaria, and still another to Charles Robert. TheHoly See strongly espoused the cause of Charles Robert and sent CardinalGentile to Hungary. Notwithstanding these efforts in his favour, it was not until 1309 that Charles Robert (1309-42) was able to secure the throne of Hungary for himself. There now began for the country a long period of consolidation. The new king regulated the internal administration, brought the state finances into good order, imposing for this purpose in 1323 a land tax, reorganized the army, and sought to increase his dynastic power by forming connexions with foreign countries. In church affairs he encroached largely onecclesiasticalrights; he filled the vacant sees and the church offices without regard to the electoralrights of thecathedral chapters. He claimed the revenues of vacantbenefices for himself, confiscated the incomes of otherbenefices, granted large numbers of expectancies, and forced those appointed toecclesiastical benefices to pay a larger or smaller sum before taking office. In 1338 a part of the Hungarian episcopate sent a memorial to theApostolic See, in which, with some exaggeration, they presented an account of the encroachments of the king. Thepope notified the king of the memorial, an act which created no ill-feeling between the two; the Holy Father contented himself with admonishing the king in a paternal manner to remove the abuses and to avoid infringing on therights of theChurch.
During the reign of Louis I, the Great (1342-82), the son of Charles Robert,Catholicism reached the height of prosperity in Hungary. Numerousmonasteries and other religious foundations came into existence in this reign; above all, the Hermits of St. Paul enjoyed the king's special favour. In 1381 Louis obtained from theRepublic of Venice therelics ofSt. Paul the Hermit, which were taken with greatecclesiastical pomp to the Paulinemonastery near Buda. Among hispious acts must be counted the building of the church at the place ofpilgrimage, Gross-Mariazell inStyria, and of thechapeldedicated toSt. Ladislaus atAachen. Splendid churches were also built in Hungary, as atGran, Eger, and Grosswardein (Nagy-Várad). In fillingecclesiastical offices the king was careful that thedioceses should receive well-trained and competentbishops. In order to promote learning he founded theuniversity at Pécs (Fünfkirchen). Louis also sought to bring about the conversion of the Slavonic peoples living to the south of Hungary, who held to theGreek Church, the Serbs, Wallachians, andBulgarians. His attempts to convert them led to repeated conflicts with these races. In this reign began the struggle with the growing power of theTurks, against whose assaults Hungary now became the bulwark ofEurope. Internal disorders broke out again in the reign of Maria (1382-95), the daughter of Louis, in which theChurch suffered greatly in the southern part of the kingdom, especially inCroatia. In Hungary proper the queen sought to further the interests of theChurch. The most important measures passed at a synod atGran were decisions regarding the training of theclergy. Maria built several churches of the Perpetual Adoration. From 1387 her rule was merely nominal, her husband Sigismund being the real ruler. After Maria's death he became her successor.
In one of the first years (1397) of Sigismund's reign (1395-1436), the decrees of the Diet of 1387 were renewed. These declared that noecclesiastical benefice could be bestowed on a foreign ecclesiastic. Sigismund, however, paid little attention to this regulation. Immediately on entering upon his reign Sigismund came into conflict with the Hungarian oligarchy. This led to openwar, and even, for a time, to theimprisonment of the king. In 1403, King Ladislaus of Naples appeared as rival king; nevertheless, Sigismund was able to maintain himself on the throne. His reign was coincident with a large part of theGreat Western Schism, and the two great reforming Councils ofConstance and Basle were held while he was on the throne. In the Great Schism, Hungary adhered to the obedience (or party) of the Roman claimant to thepapacy. Louis I, the Great, had supportedUrban VI, and his successors, Maria and Sigismund, also sided with theRoman Curia. Sigismund, indeed, in 1403 renouncedBoniface IX, because thispope supported the rival King Ladislaus, yet he did not recognizeBenedict XIII. At a later date he recognizedInnocent VII and subsequently supported theRoman Curia. In 1404 the Diet declared that in futureecclesiastical benefices in Hungary could only be bestowed by the king, consequently therights both of spiritual and secular patrons were annulled, and thejus placeti introduced, according to whichpapal Bulls and commands could only be accepted and proclaimed in Hungary after they had received the royal approval. Supported by these enactments Sigismund at once asserted his right to appointbishops. Naturally, theCuria did not recognize this claim and refused to give the investiture to thebishops chosen by Sigismund. Upon this Sigismund, in 1410, appealed toJohn XXIII, from whom he requested the recognition of this right.John did not accede to this request, although he granted investiture to thebishops appointed by the king and thus tacitly recognized the royal right of fillingbenefices, a right which, as a matter of fact, the king continued to exercise.
After his election as King of the Romans, Sigismund endeavoured to bring theschism to an end. Theunity of the Church was restored by theCouncil of Constance, and the concordat made withGermany was also authoritative for Hungary. While the council was in session, after the deposition ofBenedict XIII, Sigismund obtained for himself and his successors the right of naming thebishops. This right was, indeed, not put into documentary form, but Stephen Werböczi, in his collection of the Hungarianlaws "Opus Tripartitum juris consuetudinarii regni Hungariæ", asserted that this right was conceded to the King of Hungary at theCouncil of Constance, and Cardinal Peter Pázmány also referred to it at a later date. The council further decided that in Hungaryecclesiastical cases should be tried in the country itself, and not brought before theRoman Curia, that only appeals could be taken toRome. After the council had closed Sigismund claimed to the fullest extent therights which had been conceded to him by the council. TheRepublic of Venice having seizedDalmatia, theArchdioceses ofSpalato andZara, with their suffragans, were lost to Hungary. This is the reason why in Hungarian official documents for many years thesedioceses were given as vacant. In Hungary proper theChurch maintained itself with difficulty in the northern districts, on account of the incursions of theHussites, who traversed all upper Hungary, plundering the churches and laying waste the country. They also gained adherents in the southern districts, where, however, the movement was soon suppressed, thanks to the missionary activity of theFranciscanmonkJames of the Marches.
The chief source of anxiety to the government of Hungary in Sigismund's reign was the growing power of theTurks. Since 1389 when Servia was conquered by the Osmanli power at the battle of Kosova (also calledAmselfeld, "Field of the Blackbirds"), theTurks had slowly but steadily advanced against Hungary. In 1396 Sigismund undertook a campaign on a large scale against them, but met with a severe defeat at Nicopolis. To safeguard the Hungarian frontier, Sigismund obtained from Stephen Lazarevícs, ruler ofServia, by the Treaty of Tata (Totis), in 1426, the Servian fortresses on the border of the two countries, but he was not able to hold them against theTurks. The siege of the fortress of Galambócz (1428) ended with his defeat and narrow escape from death. The power of theTurks steadily increased, and Sigismund's successors were only able to check momentarily the westward advance of theOttoman Empire. Sigismund was succeeded by his son-in-law Albert (1437-39); in this reign the influence of the Hungarian nobility was again paramount. TheTurks recommenced their inroads, entering the country near Szendrö. After Albert's death a dispute as to the succession arose between Wladislaw I (Wladislaw III ofPoland) and the adherents of Albert's posthumous son Ladislaus. In the end Wladislaw I (1442-44) became ruler; his short reign is chiefly noted for thewars with theTurks, in which the Hungarian forces were led byJános Hunyady. Wladislaw I fell in battle with theTurks at Varna,Bulgaria, where he was defeated; after his death Hungary was thrown into confusion by the quarrels among the ruling nobles. To put an end to these disorders the inferior nobility undertook to bring the country again into unity and madeHunyady governor during the minority of Ladislaus V, Posthumus, appointing with him an administrative council. While at the head of the government,Hunyady fought successfully against theTurks. During his control of affairs also, the appointment toecclesiastical benefices was considered the prerogative of the Crown, and it was accordingly exercised by him and his council. During the reign of Ladislaus V (1453-57) the leading nobles regained control; this led once more to disturbances, especially after the death ofHunyady. While Ladislaus was king, Constantinople was taken by theTurks (1453), who now turned all their strength against Hungary.Hunyady won, indeed, the brilliant victory over them at Belgrad (1456), but he died a few days later. Thehatred of the great nobles against him was now turned against his sons, one of whom, Ladislaus, was executed. When King Ladislaus died,Hunyady's son,Matthias I, Corvinus, became king.
Matthias I (1458-90) was almost continually engaged in conflict with the Ottoman power.Pope Pius II promised the most vigorous support to the king in this struggle, but the efforts of theHoly See to organize a generalEuropeancrusade against theTurksproved unavailing because of thepope's death. Notwithstanding the lack of help from other countries,Matthias battled for a time with success against theTurks in Bosnia, and to him it is due that their advance was temporarily checked. In 1463 Bosnia was conquered by theTurks, and with this thedioceses in Bosnia ceased to exist. On account of theTurkish invasion thesee of theBishop of Corbavia had to be transferred to Modrus as early as 1460. Up to 1470Matthias maintained friendly relations with theCatholicChurch, but after 1471 his policy changed. The second half of his reign was characterized by a number of serious blunders. Notwithstanding the enactments of thelaw he gave a number ofdioceses to foreigners; in 1472 he appointed John BeckensloerArchbishop ofGran (Esztergom), in 1480 he gave the archdiocese to the seventeen-year-old John ofAragon, and in 1486 to Ippolito d'Este, who was seven years old. Foreigners were also appointed to the Dioceses ofGrosswardein (Nagy-Várad), Pécs (Fünfkirchen), and Eger (Erlau).Matthias also rewarded political services withecclesiastical offices, and treated theproperty of the Church as though it belonged to the State. His relations with theHoly See, originally friendly, gradually grew strained, and he went so far as to threaten to join theGreek Church. In 1488 Angelo Pecchinoli was sent to Hungary by thepope aslegate. Probably through the influence of his wife Beatrice, the king was led into more peaceful relations with thepapacy, so that there was a better condition of affairs in the last years of his reign.
It was whileMatthias was sovereign thatHumanism appeared in Hungary. The king himself was a vigorous supporter of the Humanistic movement and the remains of his renownedlibrary at Buda, theBibliotheca Corvina, still excite wonder. The king's example led others, especially thebishops, to cultivate the arts and learning. Among theecclesiastics who competed with the king in the promotion of learning were Joannes Vitéz, Urban Döczi, and Thomas Bakácz. At times, however, the ardour with whichMatthias supported learning slackened, thus he did not give his aid to theuniversities already existing at Pécs (Fünfkirchen) and Pozsony (Presburg), so that later they had to be closed. After the death ofMatthias there were once more several claimants for the throne.Matthias had sought in the last years of his life to have hisillegitimate son Joannes Corvinus recognized as his successor. After his death the nation divided into two parties; one was influenced by the Queen-Dowager Beatrice, who wanted the crown for herself, the other desired a foreign ruler. Finally the King ofBohemia, Wladislaw II (1490-1516), of the Polish House of Jagellon, obtained the throne. In this reign the power of Hungary rapidly declined. Naturally vacillating and indolent, Wladislaw had not the force to withstand the determination of the great Hungarian nobles to rule, and the royal power became the plaything of the various parties. The antagonisms of the different ranks ofsociety grew more acute and led, in 1514, to a great peasant revolt, directed against the nobles andclergy, which was only suppressed after much bloodshed. The Diet of 1498 passed enactments correcting theecclesiastical abuses that had become prevalent during the reign ofMatthias and prohibited particularly the appointment of foreigners toecclesiastical positions. Among other enactments were those that forbade the granting of church offices to any but natives, the holding ofecclesiastical pluralities, and the appropriation of church lands by thelaity. Wladislaw, however, was too weak to enforce these enactments. One of the particular evils of his reign was the holding of church dignities by minors; this arose partly from the granting of the royal right of patronage to differentfamilies. One of the most prominentecclesiastical princes of this period was Thomas Bakácz, who was firstBishop ofGyör and Eger, and laterArchbishop ofGran. His eminent qualities made him for a time a candidate for thepapal see. It was owing to his efforts that the offices ofprimate andlegatus natus were permanently united with the Archbishopric ofGran.
Under the successor ofWladislaw, Louis II (1516-26), Hungary sank into complete decay. The authority of the sovereign was no longer regarded; energetic measures could not be taken against the incursions of theTurks, on account of the continual quarrels and dissensions, and the fate of the country was soon sealed. In 1521 Belgrad fell into the hands of theTurks, and Hungary was now at their mercy. In 1526 the country gathered together its resources for the decisive struggles. At the battle of Mohács (29 Aug., 1526) Louis II was killed, andCatholic Hungary was defeated and overthrown by theTurks. The universal political decline of Hungary in the reign of Louis II was accompanied by the decline of itsreligious life. Theeducation of theclergy sank steadily, and the secular lords grew more and more daring in their seizure ofchurch property. Ecclesiastical training and discipline decayed. The southern part of Hungary was almost entirely lost to theChurch through the advance of theTurks. Thousands of the inhabitants of the southern districts were carried off asprisoners or killed,monasteries and churches were destroyed, and the place of theCatholic population was taken by large numbers ofSerbs who were adherents of the OrthodoxGreek Church. The Serbs had begun to settle in Hungary in the time ofMatthias I, so that during the reign of Louis II severalOrthodox Greekbishops exercised their office there. In the first half of the sixteenth century the weakened condition of theChurch in Hungary offered a favourable opportunity to theLutheran Reformation. The new religion gained adherents especially in the cities where thebishops had beenobliged to give the management ofecclesiastical affairs to others; the control had thereby passed into the hands of the city authorities, who in the course oftime claimed for themselves the right of patronage.Luther's German writings soon found a ready reception among the inhabitants of the cities, and before longLutheran preachers appeared; these came largely fromSilesia, which had active intercourse with Hungary, and soon settled even im Buda and in the neighbourhood of the king. Exceedingly severelaws were passed by the Hungarian Diets of 1523 and 1525 againstLutherans; in 1523 the penalty of death and loss ofproperty was enacted, and in 1525 the Diet condemnedLutherans to death at the stake. Owing to theselawsLutheranism did not gain much headway in Hungary before 1526. However, in the confusion which followed the death of Louis II, the new religion steadily gained ground.
Upon the death of Louis II, Hungary was once more a prey to disputes over the succession. Ferdinand ofAustria claimed the crown on the ground of a compact between the Emperor Maximilian and Wladislaw II, while the national party elected John Zápolya as king. To these two opposing elements should be added the Ottoman power, which after the conquest of Buda (1541) ruled a large part of the land. The main result of the triple political division of Hungary was the almost complete disappearance of public order and of the systematic conduct of affairs; another was the evident decline ofCatholicism and the rapid advance of theReformation. The growth of the new religion was evident soon after the battle of Mohács. It was encouraged by the existing political conditions of Hungary: the dispute over the succession, with the accompanying civilwar; the lack of a properlyeducatedCatholicclergy; the transfer of a large amount of church land to thelaity; and the claims made by both aspirants to the throne upon the episcopal domains. The foreign armies and their leaders, sent by Ferdinand I to Hungary, also aided in the spread of the newdoctrine, which first appeared in the mountain towns of upper Hungary and then extended into the other parts of this division of the country. In western Hungary, on the farther side of the Danube, larger or smaller centres ofLutheranism sprang up under the protection of the nobility and distinguishedfamilies. These beginnings of the newdoctrine grew rapidly under such encouragement.Catholicism in Hungary was not in a position to oppose this movement at the outset; a properly trainedclergy were lacking, on account of the difficulties in the way ofeducation caused by the political confusion. In the first decades there was no open rupture between theCatholic andLutheran Churches, outwardly everything wasCatholic, confession remained unchanged, and at the most Communion under both species was introduced, so that there was little apparent distinction between the tworeligions.
TheTurkish occupation of Buda, in 1541, was a great blow to theChurch in Hungary. A large part of the country was now underTurkish sovereignty;Mohammedanism gained a footing in these districts, and thebishops and chapters had to withdraw. The churches gained by theTurks were changed into mosques, andMohammedan preachers settled in the country. Thefaith ofIslam, however, did not take real hold on the population; conversions were relatively few. On the other hand, theTurkish occupation promotedProtestantism both directly and indirectly. During this periodProtestantism enteredTransylvania and soon gained ascendancy there. The Hungarian Diets of 1542, 1544, and 1548 passed far-reaching enactments for the protection of theCatholicFaith, such as banishment of the foreign preachers, the return of the sequestrated church lands, etc., but, owing to the confused state of public affairs, theselaws were not carried out. BesidesLutheranism,Calvinism also took root in Hungary at this time, and from 1547 were added the teachings of theAnabaptists, who won adherents in the western counties of upper Hungary and inTransylvania. In 1556 the districts on the farther side of the Theiss accepted the Reformed religion. The revival of theCatholicChurch began under Nicholas Oláhus,Archbishop ofGran (1553-68), who for this purpose held anational synod in 1561. He founded aseminary for boys at Nagy-Szombat (Tyrnau), and put theJesuits in charge of it. His example was followed by otherbishops, but the death (1564) of Ferdinand I put an end for a time to the efforts for reform in theChurch. Thereligious indifference of Ferdinand's successor, Maximilian II (1564-76), worked great injury to theChurch. In his earlier years Maximilian had been strongly inclined to the new creed, a fact of which the preachers of these doctrines took advantage, so that towards the end of his reign a majority of the great nobles of Hungary had becomeProtestants, thereby greatly encouraging the spread of the new doctrines. Maximilian's failure to fill the archiepiscopal See ofGran, which fell vacant in 1573, caused a further decline of theCatholic religion, nor did his successor, Rudolf II, fill the vacancy until some time after ascending the throne. In the first years of the reign of Rudolf II (1576-1608) religious conditions changed but little; later, the position of theCatholicclergy improved after the entrance of theJesuits, who improved theeducation of theclergy. Thus, at the end of the seventeenth century theCatholicclergy were ready to carry on the struggle againstProtestantism in public disputations.
In this reign began the reclaiming of the churches, founded byCatholics, which had been occupied byProtestants. At the same time also began, although slowly, the conversion of theProtestant nobility, but the revolt of Stephen Bocskay again led to a decline ofCatholicism. The Treaty ofVienna, of 1606, secured freedom for theLutheran and Reformed faiths, as well as for theCatholics. In the reign of Matthias II (1608-19) the Treaty ofVienna of 1606 was confirmed by the Diet of 1608, and religious freedom was extended to the cities and villages. The Diet also granted theProtestants theright to elect their own administrative heads, so that theProtestants could now organize as anecclesiastical body. The highest politicalhonour of Hungary, the dignity ofPalatine (president of the Diet and representative of the king) was in this era held byProtestants. Stephen Illésházy and George Thurzö followed each other in this office and, as was natural, defended their religion.
To this period also belong the taking of a more determined position by theCatholicChurch againstProtestantism and the beginning of theCounter-Reformation. Francis Forgách,Bishop of Nyitra (Neutra), laterArchbishop ofGran, took up the struggle againstProtestantism. Together with hisclergy, he protested, although in vain, against the ordinances of the Diet of 1608; the Diet of 1609 rejected his protest. It also opposed Peter Pázmány, laterArchbishop ofGran, who, as a member of theSociety of Jesus, had developed a remarkable activity. In 1613 appeared his chief work, "Hodegus", that is, "Guide to Divine Faith", to which for a long time no reply was made byProtestantism (see PETER PÁZMÁNY). Through the efforts of Pázmány and his fellowJesuits, theCatholics formed a majority in the Diet of 1618. At this Diet theProtestants endeavoured to get control of the village churches also, and tried to have an enactment passed giving aProtestant village theright to the church against the will of the lord of the manor, but they did not succeed. In 1619 a revolt for the preservation ofProtestant interests broke out; it was led by Gabriel Bethlen, ruler ofTransylvania, whose cause was espoused by theProtestant nobles of Hungary. The insurrection spread rapidly; Kassa (Kaschau), the chief town of upper Hungary, was captured by Bethlen, who by the end of 1619 was seeking to become King of Hungary. A threatened attack by theTurks forced Bethlen in 1620 to agree to an armistice with the king. A Diet was held at Beszterczebánya (Neusohl) by Bethlen in July and August, 1620, which elected him King of Hungary. The Diet confiscated the domains of theChurch and suppressed alldioceses except three. Bethlen, however, was not able to maintain himself long and wasobliged, by the end of 1621, to agree to peace with Ferdinand II (1619-35) at Nikolsburg. In religious affairs the treaty was based on the Treaty ofVienna of 1606 and the enactments of the Diet of 1608.
TheCatholicChurch now steadily increased. Thousands of those who had fallen away returned to the Faith. This at times led to renewed struggles when theProtestants were not willing to consent to the return of the churches. Their efforts at the Diets to retain the churches when the lord of the manor was converted, and the serfs remainedProtestant, failed, as what they desired was contrary to the provision of thecivil law. During the reign of Ferdinand III (1635-57) occurred, in 1644, the insurrection for the defence of therights of theProtestants, led by George Rákóczy I; thewar came to an end with the Peace ofLinz (1645). This treaty secured complete religious freedom even to the serfs, and contained ordinances concerning the use of the churches, cemeteries, and bells; the expulsion of theProtestantministers from the towns and villages was forbidden, etc. The Diet of 1646 went thoroughly into the religious question. The final decision of the king gave theProtestants 90 of the 400 churches they claimed; where they were not given the church they obtained suitable land for building. To carry out these ordinances, however,proved very difficult; strong opposition was manifested, and conditions remained very much the same up to 1670. A great change in religious affairs was caused by the discovery of the conspiracy of Francis Wesselényi and his companions, to make Hungary independent ofAustria. A large number of the conspirators wereProtestant; thus it came about that the civilwar that broke out after the discovery of the conspiracy soon became a religiouswar. The Government succeeded in suppressing the rebellion and erected at Pozsony (Presburg) a special court for the conviction of theProtestants. The revolt of Emeric Thököly, in 1678, once more injured theCatholic cause; up to 1684 Thököly had control of a large part of the country, and theProtestants took up arms against theCatholics. In 1681 the Diet was summoned to put an end to these disordered conditions. TheProtestants, however, laid before it a list of demands; some of them were conceded by the king, but theProtestants were not satisfied, and the struggle betweenCatholics andProtestants did not cease for a long time. These continual dissensions brought internal affairs into great disorder, the tension between the tworeligions showed itself also in social life, and the decline in moral character was evident among the population. TheCatholicChurch suffered great losses, churches andschools fell into decay, theregularclergy were driven away, their possessions and lands confiscated, etc. The judgments pronounced by the courts against theProtestants gave foreignProtestant princes the opportunity to interfere in the internal affairs of the country, which naturally brought inconvenience with it.
The recovery of Buda (Ofen) from theTurks led to a change very favourable to theChurch. There were no longerProtestant revolts, and, as theTurks were driven out, theChurch regained possession of its lost territories. Ecclesiastical affairs in these districts were now reorganized, new churches were built, newclergy sent, etc. In claiming its formerproperty theChurch met with the opposition of the Government, which would not consent to the restoration ofecclesiastical lands without legalproof. The relations of thedenominations were settled by the Diet of 1687 on the basis of the enactments of the Diet of 1681; freedom ofconscience was granted, with safeguards of therights of lords-of-the-manor, the return of the banishedProtestantministers was permitted, theProtestant nobles were allowed to build churches for their private use, etc. These enactments, however, soonproved insufficient, and what was lacking was settled by royal edict as cases requiring decision appeared. The Diet of 1687 also acknowledged the Hungarian Crown to be hereditary in the Hapsburgfamily and in addition to this renounced the free election of the king.
The opening of the eighteenth century was signalized by the outbreak of a revolution headed by Francis Rákóczy II. The only damage which this did to theChurch was that the work of consolidation and reorganization was delayed for a time. The revolt was purely political and did not degenerate into a religiouswar; in the districts which sided with Rákóczy theCatholicclergy also supported the prince. In 1705 Rákóczy held a Diet at Szécsény which passedlaws regarding religious questions; the religious ordinances of the Diets of 1608 and 1647 were renewed; religious freedom was granted to serfs; in those places where the population was of bothreligions the one to which the majority of the inhabitants belonged received the church, while the minority had theright to build one for itself. After the session of the Diet of Onod, 1707, where the independence of Hungary was declared, and the Hapsburg dynasty deposed, political conditions were for a short time unfavourable to theChurch, asProtestantism was granted larger influence in the affairs of the Government, but this soon passed away. King Joseph I held a Diet at Pozsony (Presburg) in 1708, at which the religious question was again brought forward, but no agreement was reached. TheProtestants made large demands, but the Government would not concede more than was contained in thelaws of 1681 and 1687. Soon after this the revolt headed by Rákóczy came to an end and in the Peace ofSzatmár (1711) the country once more obtained rest from political disorder. The regulations of the treaty in regard to religion were that the Government should maintain thelaws of 1681 and 1687 which granted the free exercise of religion topersons of every denomination; consequently religious freedom was conceded theProtestants.
For a long period after the Peace ofSzatmárCatholic Hungary was undisturbed. During this era the reorganization and strengthening of theCatholicChurch could be vigorously carried on. The colonization of the regions regained from theTurks in the later decades of the seventeenth century, and of the districts surrounding the River Temes, began after 1716. The colonists were foreigners, largely Germans, who held theCatholicFaith. As a result of this and other settlements, theCatholic population rapidly increased, so that in 1805 there were 5,105,381Catholics to 1,983,366Protestants. The number of theparishes also grew greatly, especially in the country formerly underTurkish, rule. The churches in the hands of theProtestants were reclaimed anew, but this once more led to intense friction. In order to restore religious peace, Emperor Charles VI, who was Charles Ill of Hungary (1711-40), appointed a commission for religious affairs, the decisions of which, however, were not sanctioned until 1731. These enactments, calledResolutio Carolina, confirmed thelaws of 1681 and 1687 regarding religious affairs.Protestants were permitted the public exercise of their religion in the western districts of the country, according to the provisions of thelaw of 1681, and the private exercise of it everywhere. TheProtestantministers were forbidden to live outside of the places legally designated, but the members of theirfaith could seek them where they abode. The authority of the superintendents over thepastors was limited to disciplinary matters; in secular matters thepastors were subject to thecivil jurisdiction. Matters pertaining to marriage were placed under the control of thebishop; the decision, however, was given in accordance withProtestant enactments. In regard tomixed marriages, it was enacted that the marriage must be entered upon before theCatholicpriest, and the children be brought up in theCatholic religion.
Regarding church buildings the enactments of thelaws of 1687 were declared to be in force. These are the more important ordinances of theResolutio, which were supplemented later by various royal decisions. Charles VI was the last male descendant of the Hapsburgs, and he sought to have the succession to the throne secured to thefemale line; this was enacted by the Diet of 1723. When Charles died his daughterMaria Theresa (1740-80), on the strength of thislaw, succeeded him on the Hungarian throne. During her reign the ordinances of theResolutio Carolina were strictly enforced; in reply to the complaints brought against it by theProtestants, the queen said that she did not intend to make any concessions outside of those contained in thelaw. TheCatholicChurch rapidly developed in this reign. There was no longer a lack ofpriests forparish work, and thebishops sought to train up capable and well-educatedpersons for the pastorate. Thereligious orders increased so largely underMaria Theresa that enactments were issued in 1770 to check the growth of their numbers. According to a census of this year, there were in Hungary 3570 male religious, including 191hermits; this number was made by law the maximum which was not to be exceeded. Great stress was also laid upon the development ofeducation, newschools and institutions foreducation were established, and the queen directed her attention also to advanced instruction. Theuniversity at Nagy-Szombat (Tyrnau), founded by Peter Pazmány, was completed in 1769 by the addition of a medical faculty; it was removed in 1776 to Buda, and in 1780 to Pest; in 1777 theRatio educationis was issued, which regulated the entire system ofeducation.
Thesuppression of the Jesuits occurred during the reign ofMaria Theresa, and the order ceased to exist in Hungary. Its possessions, which became theproperty of the Crown, were used for the promotion ofeducation. Newdioceses were also formed at this time; in 1776 the Dioceses of Beszterczebánya (Neusohl), Rozsnyó (Rosenau), and Szepes (Zips) were founded; in 1777 the Dioceses of Szombathely (Steinamanger), and Székes Fehévár (Stuhlweissenburg). In regard to the filling of thebishoprics, Art. XV of 1741 enacted that only natives should be appointed to thesees. Thisdecree was contrary to the custom followed by the predecessors ofMaria Theresa, under whom it frequently happened thatecclesiastical dignities were bestowed on foreigners. From 1770 the queen also reserved to herself the appointment of canons. The taxing ofecclesiastical benefices, which had existed from 1717, and had received at that time thepapal confirmation, was later renewed from decade to decade, and finally, in 1765, was treated as a permanent tax.
TheChurch suffered greatly during the reign ofJoseph II (1780-90), the son and successor ofMaria Theresa. The Edict of Toleration, which annulled theResolutio Carolina, was issued 25 October, 1781. Thisdecree made large concessions to theProtestants; thus it was enacted that wherever there were one hundredProtestantfamilies they could freely exercise their religion and might build churches without steeples or bells in such places. TheProtestants were also permitted to hold public offices; it was further enacted that they could not be forced to take anoath opposed to their religious convictions and were released from observing theCatholic feast days. Matters connected with the marriage ofProtestants were placed under the control of the secular courts. All the children of amixed marriage were to be brought up asCatholics when the father was aCatholic; if he were not, then only the daughters were to beCatholics. These ordinances worked much harm to theCatholicFaith; moreover the Emperor Joseph interfered in various otherecclesiastical matters. He reserved to himself the right of founding newparishes;diocesanseminaries were replaced by state institutions,ecclesiastical affairs were put under the control of a special Hungarian commission; edicts were also issued in regard to the administration of church lands etc. These ordinances were a source of much damage to theChurch, but the emperor went even further. With a few exceptions — the teaching orders and those who had thecure of souls — he suppressed all thereligious orders in Hungary and confiscated theirproperty. He also provoked a rupture with theHoly See, and even the journey ofPope Pius VI toVienna did not produce any change in theecclesiastical policy of the emperor. The universal discontent which the edicts of the emperor had called forthobliged Joseph, who had refused to becrowned King of Hungary, to withdraw before his death (1790) all his enactments, with the exception of the edict of toleration and thedecree concerning the serfs.
In the reign of Leopold II (1790-92), the Diet of 1790-91 granted theProtestants complete independence in the management of theirecclesiastical affairs. Liberty of religiousbelief was recognized, and the enactments of the Government were not allowed to affect any matters concerningProtestant churches andschools. In regard tomixed marriages it was decreed that these should be solemnized before aCatholicpriest, who was not permitted to prevent such a marriage. The children of amixed marriage were to be brought up in theCatholicFaith when the father was aCatholic; when he was not, then only the sons were trained in the religion of the father. While thisdecree gave theProtestants various advantages, and especially guaranteed their autonomy, theCatholicChurch suffered much damage. The administration continually sought to secure greater influence in its affairs; in the years ofwar it demanded increasingly greater aid from theCatholicclergy and allowed a number of the wealthiestecclesiastical benefices to remain vacant in order to enjoy their revenues during vacancy. Thus, for example, the archiepiscopal See ofGran remainedvacant for nearly twenty years. During the reign of Francis I (1792-1835) there was no change for a long period inecclesiastical affairs. For this the king was largely responsible; he looked with no friendly eye onclerical activity in politics, although theclergy, on account of their position in the country and their wealth, were well fitted to take part in political affairs. The Dioceses of Kassa (Kaschau) and Szatmár were founded in 1804, and at a later date the Diocese of Eger (Erlau) was raised to an archdiocese with the Dioceses ofSzepes (Zips), Rozsnyó (Rosenau), Kassa (Kaschau), and Szatmár as suffragans. In 1802 theBenedictine,Cistercian, andPremonstratensian Orders were re-established. In order to elevatereligious life andecclesiastical discipline, the Prince Primate Alexander Rudnay held a greatnational synod in 1822, at which ordinances in regard to the improvement of theschools were passed.
It was not until the Diet of 1832-36 that the affairs of theChurch were again brought up. The occasion was the question ofmixed marriages and of changes to theProtestant religion. In regard to the latter, Art. XXVI of 1791, Sec. 13, decreed that the change toProtestantism could only take place with royal permission and after six weeks' instruction. TheProtestants made strenuous efforts to have this article of thelaw annulled, but for a long time they were not successful. It was not until the Diet of 1844 that theProtestants secured a settlement of the matter in accordance with their wishes; Art. III of 1844 repealed the requirements of the royal consent and the six weeks' instruction, and decreed instead that the change offaith must be twice notified to theparishpriest within four weeks in the presence of two witnesses. If theparishpriest refused to grant a certificate of this fact, the witnesses could draw it up.
The second question that arose in this period, that ofmixed marriages, had been last regulated by the Diet of 1790-91. The law contained enactments, as mentioned above, concerning the religion of children ofmixed marriages, but the cases increased in which theparents made a formal declaration promising to bring the children up asCatholics. In 1793 there was aProtestant agitation against this declaration, and when, in the years 1830-40, the question ofmixed marriages was discussed inGermany the controversy in that country influenced conditions in Hungary. Inmixed marriages theCatholicclergy continued to demand the signing of a formal declaration. TheBishop of Nagy-Várad (Grosswardein) was the firstbishop to order (1839) that only thosemixed marriages could have the blessing of theChurch in which the religion of the children was settled by a declaration in favour of theCatholicFaith. TheProtestants demanded again from the Diet of 1839-40 the suppression of the declaration. The pastoral letter of 2 July, 1840, of the Hungarianbishops bound theclergy to passive assistance inmixed marriages in whichCatholic interests were not guarded — that is, where the formal declaration was not made. This ordinance aroused much feeling, and severalecclesiastics were fined on account of passive assistance. Thebishops now turned toRome, and theHoly See confirmed the pastoral letter, with the addition thatmixed marriages were indeed forbidden, but that such marriages were valid, even when not entered on before apriest, if two witnesses were present. The Diet of 1843-44 allowedmixed marriages to be entered upon beforeProtestantclergy; theCatholic mother, however, received the right, with the permission of the father, to bring up all of the children in theCatholicFaith.
The agitation of 1848 and the Hungarian Revolution of 1848-49, besides changing political and social conditions, also affected the interests of theChurch. The Diet of 1848 decreed the equality and reciprocity of all recognized confessions. In 1849 the minister ofeducation and public worship, Horváth, desired to grantCatholic autonomy, but after the suppression of the Hungarian Revolution it came to nothing. Large numbers of theCatholicclergy took part in the Hungarian Revolution, a fact which in the following years of absolutism led to theirpersecution by the Government. During the period of autocratic rule the ordinances of the Austrian Concordat of 1855 were made authoritative for Hungary also, and in accordance with its enactmentsprovincial synods for settling variousecclesiastical affairs were held in 1858 and 1863. Although the Concordat granted greater freedom to the Hungarian Church, yet the administration of the fund for religion andeducation remained in the hands of the Government. In 1853 political reasons led to the elevation of theDiocese of Zágráb (Agram) to an archdiocese having as suffragans the Sees ofDiakovár,Zengg-Modrus, and Körös, and later to the founding of theArchdiocese of Fogaras. The erection of this archdiocese violated therights of thePrimate of Hungary; this led to repeated, but ineffectual, protests.
The period of absolutism in Hungary came to an end with thecoronation of Francis Joseph I as King of Hungary (8 June, 1867), and thelaws of 1848 were once more in force. The responsible parliamentary Government and Parliament exercised much influence on the affairs of theChurch. The firstlaws touchingecclesiastical questions undoubtedly worked much injury to theChurch, as the Common School Law of 1868 (Art. XXXVIII), which left to the inhabitants of a community the decision as to whether the commonschool was to be denominational or communal; also Art. XLVIII which, in regard todivorce inmixed marriages, enacted that such cases might be brought by the respective parties before the competent spiritual authorities recognized by each, and that each must be bound by the decision of his, or her, own spiritual authority. This enactment led many to change to theProtestant religion. Art. LIII of 1868 enacted, in regard to the children ofmixed marriages, that the children should follow the creed of the parent of the same sex, and that this must be enforced even after the death of the parent, as, for example, after the death of theProtestant father, theCatholic mother could not bring up in theCatholicFaith the minor children belonging to theProtestant confession. It was also decreed that, when one of theparents changed his religion, the child could not follow this change unless under seven years of age. These enactments led later to a bitter ecclesiastico-political struggle.
Various efforts were made in Parliament, between 1869-72, to injure theChurch, as in the bills introducingcivil marriage, civil registration, complete religious liberty, etc. However, of these measures, those regardingcivil marriages, the keeping of the registers by civil officials, etc., were not enforced until a much later date. Serious complications arose upon thepromulgation of thedogma ofInfallibility by theVatican Council in 1870. The Government, supported by thejus placeti, forbade its publication; a royal reproof was sent in 1871 to theBishop of Székes-Fehérvár (Stuhlweissenburg), Jekelfalussy, who officially published thedogma. TheKulturkampf inGermany (1872-75) produced in Hungary a movement hostile to theChurch. Agitation was also caused by the passing of Art. XI of 1879; it enacted that the reception into anotherreligious denomination, in so far as it was contrary to Art. LIII of 1868, was subject to legal penalty. The difficulties arising from the interpretation of thislaw lasted for a long time. In 1883 a bill on the marriage ofCatholics andJews was laid before the Parliament but was twice rejected by the Upper House and finally withdrawn by the Government. The ministry of Koloman Tisza, which lasted longer (1875-89) than any other since 1867, inflicted further damage upon theCatholicChurch.Protestantism spread in all directions and received active support from the Government. The revision of the constitution of the Upper House (House of Magnates) in 1885 (Art. VII) excludedCatholicauxiliary bishops from membership, with the exception of the Auxiliary Bishops of Nándor-Fehérvár and Knin (Tinin) According to thislaw, the dignitaries of theCatholicChurch, both of the Latin and Greek Rites, entitled to membership in the Upper House since that time are the prince-primate and the otherarchbishops anddiocesanbishops, the Auxiliary Bishops of Nándor-Fehérvár and Knin, the Archabbot of Pannonhalma (Martinsberg), the Provost of Jászó (Premonstratensian Order), and the Prior of Auranien; the representatives of the OrthodoxGreek Church are thePatriarch of Karlocza (Karlowitz), theMetropolitan of Gyula-Fehérvár (Karlsburg), and thediocesanbishops; of theProtestant Churches, their highestclerical and lay dignitaries.
In the first years of the last decade of the nineteenth century a far-reaching movement threatened theChurch in Hungary. An ecclesiastico-political conflict began, caused by thedecree of the Minister of Education and Public Worship, Count Csáky. Thisdecree provided that anypriest who performed abaptism according to Art. LIII of 1868 must send a certificate ofbaptism to the legally responsibleclergyman within eight days. Neglect to obey thislaw was to be considered a misdemeanour, and punished accordingly. Thisdecree, called theWegtaufungDecree (baptism away from the other side) marked the beginning of a new ecclesiastico-political conflict. According to this edict aCatholicpriest when hebaptized a child belonging to anotherfaith must send the certificate ofbaptism to the minister of the other denomination; such an enactment was regarded by theCatholicclergy as contrary toconscience and the canonical ordinances. Thebishops did not order that thelaw be carried out, although they declared that for a time it could be tolerated; the greater part of theparishpriests, however, refused to obey it. ACatholic agitation for the modification in the interest of theChurch of Art. LIII of 1868, and for the repeal of thedecree issued by Csáky, did not succeed, while the supporters of the Government soon made use of the movement to further the introduction ofobligatorycivil marriage, civil registration, and the free exercise of religion. These latter proposals became law during the premiership of Alexander Wekerle. In 1893 theecclesiastical bills were laid before the Diet, and after long debates, being once rejected by the House of Magnates, they became law in 1894 and took effect 1 October, 1895. Articles XXXI and XXXIII of 1894 contain enactments regarding marriage and registration. Civil marriage is made compulsory, and government recognition is only given to civil registration. Article XXXII of 1894 enacts that theparents can enter into an agreement before the registrar as to the religion of the children. Registrars are appointed by the minister of the interior and are responsible to him; aparishpriest cannot be appointed to this office. The Hungarianbishops protested against theselaws and sent a memorial to the king requesting him not to sanction them; they were, however, unsuccessful. Article XLII of 1895 gave official recognition to theJewish religion; at the same time theright to belong to no confession was granted.
AKulturkampf did not, as had been feared, follow the passage of the ecclesiastico-politicallaws. Nevertheless, they led to the formation of aCatholic parliamentary party, the People's Party (Volkspartei), which made the revision of the ecclesiastico-politicallaws the chief measure of their programme. As early as the election for members of the Diet which followed the taking effect of theselaws the People's Party nominated candidates and up to the parliamentary election of 1906 it had 33 adherents among the members of the Lower House. The large proportions which theCatholic movement assumed in Hungary are due to this party.Catholic associations were founded in all parts of the land, and finally a union was formed which embraced the entire country. This reawakenedCatholic consciousness led to the holding of nationalCatholic Congresses, which have now met for a number of years. These congresses have aided greatly in the strengthening andpromulgation ofCatholic opinions. The efforts of theChurch in Hungary to gain autonomy for the protection ofCatholic interests, especially in regard to the administration ofCatholic foundations andschools, have so far been unsuccessful. The Diet of 1791 granted autonomy to theProtestants, but theCatholics neglected, at that time, to secure the same for themselves. It was not until 1848 that the first steps in this direction were taken by the holding of an episcopal conference to discuss the question. Nothing, however, resulted from these efforts, and the quickly following outbreak of the Revolution put the matter aside for the time being, nor was the question brought up during the period of absolutism. After the restoration of constitutional government the question of the autonomy of theChurch was again raised, and in 1867 thebishops had a plan drawn up, which in 1868 was laid before a large assembly. In 1870 a congress for the promotion of autonomy was called, and a commission appointed which in 1871 presented its first report. According to the plan it outlined there were to be formed a national congress and an administrative council. The national congress was to be under the guidance of the princeprimate; subordinate to the congress were to be thediocesan conventions with adiocesan senate; below, there were to be the decanal and district senates, following which were the communal assemblies and theparishes. The incorporated autonomy council was to represent the interests ofCatholics, to administer theproperty of the Church, and to be the advisory council of the king in the appointment of church dignitaries. The Congress of 1871 accepted this plan and laid it before the king, but no practical results followed. After this but little was done in the matter until 1897, when a new congress for the promotion of autonomy was called. A commission was appointed which finished its labours in three years, and in 1900 the congress reassembled. The plan of the majority claimed autonomy almost entirely for the episcopate and left the administration of theproperty to the Government. The opposition party in the congress demanded the control of the funds, theschools, and theright of presentation for the congress. The discussions lasted through the years 1901-1902; in the latter year the congress closed its labours and laid the results before the king, who reserved his decision. Since then nothing more has been done in the matter.
In 1909, after long negotiations, the question of the equalization ofclerical salaries was finally settled (Art. XIII of 1909). The principal provisions of thislaw fix the salary ofpastors of recognizedreligions at 1600 Kronen ($320) with a minimum of 800 Kronen ($160); that ofcurates and assistantpastors at 1000 Kronen ($200), with a minimum of 800 Kronen ($160); the value of I board and lodging is included in the salary of acurate or assistant, and this is reckoned at 500 Kronen ($100). In order to meet the expenses of the equalization, the higherecclesiastics of theCatholicChurch are annually taxed to the amount of 700,000 Kronen ($140,000), and the Hungarian fund for religion to the amount of 1,200,000 Kronen ($240,000). Ecclesiastical affairs are under the control of the Hungarian Ministry of Education and Public Worship, in which a separate department, having one of the higher church dignitaries at its head, has been formed. The appointment ofbishops, canons,abbots, etc. belongs to the king and follows upon the presentation of the names, with ministerial approval, by the minister ofeducation and public worship. Thebishops enter upon their office, take their seats in the House of Magnates, and receive their revenues without awaiting thepapal confirmation. A royal edict of 1870 revived the old royaljus placeti andordained that only after receiving royal approval could decisions, constitutions, and decrees of councils andpopes bepromulgated in Hungary. It should also be mentioned that theBull "Ne Temere", recently issued by theHoly See in regard tomixed marriages, was not enforced in Hungary, owing to the representations of the Hungarian episcopate, but the provisions of the Constitution "Provida", issued forGermany in the same matter, 18 January, 1906, were also extended to Hungary.
The Church in Hungary, in respect to organization, is divided into the threeArchdioceses ofGran (Esztergom), Kalocsa, and Eger (Erlau). The suffragans ofGran are the Dioceses of Beszterczebánya (Neusohl), Györ (Raab), Nyitra (Neutra), Pécs (Fünfkirchen), Székes-Fehérvár (Stuhlweissenburg), Szombathely (Steinamanger), Vácz (Waitzen), andVeszprém. The suffragans of Kalocsa are the Dioceses ofCsanád,Transylvania, and Nagy-Várad (Grosswardein). The suffragans of Eger (Erlau) are the Dioceses of Kassa (Kaschau), Rozsnyó (Rosenau),Szatmár, and Szepes (Zips). The head of theChurch is the Metropolitan Prince Primate, the PrinceArchbishop ofGran (Esztergom). There is also in Hungary proper anabbey which is equal in rank to thedioceses, theBenedictine Abbey of Pannonhalma (Martinsberg). The Kingdom of Croatia-Slavonia has one archdiocese that ofZágráb (Agram). Its suffragans are the Dioceses ofDiakovár (Bosnia, or Diakovár and Szerem), andZengg-Modrus. There are twoUniat Greekarchdioceses in Hungary, Gran (Esztergom) and Gyula-Fehérvár-Fogaras. The suffragans of theUniatArchdiocese of Gran (Esztergom) are Munkács and Eperjes; those of Gyula-Fehérvár-Fogaras areLugos, Nagy-Várad (Grosswardein), Szamos-Ujvar, and the Diocese of Körös(Kreuz) in Croatia.
The Reformed Church is divided into four districts; theLutheran Church into five districts. The OrthodoxGreek Church is governed by thePatriarch of Karlócza (Karlowitz), who has under him the Dioceses of Bács, Buda, Temesvár, and Versecz. The OrthodoxGreek Church inTransylvania is governed by theMetropolitan of Nagy-Szeben (Hermannstadt), who has under him the Dioceses ofArad and Karánsebes. ThePatriarch of Karlócza (Karlowitz) hasjurisdiction also over the Dioceses of Károlyváros (Karlstadt) and Pakrácz inCroatia. TheUnitarian Church is divided into 9dioceses with 113 mother-churches and 111pastors; thesee of theirbishop is Kolozsvár (Klausenburg). TheJews are divided into three communities, the Congress, Status Quo, and Orthodox communities. In 1905 the Baptist Church was added to the legally recognizedreligions, but only the community at Budapest, which in 1907 had 190 stations, was sanctioned as an organized community.
According to the Hungarian census of 1900 the adherents of the different religions number as follows:
Catholic of theLatin Rite, 9,846,533;Uniat Greek, 1,843,634; Reformed, 2,423,878;Lutheran, 1,280,070;Orthodox Greek, 2,799,846;Unitarian, 68,005; Jewish, 846,254; other confessions, 14,180. Total, 19,122,400.
Catholic of theLatin Rite, 73,380;Uniat Greek, 10,509; Reformed, 17,324; Lutheran, 8872;Orthodox Greek, 15,867;Unitarian, 563; Jewish, 5124; other confessions, 580. Total, 132,219.
TheCatholicdioceses of Hungary contain 21cathedral chapters with 211 regular and 113 honorary canons; 23diocesanabbeys, 51 exempt and 151 titularabbeys; 36diocesan provostships; 3 exempt and 110 titular provostships; 72 archdeaconries and 392 vice-archdeaconries; 3249 mother-churches, 7590 dependent churches with not less than 50souls, and 7594 dependent churches, with less than 50souls. In Croatia-Slavonia there are 6cathedral chapters with 60 regular and 30 honorary canons; 1diocesan and 21 titularabbeys; 3diocesan and 9 titular provostships; 24 archdeaconries and 65 vice-archdeaconries; 592 mother-churches and 360 dependent churches with at least 50souls. TheUniatGreek Church in Hungary has 6cathedral chapters, with 41 regular and 20 honorary canons; 1abbey and 6 titularabbeys; 3 provostships; 23 archdeaconries; 106 vice-archdeaconries and 74 deaconries; 2116 mother-churches, 1596 dependent churches with at least 50souls, and 1880 dependent churches with tess than 50souls; 1336parishpriests, 676assistant priests, 107priests filling other positions, 302ecclesiastical students; 46priests retired from active work; 62secular priests and 1regularpriest engaged outside the diocese. TheUniatGreek Church in Croatia-Slavonia has 1cathedral chapter with 14 regularcanonries and 1 honorarycanonry; 1 provostship; 4 archdeaconries and 4 vice-archdeaconries; 24 mother-churches, 15 dependent churches with at least 50souls; 11parishpriests, 16assistant priests and 6priests otherwise employed; 17ecclesiastical students; 3priests retired from active work, and 1priest outside the diocese. There are also in Hungary 196religious houses for men, with 2114 inmates, and 379religious houses forwomen, with 5005 inmates; 2606parishpriests, 1770assistant priests, and 713priests otherwise engaged; 1224ecclesiastical students; 260priests retired from active work; outside thedioceses, 135 secular and 116regularpriests. In Croatia-Slavonia there are 30religious houses for men, with 222 inmates, and 68religious houses forwomen, with 690 inmates; 509parishpriests, 285assistant priests, and 149priests otherwise engaged; 189ecclesiastical students; 47 retiredpriests and 45priests outside thedioceses (see articles on the respectivedioceses).
In German. — CSUDAY,Geschichte der Ungarn (2nd ed., Buda, 1899). The histories of Hungary of MAJLÁTH and FESSLER have been out of date for a long time. In Hungarian. — SZILÁGYI ed.,History of the Hungarian Nation (10 vols., Budapest, 1896-97); the ecclesiastical history of Hungary is treated by BALICS,History of the Roman Catholic Church in Hungary (Budapest, 1885-90); a synopsis of ecclesiastical conditions in Hungary is given in the sumptuous work issued on the 300th anniversary of the union of Hungary and Austria,Catholic Hungary; a brief history of the Church in Hungary, KARÁCSONYI,Church History of Hungary in Outline, 970-1900 (Grosswardein, 1906) contains a bibliography; Hungary's relations with the Holy See are set forth in FRAKNOI,Ecclesiastical and Political Connexion of Hungary with the Roman See (Budapest, 1901-03). Among the collections of original authorities, of which a list is given by KARÁCSONYI, may be mentioned PÉTERFY,Sacra concilia Hungariæ (2 vols., Vienna, 1742); THEINER,Vetera monumenta hist. Hungariam sacram illustrantia (2 vols., Rome, 1859-60), II; also the volumes of theMonumenta Vaticana historiam Hungariæ illustrantia (8 vols., Budapest, 1887-91); further the large work in course of publication on the Reformation and Counter-Reformation in Hungary,Monumenta ecclesiastica tempora innovatæ in Hungariâ religionis illustrantia (4 vols. published, Budapest, 1902). On the marriage law, REINER,The Hungarian Marriage Law (in Hungarian, Budapest, 1908). On autonomy, MELICHAR,Die katholische Autonomie (in Hungarian, Budapest, 1908). Cf. also bibliographies of the articles on the several Hungarian dioceses.
APA citation.Aldásy, A.(1910).Hungary. InThe Catholic Encyclopedia.New York: Robert Appleton Company.http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07547a.htm
MLA citation.Aldásy, Antal."Hungary."The Catholic Encyclopedia.Vol. 7.New York: Robert Appleton Company,1910.<http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07547a.htm>.
Transcription.This article was transcribed for New Advent by Douglas J. Potter.Dedicated to the Immaculate Heart of the Blessed Virgin Mary, and to Doctor Joseph B. and Mrs. Elena Laczi.
Ecclesiastical approbation.Nihil Obstat. June 1, 1910. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor.Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York.
Contact information. The editor of New Advent is Kevin Knight. My email address is webmasterat newadvent.org. Regrettably, I can't reply to every letter, but I greatly appreciate your feedback — especially notifications about typographical errors and inappropriate ads.