A short history of Belgium

by Léon van der Essen

When, by the revolt of Luther against the Roman Catholic church, Protestantism began rapidly to spread all over Europe, it quickly found a follower in the Netherlands, whose location facilitated its expansion. In virtue of their historical development, the Netherlands are an essentially Catholic state. Charles V and Philip II, as sovereigns of that state, considered themselves the defenders of orthodoxy, religious unity, and the union of church and state. In opposing what they considered to be a political as well as a religious crime, they invoked the penal laws and criminal institutions as their weapons against what they regarded as a revolutionary movement.

The famous placarts, or penal laws, enacted under Charles V to the number of a dozen between 1520 and 1530, were complementary to each other. They were all the work of the government and were approved by the States-General, the prominent members of the military aristocracy, and the knights of the Golden Fleece. They were preventive and repressive at the same time. From a repressive point of view, they distinguished between the crime of heresy and the simple offense against the prescriptions of the placarts.

The crime of heresy could be committed only by a man who had been baptized, who from the point of view of the Catholic faith was guilty of error, and who obstinately persisted in that error after having been warned and enlightened. Obstinacy in error was the main point. If there was no obstinacy, but retraction of the error, there was no more crime; there remained only a sin. On the other hand, a simple offense against the placarts might be committed by anyone, be he a Catholic, a Jew, or a heretic. Such offenses might be committed, for instance, by acts, such as the circulation of heretic books and pamphlets, by sheltering meetings of heretics, etc.

The crime of heresy was to be judged by an ecclesiastical judge, the only one able to discuss those matters. The offense against the placarts was to be dealt with by a secular judge, a layman. The jurisdiction of the ecclesiastical judge was limited by strict rules. He might not impose a penalty prescribed by the placarts, or any penalty involving the shedding of blood. If the heretic remained obstinate, he was to be expelled from the church and given over to the lay judge, who alone might impose the penalty prescribed by the placarts.

The latter penalties were simple and drastic: death by fire, by sword, or by burial alive, and the confiscation of property. The system inaugurated by Charles was anti-judicial and cruel. It was anti-judicial, inasmuch as the penalties were applied both to heretics and to simple offenders against the placarts, and thus provided similar punishment for offenses whose intrinsic criminality was wholly different. It must not, however, be forgotten that in the sixteenth century the object of every penal law was to instil terror first of all, and that those guilty of heresy were considered as seditious persons, disturbers of the state, and consequently to be punished by the severe penalties applicable to acts of lèse-majesté.

Special officers were appointed for enforcing the placarts. These were the so-called “Apostolic Inquisitors” whom Charles V requested the Pope to appoint in 1524. They were only ecclesiastical judges, receiving their instructions directly from the Holy See. Their mission consisted in discovering the heretics, in reconciling them with the church, and in imposing only a canon or ecclesiastical penalty. If the heretic remained obstinate, they were obliged to turn him over to the lay judge. For the first time, in 1546, they received detailed instructions from the Emperor and after that were considered as agents of the state.

Another measure designed to prevent the spread of heresy was the establishment of the new dioceses, but as this was undertaken by Philip II we shall deal with it in another chapter. It remains only to add that throughout the reign of Charles V the system of the placarts met with no opposition. The Emperor was a Fleming, he was born at Ghent, he knew his people, and the people accepted from him what they would not accept from his son Philip some years later.

Owing to these circumstances, Charles V was able to complete the work of the Burgundian dukes in another direction, namely, the monarchic centralization of the Belgian provinces. The numerous wars waged by him involved expenses, and, under the rights theretofore granted the country, he was obliged to obtain the consent of the States-General, called together for the purpose, whenever he required the financial assistance of his subjects. In granting the subsidies, the States-General invariably seized on the occasion for exacting some privilege or concession in return. In order to free himself of this restraint, the Emperor sought to introduce two innovations, which, in France, had practically destroyed the power of the States-General, namely, the permanent impost and the permanent army. To his sister, Mary of Hungary, who in his name governed the Netherlands, he intrusted the proposal of a clever scheme. All the provinces of the Netherlands were to form a defensive union or confederation, in order to be ready to repel the attacks from foreign princes. Should a province be attacked, all the other provinces were immediately to join in assisting it from a military and financial point of view. Such common action would involve the existence of a permanent army and the introduction of a permanent tax.

When the proposal was laid before them, the States-General immediately discovered the trap. Some of them even dared to remark that they did not want to be treated à la mode de France. The scheme was unequivocally rejected. The Emperor was obliged to yield. He was far too diplomatic openly and brutally to oppose the privileges of his subjects.

In 1555 he abdicated and went to pass the rest of his life in the Spanish monastery of Saint Just. His son, Philip II of Spain, succeeded him as sovereign of the Netherlands.