It must not, however, be thought that matters went smoothly for the Pope at first, or that so novel a method as that which I have described, whereby the faith and discipline of Christendom were settled by negotiations between sovereigns, came suddenly into existence.  In its first sessions the Council, to quote the Pope’s own words, resembled the Tower of Babel rather than a Synod of Fathers.  The Spanish prelates contended fiercely for two principles touching the episcopacy:  one was that the residence of bishops in their dioceses had been divinely commanded; the other, that their authority is derived from Christ immediately.  The first struck at the Pope’s power to dispense from the duty of residence; and if it had been established, it would have ruined his capital.  The second would have rendered the episcopacy independent of Rome, and have made the Holy Father one of a numerous oligarchy instead of the absolute chief of a hierarchy.  Pius was able to show Philip that the independence of the bishops must inflict deep injuries on the crown of Spain.  Philip therefore wrote to forbid insistance on this point.  But the Spanish prelates, though coerced, were not silenced, and the storm which they had raised went grumbling on.

Difficulties of a no less serious nature arose when the French and Imperial ambassadors arrived at Trent in the spring.  They demanded, as I have already stated, that the chalice should be conceded to the laity; nor is it easy to understand why this point might not have been granted.  Pius himself was ready to make the concession; and the only valid argument against it was that it imperiled the uniformity of ritual throughout all Catholic countries.  The Germans further stipulated for the marriage of the clergy, which the Pope was also disposed to entertain, until he reflected that celibacy alone retained the clergy faithful to his interests and regardless of those of their own nations.  At this juncture of affairs, the Roman Court, which was strongly opposed to both concessions, received material aid from the dissensions of the Council.  The Spaniards would hear nothing of the Eucharist under both forms.  The marriage of the clergy was opposed by French and Spaniards alike.  On the point of episcopal independence, the French supported the Spaniards; but Pius used the same arguments in France which he had used in Spain, with similar success.  Thus there was no agreement on any of the disputed questions between Spaniards, Frenchmen and Germans; and since the ambassadors could neither propose nor vote, and the Italian prelates were in a permanent majority, Pius was able to defer and temporize at leisure.