THE NEW SCHAFF-HERZOG
Sulzbach, 1S23; C. G. Haupt, Biblischc Real- und Verbal-Encyclopadie, Quedlinburg, 1S23-27; J. G. Hauff, Biblische Real- und Verbalkonkordanz, Stuttgart, 1S2S-34; :\Iatalene, Paris, 1837, again 1SG4; A. J. James, Paris, 1S35; Lueg, Biblische Realconcordanz, 2d ed. by Heim, Regeusburg, 1855; C. Mazeron, Paris, 1869. Caspar Rene Gregory.
Bibliography: C, Kircher, De concordanlice biblicir usu, Wittenberg, 1622 (a polemic against Romanism); J. Buxtorf, preface to his Concordantioe, Basel 1632; A. Glauch, De concordantiarum biblicarum iisu, Leipsic, 1668; W Frantz, Tractatus theologicus de interpretatione aacrarumScripturarium, pp. 52-70, Wittenberg, 1708; J. LeLong, Biblicum sacrum, i. 454a-459b, Paris, 1723; H. E. Bindseil, Concordantiarum . specimen . . , Halle, 1867; Vigouroux, Dictionnaire de la bible, ii. 892-905, Paris, 1899.
CONCORDATS AND DELIMITING BULLS.
Legal Theories of Concordats (§ 1). I. Early Concordats. II. Concordats Resulting from the Council of Constance.
III. Concordats after the Council of
Basel.
1. Germany.
The Princes' Concordats, 1446 (§1).
The Concordat of Aschaffenburg or of Vienna, 1448 (§ 2).
2. France.
IV. The Seventeenth Century. V. The Eighteenth Century.
VI. The Nineteenth Century.
1. France. The Concordat of 1801 (§ 1). French Dependencies (§ 2). The Concordat of Fontaine-
bleau, 1813 (§ 3). The Concordat of 1817 (§ 4).
2. Germany and Austria. Inconclusive Negotiations of
the Napoleonic Era (§ 1). Concordat with Bavaria, 1817 (§2).
Delimiting Bull for Prussia,
1821 (§ 3). Delimiting Bull for Hanover,
1824 (§ 4).
Ecclesiastical Upper Rhine
of the 1867-70
The term concordat was used in a much broader sense in past centuries than to-day. Concordats are now usually understood to be treaties between the sovereign of a state and the pope of Rome, whereby the affairs of the Roman Catholic Church in the country concerned receive general regulation. Agreements between a state sovereign and the pope with respect to particular questions are not designated as concordats; for instance, the so-called bullas circumscriptionis, by which the bounds of a diocese are determined. Nor is an understanding between a state sovereign and the bishops of a country so named, or an agreement between the State and a Protestant church. In former centuries the conclusion of such agreements was despatched in very diversified forms; in modern times it has been customary to comprehend the result of the transactions effected by plenipotentiaries of both sides in a document which is duly published as state law upon ratification by the State and as canon law when accepted by the Church.
The legal nature of concordats is disputed; but essentially three theories obtain: (1) The Privilege Theory: If the State be the servant of the Church, it is obliged to fulfil the offices undertaken by it in the concordat; hence all concessions of Church to State are privileges. Every concordat therefore consists of two elements, which legally are not coordinate; viz., the acknowledgment of obligations on the part of the State which were already incumbent on the State, and the grant of an indult on the part of the Church. The former is permanent; the latter, in the nature of the case, revocable. The evolution of the mod- 1. Legal ern State has removed the foundation of a Theories practical realization of these elementary prinof Con- ciples; but the privilege theory itself has not cordats. been surrendered on the Roman side, and Pius IX. in a brief of June 19, 1872, referred to the concordats as pacta seu indulta. (2) The Treaty Theory: Concordats are treaties equally binding on both sides, of the nature of international or public law. The fulfilment of these treaties inheres m the fact that each of the two parties promulgates a law conformably to the text of the treaty, and makes no alteration in the status thus determined without the consent of the other party; it being, however, under.stood that in the event of changed circumstances each party retains the right of withdrawal. This construction of concordats was prevalent at the beginning rA the nineteenth century, but it is not satisfactory, eince it assumes a coordination of Church and State that can not be reconciled with the State's pretention to ecclesiastical supremacy; and since there is wanting a common
The States of the Province of the (§5).
Concordat with Austria, 1855 (§ 6). Agreements with Hesse-Darmstadt, Wiirttemberg, and Baden, 1856- 1859 (§ 7). Modification and Repeal Austrian Concordat, (§8).
3. Italy.
4. Other European States.
5. Central America.
6. South America. VII. Spanish Concordats.
legal basis for Church and State, such as must obtain for the conclusion of legal treaties. There is consequently reason to prefer (3) The Legal Theory: The agreement expressed in the concordat is not legally obligatory, but is merely a preliminary step to the state law that is to be promulgated subsequently, for which the agreement collects and arranges the material. The substance of the concordat becomes civil and canon law only when the civil and canonical enactments to that effect have been decreed on the basis of the concordat. The State, however, is not bound by such law any more than by any other law by it enacted; that is to say, it can modify the same by process of new legislation the same as any other act of state legislation.
I. Early Concordats: The so-called Concordat of Worms, dated Sept. 23, 1122 (text and bibliography in Mirbt, Quellen, pp. 115-116; cf. also D. Schafer, Zur Beurteilung des Wormser Konkordats, in the Abhandlungen der Berliner Akademie, 1905), and terminating the German investiture dispute (see Investiture), is usually accounted the oldest concordat. The emperor Henry V- at this time renounced the investiture with ring and staff, as practised by him till then; conceded that in the churches of his realm the election and consecration of bishops should be free; promised the restoration of all church possessions; and agreed to give temporal aid to the Church whenever it was demanded. Pope Calixtus II., on his part, conceded to the emperor that the German elections should be held in his presence; and that the dignitary elect should receive his regalia from the emperor in feudal tenure, in Germany before, in other parts of the empire (Italy and Burgundy) after, his consecration.
Besides the Concordat of Worms, the following agreements lay claim to the name of concordats during the twelfth, thirteenth, and fourteenth centuries: (1) The treaty between Adrian IV. and King William of Sicily at Benevento in 1156. (2) The treaty between Celestine III. (1191-98) and King Tancred. (3) Between Innocent III. and Queen Constance of Sicily (1198). (4) Clement lY. and Charles I. of Anjou (1265), referring entirely to Sicily. (5) Gregory XI. and Queen Eleanor of Aragon (1372). (6) The understanding between the bishops of Portugal and King Dionysius, approved by Nicholas IV (1288-92).
II. Concordats Resulting from the Council of Constance: The shattering of the ecclesiastical preponderance which prevailed in the prime of the Middle Ages created new conditions for the con-