necessity of still further improvements in the latter was forcibly urged in the Vatican Council.
The numerical representation of the Council of Trent was marked by considerable fluctuations. In the first session (December 13, 1545) the spiritual dignitaries present-omitting the 3 presiding cardinals-consisted of one other cardinal, 4 archbishops, 21 bishops and 5 generals of orders. On the other hand, the resolutions of the synod were signed at its close by the 4 presidents, then by 2 cardinals, 3 patriarchs, 25 archbishops, 166 bishops, 7 abbots, 7 generals of orders and 19 procurators of archbishops and bishops. In this council-as later in the Vatican-Italy was the dominant nation, sending two-thirds of the delegates; while Spain was responsible for about 30, France for about 20, and Germany for no more than 8 members. In spite of the paucity of its numbers at the opening and the unequal representation of the Church, which continued to the last, the ecumenical character of the council was never seriously questioned. On the motion of the legates, the resolutions were submitted to the ambassadors of the secular powers for signature, the French and Spanish envoys alone withholding their assent. The recognition of the council’s enactments was, none the less, beset with difficulties. So far as the doctrinal decisions were concerned no obstacles existed; but the reformatory edicts-adhesion to which was equally required by the synod-stood on a different footing. In their character of resolutions claiming to rank as ecclesiastical law they came into conflict with outside interests, and their acceptance by no means implied that the rights of the sovereign, or the needs and circumstances of the respective countries, were treated with sufficient consideration. The consequence was that there arose an active and, in some cases, a tenacious opposition to an indiscriminate acquiescence in all the Tridentine decrees. Under Charles IX. and Henry IV. the situation was hotly debated in France: but these monarchs showed as little complaisance to the representations and protests of the Curia as did the French parlement itself; and only those regulations were recognized which came into collision neither with the rights of the king nor with the liberties of the Gallican Church. In Spain, Philip II. allowed, indeed, the publication of the Tridentinum, as also in the Netherlands and Naples, but always with the reservation that the privileges of the king, his vassals and his subjects, should not thereby be infringed. The empire, as such, never recognized the Tridentinum. Still it was published at provincial and diocesan synods in the territories of the spiritual princes, and also in the Austrian hereditary states.
In his official confirmation Pius IV. had already strictly prohibited any commentary on the enactments of the council unless undertaken with his approval, and had claimed for himself the sole right of interpretation. In order to supervise the practical working of these enactments, Pius created (1564) a special department of the Curia, the Congregatio cardinalium concilii tridentini interpretum; and to this body Sixtus V. entrusted the further task of determining the sense of the conciliar decisions in all dubious cases. The resolution es of the congregation-on disputed points-and their declarations on legal questions-exercised a powerful influence on the subsequent development of ecclesiastical law.
The Council of Trent attained a quite extraordinary significance for the Roman Catholic Church; and its pre-eminence was unassailed till the Vaticanum subordinated all the labours of the Church in the past—whether in the region of doctrine or in that of law—to an infallible pope. On the theological side it fixed the results of medieval scholasticism and gleaned from it all that could be of service to the Church. Further, by pronouncing on a series of doctrinal points till then undecided it elaborated the Catholic creed; and, finally, the bold front which it offered to Protestantism in its presentation of the orthodox faith gave to its members the practical lead they so much needed in their resistance to the Evangelical assault. The regulations dealing with ecclesiastical life, in the widest sense of the words, came, for the most part, to actual fruition, so that, in this direction also, the council had not laboured in vain. For the whole Roman Catholic Church of the 16th century its consequences are of an importance which can scarcely be exaggerated: it showed that Church as a living institution, capable of work and achievement; it strengthened the confidence both of her members and herself, and it was a powerful factor in heightening her efficiency as a competitor with Protestantism and in restoring and reinforcing her imperilled unity. Indeed, its sphere of influence was still more extensive, for its labours in the field of dogma and ecclesiastical law conditioned the future evolution of the Roman Catholic Church. As regards the position of the papacy, it is of epoch-making significance—not merely in its actual pronouncements on the papal see, but also in its tacit subordination to that see, and the opportunities of increased influence accorded to it.
There were three periods of the council, separated by not inconsiderable intervals, each of an individual character, conducted by different popes, but forming a single unity—an indivisible whole, so that it is strictly correct to speak of one Council of Trent, not of three distinct synods.
Bibliography.—Sources for the history of the council: Concilium tridentinum; diariorum, actorum, epistularum, tractatuum nova collectio, ed. Societas Goerresiana. Tom. i. (Diariorum pars i. Herculis Severoli commentaries. Angcli Massarelli diaria 1–4, collegit S. Merkle), Freiburg (1901). Tom. iv. (Actorum pars 1.: Monumenta concilium praecedeatia; trium priorum session um acta: collegit St Ehses), Freiburg (1904). Till the completion of this splendidly planned work, the following deserve especial mention: F. le Plat, Monumentorum ad historian: concilii tridentini spectantium amplissima collectio (Lovanü, 1781–1787); G. F; Planck, Anecdota ad historiam concilii tridentini pertinentia, 26 fasc. (G6ttmgen, 1791–1818); Acta genuina s. oecumenici concilii tridentini ab A. Massarello conscript, ed. A. Theiner (Zagrabiae, 1874); F. v. Döllinger, Sammlung von Urkunden zur Geschichte des Konzils von Trient, i. 1, 2 (Nördlingen, 1876); Id., Beiträge zur politischen kirchlichen, und Kulturgeschichte (3 vols., Regensburg, 1862–1882); G. Paleottus, Acta concilii tridentini a 1562 et 1563 usque in finem concilii, ed. F. Mendham (London, 1842); A. v. Druffel, Movzumenla zfridentina (3 parts, Munich, 1884–1887, parts 4 and 5, continued by K. Brandi, 1897–1899); Zur Geschichte des Konzils von Trient. Aktenstücke aus den österreichischen Archiven, ed. T. v. Sickel (3 parts, Vienna, 1870-1872); F. Lainez, Disputationes tridentinae, ed. Grisar (2 vols., Innsbruck, 1886); Die rémische Kume und das Konzil 'von Trient unter Pius IV. Aktenstücke zur Geschichte des Konzils von T rient, ed. F. Susta (vols. i. ii., Vienna, 1904–1909); Canones et decreta concilii tridentini (Rome, 1564; critical edition by A. L. Richter, Leipzig, 1853); the most important decisions on dogma and ecclesiastical law reprinted by C. Mirbt, Quellen zur Geschichte des Papsttums (ed. 2, Tubingen, Nr. 289 sqq.; p. 202 sqq.).
Literature. P. Sarpi, Istoria del concilio tridentino (London, 1619); Cardinal Sforza Pallavicini, Istoria del concilio di Trento (Rome, 1656–1657, a counterblast to the preceding); Brischar, Zur Beurteilung der Kontroversen zwischen Sarpi und Pallavicini (1844); Salig, Vollständige Historie des tridentinischen Konzils (Halle, 1741–1745); Wessenberg, Die grossen Kirchenversammlungen des 15ten und 16ten Jahrhunderts, vols. iii. and iv. (Constance, 1840); L. v. Ranke, Die römischen Papste im 16 und 17 Jahrhundert, vol. i.; ibid. Deutsche Geschichte im Zeitalter der Reformation, i. (Stuttgart, 1839); P. Tschackert, s.v. “Trienter Konzil,” in Herzog-Hauck, Realencykopädie fur protestantische Theologie (1908), vol. xx., ed. 3, p. 99 sqq.; G. Kawerau-W. Moeller, Lehrbuch der Kirchengeschichte, iii. 237 sqq. (Tubingen, 1907); F. Hergenrother, Handbuch der allgemeinen Kirchengeschichte, edition by F. P. Kirsch, Bd. III. p. 188 seq. (Freiburg im Breisgau, 1909). (C. M.)
TRENT, the chief river in the midlands of England, the third
in length in the country, exceeded only by the Thames and
Severn. It rises in the north of Staffordshire, and discharges
through the Humber into the North Sea, having a course of
about 170 m., and a drainage area of 4052 sq. m. The source
is on Biddulph Moor, which rises to a height of 1100 ft. The
course of the river is at first southerly, and it skirts the manufacturing
district of the Potteries, passing Stoke-upon-Trent.
Immediately below this town the valley widens, and the fall
of the river, from a point 15 m. from the source to the mouth,
is only 338 ft. Passing Stone, the course becomes south-easterly,
and the united waters of the Sow and the Penk are received
on the right. Near Rugeley the direction becomes easterly, and
near Alrewas the Trent receives the Tame on the right, and turns
to the north-east. Much of the valley above this point is well
wooded and picturesque, though the flanking hills are gently
sloping, and of no great elevation. The river now passes
