Editing Carmelites (section)

===Papebroch controversy===
[[Daniel Papebroch]] was a member of the [[Bollandist]]s, a group of [[Society of Jesus|Jesuit]] hagiographers who produced the ''[[Acta Sanctorum]]'', which took an analytical approach to the "Lives of the Saints". In his preliminary commentary on [[Albert of Vercelli]], who is credited with the Carmelite Rule, Papebroch said that the tradition universally received by the Carmelites, that the origin of the order dated back to the prophet Elias, as its founder, was insufficiently grounded. The Carmelites took exception to this.

From 1681 to 1693 there appeared between twenty or thirty pamphlets castigating Papebroch and his work. The series culminated in the large quarto volume signed by Sebastian of St. Paul, provincial of the Flemish-Belgian province of the Carmelite Order, which made serious charges against Papebroch's orthodoxy. Learning that steps were being taken to obtain a condemnation from Rome of the ''Acta Sanctorum'', the Bollandists responded. [[Conrad Janninck]] replied first with open letters to Sebastian of St. Paul. The two letters were printed in 1693, followed by a more extended defense of the "Acta", published by Janninck in 1695. Papebroch published his rebuttal in 1696, 1697, and 1698 in the three volumes of the "Responsio Danielis Papebrochii ad Exhibitionem Errorum".

When Rome did not issue a condemnation the adversaries of Papebroch had recourse to the tribunal of the [[Spanish Inquisition]], which in November, 1695, issued a decree condemning the fourteen volumes of the ''Acta Sanctorum'' published up to that time and branding it heretical. Janninck was sent to Rome not only to prevent the confirmation by Rome of the decree of the Spanish Inquisition, but also to secure the retraction of the decree. In December, 1697, he received the assurance that no censure would be passed against the volumes condemned in Spain. On 20 November 1698, [[Pope Innocent XII]] issued a brief that ended the controversy by imposing silence on both parties. Whether it was judged prudent in Rome not to enter into conflict with the Spanish tribunal, or whether the latter prolonged the affair by passive resistance, the decree of condemnation made in 1695 was not revoked until 1715, the year following the death of Papebroch.