Their demand for “the execution of laws” was directed particularly
against the special privileges and immunities, real or pretended, of
the clergy.[476] Beginning with the Diet of 1511,[477] both the secular
and the regular clergy were repeatedly called upon by the diets of the
sixteenth century to justify their specially privileged status and
their evasion of public responsibilities and burdens by presenting
their charters for examination, until at last they were forced to
comply with this demand in part at least.[478] The continued insistence
on the part of the nobility on the clergy’s participation in public
burdens resulted finally in the imposition by the Diet of 1563 of a
regular tax on episcopal property and tithes.[479] In the struggle
regarding ecclesiastical jurisdiction the nobility appealed to its
privileges of 1422, 1433, 1454, and the Constitution of 1505, demanding
the annulment of all royal edicts against heresy as unconstitutional,
together with ecclesiastical jurisdiction in matters involving the
nobility’s constitutional rights to life and property. As a result of
this appeal and demand the king issued instructions to the starostas
in 1563 to respect the constitutional rights of the nobility. By this
act the royal edicts against heresy and episcopal jurisdiction, whether
in cases of heresy or of refusal to pay tithes, became invalidated and
rendered of no effect.[480]
Thus, we see that the conflict between the Polish nobility and the
ecclesiastical authorities in the sixteenth century, resulting in the
former’s extensive revolt from the established church, was due mainly
to the wealth of the Polish clergy, their immunities from public
burdens, and their abuse of episcopal jurisdiction; for these not
only increased the burdens of the Polish nobility, but also seriously
menaced its social and economic status. Whatever particular form this
conflict assumed, its underlying motives were essentially economic and
social rather than religious or even purely political.
[355] Guaranteeing to compensate the szlachta for their
participation in foreign expeditions and for
injuries sustained in them, Louis of Hungary simply
confirmed and further enlarged a right which had
been previously granted by Casimir the Great by the
Statute of Wiślice of 1347, where we read: “Sed extra
Regni metas nobis servire non sunt obligati, nisi
ipsis satis competens satisfactio per nos impendatur,
vel per nos specialiter fuerint petiti et rogati ad
hoc” (Vol. leg., vol. i, fol. 44).
[356] Ibid., fol. 57.
[357] Sokołowski, vol. i, p. 295.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account