A HISTORY
OF
MEDIAEVAL POLITICAL THEORY
A HISTORY
OF
MEDLEVAL POLITICAL THEORY
IN THE WEST
BY
Sir R. W. CARLYLE, K.C.S.I., CLE.
AND
A. J. CARLYLE, M.A., D.Litt.
LECTURER IN POLITICS ALT' ECONOMICS (LATK FELLOW J
OF UNIVERSITY COLLEGE, AND OF LINCOLN COLLKOK,
OXFORD
VOL. IV.
THE THEORIES OF THE RELATION OF THE EMPIRE
AND THE PAPACY FROM THE TENTH CENTURY
TO THE TWELFTH
By A. J. CARLYLE, M.A., D.Litt.
THIRD IMPRESSION
^^NOBLE li!I£:l New York
Pi,b,,shers • Bo^i^m-r^i
Printed in Great Britain
■7'ed
SEP 2 - 1961
VOL. IV.
THE THEORIES OF THE RELATION OF THE
EMPIRE AND THE PAPACY
FROM THE
TENTH CENTURY TO THE TWELFTH
BY
A. J. OAULYLE, M.A., D.Litt.
PEEFACE TO VOLUME IV.
In this volume I have endeavoured to put together some
detailed account of the theories of the relations of the Papacy
and the Empire from the beginning of the tenth century to
the latter part of the twelfth. I have not endeavoured to
deal with the more general subject of the relations or opposi-
tions of the ecclesiastical order and the secular. Some aspects
of these have been already discussed in the first and second
volumes of this work, and we shall probably return to them
in the next volume ; but I should like to remind our readers
that the subject of this work is not the history, either civil
or ecclesiastical, of the Middle Ages, but the political theories,
and we deal with the relations of the Temporal and Spiritual
powers only so far as they seem to us to have tended to
influence the development of these theories.
I do not indeed think that these relations had as much
effect upon political theory in general as has been sometimes
suggested. The great political conceptions of the Middle
Ages, the supremacy of law, the authority of the community,
the contractual relation between ruler and subject, were only
incidentally affected by the question of the relations of the two
Powers. And yet I think that we are justified in devoting a
whole volume to the conflicts of the Empire and the Papacy
in the eleventh and twelfth centuries for two reasons. First,
viii PREFACE.
because the principle that human society was controlled by two
authorities, a spiritual as well as a temporal, represents the
development of what is one of the most characteristic differ-
ences between the ancient and the modern world. Second,
because it has been sometimes thought that the principle
of the independence of the spiritual life tended in the Middle
Ages to become the principle of the supremacy of the Spiritual
Power. I do not indeed pretend in this volume to deal with
the whole of this subject ; in the next volume we hope to
deal with this in its development in the thirteenth century.
I have endeavoured in this volume to consider how far the
question arose in the great conflicts of the eleventh and
twelfth centuries, and to arrive at some conclusions as to the
nature and extent of the development of such a theory of
supremacy during this period.
I wish to express my very great obligations to Mr Z. Brook
of Caius College, Cambridge, who has read the proofs, and
to whose corrections and suggestions I am most deeply in-
debted, though he is not in any way responsible for the final
form of the treatment of the subject, or for the judgments
which are expressed. I may be allowed to express the hope
that it may not be long before his detailed studies of Gregory
VII. may be made accessible to us all.
I wish to express my constant obligations to the masterly
work of Professor Otto von Gierke, and especially to that
part of it translated by the late Professor Maitland. Only
those who have endeavoured to work through the mass of
mediaeval literature can appreciate fully its monumental
erudition, and the accuracy of even his most incidental refer-
ences. I should also wish to express my admiration for
Professor Mirbt's excellent and detailed study of the con-
troversial literature of the eleventh and twelfth centuries,
' Die Publizistik im Zeitalter Gregors VII.' And I must
PREFACE. IX
remember with gratitude my obligations to the work of one
of the most learned of our ecclesiastical historians of the
Middle Ages, Professor Hauck of Leipzig, who has unhappily
passed away in these troubled but heroic years.
A. J. CAELYLE.
Oxford, December 1921.
CONTENTS OF THE FOURTH VOLUME.
PAET I.
RELATIONS OF THE SPIRITUAL AND TEMPORAL POWERS
FROM 900 A.D. TO 1076 A.D.
CHAPTER I.
THE OVERLAPPING OF THE SPIRITUAL AND TEMPORAL POWERS.
The subject of this volume, 1 — the part taken in Church Councils in the tenth
and eleventh centuries by secular princes, 2 — part taken by other lay-
men, 6 — part taken by Popes and bishops in appointment of secular
rulers, 8.
CHAPTER II.
ELECTION TO PAPACY IN THE TENTH AND ELEVENTH CENTURIES.
Regulations of Council of Rome, 898, for the election of Pope, 11 — Action of
Otto I. at Rome, 962-964, 12— election of Leo VIII., 14— the " Privilegium "
of Otto I., 15 — action and claims of Otto III., 16 — criticism of Thietmar
of Merseburg, 17 — action of Henry III. at Sutri, 17 — attitude of Wazo
of Liege and criticism of ' De Ordinando Pontifice,' 18 — attitude of Peter
Damian and Cardinal Humbert, 20 — circumstances of election of Leo IX.,
22 — elections of Victor II. and Stephen IX., 23 — Election of Nicholas II.
and his decree about papal elections, 24.
CHAPTER III.
THE APPOINTMENT OF BISHOPS TO 1075.
General agreement upon the various elements in this, 25 — stress laid by some
writers on election by clergy and people, 27 — by others upon the part in
this of the secular ruler, 29 — position of Gerbert, 30 — of Peter Damian,
33— typical cases of appointment, 35 — especially those of Wazo of Liege,
37 — place of Pope in the appointment of bishops, 38.
Xii CONTENTS.
CHAPTER IV.
THE RELATIVE DIGNITY OF THE TEMPORAL AND SPIRITUAL POWERS.
The superior dignity of the Spiritual as compared with the Temporal power,
40 — recognition that clergy are subject to Temporal power iu secular
matters, 42— Peter Damian admits the place of the Temporal power in
ecclesiastical affairs, 44— but asserts the superiority of the Spiritual
power, 45 — recognises the distinctive function of each power, 46.
PAET II.
THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY.
CHAPTER I.
SIMONY.
The change from the harmonious co-operation of the ecclesiastical and secular
authorities and its causes, 49 — the growth of simony in the eleventh
century, Rodolfus Qlaber, Cardinal Humbert, Lambert of Hersfeld, 52 —
measures taken to suppress it by Leo IX., 56— difficulty caused by appoint-
ment of men to bishoprics on account of their capacity for secular work,
58.
CHAPTER II.
THE PROHIBITION OF LAY " INVESTITURE."
Relation of secular authorities to simony after the death of Henry III., 61 —
Gregory VII. 's determination to take the severest measures against the
King of France on account of this, 64 — beginning of discussion of the part
belonging to secular authorities in appointment to ecclesiastical offices,
Cardinal Humbert and Peter Damian, 66— Gregory VII., in letters down
to 1079 does not seem to deny them some place in this, 69 — question of
investiture with ring and staff, Cardinal Humbert, 72— question of Milan,
75— Gregory VII. 's decree prohibiting all lay "investiture," 76— the
prohibition repeated in 1078 and 1080, 78.
CHAPTER III.
THE DISCUSSION OF THE " INVESTITURE " QUESTION — I.
Wenrich of Trier, 81 — Wido of Ferrara, distinguishes between the ecclesias-
tical and secular position of bishops, 82— Manegold maintains that no
bishop could be appointed without election by clergy and people, 86 —
urges impropriety of investiture of bishop with the ring by secular
authorities, 89— Cardinal Deusdedit denounces the notion that king could
CONTENTS. Xlii
appoint at his discretion, 90 — repudiates provision of decree of Pope
Nicholas II., that the emperor was to be consulted in appointment by
Pope, 92 — applies principle of election to parish clergy, 95 — summary, 95.
CHAPTER IV.
THE DI3CU8SION OF THE "INVESTITURE" QUESTION — II.
Development of mediating position, 97 — Ivo of Chartres, prohibition of lay
"investiture" an administrative rule, not a necessary part of the law of
the Church, 99 — Hugh of Fleury, vindicates rights both of electors and of
the king, who should invest with temporalities, but not with ring and
staff, 102 — 'Tractatus de Investitura Episcoporum,' claim of secular
power to "investiture" related to temporalities, 103 — Gregory of Catino,
lay investiture related only to temporalities, 106 — Rangerius of Lucca,
uncompromising about ring and staff, 108 — summary, 110.
CHAPTER V.
PASCHAL II. AND HENRY V.
Settlement of "investiture" question in France and England, 111 — nego-
< tiations with Henry V. from 1106 to 1110, 112— Henry V. in Italy; re-
ciprocal promises, surrender of "regalia" by the Church, surrender of
"investiture" by emperor, 115 — declaration by Paschal II. intended to
be promulgated on day of coronation, 118— Henry's account of the negotia-
tions and his attitude in his encyclical, 120 — failure of attempt at settle-
ment, 122 — Paschal taken prisoner and compelled to accept the royal
right to "investiture," 124 — " Privilegium " of Paschal, 125.
CHAPTER VI.
THE DISCUSSION OF THE ACTION AND THE PROPOSALS OF PASCHAL II.
Revolt of Church against Paschal's surrender, Bruno of Segni, Godfrey of
Vendome, 129 — continuance of mediating opinion, Ivo of Chartres, and
1 Disputatio vel Defensio Paschalis Papae,' 131 — Placidus of Nonantula
condemns Paschal's surrender, 132 — admits that prince has place in
election of bishops, like other lay people, 134 — proposes that bishop after
consecration should receive "prseceptum" from emperor, with relation
to Church property, 136 — repudiates notion that Church has no property
in "temporalities," 137.
CHAPTER VII.
THE SETTLEMENT OF WORMS.
Paschal II. compelled to repudiate his concession to Henry V., 141 — death
of Paschal II., election of Gelasius II., and his death, 142 — election of
Calixtus IL, 143 — negotiations conducted by Bishop of Chalons and Abbot
Xiv CONTENTS.
of Cluny at Strassburg, 143 — negotiations at Mouzon fail, 145 — division
of opinion at papal Council at Rheims, 147 — development in views of
Godfrey of Vendome, 149— Hugo Metellus and Hunald, 157 — intervention
of German princes, 158— conciliatory correspondence between Calixtus
II. and Henry V., 160— settlement of Worms, its provisions, 161 —
summary, 163.
PAET III.
THE POLITICAL CONFLICT OF PAPACY AND EMPIRE.
CHAPTER. I.
THE POSITION AND CLAIMS OF GREGORY VII.
The restatement and modification of the Gelasian theory in the ninth
century, 166 — conception of the superiority of the Spiritual over the
Temporal power, Rodolphus Glaber, Peter Damian, Cardinal Humbert,
167 — new conditions after death of Henry III., 170— new policy of
Gregory VII., attack upon the Temporal power as responsible for
disorders in the Church, 172 — development of this policy in relation to
France, threat to excommunicate and depose the king, 173 — relations of
Gregory VII. and Henry IV. from 1073 to 1076, 176— Henry IV. and
Council of Worms depose Gregory VII., statement of grounds in letters
of bishops and Henry IV., 181 — Gregory VII. excommunicates and
deposes Henry IV., 181 — letters of Henry IV. and Gregory VII. justi-
fying their action, 185 — collapse of Henry's power in Germany, 191 —
Henry's submission at Canossa, its terms, 192 — election of Rudolph at
Forcheim, 1077, 193 — Gregory's policy towards Henry and Rudolph, 194
— the final breach between Gregory VII. and Henry IV., excommuni-
cation and deposition of Henry, 1080, statement of Gregory's claims,
200 — deposition of Gregory VII. at Brixen, and election of Antipope
Guibert, 203 — Gregory's letter to Hermann of Metz justifying his action,
204 — death of Rudolph, letter of Gregory VII. to Altmann of Passau,
207.
CHAPTER II.
DISCUSSION OF THE ACTIONS AND CLAIMS OF GREGORY VII. — I.
Discussion between 1076 and 1080, Bernard of Constance and Bernald, 211 —
Gebhardt of Salzburg, traces conflict to neglect of principles of relation
to excommunicated persons, and to deposition of Gregory VII. at
Worms, 215 — Wenrich of Trier repudiates claim of Gregory VII. to
depose kings, 218 — Peter Crassus, 222 — 'Dicta cuiusdam de discordia
Papa; et Regi",' asserts rights of emperor in election of Pope, 225 — Wido
of Osnaburg, asserts rights of emperor in election of Pope, condemns
excommunication of Prince, condemns Gregory's claim to absolve subjects
CONTENTS. XV
from their oath of allegiance, 227 — Bernard of Constance, ' Liber Canonum
contra Heinvicura Quartum,' 231 — Manegold's reasoned defence of
Gregory's action, 233 — Bonizo, 236 — Anselni of Lucca, 236 — Bernald,
237 — Wido of Ferrara, first, defends the character and action of Gregory
VII., secondly, sets out defence of his deposition, 239 — ' De Unitate
Ecclesiae Conservanda,' critical examination of precedents for excom-
munication and deposition of kings, 242 — restates carefully the Gelasian
principal, 245 — summary, 249.
CHAPTER III.
DI3CU8SION OF THE ACTIONS AND CLAIMS OP GREGORY VII. — II.
Historical events from death of Gregory VII. in 1085 till death of Henry IV.
in 1105, 253 — Cardinal Deusdedit recognises the distinctive and divine
authority of Temporal power, but asserts " primatus " of ecclesiastical
law, 258 — Sigebert of Gembloux defends those who held themselves bound
by their oaths of fidelity to Henry IV., protests against use of violence by
Popes, 261 — Hugh of Fleury repudiates Gregory VII. 'a phrases about
sinful origin of secular authority, asserts that the king has the image of
God the Father, and the bishops that of Christ, but maintains the superior
dignity of the ministry of bishops, 266 — admits right of excommunication,
but repudiates the claim of Gregory VII. to depose kings, 269 — 'Trac-
tatus Eboracenses,' the king represents the divine nature of Christ, the
priest the human nature, 273 — maintains that the primacy of Rome was
created by man, not by Christ, 277 — Gregory of Catino, the king is the
head of the Church, 282— Placidus of Nonantula interprets the "Donation
of Constantine " as meaning that Constantine surrendered to Pope all
political authority in the West, 283 — Godfrey of Vendome asserts the
divine origin of secular authority, urges danger of unwise use of ex-
communication, 284 — Houorius of Augsburg maintains that Christ estab-
lished only the " sacerdotium," not the "regnum," to rule over the
Church, 286 — interprets "Donation of Constantine" as meaning the
complete surrender of all political authority to the Pope, the "sacer-
dotium" establishes and orders the "regnum," 289 — maintains that
Temporal power, in spite of its origin through sin, is a divine institution,
and Pope and all clergy are subject to it in secular matters, 292 — the
king, even if heretic, apostate, or schismatic, must be patiently endured,
294 — summary, 295.
CHAPTER IV.
THE DEVELOPMENT OP THE FEUDAL AUTHORITY OP THE PAPACY.
Became important with immediate predecessors of Gregory VII., 298 —
Nicholas II. and the Normans in South Italy and Sicily, 299— Alexander
II. and William the Conqueror, 299 — Gregory VII. and Normans in
South Italy, 300— Spain, 301— Hungary, 302— Russia, 303— Denmark, 304
— Corsica, 304 — Dalmatia, 304 — Saxony, 305 — Provence, 306 — letter to
Altmann of Passau, and the German Kingdom, 306.
XVI CONTENTS.
PAET IV.
THE CHURCH AND THE EMPIRE FROM 1122 TO 1177.
CHAPTER I.
FREDERICK I. AND THE PAPACY.
The settlement of Worms and peace between the Empire and the Papacy for
thirty years, how far were the provisions of the settlement maintained, 307
— relations between Frederick I. and the Popes from 1152 to 1157, Treaty
of Constance, 1153, 311— Treaty of Beneventum between Hadrian IV. and
Normans, 1156, 312— dispute between Hadrian IV. and Frederick I.
caused by letter in which Hadrian seemed to speak of Empire as a papal
fief, 313 — dispute between Hadrian and Frederick about certain demands
of the Pope, 318 — the contested election of Alexander III. and Victor,
1160, 320 — Frederick summons a General Council at Pavia to decide this,
321— decision of Council in favour of Victor, and conflict between Empire
and Papacy till 1177, 326.
CHAPTER II.
JOHN OP SALISBURY.
He maintains superiority of Spiritual power and law over the Temporal, 330 —
maintains that the "Two Swords" belong to the Church, 333— parallels
in writings of St Bernard and Hugh of St Victor, 333 — relation of his
conception of the two authorities to that of Honorius of Augsburg, 336 —
his severe condemnation of avarice and other abuses in papal government
and in the Church, 337.
CHAPTER III.
GERHOH OP REICHERSBERG.
Value of his work as that of one who endeavoured to hold the balance between
the two Powers, 342 — the position and principles of Arnold of Brescia
with respect to the secular property and powers of the Church, 343 —
Gerhoh doubts the propriety of the tenure of the "Regalia" by the
Church, in his early treatises, 347 — a little later he seems to acquiesce in
this, 350 — later he gives an account of Paschal II.'s readiness to surrender
the " Regalia," and restates his doubts about the Church's tenure of them,
353 — in work attributed to 1151 he recognises the right of the Pope to
excommunicate and depose Princes, but maintains the distinct position of
the Temporal and Spiritual powers, 361 — his later treatises related to
conflict between Frederick I. and Alexander III., 364 — statement of
circumstances of election, 364 — his own uncertainty, inclines to think that
CONTENTS. XVii
only a General Council could settle the matter, 365 — denounces policy of
papal court and especially of claim to political authority over Empire, 369 —
his treatise addressed to the Cardinals in 1166-67, recognises Alexander III.
as Pope, but demands that they should clear the Papacy of charge of
conspiracy against the Emperor, 374 — his last work, fidelity both to Rome
and the Empire, 377.
CHAPTER IV.
CONCLUSION.
The conception of a twofold authority in human society, the Temporal and the
Spiritual, 384 — how far in actual fact did the one authority interfere with
the other, 386 — how far did there grow up a theory of the supremacy of
the one over the other, 389 — how far had such a theory any important
place in the actual conditions of the eleventh and twelfth centuries, 394.
TEXTS OF AUTHORS REFERRED TO
IN VOLUME IV.
Abbo of Fleury, ' Collectio Canonum ' — Migne, Patrologia Latina, vol.
139.
Adalbero, ' Carmen ' — Migne, Patrologia Latina, vol. 141.
St Adalbert, ' Vita ' — Migne, Patrologia Latina, vol. 137.
Alexander II., Epistles — Migne, Patrologia Latina, vol. 146.
' Annales Hildesheimenses ' — Monumenta Germanise Historica, Scrip-
tores, vol. 3.
Annales Paderbornenses — Monumenta Germanise Historica, Scrip-
tores, vol. 3.
Annales Romani — Monumenta Germanise Historica, Scriptores, vol. 5.
Anonimus Haserensis — Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Scriptores,
vol. 7.
Anselm, ' Continuator Sigeberti Gemblacensis ' — Monumenta Ger-
manise Historica, vol. 6.
Anselm, ' Gesta Episcoporum Leodiensium ' — Monumenta Germanise
Historica, vol. 7.
Anselm, ' Historise Dedicationis Ecclesiae S. Remigii ' — Migne,
Patrologia Latina, vol. 142.
Anselm of Lucca, ' Liber contra Wibertum ' — Monumenta Germanise
Historica, ' Libelli de Lite,' vol. 1.
Arnulf, ' Gesta Archiepiscoporum Mcdiolanensium ' — Monumenta
Germanise Historica, Scriptores, vol. 8.
Atto of Vercelli, ' De Pressuris Ecclesiasticis ' — Migne, Patrologia
Latina, vol. 137.
St Bernard, ' Vita ' — Migne, Patrologia Latina, vol. 185.
' De Consideration '• — Migne, Patrologia Latina, vol. 182.
Epistles — Migne, Patrologia Latina, vol. 182.
Bernard of Constance, Epistola, in Bernald, Libellus II. — Monumenta
Germanise Historica, ' Libelli de Lite,' vol. 2.
XX TEXT OF AUTHORS REFERRED TO IN VOL. rV.
Bernard of Constance, ' Liber Canonum contra Hemricum Quartum '
— Monumenta Germanise Historica, ' Libelli de Lite,' vol. 1.
Bernald, ' Libelli ' — Monumenta Germanise Historica, ' Libelli de
Lite,' vol. 2.
Berthold, ' Annales ' — Monumenta Germanise Historica, Scriptores,
vol. 5.
Bonizo, ' Liber ad Amicum ' — Monumenta Germanise Historica,
' Libelli de Lite,' vol. 1.
Bruno, ' De Bello Saxonico ' — Monumenta Germanise Historica, Scrip-
tores, vol. 5.
Bruno of Segni, ' Epistola ' — Monumenta Germanise Historica, ' Libelli
de Lite,' vol. 2.
Calixtus II., Epistles — Migne, Patrologia Latina, vol. 163.
" Casuum Sancti Galli, continuator " — Monumenta Germanise His-
torica, Scriptores, vol. 2.
Clement II., Epistles— Migne, Patrologia Latina, vol. 142.
' Codex Udalrici ' in Monumenta Bambergensia, ed. P. Jaff6.
' Concordia Beneventanum ' — in J. M. Watterich, ' Pontificorum Ro-
manorum Vitse,' vol. 2.
' Constitutiones ' — Monumenta Germanise Historica, Legum, sect. iv..
vol. 1.
' Continuator Reginonis ' — Monumenta Germanise Historica, Scrip-
tores, vol. 1.
Councils — Mansi, Concilia.
' De Ordinando Pontifice ' — Monumenta Germanise Historica, ' Libelli
de Lite,' vol. 1.
' De Unitate Ecclesise Conservanda ' — Monumenta Germanise His-
torica, ' Libelli de Lite,' vol. 2.
Deusdedit, ' Collectio Canonum ' — ed. V. W. von Glanvell, 1905.
' Libellus contra invasores et simoniacos ' — Monumenta Ger-
manise Historica, ' Libelli de Lite,' vol. 2.
' Dicta cuiusdam de discordia Papse et Regis ' — Monumenta Germanise
Historica, ' Libelli de Lite,' vol. 1.
' Disputatio vel Defensio Paschalis ' — Monumenta Germanise His-
torica, ' Libelli de Lite,' vol. 2.
Eadmer, ' Historia Novorum,' Rolls Series.
Ekkehard, ' Chronicon ' — Monumenta Germanise Historica, Scriptores,
vol. 6.
Fulbert of Chartres, Epistles — Migue, Patrologia Latina, vol. 141.
TEXT OF AUTHORS REFERRED TO IN VOL. IV. XXI
Gebhardt of Salzburg, ' Epistola ' — Monumenta Germanise Historica,
' Libelli de Lite,' vol. 1.
Gerbert, Epistles — ed. J. Havet, 1889.
Gerhoh of Reichersberg — Monumenta Germanise Historica, ' Libelli
de Lite,' vol. 3.
' Gesta di Federico I.' — ed. Monaci.
Godfrey of VendSme, ' Libelli ' — Monumenta Germanise Historica,
' Libelli de Lite,' vol. 2.
Gregory V., Epistles — Migne, Patrologia Latina, vol. 137.
Gregory VII., ' Registrum ' — ed. Jaffe, ' Bibliotheca Rerum Germani-
carum,' vol. 2.
Gregory of Catino, ' Orthodoxa Defensio Imperialis ' — Monumenta
Germanise Historica, ' Libelli de Lite,' vol. 2.
Gunther, ' Ligurinus ' — ed. Diimge.
Hatto of Maintz, Epistola — Mansi, Concilia, vol. 18 A, p. 204.
' Historia Pontificalis ' — Monumenta Germanise Historica, Scriptores,
vol. 20.
Honorius of Augsburg, ' Summa Gloria ' — Monumenta Germanise
Historica, ' Libelli de Lite,' vol. 3.
Hvigh of Fleury, ' Tractatus de Regia Potestate et Sacerdotali Digni-
tate,' Monumenta Germaniae Historica, ' Libelli de Lite,' vol. 2.
Hugh of St Victor, ' De Sacramentis ' — Migne, Patrologia Latina,
vol. 176.
Hugo Cantor, ' Historia,' Rolls Series.
Hugo Metellus, ' Certamen Papso et Regis '—Monumenta Germania3
Historica, ' Libelli de Lite,' vol. 3.
Humbert of Silva Candida, ' Ad versus Simoniacos ' — Monumenta
Germanise Historica, ' Libelli de Lite,' vol. 1.
Hunold, ' Carmen de Anulo et Baculo ' — Monumenta Germanise
Historica, ' Libelli de Lite,' vol. 3.
Ivo of Chartres, ' Epistolse ' — Monumenta Germaniae Historica,
' Libelli de Lite,' vol. 2.
John XIII., Epistles — Migne, Patrologia Latina, vol. 135.
John of Salisbury, ' Policraticus '— ed. C. C. I. Webb, 1909.
Lambert of Hersfeld, ' Annales ' — Monumenta Germanise Historica,
Scriptores, vol. 5.
Lanfranc, ' Vita ' — Migne, Patrologia Latina, vol. 150.
Leo IX., Epistles — Migne, Patrologia Latina, vol. 143.
' Vita ' — Migne, Patrologia Latina, vol. 143.
St Lietbert, ' Vita ' — Migne, Patrologia Latina, vol. 146.
Luitprand of Cremona, ' De Rebus Gestis Ottonis ' — Monumenta Ger-
manise Historica,' Scriptores, vol. 3.
XXii TEXT OF AUTHORS REFERRED TO IN VOL. IV.
Manegold, ' Ad Gebehardum ' — Monumenta Germanise Historica,
' Libelli de Lite,' vol. 1.
' Monumenta Bambergensia ' — ed. P. Jaff6, ' Bibliotheca Rerum Ger-
manicarum,' vol. 5.
' Monumenta Corbeiensia ' — ed. P. Jaffe, ' Bibliotheca Rerum Ger-
manicarum,' vol. 1.
4 Narratio de electione Lotharii in Regem Romanorum ' — Monumenta
Germanise Historica, Scriptores, vol. 12.
Nicholas II., Epistles — Migne, Patrologia Latina, vol. 143.
Otto of Freising, ' Gesta Friderici ' — Monumenta Germanise Historica,
Scriptores, vol. 20.
Paschal II., Epistle — ' Monumenta Moguntina,' P. Jaffe, ' Bibliotheca
Rerum Germanicarum,' vol. 3.
Peter Crassus, ' Defensio Heinrici Regis ' — Monumenta Germanise
Historica, ' Libelli de Lite,' vol. 1.
Peter Damian, ' Disceptatio Synodalis '—Monumenta Germanise His-
torica, ' Libelli de Lite,' vol. 1.
Epistles and Sermons — Migne, Patrologia Latina, vol. 144.
' Liber Gratissimus ' — Monumenta Germanise Historica,
' Libelli de Lite,' vol. 1.
Opuscula '■ — Migne, Patrologia Latina, vol. 145.
Placidus of Nonantula, ' Liber de Honore Ecclesise ' — Monumenta
Germanise Historica, ' Libelli de Lite,' vol. 2.
Rangerius, ' Liber de Anulo et Baculo ' — Monumenta Germanise His-
torica, ' Libelli de Lite,' vol. 2.
Ratherius of Verona, ' Prseloquiorum ' — Migne, Patrologia Latina,
vol. 136.
' Regesta Pontificum ' — ed. Jaffe, Wattenbach.
Rodolphus Glaber, ' Historise ' — Migne, Patrologia Latina, vol. 142.
Rufinus, ' Summa Decretorum '■ — ed. H. Singer.
Siegfried of Maintz, Epistles — Migne, Patrologia Latina, vol. 146, and
' Monumenta Bambergensia,' Jaffe, ' Bibliotheca Rerum Ger-
manicarum,' vol. 5.
Sigebert of Gembloux, ' Chronicon ' — Monumenta Germanise His-
torica, Scriptores, vol. 6.
' Leodicensium Epistola adversus Paschalem Papam ' — Monu-
menta Germanise Historica, ' Libelli de Lite,' vol. 2.
Silvester II., ' De Informatione Episcoporum ' — Migne, Patrologia
Latina, vol. 139.
Stephen of Tournai, ' Summa Decretorum '— ed. J. F. von Schulte.
Suger, ' Vita Laclovici VI.' — Monumenta Germanise Historica, Scrip-
tores, vol. 26.
TEXT OP AUTHORS REFERRED TO IN VOL. IV. XXUl
Thietmar of Merseburg, ' Chronicon ' — Monumenta Germaniae His-
torica, Scriptores, vol. 3.
' Tractatus Eboracenses '■ — Monumenta Germaniae Historica, ' Libelli
de Lite,' vol. 3.
' Tractatus de Investitura Episcopali ' — Monumenta Germaniae His-
torica, ' Libelli de Lite,' vol. 2.
St Udalricus, ' Vita ' — Migne, Patrologia Latina, vol. 135.
Urban II., Epistles — Migne, Patrologia Latina, vol. 151.
Wenrich of Trier, ' Epistola ' — Monumenta Germaniae Historica,
' Libelli de Lite,' vol. 1.
Wido of Ferrara, ' De Seismate Hildebrandi ' — Monumenta Germaniae
Historica, ' Libelli de Lite,' vol. 1.
Wido of Osnaburg, ' Liber de Controversia Hildebrandi et Heinrici ' —
Monumenta Germaniae Historica, ' Libelli de Lite,' vol. 1.
William the Conqueror, Epistle — in Gregory VII., ' Epistolae Extra
Vagantes,' Migne, Patrologia Latina, vol. 148.
William of Malmesbury, ' Gesta,' Rolls Series.
Wippo, ' Vita Chuonradi ' — Migne, Patrologia Latina, vol. 142.
PART I.
RELATIONS OF THE SPIRITUAL AND TEMPORAL POWERS
FROM 900 A.D. TO 1076 A.D.
CHAPTEE I.
THE OVERLAPPING OF THE SPIRITUAL AND TEMPORAL POWERS.
In the first volume of this work, we endeavoured to consider
the main principles and characteristics of the relations of the
spiritual and temporal authorities in the ninth century, and
we came to the conclusion that, while it was clearly appre-
hended that the principle which governed these relations was
that each authority should be supreme and independent of the
other within its own sphere, the relations were in fact very
complex, and often appeared to be inconsistent with this
principle. The Temporal power actually and continually
possessed a great influence in the ecclesiastical sphere, while
the Spiritual constantly exercised a great amount of control
in temporal affairs. The principle was clear enough, but it
was obviously very difficult to act in strict accordance with
the principle. The emperor or king frequently found himself
in the position of one whose duty it was to see that the
ecclesiastical officers of the Church carried out their functions
rightly, and therefore actually exercised a large if undefined
authority in ecclesiastical matters ; while, on the other hand,
the spiritual authorities were frequently involved in the
direction and ordering of secular matters.
vol. iv. A
2 SPIRITUAL AND TEMPORAL POWERS. [PART I.
The principles which men held were clear and apparently
simple, but the actual relations of the two great authorities
were very complex. It is, however, true on the whole to ;■
that in spite of this complexity there was no serious collision
or conflict between the two authorities.
In this volume we have to consider how it came about that
these comparatively tranquil conditions were changed, and
that for some two hundred and fifty years, from the accession
of Pope Gregory VII. in 1073 till the death of Pope Boniface
VIII. in 1303, Western Europe was almost stunned with the
noise of the great conflict between the Empire and the Papacy,
while in other Western countries the conflicts of the Temporal
and Spiritual powers were, if not so sensational in their form,
not less serious in their character. In this volume we do not
propose to deal with the subject beyond the date of the
accession of Innocent III. (1198), for which his pontificate these
relations assumed a new form which must be considered in
immediate connection with the conditions and theories of the
thirteenth century.
We have to consider, first, how the great conflict came
about ; second, the actual nature of the questions and
principles at stake in the conflict ; and third, the nature of
the solutions, partial or permanent, at which men arrived in
the course of the twelfth century. And first we must consider
how the great conflict came about, for certainly here, if any-
where in history, it is only through the consideration of the
antecedents or causes of the situation that we can hope to
reach any real interpretation of the situation itself. In order
that we may do this we must therefore begin by considering
the actual nature of the relations of the two great authorities,
the spiritual and the temporal, in the tenth century and in
the eleventh, until the accession of Pope Gregory VEI. to the
Papal See.
When we begin to examine dispassionately the history of
this period we are impressed before all with the fact that,
while there is no reason to think that any one doubted that
the spiritual and temporal authorities were distinct and had
CHAP. I.] SPIRITUAL AND TEMPORAL POWERS. 3
each their own proper sphere, 1 in actual fact the temporal
ruler and the laity in general did constantly take a large part
in administering ecclesiastical affairs, while the Pope and
bishops exercised a large amount of authority in political
matters.
Throughout the tenth and eleventh centuries we find
constant reference to the presence of secular princes and
other laymen at Church councils as taking part in their
deliberations, and giving their authority to their determina-
tions. A good example of this is to be found in the proceed-
ings of a council held at Augsburg in the year 952. The
council was summoned by Otto I., with the advice of the
bishops, for the consideration of spiritual affairs and the
condition of the Christian Empire ; and the bishops specially
invited his presence at the discussion of sacred matters.
Otto is not actually represented as taking part in declaring
the laws of the Church, but he was present while they were
deliberated on, and it was to his support that the clergy
looked for their maintenance. 2
1 Cf. Acta Concilii Trosliani, a.d. gubernari deliberavit, Heroldo etiam
909 ; Mansi, ' Concilia,' vol. xiii. chap. Juuauensis secclesiaj archiepiscopo . . .
i. They quote the sayings of Pope ceterisque Italia;, Gallia:, Germanias
Gelasius I. on the nature of the two subnotatis pontificibus huic discussioni
powers. operam exigentibus. . . . Cum eorum
2 M. G. H., Legum, Sect. IV., Const. 9. unanimis diligentia huic aecclesiastico
Convent us Augustana, 952 a.d. : " Cum negotio vigilanter instaret, omnibus
excellentissimus piissimusque Otto rex ratum putabatur, principem regni,
superna attactus clemencia, non minus beatae matris a>cclesi» devotum filiura
de negotio spirituali, quam de statu postulare, quatinus ibidem divina dis-
christiani imperii tractare disponeret, cucientibus interesse dignaretur. Turn
inprimis pontificum aiiorumque prima- die prefinito eo veniens, dulcisona
turn suorum communi coneilio fretus ; modulationum incunditate honorifice,
anno incarnationis dcccclii, indictiono uti rogiam dignitatem decuerat, ab
x, anno vero regni eius xvi, sub die omnibus acceptus, missae ca;lebratione
vn Id. Aug. placitum conventumque finit a, satisfaciendo pontificum peticioni
synodalem Augustam fieri decrevit, cum insigni primatum turba synodum
quatinus concordi diligentia, tam sancti intravit. Interim reverendus Mogon-
cleri quam populi, secclesia? stabilitatis tine sedis archiepiscopus Frithuricus
profeetus et tofius christianitatis utili- se a solio erigons, humiliier strenueque
tates tractarentur. Cuius divinae rei sermonem regulari studio congruentem
dispositionem per reverentissimi atque protulerat ; deinde cuncta, quae de
prudentissimi Frithurici Mogontinae iure aecclesiastico juxta canonicam
sedis Archicpiscopi iuduslriam maxima aucloritatem et imitanda sanctorum
SPIRITUAL AND TEMPORAL POWERS.
[PART I.
We can find numerous parallels to this in the tenth and
eleventh centuries, not only in Germany hut also in Italy.
In the reports of various councils held during the pontificate
of John XIII., it is said that the Emperor Otto I. was present
and consenting ; x and again in the account of a council held
at Eome hy Pope Gregory V., in the year 998, the Emperor
Otto III. is represented as having taken an active part in
the discussion of the question of a contested election to the
bishopric of Auxonne. 2 Again, Otto III. is spoken of as pre-
siding along with Pope Gregory V. at the council held in
Eome, at which the see of Merseburg was refounded and
restored to its original dignity. 3 The Emperor Conrad II.
patnim decreta erant ventilata, pro-
mintians, in his et in omnibus huic
rei necessariis se in commune eius
presidium sentire postulabat. Quibus
rex suporni amoris ipse succensus et
zelo divini amoris animatus, mentis
corporisque nisu secclesiasticarum re-
rum auxiliatorem defensorem promp-
tissimum se esse promittendo certi-
ficavit. Hac videlicet promissione
audita regali, prelibatus archiepiscopus
residens, communi ceterorum assensu
capitula subsequentia titulari precepit."
Cf. id. id., No. 6. ' Gesta Synodi
Ingelheimensis.'
1 Mansi, ' Concilia,' vol. xviii. A., p.
509 : " Ipso namque anno una nobis-
cum, favente, et consentiente invic-
tissimo prfedicto imperatore, acta est
magna synodus Ravenna a xii Kal.
Maii, convenientibus archiepiscopis et
episcopis circumquaque ex omni Italia,
residentibus nobis in ecclesia beati
Severi confessoris Christi, et ibi statutis
omnibus rebus ecclesiasticis, secundum
statuta canonum, et decreta ante-
cessorum nostrorum."
Id. id. id., p. 532 : " Lectum in
synodo Romas habita assidentibus
divis imperatoribus Ottone Magno,
filioque eius aequivoco."
2 Mansi, ' Concilia,' vol. xix. p. 228 :
" Nos denique obedientes prseceptis
canonum, judicantibus Episcopis Rom-
anis, Longobardis, et ultramontanis,
consentiente et judicante Domno Ottone
Imperatore Augusto, jussimus a Bene-
dicto Archidiacono nostro et Rotberto
Oblationario ipsum Guadaldum deponi.
. . . Post hsec omnia peracta, Domno
imperatore iubente, et Episcopis Rom-
anis, Longobardis atque ultramontanis
iudicantibus, consentiente et accla-
mante Ermengardo comite cum clericis
et optimatibus qui de regione ilia ibi
aderant, una cum senatu et militia
Romana, Longobardorum et ultra-
montanorum, privilegio nostras aucto-
ritatis confirmando et corroborando
Arnulfum prsenominatum episcopum
in ordine pontificali Eeclesiae Ausonensis
statuimus atque sublimavimus, anulum-
que et virgam pastoralem ei dedimus."
3 M. G. H., Legum, Sect. IV.,
Const. 24, Concilum Romanum (998-
999), li. : " Ut episcopatus Merseburg-
ensis a sede apostolica et bonse
memorise Ottone primo imperatore per
universale concilium fundatus, itemque
a sede apostolica et imperatore Ottone
secundo sine concilio destructus, ut in
proprium honorem redeat a sancta sede
apostolica iudicatum est per universale
concilium, pra?sidente domino Ottone
terlio augusto cassare et domino Gre-
gorio papa quinto."
CHAP. T.]
SPIRITUAL AND TEMPORAL POWERS.
is said to have presided with Pope John XIX. at a council
held in Eome in 1027 to determine the relation of Grado to
the Patriarch of Aquileia, and the decision is described as
being that of the Pope and the Emperor ; the Emperor
Conrad is also said to have presided at a council of bishops
at Frankfort, at which a large number of the inferior clergy
and laity were present. 1
Again, Henry III. is said to have been present at a synod
held at Pa via in 1046, and the decision of the synod with
regard to the precedence of the Bishop of Verona is described
as being in accordance with his " prseceptum." 2 In the
decrees of the Council held at Maintz in 1049 by Pope
Leo IX., the Pope speaks of the Emperor Henry III. as sitting
with him in the Council, and as giving his approval to the
judgment of the Coimcil with regard to a disputed claim to the
archbishopric of Besancon. The inferior clergy and the laity are
also mentioned as being present and signifying their approval. 3
1 M. G. H., Legum, Sect. IV., Const.
38 : " [In nomine dom. Dei et] Salv.
nostri Iesu Christi, imperante Chuon-
rado perpetuo Augusto anno primo
. . . presidente sancto ac beatissimo
nonodecimo Iohanne [universali pape]
sedis apostolice urbis Rome, una cum
predicto imperatore in ecclesia domini
Dei et Salvatoris nostri. . . . Reveren-
dissimus igitur papa et piissimus im-
perator, secundum quod prsedictum
est, Poponem patriarcham de Gradensi
plebe pastorali virga investientes, ex
apostolico et imperiali decreto hoc
privilegium, Aquilegensi ecclesie et
Poponi patriarche sub anathematis
vinculo inviolabiliter permansurum,
Romane ecclesie bibliothecario scribere
iusserunt."
Id. id., 40 : " In generali Francan-
anordensi concilio, presidente impera-
tore Conrado cum episcopis xxn, et
abbatibus octo cum numerosa cleri
plebisquo frequencia," &c.
2 Id. id., 48 : " Cumque mult:r> res in
eadem sinodo iuste ac rationabiliter
in eiusdem gloriosi regis prsesentia,
archiepiscoporum illius et episcoporum
pertractarentur . . . domini Walterii
Veronensis episeopi sedile ad iam dicti
patriarchae dexteram decenter iussum
est poni, et per victoriosi regis Henrici
precept um et sanctse sinodi laudatione
atque corroboratione statutum est et
sancitum," &c.
3 Id. id., 51: "per haac nostrse
pricceptionis paginam innotescimus
eorum aliqua quae gessimus in synodo
Magontina, in qua nobis consedit
jirudentissimi filii nostri Heinrici
II Romanorum imperatoris augusta
maiestas multorumque fratrurn et
coepiseoporum nostrorum nee non
abbatum reverenda sanctitas, hones-
torum clericorum atque laicorum re-
ligiosorum praesente non parva multi-
tudine, &c. . . . Quam sentontiam
iuste et canonice prolatam nostra et
apostolica auctoritas roboravit , laudante
dulcissimo filio nostro prenominato
augusto cunctoque qui aderat clero et
populo."
6 SPIRITUAL AND TEMPORAL POWERS. [PART L
These passages will serve as illustrations of the fact that the
kings or emperors of the tenth and eleventh centuries fre-
quently took an important part in the proceedings of ecclesi-
astical assemblies. It is not less important to observe that
the presence of other laymen is mentioned in the accounts of
the Synods of Frankfort and Maintz, to which we have just
referred, and it is worth while to notice some further illustra-
tions of this. Pope Leo IX. in one of his letters refers to the
decisions of the Council which he held at Eheims in 1049
as having been made by himself, with the advice of the
bishops, and the assent and approval of the clergy and people. 1
A few years later, in a letter addressed by Pope Nicholas II. to
the bishops of Gaul, Aquitaine, and Gascony, he describes the
Council which he had held in Eome in 1059 — the Council at
which the famous new order for papal elections was made —
as having been attended by bishops, abbots, clergy, and laity. 2
A few years later again, in 1067, we find a letter of Pope
Alexander II. addressed to the clergy and laity of the Church
of Cremona, inviting them to send representatives to a council
which he proposed to hold after Easter. 3 There is therefore
nothing to surprise us when we find it stated in the life of
Lanfranc, that the council for the revival of the canonical
system and order of the Church in England was summoned by
i Pope Leo IX., ' Epistles,' 17 : " Post sanctae ad communem utilitatem, Deo
consecrationem ecclesise in eadem propitio, canonice disposuimus."
synodum celebrantes, plurima ad utili- 3 Pope Alexander II., ' Epistle,' 36 :
tatem Christianas religionis necessaria, "Alexander, servus servorum Dei,
consilio coepiscoporum nostrorum, as- Cremonensis ecclesise religiosis clericis,
sensu etiam et laude cleri et populi, et fidelibuslaicis, salutemet apostolicam
quorum innumera multitudo ad tantie benedictionem. . . . Sed quia nonnulla
devotionis celebritatem confluxerat, prater hsec quae vobis sunt admodum
statuondo confirmavimus." necessaiia, ut a nostra respondeat ur
2 Pope Nicholas II., 'Epistle,' 71: auctoritate consultu hortamur, ut
"Anno dominicae incarnatiorris 1059, synodale concilium, quod auctore Deo
anno pontificatus nostri primo, indict. post proxirmrm Pascha celebraturi
xii. Rornana urbe in basilica Sancti sumus, prudentes ex vobis viros venire
Salvatoris quas appellatur Constantiana, non pigeat qui nobis quidquid exi-
sanctam celebrantes synodum, a Sanctis gendum est, vestrisque utilitatibua
Patribus, videlicet 113 episcopis, ex- conferendum non per iudicia litter-
ceptis abbatibus, et clericis religiosis arum, sed per viva? voeis ofhcium
ao laicis celebratam, de statu Ecclesix' patenter exponant."
CHAP. I.]
SPIRITUAL AND TEMPORAL POWERS.
him with the authority of Pope Alexander and King William,
and that it is described as being composed of the bishops and
princes, the clergy, and the people. 1 The Synod or Council of
Eome, held in the year 1076 by Gregory VII., at which the
Emperor Henry IV. was excommunicated and declared to be
deposed, is said to have been attended not only by the bishops
and abbots and clergy, but also by the laity. 2 At the end of
the eleventh century we find another example of the same
thing in two letters of Pope Urban II. dealing with the
question of the metropolitan authority of the Archbishop of
Tours in Britanny ; he announces his decisions as having been
made in a council attended not only by bishops and other
clergy, but also by the Roman judges and " consulars," and
by their advice. 3
It might seem that these and similar phrases are not in them-
selves of much importance, and no doubt in many cases they
are little more than formal ; but this does not really affect
their significance, for what they imply is this, that however
1 Migne, P. L., vol. 150 ; Lanfranc,
' Vita,' x. : " Sed ut retro redeam,
primo adventu eius in Angliam,
auctoritate surnmi pontificis Alexandri,
et gloriosi regis Willelmi, convocavit
episcopos et principes terrae, clerum
et populurn, ad ronovanda decreta
et instituta sanctorum Patrum de
synodis celebrandis, de eonsuetudini-
bus eeclesiasticis."
2 Pope Gregory VII., Registrum,
iii., 10 a : " Anno ab incarnatione
Domini millesimo septuagesimo quinto,
indict ione 14, celebravit ipse domnus
Gregorius papa Romse synodum in
ecclesia domini Salvatoris, quso Con-
stantiniana dicitur ; ubi intcrfuit
episcoporum et abbatum atque di-
versi ordinis clericorum et laicorum
copia."
3 Pope Urban II., 'Epistle,' 113:
" Omnibus itaquo pertractatis, incon-
cussa confratum nostrorum Joannis
Portuensis, Ubaldi Sabincnwis, Joannis
Tusculanensis, Brunonis Signiensis,
Daimbeiti Pisani, Lamberti Atrebaten-
sis episcoponun, et nonnullorum nos-
trae Eeclesiae clericorum, Romanorum
quoque iudicum et aliorum con-
sularium : ex communi consilio visum
est harum rerum, quae per tot apos-
tolicos pontifices connrmatae fuer-
ant, definitionem plenam non debere
diferri. . . ."
Id., ' Epistle,' 114 : " Qtiibus omnibus
diligentius exquisitis, ex communi con-
silio tam confratum nostrorum episco-
porum et nonnullorum nostra? eeclesiae
clericorum Romanorum quam iudicum
et aliorum consularium adiudicatum
est, harum rerum quae per tot apos-
tolicas pontifices confirmatae fuerant,
definitionem plenam non debere differri.
Igitur et nos eonun statuta firmantes,
praesentium vobis auctoritate praecipi-
raus ut, sicut ab ipsis decretum est,
Tuxonensi deinceps archiepiscopo earn,
quaae metropolitanum decet, obedien-
tiam cxhibcre curetis."
3 SPIRITUAL AND TEMPORAL POWERS. [PAET I.
clearly men might maintain the principle of the separation of
the two powers, and of the two orders of clergy and laity, in
fact the layman was not conceived of as completely excluded
from the organised ecclesiastical authority.
If it is important to observe the fact that the temporal
ruler and the laity in general were recognised in the tenth
and eleventh centuries as having some place in the administra-
tion of ecclesiastical affairs ; it is not less important to take
note of some passages in the writings of these times in which
the Pope or other ecclesiastical persons are spoken of as
having their place in the regulation of temporal matters. We
shall have to consider later very carefully the exact nature of
the claims made with respect to this when the great con-
flict had broken out, in the meanwhile we only desire to take
note of some incidental references to the matter before that
time.
We have pointed out in the first volume of the work that
it was frequently recognised in the ninth century that the
Popes and the bishops of the Church had a considerable
authority in the appointment of emperors and kings. 1 As we
have said, it is difficult to determine the exact principles upon
which this was founded. In the case of the relation of the
Pope to the appointment of an emperor, there were the special
circumstances attending the recognition of the Frank rulers as
Eoman Emperors ; in the case of the bishops in general it is
difficult to say how much was due to the respect for their
spiritual office and authority, how much to the fact that the
bishops were among the great men of the community to whom
the selection and proposal of the ruler was normally en-
trusted. It is, indeed, very doubtful whether in the ninth
century the various elements upon which the intervention
of ecclesiastical persons in secular matters depended were
clearly distinguished from each other, and it would seem that
there is the same ambiguity about the matter in the period
that followed.
In the last year of the ninth century we find some im-
1 Cf. vol. i. pp. 282-287.
CHAP. I.]
SPIRITUAL AND TEMPORAL POWERS.
9
portant phrases in a letter attributed to Hatto, the Arch-
bishop of Maintz, and written to Pope John IX., with
reference to the election of Louis, " the Child," as King
in Germany. Hatto excuses the neglect to consult the Pope
about the election, on the ground that the roads between
Germany and Eome were blocked by the " pagans," and
asks the Pope that, now that it was possible to communi-
cate with him, he would confirm their action. 1 The letter
implies clearly that the Pope was in such a sense recog-
nised as having a place in the matter, that it was important
to conciliate him, and to secure his approval and support.
In the tenth century, and at the time of the deepest degra-
dation of the Papacy, Pope John XII. speaks of Otto I. as
having come to Eome that he might seek the imperial crown
from St Peter by his hands, and proclaims that he had anointed
him as Emperor for the defence of the Church, and with the
benediction of St Peter. 2 Eodolphus Glaber, writing in the
first half of the eleventh century, states very emphatically
the principle that no one might be called, or could be,
Emperor except he whom the Pope should choose as fit for
such an office, and upon whom the Pope had conferred the
Empire. 3 The Continuator of the ' Annals of Hildesheim '
1 Mansi, ' Concilia,' vol. xviii. A., p.
204 : " Sed cur hoc sine vestra iussione
et permissione factum sit, vest ram
haud dubitamus latere prudent iam.
Nulla scilicet alia causa actum constat,
nisi quia paganis inter nos et vos
consistentibus, impeditum est iter
nostrum ad sanctam mat rem nostram
Romanam seclem : ita ut nee legati a
nostra parvitate ad vestram dignitatem
dirigi potuissent. Sed quia tandem
occasio et tempus advenit, quo nostra
epistola vestris obtutibus prsesentare-
tur : rogamus nostram communem
constitutionem, vestra dominationis
benedictione roborari."
2 Id. id., p. 461 : " Nunc vero,
Dei operante dementia carissimus et
Christianissimus films noster rex Otto
devictis barbaris gentibus, Avaribus
scilicet, aliisque quamplurimis, ut ad
defensionem sanctae Dei ecclesia;
triumphalem victorise imperii culmen,
per nos a beato Petro Apostolorum
principe susciperet coronam, summam
et universalem, cui Deo praesidemus
auctore, adiit sedem : quern paterno
affoctu suscipientes, ob defensionem
sanctie Dei ecclesia? in imperatorem
cum beati Petri benedictione unximus."
3 Rodolphus Glaber, ' Historic,' i. 5 :
" Illud nihil ominus nimium condecens
ac perhonestum videtur, ut ne quis-
quam audenter Romani imperii scep-
trum proeproperus gestare princeps
appetat, seu imperator dici aut esse
valeat, nisi quem papa sedis Romans
morula probitate delegerit aptum
reipublicae, eique commiserit insigne
imperialo."
10 SPIRITUAL AND TEMPORAL POWERS. [PART I.
speaks of Henry III. as having made his infant son king
by the election of the Eoman Pontiff and the other bishops
and princes. 1
Enough has been said for the moment to illustrate the
extent to which in the tenth and eleventh centuries the
two great authorities, the temporal and the spiritual, continued
to overlap each other, and to show how often the temporal
authority intervened in ecclesiastical matters, and the spiritual
in secular. We must now consider in more detail some of
those questions in relation to which there finally arose the
great conflict of the eleventh and the twelfth centuries.
1 ' Annales Hildesheimeiises,' Cont., pontifieis eeterorumque pontifioum et
Anno 1056 (p. 104) : (Heinricus) principum elections regem constituit."
" filium suuni Heinric-uin Romani
11
CHAPTER II.
ELECTIONS TO THE PAPACY IN THE TENTH AND
ELEVENTH CENTURIES.
If we are to attempt seriously to understand the nature of
the later controversies, we must begin by considering the part
taken by the German Emperors, from Otto I. to Henry III., in
the appointment and deposition of the Popes. We do not
indeed pretend here to give an exhaustive or detailed account
of all the circumstances of the papal elections during this
period, and there is the less need of this, as there are several
important monographs on the subject. We think, however,
that it is possible to recognise certain important principles as
generally admitted in this period, and we can also distinguish
with sufficient clearness the most important points of doubt
and controversy. It is clear on the one hand that throughout
this period — that is, from the beginning of the tenth century
to the accession of Gregory VII. — some place was recognised as
belonging to the Emperor in the election of a Pope ; while on
the other hand we can also see that there were grave doubts
about the extent of the imperial share in the election, and
about the attempt to assert jurisdiction over the Pope, on
the part of any men, whether lay or clerical.
The tenth section of the proceedings of the Council held at
Eome in the year 898, by Pope John IX., may be taken as
representing the circumsta noes on which the place of the imperial
authority in papal elections actually rested in the tenth century.
It speaks of the violence to which the Roman See was exposed
12 SPIRITUAL AND TEMPORAL POWERS. [part I.
on the death of a Pope, when the consecration of a successor
was carried out without notice to the Emperor, and without
the presence of his envoys, who should prevent the occurrence
of violence and other scandals at the time of the consecration ;
and it provides that for the future the elections should be
made by the bishops and clergy on the proposal of the senate
and people, that the Pope should be consecrated in the
presence of the imperial envoys, and that no one for the
future should extort from the Pope-elect any oath or
promise except that which was in accordance with ancient
custom, lest the Church should receive scandal, and the
honour due to the Emperor should be diminished. 1
The document recognises that, while the election of the
Pope belongs to the bishops and clergy, acting on the
proposition of the Eoman laity, the election should not
be carried out to its completeness by consecration until the
Emperor had been informed and his envoys were present ;
and the reason specially suggested for this is that without
the protection of the Emperor the appointment could not
be carried out in peace and freedom.
It is not our part here to attempt to appreciate in its
complete historical significance the whole history of the con-
dition of the Papacy in the tenth and the earlier eleventh
centuries. It must suffice for us to recognise that when
Otto I. came for the second time to Italy, and was crowned
as Emperor by Pope John XII. in 962, he found the Eoman
See at a very low level, and under the control of the factions
of the Eoman nobles. John XII. crowned Otto as Emperor,
but as soon as Otto had left Eome, began, as it was said,
1 Mansi, ' Concilia,' vol. xviii. A., p. dus pontifex convenientibus episcopis,
225 : " Quia sancta Romana ecclesia, et universe* clero eligatur, expetente
cui Deo auctore prsesidemus, plurimas senatu et populo, qui ordinandus eat,
patitur violentias pontifici obeunte : et sic in conspectu omnium celeberrime
quae ob hoc inferuntur, quia absque electus ab omnibus, pra?sentibus legatis
imperatoris notitia et suorum logatorum imperialibus, consecretur. Nullusque
prsesentia pontifieis fit consecratio, nee sine periculo iuramentum, vel promis-
canonico ritu et consuetudine ab im- siones aliquas nova adinventione ab eo
peratore directi intersunt nuntii, qui audeat extorquere, nisi quas antiqua
violentiam et s^andala in eius conse- exigit consuetudo, ne ecclesia scanda-
cratione nonpermitt ant fieri : Volumus, lizetur, vel imperatoris honorificentia
id ut deinueps abdicetur, et constituen- minuatur."
CHAP. II.] ELECTIONS TO THE PAPACY. 13
to conspire against him. Otto returned to Rome, and then,
according to the statement of Luitprand, Bishop of Cremona,
held a council in which there sat bishops from Italy, Saxony,
Franconia, and the clergy and principal citizens of Rome.
The Pope was accused of a variety of moral and ecclesiastical
offences, and the council invited him to attend and purge
himself of these charges. John replied by threatening to
excommunicate them if they endeavoured to appoint another
Pope. After further negotiations, the Emperor addressed the
Council, and complained that John had broken the oath which
he had taken to him, and had conspired with his enemies
against him. The clergy and people replied that such an
unheard-of offence must be dealt with by unprecedented
means, and that the Pope had injured not himself only, but
others, by the profligacy of his conduct, and demanded that
he should be deposed and another elected. The Emperor
assented to their demand, and they, with one voice, elected
Leo, the " Protoscrinarius " of the Eoman Church, as Pope *
(964). It would seem, however, that the apparent un-
1 Luitprand, Bishop of Cremona — obnixe, ne Romam venire atque ex his
' De Rebus Gestis Ottonis ' (M. G. H., omnibus vos purgare dissimuletis."
S. S., vol. iii.) : 13. The Pope replies : " Nos audivi-
8. Otto advances against Rome, and mus dicere, quia vos vultis alium papam
Pope John XII. flies. " Cives vero facere ; si hoc facitis, excommunico
imperatorem sanctum cum suis omni- vos da Deum omnipotentem, ut non
bus in urbem suscipiunt, fidelitatem habeatis licentiam nullum ordinare, et
repromittunt ; hoc addentes et firmiter missam celebrare."
iurantes, nunquam se papam electuros 14. The Emperor and Council reply :
aut ordinaturos prseter consensum et " Si ad synodum venire et obiecta
eloctionem domni imperatoris Ottonis purgare non differtis, auctoritati ves-
cesaris augusti, filiique ipsius regis trae procul dubio obedimus. Sed si,
Ottonis." quod absit, venire et obiecta vobis
9. A Court held in Rome, at which capitalia crimina purgare dissimulatis,
" sederuntque cum imperatore, archi- cum prassertim vos nihil venire ini-
episcopi," &c. ..... pediat . . . tunc excommunicationem
vestram parvipendemus, eamque potius
in vos reterquebimus, quoniam quidem
11. " Sancta sinodus dixit : Si placet iuste facere possumus."
sancto imperatori, mittantur litterae 15. The messenger of the Council
domno pap;c, ut adveniat, seque ex could not find the Pope, and the Em-
his omnibus purget." peror presents his complaint to the
12. Letter of Council to Pope, writ- Council ; he relates that he had been
ten by the Emporor and the bishops: called by the Pope himself to his help,
" Oiamus itaque patemitutoiu vestram but he then had called in the Emperor'*
14
SPIRITUAL AND TEMPORAL POWERS.
[PART I.
animity of the Eoman people and clergy was superficial, for
when the Emperor left Rome, the people rose against
Leo VIII. , and he fled to the Emperor. Pope John XII.
died, and the Eomans elected Benedict V. The Emperor
returned, and Benedict was brought before the Council in the
Vatican, and sent into exile in Germany. 1
In the next year (965) Leo VIII. died, and the account of
the election of his successor, which is given by the Continuator
of Eegino's Chronicle, is important. On the death of Leo, the
Eomans, he says, sent Azo, the Protoscrinarius, and Maximus,
the Bishop of Sutri, to the Emperor, who was then in Saxony,
to ask him to appoint whom he would as Pope. The Emperor,
however, did not do this, but sent Otgar, the Bishop of Spires,
and Liuzo, the Bishop of Cremona, to Eome ; and then, presum-
ably in their presence, the Eoman people elected John, the
Bishop of Narni, as Pope. 2
enemies : " oblitus iuramenti et fideli-
tatis quarn mihi supra corpus saneti
Petri promisit." The clergy and people
of Rome reply : " Inauditum vulnus
inaudito est cauterio exurendum. Si
corruptis moribus soli sibi, et non
cunctis obesset, quoquo modo tolcr-
andus esset. Quot prius casti huius
facti sunt imitatione incasti ? Quot
probi huius exemplo conversation! s
sunt reprobi ? Petimus itaque mag-
nitudinem imperii vestri, monstrum
illud nulla virtuto redemptum a vitiis,
a sancta Romana eeclesia pelli, aliumque
loco eius constitui, qui nobis exemplo
bona* conversations preeesse valeat et
prodesse ; sibi recte vivat, ac bene
vivendi nobis exemplum prasbeat."
Tunc imperator : " Placet, inquit,
quod dicitis, nilulque gratius nobis,
quam ut talis, qui huic sanctae et
universali sedi praeponatur, inveniri
possit."
16. His dictis, omnes una voce dix-
erunt : " Leonem, venerabilem sancta?.
Romana? eeclesia? protoscrinarium,
virum approbatum et ad summum
sacerdotii gradum dignum, nobis in
pastorem eligimus, ut summus et uni-
versalis papa sancta? Romaiiw eeclesia?,
reprobato ob irnprobos mores Johanne
apostata." Ciunque hoc tertio omnes
dixissent, annuente imperatore, nom-
inatum Leonem ad Lateranense pala-
tium secundum consuetudinem cum
laudibus ducunt, et certo tempore
in eeclesia saneti Petri ad summum
sacerdotium sancta consecratione attol-
lunt, et fideles ei adluturos iureiurando
promittunt."
1 ' De Rebus Gestis Ottonis,' 21.
2 ' Continuator Reginonis,' i. (327,
(M. G. H.) : " Leo papa obiit. Tunc
legati Romanorum, Azo videlicet
protoscrinarius, et Marinus, Sutriensis
ecclesias episcopus, imperatorem, pro
instituendo quem vellet Romano pon-
tifice in Saxonia adeuntes, honorifice
suscipiuntur et remittunter. Et Ot-
gerus Spirensis opiscopus, et Liuzo,
Cremonensis episcopus, cum eisdem
Romam ab imperatore diriguntur.
Tunc ab omni plebe Romana Iohannes,
Narniensis ecclesiae episcopus, eligitur."
Of. Ratherii, ' Itinerarium,' 2 ; and
' Vit. Pont. Muratori. R. It. Script.,'
III. ii. 329.
i 'HAP. II.] ELECTIONS TO THE PAPACY. 15
It would be unsafe to conclude that this narrative presents
us with a complete account of the whole circumstances : we
must allow for the possibility that the statements may be
coloured by the position of their authors.
The action of Otto I. and the Council in deposing Pope
John XII. was parallel to the action of Henry III. and
the Council of Sutri in 1049. There were precedents in
the purgation both of Leo III. and Leo. IV. for some claim
on the part of the Church and the Emperor to be con-
cerned with the character of the head of the Church. 1 It
is more important to observe that, whatever irregularity there
might be in relation to the deposition of John XII., it seems
clear that the traditional forms were carefully observed in
the elections of Leo VIII. and John XIII. As Luitprand
relates the matter, it was the clergy and people of Eome
who elected Leo VIII., and the Emperor only gave his assent
to their election. The narrative of the continuator of Eegino
seems clearly to imply that on the death of Leo VIII., Otto I.
did not make any appointment to the Papacy by himself,
but referred the election to the Eonians, presumably in the
presence and with the sanction of his envoys.
This agrees indeed with the provisions of the " Privilegium "
of Otto I. with regard to papal elections, which is attributed
to the year 962, and is thought to be substantially genuine. 2
In this, it is provided that the Eoman clergy and nobility are
to secure that the election was to be carried out canonically
and justly, and that he who was elected to the Apostolic See
was not to be consecrated until he had, in the presence of the
imperial mission, made the same declaration as had been
voluntarily made by Pope Leo ; and further, that no one was
to interfere with the freedom of the Eomans, to whom
by ancient custom and to constitution of the holy fathers
the right of election belonged — this prohibition extended to
the missi of the Emperor. 3 These provisions correspond with
1 Cf. vol. i. p. 263. secundum quod in pacto et constitu-
2 Cf. Editor of ' Constitutiones ' in lione ac promissionis firmitate Eugenii
M. G. H. ad loc. pontifieis successorumque illius conti-
3 M. G. H., Legum, Sect. IV., Const. netur ; id est ut omnis clerus et
12 : " Salva in omnibus potestate nostra universi populi Romani nobilitas prop-
et filii nostri posterorumque nostroruin, ter diversas necessitates et pontilicum
16
SPIRIT UAL AND TEMPORAL POWERS.
[PART I.
those of the " Pactum " of Louis the Pious, and the " Constitutio
Romana " of Lothair I., 1 they clearly recognise that the right
of election belonged to the Eomans, while the Emperor retained
an important place in the process.
A little later in the century we find that these constitu-
tional traditions were no longer so carefully observed. The
life of St Adalbert contains an account of the appointment
of Pope Gregory V. in the year 996. From this it would
appear that the Emperor Otto III. was at Eavenna when
Pope John XV. died. The chief men of Rome (proceres et
senatorius ordo) sent letters and messengers announcing the
death of the Pope, and desiring to receive the royal judgment
as to whom they should set up in his place. Otto III. selected
Bruno, a young and learned clerk of the royal chapel, who
was his kinsman, and he was elected a maioribus, apparently
at Ravenna, and was then sent, with the Archbishop of Maintz
and another bishop, to Rome, where he was received with
honour. 2 The procedure is much of the same kind as that
inrationabiles erga populum sibi sub-
iectum asperitates retundendas Sacra-
mento se obliget, quatinus futura pon-
tificum elect io, quantum uniuscuiusque
intellectus fuerit, canonice et iuste
fiat ; et ut ille, qui ad hoc sanctum
atque apostolium regimen eligitur,
nemine consentiente consecratus fiat
pontifex, priusquam talem in presentia
missorum nostrorum vel filii nostri seu
universae generalitatis faciat promis-
sionem pro omnium satisfactione atquo
futura conversatione, qualem domnus
et venerandus spiritalis pater noster
Leo sponte fecisse dinoscitur.
" Preterea alia minora huic operi
inserenda previdimus, videlicet ut in
electione pontificum neque liber neque
servus ad hoc venire preeusumat, ut
illis Romanis, quos ad hanc electionem
per constitutionem sanctorum patrum
antiqua admisit consuetudo, aliquod
faciat impedimentum ; quod si quis con-
tra hanc nostrar~ institutionem venire
prresumpserit, exilio tradatur. Insuper
eciam ut nullus missorum nostrorum
cuiuscunque impeditionis argumentum
componere in prefatam electionem
audeat, prohibemus."
1 Cf. vol. i. p. 271.
2 ' Vita S. Adalberti,' xxi. ; Migne,
P. L., vol. 137. Otto III. was at
Ravenna. " Ibi in ejus occursum
veniunt epistolse cum nunciis, quas
mittunt Romani proceres et senatorius
ordo. Primo illius adventum, velut
toto tempore paternse mortis non
visum, totis visceribus desiderare ao
debita fidelitate pollicitantur ex-
speetare ; deinde in morte domni apos-
tolici tam sibi quam illis non minimam
invectam esse partem incommodorum
annunciant, et quem pro eo ponerent,
regalem exquirunt sentenciam. Erat
item in capella regis quidam clericus
nomine Bruno, secularibus litteris
egregie eruditus et ipse regio sanguine
genus ferens ; magnae scilicet indolis,
sed, quod minus bonum, multum
fervide juventutis. Hunc quia regi
CHAP, n.] ELECTIONS TO THE PAPACY. 17
of which we shall find examples when we come, in the next
chapter, to deal with the appointment of bishops.
In a document of a few years later, whose genuineness has
indeed been disputed, but probably without sufficient reason,
we find Otto III. claiming very explicitly that it was he
himself who had created Gerbert (Silvester II.) Pope in the
year 999. 1 How much exactly this may mean it is not easy
to say, but at least it implies that Otto III. had a very high
conception of his own share in the appointment.
We have very little by way of contemporary observation
and criticism on the events which we have recorded ; but it
is important to observe that Thietmar of Merseburg, writing
not later than the first quarter of the eleventh century,
expresses his disapproval of the deposition of Benedict V.,
whom he calls " valentiorem sibi [i.e., the emperor] in Christo,"
and maintains that no one had authority to judge him except
God Himself. 2
After the death of Otto III. the Papacy was comparatively
free from the pressure of the Empire, but also it lost its
support, and once again it fell on evil days, for, if it was
emancipated from the interference of the Germans, it only
fell more helplessly under the domination of the local
factions, and by the middle of the eleventh century the
situation had once again become acute. We do not
need to enter into the details of the intervention of
Henry III. ; it is enough for us here to remember that
placuit, a majoribus electum Magon- nostro dona conferimu8, ut habeat
tinus episcopus Willigisus et suus col- magister, quid principi nostro Petro a
lega Hildebaldus episcopus adduxerunt parte sui discipuli offerat."
Romam ; proinde a Romanis honori- 2 Thietmar, ' Chronicon,' ii. 18 :
fice acceptum, ad hoc ordinati episcopi " Romanorum prepotens imperator
apostolico honore promulgarunt." augustus valentiorem sibi in Christo
1 M. G. H., Legum, Sect. IV., Const. domnum apostolicum, nomine Bene-
26 : " Sicut enim pro amore sancti Petri dictum, quem nullus absque Deo
domnum Siluestrurn magistrum nos- iudicare potuit, iniuste, ut spero, accu-
trum papam elegimus et Deo volentc satum, deponi consensit, et, quod
ipsum serenissimum oidinavimus et utinam non fecisset, oxilio ad Ham-
creavimus ita pro amore ipsius domni mabure religari precepit, ut po3t
Silvostri pape sancto Petro de publico lucidius indicabo."
VOL. IV. B
18 SPIRITUAL AND TEMPORAL POWERS. [part I.
Gregory VI. was deposed at the Council held in the
presence of Henry III. at Sutri in December 1046, and
that Snidger, the Bishop of Bamberg, was elected to the
Papacy as Clement II. 1
It need not be doubted that the action of Henry III. was
well intended, and indeed it succeeded in producing a reforma-
tion of the conditions and character of the Papacy which had
permanent effects. The question of the propriety of the
methods used is another matter.
Clement II. died in 1047, while Gregory VI. was still alive.
Among the most highly respected bishops of the Empire was
Wazo, Bishop of Liege, of whom we shall have more to say
later. Henry III. asked his advice about the appointment
of a successor to Clement ; but Wazo, as reported by his
biographer, replied with great courtesy but with great firm-
ness, warning Henry III. against proceeding to any appoint-
ment while the legitimate occupant of the Holy See was
still alive, and urging that it was the clear doctrine of the
holy fathers that no one could judge the Supreme Pontiff but
God Himself. 2 It appears that Wazo's reply did not reach
Henry III. till after Poppo of Brixen had been appointed
Pope as Damasus II., but his judgment is very significant.
1 For a full discussion of the circum- ' Recogitet," inquit, " serenitas
stances, compare R. L. Poole's paper vestra, ne forte surnmi pontificis sedes
on Benedict IX. and Gregory VI. in depositi a quibus non oportuit ipsi
the ' Proceedings of the British Aca- divinitus sit reservata, cum is quem
demy,' vol. viii. vice eius ordinari iussistis defunctus,
2 Anselmi, ' Gesta Episcoporum Leo- cessisse videatur eidem adhuc super-
diensium,' 65 ; M. G. H. ; S. S., vol. 7 : stiti. Quocirca quandoquidom nostram
"In quibus diligenter revolutis nichil super his flagitare placuit sententiam,
aliud quam summum pontificem, cu- . . . desinat sublimitas vestra aliquem
iuscunque vitse fuerit, summo honore in eius locum qui superstes est velle
haberi, eum a nemine umquam iudi- substituere, quia nee divinas nee
cari oportere, immo nullius inferioris humanas leges cerium est concedero
gradus accusationem adversus superi- hoc, astipulantibus ubique sanctorum
orem rocipi debere, invenire poluit ; patrum tarn dictis quam scriptis, sum-
et quoniam condictum erat, hanc mum pontificem a nemine nisi a solo
electionem apostolici pontificis in natale Deo diiudicari debere. Testor Deum
dominico futuram, audacissimus purse et quod ego indignus sacerdos vobis
veritatis assertor responsalem suum inravi sacramentum, super hoc negotio
illo transmisit, et ingrata imperatori nihil hac sententia verius, nichil pr«e-
inter alia co Jidenter deferri iussit stantiua a me excogitari vel inveniri
mandamina, qua; fuere huiusmodi. posse."
CHAP. II. J ELECTIONS TO THE PAPACY. 19
What Wazo expresses firmly but in cautious and moderate
language was expressed much more roughly in an apparently
contemporary work of a French Churchman. He denounces
the emperor as most wicked, and challenges him to consider
how contrary was his action in venturing to sit in judgment
upon an ecclesiastic to the example of former emperors and
kings. He even suggests that Henry III. was not fit to judge
even laymen on account of what he calls his incestuous
marriage with Agnes of Poitou, who was his kinswoman. He
maintains that as the layman confesses to the priest, the priest
to the bishop, and the bishop to the Pope, so the Pope con-
fesses to God only, to God who had reserved him to His own
judgment. The emperor, he exclaims indignantly, does not
hold the place of Christ, but rather of the devil, when he uses
the sword and sheds blood. 1 It is also significant that he
protests against the election of the Pope as having been carried
out without the counsel and consent of the French bishops,
and contends that as they had no share in the election, they
were not bound to render obedience. 2
1 M. G. H., ' Lib. de Lite,' vol. i. Ubi enim inveniuntur imperatores
pp. 12-14, ' De Ordinando Pontifice ' : locum Christi obtinere ? Si veriusliceat
" Sileat ergo, sileat vaniloquium nos- nobis dicere, potius offitio diaboli sur-
trum, veniat imperator ille nequissi- guntur in gladio et sanguine, ut, dura
mus, ad iudicium introducantur testes per penitentiam eruantur vitia spirituali
ex ordin6 euo, qui eura convincant, in resecatione, ipsi insaniant vel in cede
sacerdotem eum non debuissc mittere vel in membrorum carnali obtrunca-
mamum. Die, religiosissime imperator tione ; quod secundum gratiam apud
Constantino, qui beato paps Silvestro Deum omnino est abhominabile."
obcedisti = M. G. H., ' Lib. de Lite,' vol. i.
p. 11 : "Quod cum ita sit in mino-
Sed imperator, unde loquimur, infamis ribus, fiat una provincia in spatio
orat, utpote qui incestuose cognatam ecelesise totius orbis, ut vel praeeentia
suam sibi mulierem copulaverat. In vel consensu omnes episcopi conveni-
quo etiam nee laicum diiudicare ant in ordinationem summi pontificis.
poterat. ...... Alioquin legitima non sit. Si enim
ordinationi consenserint, de electione
Cui erat confe.ssionem reddere, cuius contentio non erit, quia per id quod
erat exigere ? Quo loco, quo ordine ? sequitur id quod prius est aliquando
In secclesia populus sacerdoti, sacerdos solet intelligi. Hunc autem quis
episcopo potest confiteri, episcopus ordinavit ? Episcopi Francise nee in-
suinmo et universal] pontifici, ille vitati sunt nee dedere consensum. Qui
autem soli Deo, qui eum suo iuditio ergo secernuntur ab ordinatione, ab-
resorvavit. ..... solvantur et a debito obedientise."
20
SPIRITUAL AND TEMPORAL POWERS.
[PART I.
The attitude of Wazo and of the French writer is very
significant, and represents the same principle as that which,
as we have seen, was expressed earlier in the century by
Thietmar of Merseburg. We must, however, observe that the
condemnation of Henry's action does not seem to have been
shared by important members of the reforming party in the
Church. The most eminent Italian representative of reform
was Peter Damian, and it is clear that he had the highest
opinion of Henry III. and of the services which he had ren-
dered to the Church, especially in attacking the simoniacal
practices which were already so prevalent in it. In a treatise
written during the pontificate of Leo IX. he even says that it
was specially due to his services in this respect, that the
divine dispensation permitted that the Eoman Church should
be ordered according to his will, and that no one should be
elected to the Apostolic See without his authority. 1
1 Peter Damian, ' Liber Gratissi-
mus,' xxvii. ; ' Lib. de Lite,' i. p. 56 :
' ' Quis enim nesciat usque ad huius
Heinrici clementissimi regis imperium
presulatumque reverends memoriae
dementis papas, istius etiam bea-
tissimi Leonis apostolici, quo nunc
videlicet presule sancta se guber-
nari gratulatur ascclesia, per occiden-
talia regna virus symoniacse hereaeos
letaliter ebulisse, ita ut quod passim
fiebat licenter admissum, ultorise anim-
adversioni nequaquam duceretur ob-
noxium, et quod erat fere omnibus
consentaneum, pro regula tenebatur,
tamquam legali sanctione decre-
tum ? "
Id. id., xxxviii. ; ib. p. 71 : " Prasterea
dum venerabilis papas gesta recolimus,
consequenter ratio suadet, ut ad consi-
derandum quoque magni huius Henrici
regis insigne preconium animum trans-
feramus. Post Deum siquidem ipse
nos ex insatiabilis ore draconis eripuit,
ipse symoniacas hereseos ut revera mul-
ticipis hydra omnia capita divince vir-
tutis mucrone truncavit. Qui vide-
licet ad Christi gloriam non immerito
potest dicere : ' Quotquot ante me
venerunt fures fuerunt et latrones.'
Nam usque ad sui tempus imperii
sacerdotum falsitas inexplebiles, ut
ita fatear, Babilonico Beli prebebat im-
pensas. At postquam hie auctore Deo
paternum obtinuit principatum, dra-
conteis mox faucibus offam picis iniecit
et sic immanem bestiam quasi Dani-
hel alter extinxit. . . . Usque ad
huius sane tempus august i cuncta
canonum decreta, quaa super huius-
modi peste fuerant a patribus edita,
de multorum memoria longa iam vide-
bantur oblivione deleta. Sed hie tan-
quam olim insignis ille Iosias, mox ut
librum legis Domini repperit, vosti-
menta scidit, quia condoluit, aras
subruit, ydola abhominanda deiecit om-
nesque priorum regum sacrilegas super-
stitiones evertit. Et quoniam ipse
anteriorum principum tenere regulam
noluit, ut asterni regis procepta ser-
varet, hoc sibi non ingrata divina dis-
pensatio contulit, quod plerisque de-
cessoribus suis eatenus non concessit,
ut videlicet ad eius nutum sancta
Romans secclesia nunc ordinetur, ac
preter eius auctoritatem apostolicaa
sedi nemo prorsus eligat sacerdotem."
CHAP. II.]
ELECTIONS TO THE PAPACY.
21
Another of the most eminent reforming prelates of this
period, Humbert, Cardinal of Silva Candida, in his treatise,
' Ad versus Simoniacos,' refers in the warmest terms to the
great service Henry HI. had rendered to the Church by his
action against simony. 1 And, it should be observed, that
even Gregory VH. refers in the highest terms to Henry HI.,
and speaks of him and his wife with great admiration. 2
It is at least clear, from the consideration of these divergent
opinions, that even those who were most zealous for the refor-
mation of the Church were by no means fully agreed in their
judgment upon the action of Henry III. at Sutri.
The question of the right of the emperor to some share in
the appointment of the Popes was in some respects different.
It does not appear that any one had so far seriously questioned
the propriety of the emperor having some part in this, but
the nature of that part was uncertain. We must now briefly
consider the history of the question from the time of the
Council of Sutri down to that of Pope Nicholas II. and his
decree with regard to the method of papal elections.
Henry III. had received at Eome the title of " Patricius,"
and as some writers seem to suggest, this carried with it some
special authority in the election of a Pope. 3 As we have seen,
Clement II. died in 1047, the year after his appointment,
and Poppo of Brixen was appointed as Damasus II. by the
emperor and his court in Germany, apparently before Wazo's
letter, deprecating any election while Gregory VI. was alive,
had reached the emperor. When, however, Damasus II.
1 Humbert, ' Adversus Simoni-
acos ' ; M. G. H., ' Lib. de Lite,' i. p.
206, iii. 7 : " Ut enim de prioribus
sa>culis reticeatur, adhuc retinet me-
moria multorum hanc rociprocatse
venditionis rabiem grassatam per Ger-
maniam et Gallias totamque Italiam
a temporibus Ottonum usque augustse
et divae memorise imperatorem Heinri-
cum Chuonradi filium. Hie diebua
suis tam a se quam ab ecclesiasticis
imperii sibi crediti persouis tantum
Baorilegium removit aliquantulum,
quamviH instarel multum et cuperet
removere totum. In quo cordis sui
optimo desiderio immatura morte pr»-
ventus ad vitae seternse regnum, ut
creditur vel pro hac sola intentione
velut pro oculi sui simplicitate est
translatus, cum ex multis quoque
aliis bonis extiterit laudatus."
1 Gregory VII., Reg. iv. 3 : " Quibus
non possunt nostra rotate ad imperii
gubernacula inveniri aequales."
3 Cf. Bonizo, ' Lib. de Lite,' vol. i.
p. 586, and Ann. Rom. M. G. H. ;
S. S. v. p. 469, and Peter Damian,
' Disceptatio Synodalis.' M. G. H.,
' Lib. de Lite,' i. p. 80.
22 SPIRITUAL AND TEMPORAL POWERS. [part I.
died in the same year, it became evident that the question of
the right method of electing the Pope had begun seriously to
affect the minds of men. We have more than one account of
the election of Bruno of Toul as Leo IX. The first of these,
which is contained in the history of the Church of Eheims by
Anselm, relates how, on the death of Pope Damasus II., the
Eomans announced this to Henry III., and asked that he
should appoint another in his place. The emperor, having
consulted the bishops and "optimates " of the Empire, selected
Bruno of Toul, a man distinguished for his character and learn-
ing and a kinsman of his own. The " insignia " of the Apos-
tolic dignity were adjudged to him, and he was sent to Eome
" ad haec secundum ecclesiasticas sanctiones suscipiendas."
On his arrival there he was received with honour by the Eoman
people, and enthroned in the chair of St Peter as Leo IX. 1
In the life of Leo IX., however, which was written by
Wibert, who had been Archdeacon of Toul under him, we have
a great deal of additional and highly significant detail. The
author represents Leo as being elected in the presence of the
Emperor Henry III. at Worms by a council of the bishops
and proceres. He demanded three days' time for considera-
tion, and spent them in fasting and prayer, and then declared
his readiness to accept the office, but only on the condition that
he should be assured of the consent of the whole clergy and
people of Eome. He drew near to Eome walking on bare
feet, and when he reached the city he announced the imperial
election, but demanded that they should declare their will,
1 Anselm, Monk of Rheimp, ' His- batur conspicuus, sibique sanguinis
toria dedicationis Ecclesiae S. Renigii,' affinitate proximus. Unde apostolicae
7 ; Migne, P. L., vol. 142 : " Defuncto dignitatis ei adjudicata sunt insignia,
siquidem papa Damaso. . . . Romani, jussusque ab Augusto ut ad base
legatione de ejus obitu ad imperatorem secundum ecclesiasticas sanctiones sus-
Henricum directa, petierunt ut eccle- cipienda Romans inviseret mcenia. . . .
siae pastore viduatae ab eo 6ubrogaretur ........
alius. Qui super hoc negotio episcopo- Quo perveniens, cum favore totius
rum et optimatum imperii sui quaerens populi honorabiliter excipitur apostoli-
consilium, invenit inter caeteros dom- casque dignitatis infulis insignitur, in
num Brunonem Tullensem prsesulem ad hypapanti Domini in cathedra beati
idem officium subeundum esse idoneum, Petri inthronizatur, et Leo papa,
utpote qui v ^atis maturitate, mor- Romano more nuncupatur."
umque et sHenty j claritudine vide-
CHAP. II.]
ELECTIONS TO THE PAPACY.
23
whatever it might be, protesting that according to the canons
the election of the clergy and people must precede all other
authority, and assured them that he would gladly return to his
home if they were not pleased to elect him. It was only when
he saw that they unanimously acclaimed him that he finally con-
sented to be enthroned. 1 We must, perhaps, allow for the possi-
bility that the narrative may be, to some extent, coloured by the
principles of the writer, but even when we make allowance for
this it remains very significant. It does not seem to have been
denied that the emperor shoidd have some voice in the appoint-
ment of the Pope, but he could not neglect or override the rights
of the clergy and people of Eome as the primary electing body.
The appointment in 1054 of the successor of Leo IX.,
Gebhardt, Bishop of Eichstiidt (Victor II.), is described in
somewhat different terms by different authorities, but it seems
clear that the election was made by the emperor himself, with
the advice of his bishops and court, and with the consent of
the representatives of the Eoman Church. 2
1 Leo IX., ' Vita,' ii. 2 ; Migne, P. L.,
vol. 143 : " Interea apud Wangionum
urbem ante present iam gloriosi Henrici
secundi (III) Romanorum Angusti fit
pontificum reliquorumque procerum
non modicus conventus. . . . Et re-
pente, illo nihil talo suspicante, ad onus
apostolici honoris suscipiendum eligitur
a cunctis. Quod onus humilitate com-
monente diutissime refugiens, dum
magis ac magis cogitur, triduanum
consulendi deposcit spatium, in quo
jejuniis vacans et orationibus, omnino
sine cibo potuque permansit. . . .
Videns ergo nulli modo se posse effugere
imperiale praeceptum et commune
omnium desidorium, coactus suseepit
injunctum officium, prsesentibus legatis
Romanorum, ea conditione, si audiret
totius clcri ac Romani populi com-
munem esse sine dubio consensum.
. . . Omnipotentis igitur roboratus so-
lamine, Romam appropinquit, cui tota
urbs cum hymnidico concentu obviam
ire parai : sod ipse pedes longinquo
itinere nudis plnnti?- inoedit, et magis
ad mentis devotionem quam ad laudum
delectionem animum inflectit. . . .
Imperialem de se electionem in tarn
laborioso officio brevi sermunculo pro-
mulgat, eorum voluntatem, qualis-
cumque erga se sit, pandere expostulat ;
dicit electionem cleri et populi canoni-
cali auctoritate aliorum dispoeitionem
praeire ; affirmat se gratanti animo in
patriam rediturum, nisi fiat electio eius
communi omnium laude j ostendit se
coactum ad tarn grande onus suscipi-
endum venisse. Cumque videret un-
animem omnium acclamationem, ad
correctionem vitae coeptam repetit
exhortationem, supplex cunctorum ex-
petit orationem atque absolutionem.
Itaque, divina favente gratia, cunc-
tis applaudentibus, consecratur, ac Do-
minicae quadragesimalis initio, pridie
Idus Februarii, apostolicae cathedrae
inthronizatur."
2 ' Annales Romani,' a. 1054 j Ber-
thold, ' Annales,' a. 1054 ; ' Annales
Haserensis,' a. 1054.
24 SPIRITUAL AND TEMPORAL POWERS. [PART I.
There is no trace of any consultation of the imperial court
in relation to the election of Stephen IX. (1057), but on his
death in the following year the aristocratic factions in Eome
endeavoured to reassert themselves, and procured the election
of the Bishop of Velletri as Benedict X. The cardinals, how-
ever, refused to recognise him, and with the sanction of the
imperial court proceeded to elect Nicholas II. at Siena. It
was no doubt this attempt of the Eoman factions which led
Nicholas II. to promulgate his famous decree for the regulation
of the method of papal elections in April 1059. The most
important provisions of this are — the primary place given to
the cardinal bishops and the other cardinals in the election ;
the permission in case of necessity to proceed to the election
of a Pope outside of Bome, who should exercise the full
authority of the Papal See, even if he could not at once be
enthroned in Bome ; and, finally, the recognition of the
relation of Henry and his successors to the election. The
phrases are vague, but certainly seem to imply that in normal
circumstances they were to have a legitimate place in the
process of the appointment of a Pope. 1
1 M. G. H., Legum, Sect. IV., Const. iniquorum hominum ita perversitas in
vol. i. 382 : " 3. Ut obeunte huius valuerit, ut pura sincera, atque gra-
Romanss universalis ecclesiae pontifice, tuita electio fieri in urbe non posset,
imprimis cardinales episcopi diligentis- cardinales episcopi, cum religiosis
sima simul consideratione tractantes, clericis catholicisque laicis, licet paucis,
mox sibi clericos cardinales adhibeant ; ius potestatis obtineant eligere apos-
sicque reliquus clerus et populus ad tolicse sedis pontificem, ubi congru-
consensum novae electionis accedant. entius iudicaverint. 8. Plane post-
4. Ut nimirum ne venalitatis morbus quam electio fueerit facta, si bellica
qualibet occasione subrepat — religiosi tempestas vel qualiscumque hominum
viri praeduces sint in promovendi conatus malignitatis studio restiterit,
pontificis elections, reliqui autem se- ut is qui electus est in apostolica sede
quaces. ... 6. Salvo debito honore et iuxta consuetudinem intronizari non
reverentia dilecti filii nostri Henrici, valeat, electus tamen sicut papa auc-
qui inprajsentiarum rex habetur et fu- toritatem obtineat regendi sanctam
turns imperator Deo concedente sper- Romanam ecclesiam et disponendi
atur, sicut iam sibi concessimus, et omnes facilitates illius, quod beatus
successores illius, qui ab hac apostolica Gregorius ante consecrationem suam
sede personaliter hoc ius impetra- fecisse cognoscimus."
verint. 7. Quodsi pravorum atque
26
CHAPTER III.
THE APPOINTMENT OF BISHOPS TO 1075.
In the first volume of this work we have endeavoured to
point out briefly the principles which were generally recog-
nised in the ninth century as governing the appointment of
bishops in the Carolingian Empire. We have stated our
own conclusion that it was held that a proper appointment
normally included a number of different elements — the
election by the clergy and people of the diocese, the approval
of the comprovincial bishops and the metropolitan, and the
consent of the prince, and that it was generally recognised
that no one of these elements should be neglected. 1 No
doubt the practice of the time was often a little uncertain,
but the principles acknowledged were clear, and there was no
serious dispute about them. We have now to consider briefly
the history of the question until the time, i.e. 1075, when
the great dispute about episcopal appointments broke out
between the Papacy and the Empire. It is indeed necessary
to consider this with some care if we are to understand the
real nature of that great conflict and to do justice to the
various points of view represented in it, and if we are to
escape from that vicious and unhistorical conception which
regards that great conflict as representing either mere ecclesi-
astical aggression or mere secular tyranny.
It seems to us quite clear that until the beginning of the
great conflict the principles represented in the Literature of the
ninth century continued to be accepted, and that in theory at
1 Cf. vol. i. pp. 267-270.
26 SPIRITUAL AND TEMPORAL POWERS. [PAUT I.
least it would have been recognised that the election of the
clergy and people, the consent of the comprovincial bishops
and the metropolitan, and the approval of the prince, were all
normally elements in the legitimate appointment of a bishop.
We must examine the evidence in some little detail.
In a treatise of Atto, who became Bishop of Vercelli in the
year 945 and died in 961, we find the conditions of an
episcopal appointment set out with great clearness. The
clergy and people, according to the canons, must have the
free and unimpeded right of electing the person whom they
think best. The person who is thus elected must then be
carefully examined by the metropolitan and the other bishops
of the province, and if they find him guilty of some grave
fault they are to refuse to consecrate. If, however, they find
him worthy of the office, then after due notice to the prince
of the territory in which the diocese is situated, and with his
consent, he is to be consecrated. 1
The same principles are stated in what seems to be a
formula for election contained in a work of Odoramnus, a
monk of St Peter at Sens, which belongs to the first half of
the eleventh century. The Church of Sens proclaims the
appointment of a bishop, with the consent and will of the
King of the Franks, the comprovincial bishops, the great men,
the abbots and clergy, and the faithful of both sexes. 2
In these passages we have what seems to us to have been the
1 Atto of Vercelli, ' De Pressuris removeantur gratia. Si vero dignus
Ecclesiasticis,' ii. ; Migne, P. L., inventus fuerit, tunc cum consensu
vol. 137 (p. 87) : " In electione vero et notitia principis ad cujus ditionem
pontificum sanctorum in omnibus eadem parochia pertinere videtur, sol-
canonum ordo servetur, nullum clerus emmter et devotisBime consecretur."
vel populus praeiudicium patiatur ; - Odoramnus, ' Opusculum,' viii. ;
sed libera sit eis absque alicujus Migne, P. L., vol. 142 : " Cuius vigore
controversia facultus tranquille quem nobiliter pollens sancta Senonensis
melius prseviderint eligendi. Electus mater ecclesia ... ad praesens una
quoque tam a metropolitano, quam cum consensu et volentate illius re-
a cseteris comprovincialibus episcopis gis inclyti Francorum, conprovinciali-
diligentissime examinandus erit. Quod umque episcoporum et procerum
si quis contra eum juste aliqua poterit abbatumque et clericorum, nee non
obiicere, licentiam habeant in omnibus utriusque sexus fidelium, proclamat
tunc ventilare, quem si convincere sibi dorunum ilium fieri pontiiiceru
poterit de culpa, a benedictionis suminuin."
CHAP. III.] THE APPOINTMENT OF BISHOPS TO 1075.
27
normal judgment of the times upon the proper conditions
of the appointment of a bishop. It is true, however, that the
discussion of these questions usually arose under the terms
of a more or less controversial assertion of the importance
of this or that element in the appointment. This has indeed
been the source of a certain confusion in the discussion of the
subject, for to the unwary or hasty student, such references
might often seem to assert the necessity of one element to the
exclusion of others. We must, therefore, approach the con-
sideration of the subject with caution.
In the first place, we may consider some passages which
assert the principle of election by the clergy and people as
normal or necessary. In a work of Abbo, Abbot of
Fleury, in the latter part of the tenth century, to which
reference has frequently been made in vol. iii., we have a
very comprehensive affirmation of the election principle in
Church and State. There are, he says, three " generales "
elections known to him : that of the king or emperor, by the
agreement of the whole kingdom ; that of the bishop, by the
unanimous agreement of the citizens and clergy ; and that of the
abbot, by the wiser judgment of the monastic congregation. 1
Alongside of this, we may put some more specific references
to the question made by Fulbert, who was Bishop of Chartres
from 1006 to 1028. In one of his letters he emphatically
refused to take part in the consecration of a certain Theo-
dosius as bishop, on the ground that the prince had no right
to thrust a person on the diocese in such a way that neither
the clergy nor the people nor the other bishops could exercise
a free choice. 2 That Fulbert did not, however, intend to
1 Abbo, Abbot of Fleury, ' Collectio
Canonurn,' iv. ; Migne, P. L., vol. 139 :
" Tres namque electiones generales
novimus, quarum una est regis vel
imperatori8, altera pontificis, tertia
abbatis. Et primam quidem faeit
concordia totius regni ; secundam vero
unanimitas civium et cleri ; tertiam
aanius consilium coenobialis congrega-
tionia."
2 Fulbert of Chartres, ' Ep.,' xxvi. ;
Migne, P. L., vol 141 : " Nam cum
sit electio unius de pluribus maxime
complaciti secundum liberam arbitrii
voluntatem acceptio, quomodo electio
recte dici possit, ubi sic a principo
unus obtruditur, ut nee clero, nee
populo, nee ipsis summis tac^rdoti-
bus ad aliuxn deflectere concedatur
De viuleutia luiiutiuaodi t'onstantiiius
28 SPIRITUAL AND TEMPORAL POWERS. [pakt I.
deny that the prince had his proper place in determining the
appointment to a bishopric seems evident from another letter.
This is addressed to a certain Avisgaudus, who had resigned
his bishopric, and after the appointment of his successor
wished to return to it. Fulbert points out that he has no
right to do this, seeing that his successor had been appointed
after the election of the clergy, the vote of the people, the
grant of the king, and the approval of the Eoman Pontiff, by
the metropolitan, the Archbishop of Sens. 1
Later, in the eleventh century, we find the principle of the
need of the election by the clergy and people very strongly
affirmed and enforced by the reforming school in Church and
Stijte. At the Council which was held by Leo IX. at Eheims
in 1049, a canon was promulgated, that no one should be
advanced to rule in the Church without the election of the
clergy and people. At the Council held at Maintz by him
in the same year, two claimants appeared for the arch-
bishopric of Besancon, Berthold, who claimed that he had
received the investiture from Eudolph, the King of Burgundy,
and had been consecrated by the bishops of the province ; and
Hugh, who protested that Berthold had not been elected or
received by the clergy and people, but had purchased his ap-
pointment from the king with money, while he himself had been
elected by the clergy and the people. The Council, after con-
sidering the canonical rules, decided that Berthold, inasmuch as
he had not been elected by the sons of the Church, and had not
been received by them as their pastor, but had always been
repudiated, neither could nor ought to have been imposed
upon an unwilling people ; while Hugh, who had been demanded
and elected by the clergy and people as their archbishop, and
had held the see for so long a time without reproach, should
Augustus talem contra se et contra Cf. ' Ep.,' 136-138.
alios principes sententiam dedit : 1 Id., ' Ep.,' xxxv. : " Quod si ita est,
' Quascumque,' inquit, ' contra leges et sic tibi consequenter substitutus
fuerint a principibus obtenta, non est Franco, eligente clero, suffragante
valeant.' Et Rhegiense concilium : populo, dono regis, approbatione Ro-
' Sed nee ille,' inquit, ' deinceps epis- raani pontificis, per manum metro-
copus erit, quem .aec clerus nee populus politani Senonensie."
propri» oivitatis elegerit.' "
CHAP. III.] THE APPOINTMENT OF BISHOPS TO 1075. 29
occupy it iu peace, for he was the true shepherd who had
entered by the door, and he who came in otherwise was
a thief and a robber. 1 It is noticeable that the decree of the
Council was not based upon the charge of simony, which Hugh
had brought against Berthold, which may not have been
substantiated, but on the ground that the rights of the clergy
and people in election had been overriden. And it is further
noteworthy that, as we have mentioned in a previous chapter,
the Emperor Henry III. was present at the Council, and that
it is specially mentioned that he gave his approval to the
decision. 2
If in these passages we find the clear assertion of the
principle that the bishop must be elected by the clergy
and people of the diocese, we can also find in the literature
of the tenth and eleventh centuries many passages which might
be interpreted as implying that the secular ruler, whether
king or emperor, really possessed an unlimited power in
making ecclesiastical appointments. In the fife of St Udalric,
which was probably written in the last years of the tenth
century, it is in one place said that he asked the emperor
that, after his own death, he should confer the bishopric which
he occupied upon Adalbero his nephew, and that the emperor
promised that he would do this. 3 We shall presently have to
Anselmus, Monchus S. Remigii tanto tempore tranquille possidentem,
Remensis, ' Historia Ded. Eccl. S. nulla umquam calumnia ab eodem
Renigii,' 16 : " Ne quis sine electione Bertaldo inquietandum, perpetua pace
cleri et populi ad regimen ecclesiasti- debere eumdem episcopatum possidere
cum provehetur." quia ille pastor eseet qui per ostium
Leo IX., ' Ep.,' 22 ; Migne, P. L., intraret, qui vero aliunde fur et
vol. 143 : " Itaque pari consensu et latro."
communi consulto, prolatis sanctorum 2 See p. 5.
canonum sententiis, decrevit sancta s Vita S. Udalrici, xxi. ; Migne, P. L.,
synodus eundem Bertaldum, a filiis vol. 135 : " . . . ut post eius disces-
Ecclesise non electum, non recep- sum cathedram episcopalis potestatis
turn, non pro pastore habitum, sed ei donaret. . . . Cujus petitioni
semper repudiatum, semper repulsum, gloriosus et benevolus imperator as-
invitis dari non potuisse nee debuisse, sensum prsebens saecularium negoti-
ideoque perpetua taciturnitate ab orum eommercia Adalberoni com-
huiusmodi querimonia debere cessare : mendavit, et episcopalis honorem
Hugonem vero archiepiscopum a clero cathedrae post vitam episcopi, si Deus
et populo oxpetitum, electum, sedem vellet, ei donare promisit."
30 SPIRITUAL AND TEMPORAL POWERS. [PART I.
consider the passage in which the author of the life describes
some of the actual circumstances of the appointment of St
Udalric's successor ; in the meanwhile it is important to
observe the somewhat arbitrary manner in which the
emperor is represented as acceding to this very irregular
request.
Again, it is noticeable that Eatherius of Verona, while he
vigorously maintains the greater dignity of the bishop as
compared with that of the king, and urges that while kings
are "instituted " by the bishops, they cannot ordain bishops,
yet speaks of kings as having power to elect or designate the
bishop. 1
Again, Bodolfus Glaber, while denouncing simony with great
vigour, both in his own person and in an address which he
represents Henry III. as making to the bishops of Gaul
and Germany, seems to assume that kings have the right
of appointing to sacred offices. 2
It would be quite natural if the hasty student were to
judge from such passages as these that at this time episcopal
appointments were for the most part made by the secular
rulers without any reference to the wishes of the clergy and
people, or other ecclesiastical authorities. And yet, in truth,
no such conclusion should be drawn, and the real nature of the
situation is best understood when we observe that it is quite
possible to find apparently inconsistent statements with regard
to this question in the writings of some of the most eminent
Churchmen of these times.
In the correspondence of Gerbert, afterwards Pope Silvester
II., we can find passages which might serve to defend almost
any view of the proper method of appointment to Church
offices. In what seems to be a draft of a letter to be written
1 Ratherius of Verona, ' Praeloqui- Migne, P. L., vol. 172 : " Nam ipsi
orum. iv. 2 : " Dixi, nisi fallor, epis- reges, qui sacrae religionis idonearum
copos a Deo solo, ut reges, et praestan- decretores personarum esse debuerant,
tius multo quam reges, quia et reges munerum largitione conupti, potio-
ab episeopis instituti, episeopi vero a rem quempiam ad regimen Ecclesiarum
regibus, etsi eligi vel decerni, non vel animarum dijudicanl , ilium vide-
valent tamen orr'jnari, institutes." licet, a quo ampliora muuera suscipere
* Rodolfus Glaber, ' Historia,' ii. 6 ; sperant."
CHAP. III.] THE APPOINTMENT OF BISHOPS TO 1075.
31
in the name of Adalbero, the Archbishop of Kheims, to the
Empress Theophano, the widow of Otto II., she is asked,
if there should be a vacant bishopric, not to confer it upon
any one who is not recommended to her by the archbishop,
and in particular to confer one upon Gerbert. 1 In another
letter written in the name of the same archbishop, Adalbero
appears as having permitted his nephew to accept a bishopric
conferred on him by the king. 2 In another letter again,
written probably in the name of the Archbishop of Trier,
he denounces the people of Verdun for their unwillingness
to accept another Adalbero as their bishop when he had been
appointed by the king, with the consent and approval of the
bishops of the province. 3 Again, in a letter written in the
name of Otto III., Otto is represented as saying that he had
bestowed the Abbey of St Vincent, at Capua, upon a certain
monk. 4
If we were to judge from these passages alone, we should
naturally come to the conclusion that Gerbert looked upon
1 Gerbert, ' Epistolae,' 117: "Ex
tanto ergo affectu, tantoque amore, a
vestra munificentia praesumimus petero,
quod scimus per fidissimos nuntios olim
nobis concessum esse, id est si in
regnorum confinio quselibet eeclesia
vacaret pastore, in ea non alium con-
stituendum, nisi quern vestra; utilitati
omnimodis aptum sano juditio dele-
gerimus. Et quia omnibus compro-
vincialibus notura, Italia expulsum,
sed in fide non ficta praestantem
habcmus abbatcm Gerbertum, hunc
ecclcsiae praefioi, modis quibus possu-
mus, oramus."
2 Id., 'Ep.,' 57: " Perfidias ac in-
fidclitatis crirnine in regiam maiesta-
tera arguor detinori, eo quod nepotem
meum, clcricum videlicet mese ecclesiae,
licentia donavorim, quia et palatium
adierit, et dono alterius regis episco-
patum acGeperit ejus regni, quod
senior Lothariua rex in proprium
ius revocavorat , quodque gradus eecle-
sia; ticos oi postmodum eontulorim
absque licentia et auctoritate senioris
mei."
3 Id., ' Ep.,' 79 : " Quod remedium
morbis tuis inveniemus, Vordunensiurn
execrata ci vitas ? Unitatem sanctae
Dei ajcclesiae scidisti. Sanctissimam
societatem humani generis abrupisti.
Quid enim aliud egeris, cum pastorem
tuum, voluntate htcreditarii regis,
consensu et favore conprovincialium
episcoporum electum, ac insuper epis-
copali benedictiono donatum, adhuo
pertinax minime recognoscis, teque
velut membrum mutilum ac deforme
sine imitate corporis ex olea in ole-
astrum inserere temptas ? "
4 Id., 'Ep.,' 214: " O. gratia Dei
imperator augustus, R. comiti salutem.
Di versa regni negotia interdum coguiit
nos indicero diversa imperia. Hinc est
quod abbatiam sancti Vincentii Capuae
sitam ob quarumdam rerum necessitu-
dines nuper Ioanni monacho dona-
verimus, Rotfrido abbate nee adjudi-
cato, nee deposito."
32 SPIRITUAL AND TEMPORAL POWERS. [PART I.
the appointment to ecclesiastical office as belonging to the
secular authorities, with some regard at most to the rights
of the comprovincial bishops. When, however, we examine
his letters more completely, we find that at other times they
represent quite a different attitude. In a letter written in
the name of the abbots of the monasteries of Eheims to
the monks of Fleury, he speaks with indignation and con-
tempt of some one who claimed an abbey apparently in virtue
simply of a royal appointment. 1 Again, in the document an-
nouncing the election of Arnulf to the archbishopric of
Eheims in 989, the bishops of the province are represented
as saying that they, with all the clergy, with the acclama-
tion of the people, and with the consent of the kings, elect
him as their head. 2 In the letter of the same bishops announc-
ing the election of Gerbert himself as Archbishop of Eheims,
after Arnulf had been deposed by the Council of Verzy in
991, there is a very interesting discussion of the true mean-
ing of the requirement of election by the people. They say
that they had elected Arnulf under the influence of the
popular clamour, inasmuch as the Scripture said, " The voice
of the people is the voice of God," and the canons required
the desire and wishes of the clergy and people in the election
of a bishop. They had not, they say, understood that it is
not always true that the voice of the people is the voice of
God, and that therefore it is not the wishes of all the clergy
and people which are to be considered in the election of a
bishop, but only those of the simple and uncorrupted. They
quote the Fathers as saying that the election of a bishop must
not be made by a mob, but that it should be in the hands of the
bishops, that they might prove him who was to be consecrated.
They, therefore, the bishops of the province of Eheims,
1 Id., ' Ep.,' 95 : " Secernite vos oves 2 Id., 155: " Nos qui dieimur epis-
Christi, ab eo qui non est pastor, sed copi dioceseos Rernorum metropolis,
lupus ovium depopulator. Pretendat cum omni olero diversi ordinis, populo
sibi reges, duces, seculi principes, qui acclamante, ortodoxis regibus nostris
se favore solummodo eorum moncho- consentientibus, eligimus nobis in prse-
rum principem *3cit. Nee erubuit se sulem vii-um pietate prtestantem, fide
ingerere, qui ex humilitate debuerat insignem," &c.
fefugere."
CHAP, in.] THE APPOINTMENT OP BISHOPS TO 1075. 33
with the favour and approval of the kings, Hugh and Robert,
and the assent of those of the clergy and people, who are
God's, declare that they have elected the Abbot Gerbert as
their archbishop. 1
When we take account of all these passages, it is plain
that Gerbert was well aware that the appointment of bishops
and abbots was not a matter for the arbitrary decision of the
secular power, but that the community of the diocese, whether
clerical or lay, and the bishops of the province, in the one
case, and the community of the abbey in the other, had
their just and legal rights.
The correspondence of Gerbert may serve to illustrate the
great need of caution in the interpretation of the occasional
phrases of writers of the tenth and eleventh centimes, and the
works of Peter Damian make it very clear that even in the
third quarter of the eleventh century the most distinguished
representative of the reforming party still recognised the com-
plexity of the elements which constituted a legitimate and
well-ordered ecclesiastical appointment. By this time the
Church was alive to the need of dealing rigorously with
simony — we shall discuss this question in detail a little
1 Gerbert, ' Ep.,' 179 : " Ecce enira patrum exponendae : ' Non liceat, in-
post dissolutionem beatse memorise quit, turbis electionem facere eorum
pat lis A. quenclam ex regio semine qui ad sacerdotium provocantur, sed
prodeuntem nobis accclesiaeque Remensi judicium sit episcoporum, ut ipsi eum
praefecimus, et clamore multitudinis qui ordinandus est probent, si in ser-
inpulsi, Scriptura dieente : ' Vox mone, et in fide, et in episcopali vita
populi, vox Domini ' et sanctorum edoctus est.' Nos igitur episcopi Re-
canonum institutis, desiderium ac morum dioceseos, secundum has con-
vota cleri ac populi in eleetione epis- stitutiones patrum, favore et coniventia
copi perquirentium. Caligavit acies utriusque principis nostri domni
mentis nostras litteram incaute se- Ugonis augusti, et excellentissimi
quendo, coneordem sententiam divin- regis Rotberti, assensu quoque eorum
arum scripturarum parum investigando. qui Dei sunt in clero et populo, eli-
Non erat quippe vox Domini, vox gimus nobis archiepiscopum, abbatem
populi clamantis : ' Crucifige, cruci- Gerbertum, aetate maturum, natura,
fige.' Ergo non omnia vox populi, prudentem, docibilem, affabilem, mis-
vox Domini est. Nee omnis cleri et ericordem." I am indebted for the
populi vota et desideria in eleetione details with regard to this passage
episcopi perquirenda sunt, sed tantum to the edition of Gerbert's letters by
simplicis et incorrupti, id est spe M. Havet.
quostus minime illecti. Sententiae
VOL. IV. C
1 A
SPIRITUAL AND TEMPORAL POWERS.
[part I.
later — and reforming Churchmen, like Peter Damian, were
continually denouncing this vice, and advocating the most
stringent measures for its suppression ; but this does not
mean that they doubted or denied the propriety of the
secular authorities taking their part in ecclesiastical ap-
pointments.
In one of Peter Damian's smaller treatises, for instance,
he attacks with great vigour the custom of appointing men
to bishoprics because of the services which they had rendered
in the administration of secular offices, as clerics of the
royal or imperial chapels ; and he urges upon princes
and all others who had the right of appointing to ecclesi-
astical offices the duty of remembering that they must not
use their authority in an arbitrary or capricious fashion. 1
He warns them, that is, against the abuse of their authority ;
he does not suggest that the authority itself is illegitimate.
In another place, in a letter to the clergy and people of
Faenza, he recognises indeed very explicitly their right
to elect their bishop, and the place of the Pope in his
appointment ; but he praises them that they had determined
not to proceed to an election until the arrival of the King. 2
In a letter to Cadalous of Parma, who had been elected to the
Papacy as Honorius II., in 1061, by a synod of German and
Lombard bishops, in opposition to Alexander II., Peter in-
veighs in somewhat unmeasured terms against his presump-
tion in venturing to claim the Eoman See without the will
1 St. Peter Damian, ' Opusculum '
xxii. 4 ; Migne, P. L., vol. 145 :
" Principibus quoque, et quibuslibet
ordinatoribus ecclesiarum summopere
cavendum est, ne sacra loca, non
considerato divino iudieio, sed pro
arbitrio et ad libitum, prsbeant, ne
ad sviam confusionem divinae legis
ordinem, sacrorum canonum statuta
confundant."
2 Id., ' Epistles,' Bk. v. 10 ; Migne,
P. L., vol. 144 : " In quantum vero
deprehendere possunius, unus spiritus
t'uit, qui et nostri cordis ingeniolum
tetigit, et sanctam prudentiam ves-
tram in id, quod inter vos pactum
est atque conventum, unanimiter in-
citavit : videlicet, ut non eligatis
episcopum usque ad regis adventum.
Qui scilicet et errorem toll at, et vos,
atquo Ecclesiam vestram, sedatis un-
dique jurgiis, in quietis ac pacis
tranquil litate componat. Unde et
dominus noster papa rogandus est,
ut episcopum vobis modo non ingerat,
sed Ecclesiam vestram interim vacare,
et vos sub sua? benedictionis umbraculo
nianere decernat."
CHAP. III.] THE APPOINTMENT OF BISHOPS TO 1075. 35
of the Eoman Church ; not to speak of the Senate, the inferior
clergy, and the people, he ought to have recognised the place
of the Cardinal Bishops, who played the principal part in the
election of the Eoman Pontiff. The canonical authority decreed
that even in the humblest church the clergy should have a free
judgment about him who was to be set over them. Further
on he sums up the principal elements in a just election to the
See of Eomc. The Cardinal Bishops, he says, play the first
part ; then comes the assent of clergy in general, and thirdly
the approval of the people. Finally, the matter is to wait
until the royal authority has been consulted, unless, as had
been the case in the election of Alexander II., the circum-
stances were of such a kind that it was dangerous to wait. 1
The phrases of this letter seem clearly to refer to the
new regulation of Pope Nicholas II. for papal elections, and
we cite it here as illustrating the fact that Peter Damian
recognised both the rights of the clergy and people in election
to bishoprics, and also the right of the king or emperor to be
consulted.
Perhaps the best illustration of the principles of ecclesi-
astical appointments during this period is to be found in
the accounts of some elections which have been preserved.
The first we shall notice is contained in that life of St Udalric,
1 St Peter Damian, ' Ep.,' Bk. i. iudicium ; qua tumoris audacia
20 i " Cum itaque sacerdotium tuum tu prasumpsisti te violenter illis
tanta laboret infamia, quo pacto ingerere, qui praater communura
praesumpsisti, vel, ut mitius loquar, Ecclesiso regulam, super ipsos quoque
acquiescere potuisti, ignorante Romana pontifices authenticam prsevalent pro-
ecclesia, Romanum te episcopum eligi. mulgare censuram. . . .
Taceamus interim de senatu, de infori- ........
oris ordinis clero, de jjopulo. Quid " Nimirum cum electio ilia per
tibi de cardinalibus videtur episcopis ? episcoporum cardinalium fieri debeat
Qui videlicet et Romanum pontificem principalo judicium, secundo loco jure
prineipaliter eligunt, et quibusdam pr;cbeat clerus assensum, tertio popu-
aliis prserogativis, non rnodo quorum- laris favor attollat applausum : sicque
libet episcoporum, sod et patriarch- suspendonda est causa, usque dura
arum, atque primatum jura transcen- regiae celsitudinis consulatur auctor-
dunt. . . . Et cum canonica decernat itas : nisi, sicut nuper contigit, peri-
auctoritas, ut vel huxnilis cuiuscunque culum fortassis immineat, quod rem
Ecclesia; clero liceat liberum de illo, quantocius accelerare compellat."
qui sibi pr&'ferendus est, habere Cf. Id., ' Disceptatio Synodalis.'
36 SPIRITUAL AND TEMPORAL POWERS. [part I.
to which we have already referred. It tells us that after his
death the envoys of the diocese were sent to the Emperor,
carrying with them his pastoral staff. A certain Count
Burchardt succeeded in intercepting them, and persuaded
them that the Emperor had determined that his son should
be the bishop. The envoys are said to have known that it
was in their power either to elect him or not ; finally they
did this, and then proceeded on their way to the Court to
obtain the Emperor's confirmation for their election. 1
With this may be compared the account given by Fulbert
of Chartres of the circumstances attending the succession to
the Abbey of St Peter. When the abbot was dying a certain
Megenard went to Theobald, the Count (of Chartres), to ask
for the abbacy. The Count sent him back to the monks, de-
siring them to receive him as their abbot ; but they replied
that no one could become abbot while the previous one
was still alive, or except by the election of the brethren.
When shortly afterwards the abbot died, the monks decided
that they did not want Megenard as abbot, and determined
to send representatives to the Count announcing his death,
and asking for his permission to proceed to an election.
Two of the monks, however, went off privately to the
Count, and represented to him that the brethren had elected
Megenard ; and the Count, gratified with their compliance,
immediately handed over the pastoral staff. The other monks
were extremely indignant, and wrote to the Count denying
that they had elected him, but he compelled them to receive
him. 2
We have another interesting and detailed account of an
election in the life of St Lietbert, Bishop of Cambrai. On
the vacancy of the see he was elected to the bishopric by
the clergy and people, and he and the representatives of the
Church of Cambrai were then sent to the court of Henry III.
to report to him the death of the last bishop and the election
of Lietbert. Henry announced that he would with them elect
Lietbert Bishop of Cambrai. The matter was then reported,
1 ' Vita S. Udalrici,' xxviii. ; Migne, 2 Fulbert of Chartres, ' Ep.,' II. ;
P. L., vol. 135. Migue, P. L., vol. 141.
CHAP, in.] THE APPOINTMENT OF BISHOPS TO 1075. 37
with the assent of the bishops of the province, to the Arch-
bishop of Rheims, as metropolitan, in accordance with his legal
rights, and he gave his approval. 1
More important, however, than these narratives is the very-
detailed account of the circumstances attending the appoint-
ment of Wazo as Bishop of Liege. On the death of Bishop
Nithard in 1041 he was, in spite of his reluctance, elected
unanimously. He protested that his election would be dis-
pleasing to the King, and urged that they should wait to
know his will ; but his objection was overruled, and he was
elected and sent to Batisbon, where Henry III. then was.
On Wazo's arrival there the episcopal staff was handed over
to the King with the letter of the Church of Liege. On the
following day the King considered the matter with the bishops
and the princes of the palace. A number of them maintained
that the election, having been held without the approval of
the King, should be set aside, and urged that a bishop should
be chosen from the clergy of the royal chapel, among whom
Wazo had never served. The opinion of these persons might
have prevailed if it had not been for the intervention of
Hermann, Archbishop of Cologne, and of Bruno, Bishop of
Wiirzburg, who finally persuaded Henry to accept the
election of Wazo. 2
1 ' Vita S. Lietberti,' x. ; Migne, 2 Anselmi, * Gesta Episeoporum
P. L., vol. 146. Election by clergy Leodiensium,' 50 ; M. G. H. ; S. S.,
and people. . . . vol. 7 : " Ille (Wazo) e contra credi
xi. " suae voluntatis sententiam rex non potest quantas moras suae electioni
eis aperuit, Lietbertum scilicet praeposi- innectere, quanto annisu ne fieret
tuni se simul cum eis eligere Camera- studuerit insistere ; electionem regi
censis Ecelesise episcopum. . . . displicituram parum valere, super hoc
xvi. " cui quoniamsuiiurisiderat, de negotio magis eius expectandum
praenominata per ideneas personas elec- esse dicens arbitrium. Taliter reti-
tione suggeritur, suaeque corroborati- nentis et excusantis sententia non
onis auctoritas suppliciter imploratur ; auditur, invitus unanimiter a cunctis
episcoporum comprovincialium sub- eligitur, Radisbonam mittitur, ubi forte
jungitur epistolaris assensus, electique Henricus tunc rex, postea imperator,
pontificis dies consecrationis requiritur Boemiam cum exercitu aggressurus
ab omnibus. Audita Remisis metro- aderat. Virga episcopalis cum aecclesiae
politanus tam religiosa tamque celebri nostras litteris praesentatur, res agenda
eloctione, consideratisquo viri virtuti- in crastinum differtur : postera die a
bus, Doi munificentiam laudat et rege cum episcopis et reliquis palatii
ipse." principibus consulitur. Neo defuere
38 SPIRITUAL AND TEMPORAL POWERS. [PART I.
In these narratives we can probably recognise the normal
conception and method of appointment during this period.
The clergy and people of the diocese or abbey claimed the
right of election, but the prince had to give his sanction.
We should gather that the person whom the diocese had
chosen was sent with the pastoral staff of the bishop to the
king, and, if he approved the choice, he would invest him
with this. If, however, the king was not satisfied with their
election, he might not only refuse his consent, but might
proceed to another appointment himself. The person thus
appointed would then be sent to the metropolitan, for he
and the bishops of the province had the right to be consulted
before his consecration.
It is well finally to notice that we can also see that in
a number of cases in the tenth and eleventh centuries the
Pope took an important part in the appointment of bishops.
Pope John XIII. is spoken of as appointing an Archbishop
of Salzburg on the election of the Bavarians, lay and
clerical. 1 Pope Gregory V. is represented as confirming and
corroborating the command of the Emperor, the judgment
of the bishops, and the consent and acclamation of the clergy
and notables of the diocese, and appointing a certain Arnulf
to the bishopric of Auxonne. 2 Clement II. confirms the
adulantium linguae, qui electionem episcopus tarn inutili sentential saniori
sine regio favore factam asseverar- consilio ausi sunt obviare. Nee prius
ent eausam fore. Ex capellanis po- veritatis assertores Deique co-opera-
eius episcopum constituenduni, Wazo- tores absistunt, donee vix tandem
nem numquam in curte regia desu- regia? maiestati peticionem nostrain
dasse, ut talem promereretur honorem ; eonciliant, et procerum animos in
quod vero nefas sit alium episcopari, sententiam suam traiciunt."
nisi quern constiterit in curte regia 1 Pope John XIII., ' Ep.' and Dec.
evagari, ac non potius talem eligi III.; Migne, P. L., vol. 135: " elec-
oportere, qui informatus subiectione tione et postulatione omnium pene
claustralis oboedientise, non tam prse- nobilium, Bawariorum scilicet cleric o-
esse quam prodesse didicerit. Qua rum et laicorum, sancta Romana mater
sententia adulatorum facile inductus Ecclesia, suae auctoritatis privilegio
juvenilis regis animus, nescio quern Fridericum virum venerabilem et
harbarum cervicibus nostris praipar- cunctislaudabilrmloeoeiusdem Heroldi
abat inponere, cum ecce, inspirante ut fieri esse que archiepiseopum omniuo
credimus Deo, e:. omni illo consiliari- decreverit."
orum coptu soli Herimannus archi- 2 Gregory V., ' Ep.,' xviii. ; Migne,
episcopum et Bruno Wircenburgensis P. L., vol. 137 : " Post ho?c omnia
CHAP. Til.] THE APPOINTMENT OP BISHOPS TO 1075.
39
election of an Archbishop of Salerno by the clergy, the people,
and the prince. 1 Alexander II. gives his formal assent to the
appointment of an Archbishop of Eouen by William the
Conqueror ; 2 and, as we shall have occasion to consider
later, the Papacy is said to have claimed, under the advice
of Hildebrand, that no election to the archbishopric of
Milan was valid without the papal consent. 3 What exactly
was the rationale of the papal position in ecclesiastical
elections we cannot here discuss, but it is important to
observe these illustrations of it.
peracta, domno imperatore iubente, et
episcopis Romanis, Longobardis, atque
ultrarnontanis iudicantibus, eonsenti-
ente et acelamante Ermengaudo comite
cum clericis et optimatibus qui de
regicne ilia ibi aderant, una cum
senatu et militia Romana Longobard-
orum e. ultramontanorum, privilegio
nostra auctoritatis confirmando et
corroborariJo Arnulfum pnenominatum
episcopum in ordine pontificali Ec-
clesiae Ausonensis statuimus atque
sublimavimus, annulumque et virgam
pastoralem ei dedimus, ligandi solven-
dique potestatem vice apostolorum et
nostra ei eoncessimus, et episcopatum
praefaturn una cum prsecepto domni
August i cum omnibus suis pertinentiis
. . . illi slabilivirnus."
1 Clement II., ' Ep.,' vii. ; Migne,
P. L., vol. 142 : " Te vero, frater
charissime quem unanimitas cleri et
populi Salernitanae ecclesise, una cum
gloriosissimo principe Guaimario do
sedo Pestana accepit, et in suum
pontificem elegit, diligenter discussi-
mus, ne tua; ambit ionis causa, et non
maioris utilitatis necessitate electus
fuisses, aut forte per simoniacam
ha?rosim."
2 Alexander II., ' Ep.,' 56 ; Migne,
P. L., vol. 146 : " Alexander . . .
[i inni ^.bricenaium vencrabili epis-
copo, salutem et apostolicam bene-
dictionem. Destituta Rothomagensis
ecclesia pastore, comperimus Sedun-
ensis episcopi et Lanfranci abbatis
relatione te ex electione principle tui
dilectissimi filii nostri Guillelmi regis
Anglorum, ob vita? et morum probita-
tem, ad maiorem sedem promovendum,
si ex auctoritate sedis apostolicae fuerit
assensus, cui Deo auctore prsesidemus.
Nos igitur moti illorum preeibus, ob
salutem illius Ecclesise et omnium in
tuis partibus, volumus atque dilectioni
tuse apostolica auctoritate praecipimus
ut quod divina dispensatio de te pro-
vidit non contradicas et electioni te
obedientem exhibea-."
3 Arnulfus, ' Gesta Archiepiscopo-
rumMediolanensium ' ; M.G.H. ; S.S.,
iii. 21 : " Vetus quippe fuit Italici
regni condictio perseverans usque in
hodiernum, ut defunctis eeclesiarum
prsesulibus, rex provideat successores
Italicus, a clero et populo decibiliter
invitatus. Hoc Romani canonicum esse
negant, sed instantiis archidiaconus
ille Hildeprandus ; qui cum abolito
veteri novum temptaret inducere con-
stitutum, palam i'atebatur, haud secus
sedari posse Mediolanense discidium,
quam canonicum habendo pastorem, ad
quem eligendum necessarium dicebat
Eomanum fore consensual."
40
CHAPTER IV.
THE RELATIVE DIGNITY OF THE TEMPORAL AND
SPIRITUAL POWERS.
Enough has been said to make it elear that, while probably
every one in the tenth and eleventh centuries would have
recognised certain general principles as determining the
relative position of the two great authorities, the actual
demarcation of the exact sphere of each authority was some-
what uncertain and fluctuating. The secular authority had
its ecclesiastical responsibilities, and the ecclesiastical its
political, while in the direction and control of many ecclesi-
astical matters the Christian people, the laity, had an un-
determined but real place. It will be useful to notice a little-
further some of the conceptions of the time, which illustrate
in an undeveloped form the questions round which the later
conflicts turned, and the judgment of some great Churchmen
on them.
We can find phrases which assert very emphatically the
superior dignity of the Spiritual as compared A\ r ith the
Temporal power. We have referred in the last volume
frequently to that interesting but somewhat strange prelate
of the tenth century, Eatherius of Verona. In his writings
we find the confident expression of his conviction of the
superiority of his office and position to that of the king.
He had become Bishop of Verona through the influence of
Hugh, the King of Italy, but quarrelling with him, was im-
prisoned for a time in Pavia. In his treatise entitled ' Prselo-
quiorum,' he deals very fradri3j<j*li^the king, and admonishes
CHAP. IV.] TEMPORAL AND SPIRITUAL POWERS.
41
him to venerate the bishops, and to remember that they have
been set over him, and not he over them, and he cites the
story of Bufinus about Constantine, and his humility in
presence of the bishops at the Council of Nice. 1 He claims
that bishops could not be judged except by God Himself, 2
and that bishops were on a higher level than kings, for kings
were created (instituti) by bishops, but bishops could not be
ordained by kings. 3
Again, in a treatise ascribed to Pope Silvester II. (Gerbert),
he urges bishops to remember that no dignity can be compared
with theirs, that the crowns of kings are in comparison with
the mitres of bishops as lead compared to gold, and that
kings and princes bow their necks to the priest and reverence
his decrees. 4
We shall perhaps find the most significant and weighty
assertion of this principle in some words attributed to that
Wazo, Bishop of Liege, to whom we have already referred
several times. His biographer relates how on one occasion,
1 Ratherius, ' Pra?loquiorum,' iii.
4 ; Migne, P. L., vol. 136 : " Tu potius
time Deum, rege, imo populum tibi com-
missum, deprecare sanctos, venerare
episcopos ; noveris illoa tibi, non te illis
esse prtelatos ; ot, ut amplius dicam,
deos tibi a summo et uno et singulari
Deo, et angelos ab ipso magni consilii
Angelo esse datos. Quid si me putas
mentiri, antecessorem tuum interroga
Constantinum, interroga psalmum ip-
sum, interroga Dominum. Vos, ait ille
(Constantinus) jam fatus, nobis a Deo
dati estis dii, et conveniens non est, ut
homo judicet deos."
2 Id. id., iii. 9 : " sed ut praeter aliud
etiam hoc agnoscas, episcopum. . . .
A nullo penitus nisi ab ipso Omni-
potente, si deliquerint, aliqua pconi-
tentia corrigi posse vel dobere. Quis
enim judicem judicare, angelum corri-
gere, nisi ille qui super angelos est,
audeat, nedum ligare ?
10. Quod vero a nemino nisi ab ipso
Deo possint judicari aut reprehencli,
testatur Apostolus quibusdam detrac-
toribus."
3 Id. id., iv. 2: " Dixi, nisi fallor,
episcopos a Deo solo, ut reges, et prae-
stantius multo quam reges, quia et reges
ab episcopis instituti, episcopi vero a
regibus, etsi eligi vel decerni, non
valent tamen ordinari institutos."
4 Sylvester II., ' Do Informations
Episeoporum ' : " Honor igitur, fratres,
et sublimitas episcopalis nullis potest
comparationibus aequari. Si regum
compares infulas et principum diade-
mata, longe erit inferior, quasi plumbi
metallum ad auri fulgorem compares ;
quipjae cum videas regum colla et prin-
cipum genibus submitti sacerdotum, et
oxosculatis eorum decretis, orationibus
eorum credant se communiri."
Cf. Adalbero, Ep. Laud., ' Carmen,'
260; Migne, P. L., vol. 141: " Omne
genus hominum prsecepto subdidit
illis Princeps, excipitur nullus, cum
dicitur omne."
42 SPIRITUAL AND TEMPORAL POWERS. [rART I.
when attending the court of the Emperor Henry III., he
asked that he should be provided with a seat, for it was not
seemly that one who had been anointed with the holy chrism
should not receive due respect. The Emperor said that he
also had received his authority with the anointing of the
holy oil, but Wazo replied that this unction which he had
received was very different from that of the priest, and greatly
inferior, for it was the sign of the power of death, while that
of the priest was the sign of the power of life. 1
When, however, we have recognised how emphatic, even in
those times, was the claim that the Spiritual power was superior
in dignity to the Temporal, we must be careful to observe that
this did not at all mean that the ecclesiastical person was not
subject to the secular in secular matters. The greater clergy,
that is the bishops and abbots of the greater monasteries, were
by the end of the tenth century, in almost all cases, the
vassals of the emperor or king, or of some great lord, and
as such they owed them loyalty and were subject, with
respect to their feudal tenure, to the jurisdiction of the
feudal courts.
We have cited above the words in which Gerbert, as Pope
Silvester II., speaks of the dignity of the bishop as greater
than that of the king ; but it is important to observe that the
same Gerbert, when he was Abbot of Bobbio, speaks of himself
as having once indeed been free, but now as the servant of the
Emperor. 2 Again, Wippo, in his life of the Emperor Conrad I.,
in relating the rising of the " Valvassores " in Lombardy
1 Anselm, ' Gesta Episcop. Leod.,' ad vivificandum ornati sumus ; unde
66 ; M. G. H. ; S. S., vol. 7. quantum vita morte prcestantior tan-
" Nam etsi Wazo rugis eonfertus et turn nostra vestra unctione sine dubio
senio indignus est honorari, tamen est excellentior."
eacerdotem et sacro chrismate inunc- 2 Gerbert, ' Epistolse,' 1 : " Domino
turn dedecet inter populares tarn in- suo O. Cesari semper augusto, G.
iioneste fatigari. Ego vero, inquit, quondam liber. Dum regnorum pub-
similiter sacro oleo data mihi prtc lica perpendo negotia, serenissimi do-
cjfiteris imperandi potestate sum per- mini mei aures propriis occupare
unctus. Alia inquiens est et longe expaveseo. Loquatur dominus meua
a sacerdotali difforens vestra hsec quam servo suo propriis epistolis solito more,
asseritis unctio, quia per earn vos ut eius servitutis fiat exhibitio."
ad moitificandum, nos auctore Deo Cf. Ep. 159, and Havet's notes.
CHAP, IV.] TEMPORAL AND SPIRITUAL POWERS. 43
against the greater feudal lords, mentions that he seized three
of the Lombard bishops and sent them into exile. It gave, he
says, great offence to many that the priests of Christ should
be condemned without a trial, and he specially mentions that
Henry, the son of Conrad (afterwards Henry HI.), was much
displeased with his father's action. The bishops indeed would
have had no claim to honour had they been deposed by a
judicial sentence, but before such a judgment they were
entitled to the reverence -which is due to the priest. 1 The
general disapproval of Conrad's action against the bishops
without regard to the proper judicial forms, only brings out
more clearly the fact that it was recognised that the bishops
were liable to the judgment of the proper courts for offences
against the Emperor.
This is brought out even more emphatically in the same
life of Wazo of Liege which we have just cited. Wiger, the
Archbishop of Eavenna, was accused of various ecclesiastical
irregularities, and summoned to the court of the Emperor, and
the matter was referred to the bishops. There was much
hesitation among them, but Wazo declared that an Italian
bishop could not be judged by a northern one. At last, when
called upon by the Emperor in the name of his obedience to
give his opinion on the whole matter, he replied that they,
the bishops, owed obedience to the Pope and fidelity to the
Emperor ; that they had to render account to the latter with
regard to secular matters, but to the former with respect to
spiritual ; if, therefore, the Archbishop of Eavenna had com-
mitted an offence against the ecclesiastical order, the judg-
ment on this belonged only to the Pope, but if he had acted
negligently or unfaithfully in those secular matters which
1 Wippo, ' Vita Chuonradi ' (p. filium imperatoris, salva reverentia
1245) : " Eodem anno in Italia ties patris, clam detestari prssumptionem
episcopi, Vercellensis, Cremonensis, Caesaris in archiepiscopum Mcdiolanen-
Placentinus apud imperatorem accu- sem, a I que in istos tres ; et nierito,
sati sunt ; quos impcrator comprehon- quia sicut post iudicialem sententiam
sos exsulari fecit. Quae res displicuit depositionis nullus honor exhibendus
multis, sacordotos Christi sine iudicio est, sic ante iudicium magna reverentia
damnari. Referebant nobis quidam eacerdotibus debetur."
piissimum nostrum Heinricum regem,
44
SPIRITUAL AND TEMPORAL POWERS.
[PART I.
had been entrusted to him by the Emperor, this without
doubt should be dealt with by him. 1
Wazo's determination to maintain the autonomy of the
spiritual authority within its own sphere is evident, but
equally evident is his judgment that with regard to secular
matters the bishops were subject to the judgment of the
secular authority.
It may perhaps serve to bring out most clearly the com-
plexity of men's conception of the character and relations of
the Temporal and Spiritual powers if we again consider briefly
the position of Peter Damian, to whom we have already
referred several times. He was, as we have said, one of
the most convinced and energetic promoters of the reform
of Church order and discipline in the third quarter of the
eleventh century, but died just before the great conflict
between the Empire and the Papacy broke into open
flame.
It would be quite easy to bring forward passages from
his writings which might, if taken alone, seem to show that
his position was that of either the one or the other of the
two great parties into which Europe was presently to be
divided. As we have already seen, he recognised very clearly,
1 Anselmi, ' Gesta Episc. Leod.,'
58 ; M. G. H. ; S. S., vol. 7 : " Unde
pro multis inconsulte ab ipso ibi-
dem gestis et pro hac maxime quasi
temeritate accusatus, ad palatium evo-
catur, ab imperatore, quod eiusmodi
praesumptionem admiserit, graviter
insirnulatur. Cumque ille id semper
eius aacclesias presbiteris ex sanctorum
patrum auctoritate licuisse respond-
isset, super his iudicium episcoporum
exquiritur. Respondentibus quibus-
dam ad voluntatem imperatoris, qui-
busdam vero hesitantibus, venitur ad
Wazonem episcopum ; illo multum ex-
cusante Italicum episcopum nequaquam
a se cisalpino deoere iudicari, imperator
iterum, ut ammonitus per obretlientinm
super hoc facto iudicii sentent iam
edicat, vehementor insistit. Ita coac-
tus, tandem quod super his sentiret
aperuit : ' Summo,' inquiens, 'ponti-
fici oboedientiam, vobis autum debe-
mus fidelitatur. Vobis de secularibus,
illi rationem reddere debemus de his
qua? ad divinum officium attinere vi-
dentur, ideoque mea sententia quicquit
iste contra secclesiasticum ordinem ad-
miserit, id discutere pronuntio apos-
tolici tantummodo interesse. Si quid
autem in secularibus, quse a vobis illi
credita sunt, negligenter sive infideliter
gessit, procul dubio ad vestra refert
exigere.' Consentientibus huic sen-
tential caeteris episcopis, nullius iudicio
eo die episcopatum perdidisset, nisi
ipso ultro imperatori redderet baeulum
cum anulo."
CHAP. IV.] TEMPORAL AND SPIRITUAL POWERS. 45
in spite of his zeal for the reform of the methods of ecclesiastic;) 1
appointments, the legitimate place of the secular authority in
regard to them. In his letter to the people of Faenza he com-
mends their determination not to proceed to the election of
their bishop till the King (Henry III.) should arrive. 1 While
warning the secular princes against the error of thinking that
they have arbitrary rights of appointment, he seems clearly
to recognise their rights. 2 Even with respect to appointments
to the Papal See, he seems clearly to interpret the decree of
Pope Nicholas II. as implying that the election was not to be
reckoned as complete until it had been submitted to the royal
authority. 3 And in his references to Henry III. he recog-
nises, as we have seen, in the most unqualified terms the
service which he had rendered to the Church in purging it
from simony, and compares him to King Josiah, who, when he
had found the Book of the Law, overthrew the altars and the
abominable idols and superstitions of former kings, and says
that it was because he refused to follow the corrupt example
of his predecessors that, by the divine dispensation, it had
come about that the Eoman Church was now ordered accord-
ing to his will, and that no one should be elected to the
Eoman See without his authority. 4
If, however, from such passages as these we may justly
infer that Peter Damian admitted the propriety of the in-
tervention of the Temporal power in ecclesiastical affairs, we
can also find in his writings phrases which express a very
high sense of the superiority of the Spiritual power over the
Temporal. In one place he describes the Pope as the King
of Kings and Prince of Emperors, who excels all men in
honour and dignity. 5 It is Peter Damian who apparently
first used some words which were frequently cited in the later
controversies. He speaks of Christ as having committed to
St Peter " beato vitte seternse clavigero, terreni simul et
1 See p. 34. " quia quilibet imperator ad papse
2 See p. 34. vestigia corruit, tanquam rex regum,
8 See p. 35. et prinoeps imperatorum, cunctos in
* See p. 20. carne viventes, honore, ae dignitate
B Petor Damian, * Opusc.,' xxiii. ) : priecellit."
16
SPIEITUAL AND TEMPORAL POWERS.
[part I.
CGelestis imperii iura " ; and, in another place, as having
committed to St Peter the laws of heaven and earth. 1
These phrases have an important history, and were often
interpreted as implying that the successor of St Peter had
in some sense authority in temporal as well as spiritual
matters and organisations. 2 What exactly Peter Damian may
have himself meant by these words is exceedingly difficult to
say : the contexts in which they occur do not throw any light
upon the interpretation. It seems to us, from an examina-
tion of his whole works, extremely improbable that he meant
to assert the supremacy of the Spiritual power over the
Temporal in temporal matters, but certainly he did mean to
assert the great superiority in dignity of the Spiritual power,
and the principle that even the greatest men, kings and
emperors, were subject to the spiritual authority of the
Pope.
Once at least his language suggests an ominous anticipation
of the great conflicts which were soon to break out. In a letter
addressed to Henry IV. he exhorts him to support the Church
and the true Pope, Alexander II., against Cadalous of Parma,
the anti-pope, who had been elected by a council of Lombard
and German bishops in 1061 ; and he urges that Henry will
be worthy of blame if he does not do this, and that the king
only deserves obedience when he obeys his Creator — if he
disobeys the divine commands he may rightfully (lawfully) be
deposed by his subjects. 3
When, however, we have taken account of the various
aspects of the conceptions of Peter Damian, it remains quite
clear that his normal judgment on the relation of the
1 Id., ' Opusc.,' v. 9 : " solus ipse
fundavit et super pet-ram fidei mox
nascentis erexit (Matthew xvi.), qui
beato eternse vitae clavigero terreni
simul et coelestis imperii iura com-
misit."
The phrase is also in Peter Damian's
' Disceptatio S^nodalis,' Mi G. H.,
Lib. de Lite. vol. i. p. 78.
Id., ' Opusc.,' lvii. 3 : " Salvator
etiam noster, qui tamquam mitis
agnus apparit, mox ut Petro cujli
terraique iura commisit."
2 Cf. vol. ii. pp. 206-209.
3 Id., ' Ep.,' vii. 3, vol. 144, col. 441 :
" sed tunc deferendum est regi, cum
rex obtemperat conditori ; alioquin
cum rex divinis resultat imperiis,
ipse quoque iure contemnitur a sub-
iectis."
CHAP. IV.] TEMPORAL AND SPIRITUAL POWERS. 47
Temporal and Spiritual powers is practically based upon what
we have called the Gelasian tradition — that is, the conception
set out in the fifth century by Pope Gelasius I., of the autonomy
of each of the great powers within its own sphere. 1 We think
that this is implied in a number of passages in his writings,
and under terms which are interesting and important.
In that same letter to Henry IV., from which we have
just quoted, Peter Damian speaks of the close union which
ought to exist between the royal and the priestly power, for
each has need of the other. The priesthood is protected by
the kingdom, and the kingdom by the sanctity of the priestly
office. The king is girded with the sword to resist the
enemies of the Church, while the priest gives himself to
prayer that he may propitiate God to the king and people. 2
In another place he very carefully distinguishes the functions
of the two powers : the function of the priest is to abound
in compassion, and to cherish the children with motherly
love ; the function of the judge is to punish the wicked, to
deliver the innocent from their hands ; he must always re-
member the words of the apostle : " Wouldest thou have no
fear of the power ? Do that which is good, and thou shalt
have praise of the same : for he is the minister of God
to thee for good. But if thou doest that which is evil,
be afraid ; for he bareth not the sword in vain." There
is a great difference between the sword of the prince and
the infula of the priest. 3
1 Cf. vol. i. pp. 190-193. excubiis, ut regi cum populo Deum
2 Id., ' Ep.,' vii. 3, p. 440: " Utra- placabilem reddat. Illo sub lance
que prseterea dignitas, et regalis scilicet, iustitia; negotia debet terrena diriraere ;
et sacerdotalis, sicut principaliler in iste fluenta coelestis eloquii debet
Christo sibimet invicem singulari sacra- sitientibus propinare."
menti veritate connectitur, sic in Chris- 3 Id., ' Opus.,' lvi. 1 : " Non omnia
tiano populo mutuo quodam sibi fcedere membra Ecclesias uno funguntur officio,
copulatur. Utraque videlicet alterna 1 Aliud nempe sacerdoti, aliud competit
invicem utilitatis est indiga, dura et iudici. Ille siquidem visceribus debet
sacerdotium regni tuitione protegitur, pietatis artiuere, et in maternae miseri-
et regnum sacerdotalis officii sancti- cordis; gremio sub exuberantibus
tate fulcitur. Rex enim praecingitur doctrinse semper uberibus filios con-
gladio, ut hostibus Ecclesiaa munitus fovere. Istius autem officium est, ut
occurrat. Sacerdos orationum vacat reos puniat, et ex eorum manibua
48 SPIRITUAL AND TEMPORAL POWERS. [paut I.
In another place lie expresses the same judgment in slightly
different phrases. The tribunal of the judge is clearly differ-
ent from the seat of the priest. The judge bears the sword
that he may punish those who live unrighteously ; the priest is
content with the staff of innocence that he may maintain a
quiet and peaceable discipline. 1 And, in yet another place,
he sets out the same principle under the terms of the two
swords, and he describes the felicity of that condition of
things when the sword of the kingdom is joined to the sword
of the priest, when the sword of the priest tempers that of the
king, and the sword of the king sharpens that of the priest ;
for these are the two swords spoken of at the time of the
Lord's Passion. Then, indeed, will the Kingdom and the
priesthood be set forward and honoured, when they are joined
in this happy union. 2
The two swords are both from God : both represent the
divine authority, and they ought to be in the closest alliance
with each other ; but it is very noteworthy that Peter Bamian
talks of them as quite distinct and independent, and that he
in no way suggests that conception, which appeared later,
that both swords belonged to the Spiritual power. 3
eripiat innocentes ; ut vigorem recti- 1 Id., ' Opusc.,' lvii. 2 : " Distat
tudinis et justitiae teneat, et a zelo plane tribunal iudicis a cathedra sacer-
sanctionum legalium non tepescat ; ut dotis. Ille nimirum ad hoc gladium
ab sequitatis linea non declinet ; ut portat, ut eum in ultiono injuste
lcgitimi vigoris genium non enervet. viventium exerat ; iste baculo tantum
Memineri etiam semper quod per Apos- contentus est innocentise, ut quietus
tolum dicitur : " Vis non timere potes- et placidus teneat custodiam discip-
tatem ? fac bonum, et habebis laudem linse."
ex ilia. Dei enim minister est tibi in 2 Id., Sermo lxix. : " Felix autem,
bonum. Si autem malum feceris, si gladium regni cum gladio iungat
time, non enim sine causa gladium saeerdotii, ut gladius sacerdotis
portat. In quibus utique verbis (datur- mitiget gladium regis, et gladius
vel aliquid simile) intelligi, aliud esse regis gladium acuat sacerdotis. Isti
gladium prineipis, aliud infulam sacer- sunt duo gladii, de quibus in Domini
dotis. Non enim ad hoc prsocingeris passione legitur : ' Ecce gladii duo
gladio, ut violentorum mala dcbeas hie ;' et respondetur a Domino : ' Suffi-
palpare, vel ungere : sed ut ea studeas cit.' Tunc enim regnum provehitur,
vibrati mucronis ictibus obtruncare. sacerdotium dilatatur, honoratur ut-
Hinc est quod sequitur : ' Dei enim rumque, cum a Domino prsetaxata
minister est vindex in iram ei, qui felici confeederatione iunguntur."
male agit.' " 3 Cf. vol. ii. p. 208.
PART II.
THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY.
CHAPTER I.
SIMONY.
We have endeavoured to consider the relations of the tem-
poral and spiritual authorities during the tenth century and
the first seventy years of the eleventh, and we think that it
will be evident to any one who examines the history of the
subject dispassionately that, while there was much in these
relations difficult and in various ways unsatisfactory, yet
that it is on the whole true to say that the relations were
friendly and sympathetic. There is no evidence that there
was any settled desire upon the part of the emperors or kings
to invade the liberties of the Church, or on the part of the
Popes or bishops to claim any political authority beyond that
which had been recognised in the tradition of the ninth and
tenth centuries. We may very well say that so far the two
authorities were working together for the progress of Euro-
pean civilisation, not without occasional friction, but on the
whole in harmony, and, as far as the best representatives of
each were concerned, with a large measure of mutual under-
standing.
We have to consider the history of a time during which all
this was changed, and the peace and co-operation of the
earlier time were exchanged for violent conflict and mutual
VOL. iv. i>
50 THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY. [PART II.
animosity. We must, indeed, guard against a mistake into
which the unwary may fall. The conflicts of the two
powers were not continual from Hildebrand to Innocent III. :
during many years in that period the relations of Emperor
and Pope were friendly. It may, indeed, be urged that this
was abnormal, and that normally during this time their rela-
tions were hostile, that no solution of the conflicting claims
had been reached, and that these intervals of tranquillity were
only like the periods of an armed truce in a great campaign.
It would be premature to pronounce a definite judgment upon
this view till we have examined our materials in detail : we
must bear in mind that it is just this subject which we
have to examine, and we must lay aside our preconceptions if
we are to hope to do this with any success.
The first aspect under which we must consider the great
conflict is that which is generally known as the " Investiture "
controversy, or to put it in broader and more correct terms,
the question of the place of the secular authority in the appoint-
ment to ecclesiastical offices. It is still difficult to be quite
certain about all the circumstances which, in the third quarter
of the eleventh century, caused this question, with apparent
suddenness, to become so important ; but it is possible now, at
least, to trace and to recognise some of the facts, and some of
the movements of feeling and opinion which lay behind this.
It seems to us to be clear that this conflict, like other
movements in the Church, arose out of a great spiritual
revival. Behind the noise of ecclesiastical strife there lay the
profound and far-reaching influence of the religious revival
which had found its centre, in the latter part of the tenth
century in the Abbey of Cluny. It was not, indeed, that
the secidar authorities were in any way hostile to this
reformation ; on the contrary, it is clear that some of the
emperors, both of the Saxon and Franconian houses, were among
its most energetic supporters ; and yet it is also true that the
movement did ultimately raise questions which proved to be
subversive and hard of solution.
The two questions on which in the end the Cluniac reforma-
tion brought the Spiritual and Temporal powers into collision
CHAP. I.] SIMONY. 51
with each other were, first, the question of simony, and second,
the question of the place of the greater clergy in the adminis-
tration of political affairs. It is, indeed, true that some of
the greatest emperors, like Henry III., did a great deal to
assist the reforming Popes and bishops to suppress the venality
of ecclesiastical appointments, but it was only some whose
convictions were sufficiently strong to enable them to resist
the financial temptation. The question of the place of the
greater clergy in the political structure of the Empire and of
other countries was probably even more difficult. The bishops
and abbots were the mainstay of the national and general
as distinguished from the local and particular interests. The
development of the hereditary principle in feudalism had in
great measure broken up the administrative system of political
society : it was only in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries
that in England and France the national monarchy slowly
built up a new administrative system powerful enough to
coimteract the disintegrating forces of feudalism. In the
tenth and eleventh centuries the bishops and abbots, and the
clergy of the royal and imperial chapels, represented the main
elements on which the kings and emperors could construct a
system of government, and it was a matter of imperative
necessity that they should be men of administrative training
upon whose personal loyalty they could depend. It was,
therefore, of the greatest importance that the secular authori-
ties should possess a predominant influence in the selection of
men for ecclesiastical office, and it was natural that they
should generally find the men best suited for this among
those who had served their apprenticeship in the royal
chapel. It was almost inevitable that in the long run
the reforming party should come into conflict with the
political authorities over this very point, for to the religious
reformer it was above all things essential that the bishops
and abbots should be men controlled by religious principles
and devoted to the interests of the Church. The wiser and
more refigious-minded rulers, bke Henry HI. or William the
Conqueror, would indeed recognise this, but the lesser men, the
more unscrupulous and short-sighted, would not du so.
52 THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY. [PART II.
We cannot here discuss the whole history of the growth
of simoniacal practices in the mediaeval Church ; we must
content ourselves with a brief account of the conditions as
they appear in the literature of the eleventh century.
Eodolfus Glaber gives in general terms a very gloomy account
of the conditions as they had existed for some time. Even
the kings, he says, who ought to have been careful to see that
fit men were appointed to the government of the Church,
rather deemed those to be the most suitable from whom they
received the largest gifts. 1 In another place, he reports a
speech addressed by the Emperor Henry III. to the bishops
of Germany and " Gaul " on the same matter, and represents
him as saying that he was well aware of the extent of the
simoniacal practices, and that he acknowledged that his father
(the Emperor Conrad the Salic) had been greatly guilty in
the matter. He reports also that Henry proposed that it
should be decreed for the whole Empire that no clerical rank
or ecclesiastical office should be obtained for a price ; and
that if any one dared either to give or to receive this he
should be deprived of his office and anathematised ; and that
for his part he promised that, as God had freely given him
the imperial crown, he would freely give whatever pertained
to religion. 2
Humbert, Cardinal of Silva Candida, was one of those
northern ecclesiastics of the reforming school whom Bruno
1 Rodolfus Glaber, ' Historia,' ii. 6: ammarurn dijudicavit, ilium videlicet,
" Atque ideirco ista prsemisimus, a quo ampliora munera suscipore
quoniam iamdudum, muneribus ineptis sperant."
excascatis pene universis principibus, 2 Id. Id., v. 5 : " Turn proposuit
desfevit hsec pestis longo lateque in edictum omni imperio suo : ut nullus
Ecclesiarum quibusque praelatis toto gradus clericorum vel ministerium
terrarum orbe diffusis. . . . Et licet ecclesiasticum pretio aliquo acquiretur,
adversus talium personarum proca- ac si quis dare aut accipcre prssumeret,
citatem multipliciter clamet sacrarum omni honore destitutus, anathemate
Scripturarum canon, nunc tamen solito multaretur. Spopondit insuper pro-
multiplicius comperitur fieri in diversis missum hujusmodi, dicens : ' Sicut
Ecclesiarum ordinibus. Nam ipsi reges, enim mihi Dominus coronam imperii
qui sacra? religionis idonoarum decre- sola miseratione sua gratis dedit, ita
tores personarrn esse debuerant, et ego quod ad religionem ipsius
munerum largitione corrupti, potiorem perlinet gratis impendam. Volo si
quempiam ad regimeu Ecclesiarum vel placet, ut et vos similiter facialis."
CHAP. I.] SIMONY. 53
of Toul brought with him to Italy when he became Pope as
Leo IX., in 1048. In one place he says that, from the time
of the Othos to that of Henry III., the vice of simony had
prevailed in Germany, the " Gauls," and Italy. Henry III.
had indeed done something to remove it, and had desired
to destroy it wholly, but had been cut off by a premature
death. Humbert denounces with special vehemence the con-
temporary King Henry I. of France, who had so far persisted
in this vice. 1 In another place he says that every one,
from the highest to the lowest, was engaged in the traffic
in ecclesiastical things ; that emperors, kings, princes, and
all other secular authorities, who ought to defend the Church,
forsook their own proper work that they might possess them-
selves of the property of the Church. 2 Simony had indeed
begun even in apostolic times, but had disappeared in the time of
persecution ; it was with the restoration of peace to the Church,
and the submission of the emperor to the authority of the priest,
that it had revived, for the prosperity of the Church stimulated
men's cupidity. 3 He represents the matter as having gone
1 Cardinal Humbert, ' Adversus satui, cuius gratiam impugnat et
Simoniacos,' ' Lib. de Lite,' iii. 7, p. expugnare non cessat in cunctis sure
206 : " Ut enim de prioribus srceulis ditionis partibus," &c.
reticeatur, adhuc retinet memoria 2 Id. id., iii. 5, p. 204 : " A summo
multorum banc reciprocatae venditionis enim graduum ecclesiae usque ad mini-
rabiem grassatam per Germaniam et mum omnes de ecclesiasticis rebus sibi
Gallias totamque Italiam a temporibus negotiari non prsetermittunt. Imper-
Ottonum usque augustae et divae mc- atores quoque, reges, principes, iudicea
morise imperatorem Heinricum, Cbuon- et quotquot aliquid in sasculo possunt
radi filium. Hie diebus suis tarn a se ante omnia istud exercent et quserunt
quam ab ecclesiasticis imperii sibi hoc, qui deberent res ecclesiasticas
crediti personis tantum saerilegium re- ecclesiastico iuri defendere gladio
movit aliquantulum, quamvis instaret spirituali hoc, qui et materiali.
multum et cuperet removere totum. . . . Nam relicto militari negotio,
In quo cordis sui optimo desiderio quo rempublicam et patriam tueri
immatura morte praaventus ad vita? debuerant ab externis incursibus . . .
a^ternae regnum, ut creditur, vel pro hac omnem suam potestatem, omnem ter-
sola intentione velut pro oculi sui sim- rorem, omne ingenium, omne stu-
plicitate est translatus, cum ex mult is dium ad expugnandum et sibi penitus
quoque aliis bonis extiterit laudatus. vendicandum res ecclesiasticas, quibus
Cuius syncronos et aequivocus occi- tutores dati fuerant, transferunt."
dentalis Francia; perditor et Dei 3 Id. id., ii. 35, p. 183 : " Verum haec
tyrannus e contrario sicut filius per- cretata ecclesiasticas dignitatis ambitio
ditionis et anticliiistus Christo adver- ab ipso tempore apostolorum usque ad
54
THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY.
[PART II.
so far, and become so open and shameless, that any one who
desired a place of authority in Church or State had to pledge
himself by oath to maintain the simoniacal persons in their
pretended rights. The emperor himself had to swear that,
so far from maintaining the laws of his pious predecessors
against simony, he would render them null and void. 1 He
says that he had known it to happen that, in order to pay
the price which he had promised, the wretched simoniacal
purchaser was actually compelled to strip off the precious
marbles of the churches, and even the very tiles from their
roofs ; 2 and in another place he describes in lamentable terms
tempora christianorum principum im-
manitate perseeutionum deterrita dis-
paruit. Quia primus omnium et
gravioribus tormentis subiciebatur, qui
primus rector et potent ior ceteris
videbatur. Simul vero pax est reddita
christianis in tantum, ut ipsi etiam
imperatores augustum verticem cunc-
tasque terreni imperii infulas sacer-
dotum Christi submitterent vestigiis,
pestis ilia antiqua rediit, tantamque
potentiam et gloriosum, in quo cum
Christo sancti iam regnabant, regnum
et sacerdotium videns obstupuit, cui
doininari et principari solito cupida,
quia veritate, cuius particeps non est,
nequivit, fallaoia sibi praeripere maluit.
Unde quod catholica ecclesia promeru-
erat Dei gratia, ambitio symoniana
optinere quaesivit pecunia ; non ut in
catholica velut adoptionis filus subesset
gratis Dei ac deserviret, sed ut pr»-
sumptionis tyrannus praesset ac im-
peraret."
1 Id. id., ' Lib. de Lite,' ii. 36, p. 185 :
" Sic quod prius fuerat furtum quod-
que gradatim factum est latrocinium,
ad tantam iam pervenit tyrannidem,
ut, quicumque seu ecclesiis seu civi-
tatibus principari quaerit, non prius
id adipiscatur, quam ipsi quoque
plebeeulae libelloL heroticorum et sac-
rilegorum se observaturum et defen-
surum iuramento et scripto confir-
mavorit. Parum videtur hoc exigi
ab inferioribus potestatibus, ab ipsis
summis hoc exigitur imperatoribus.
Nee prius licet eis imperii insignia
suscipere, quam iuravermt se non
solum scripta ilia non cassatum, sed
etiam defensum iri. O libertas et
pietas Romanae reipublicae ! O liber-
alitas et potestas maiestatis irnpera-
torise ! Cogitur summus princeps iurare,
ne leges religiosorum principum ante
se vel suas debeat observare, sed potius
evacuare. Vult sibi reddi quae sunt
caesaris ab his, qui contradicunt Deo
reddi quae sunt Dei. Videat, quasso,
quale sibi sit illud imperium, quod eum
repente efticit ex christiano paganum,
immo peiorem pagano, quia apostatat a
Deo ; cum perversis enim efficitur per-
versus et cum sacrilegis sacrilegus et
ideo morte dignus, quia consentit talia
facientibus, qui iam non est dicendus
perversis consentire, sed revera, ut
peiora faciant, imperare, quibus licen-
tiam suo iuramento administrat impune
retinendi, quae invaserant, et audaciam
impune invadendi, si qua restant."
2 Id. id., ii. 43, p. 192 : " Hinc iam
venditor ab emptore non solum suam
et suorum, sed insuper ecclesiastieam
pecuniam non erubescit omnimodis
oxigere. Ei michi ! contigit me ab
his qui interfucrunt tarn horrendum
facinus cognovisse, videlicet post
CHAP. I.]
SIMONY.
55
the ruin and desolation of the churches and monasteries, especi-
ally in Italy, which had been brought about by this vice. 1
Lambert of Hersfeld represents the Archbishop of Bremen
and Count Werner, while they controlled the government
during the minority of Henry IV., as selling all offices, whether
ecclesiastical or secular, and especially the abbacies. 2
We must not indeed take such statements as these too
literally, we must be prepared to allow for something at least
of exaggeration in the picture which they present of the
condition of the Church ; but there is no reason to doubt
that it was substantially true, and there was no question
of Church order to which the reformers felt it more necessary
to turn their attention. We have already dealt with the
history of the deposition of the Pope at Sutri, and have noted
pretiosa marmora parietum et emble-
matum basilicarum pro hoc negotio
distracta etiam tegulas tectis earum
cogente et iubente venditore diruptas,
ut sibi a miserrimo emptore iam sero
super tale factum lamentante pro-
inissi pretii summa persolveretur. Di-
cat si quis valet, quamam hseresis ali-
quando tantam desolationem ecclesiis
Dei machinata est, quantam haec."
1 Id. id., ■ Lib. de Lite,' ii. 35, p. 184 :
" Inde passim et maxime per totam
Italiam viclentur eeclesia? Dei et monas-
teria seu reliqua religiosa loca, qufedam
a fundamentis destructa et eversa, quae-
dam etiam effossa, quaadam adhuc semi-
rutis tectis et ruinam sui minantibus
parietibus horrida, qusedam desolata ab
homimbus, bestiis tantum noxiis et volu-
cribus immundis relicta, qusedam frutec-
tis et urticis repleta, quaedam et si aclinic
videntur muris et ajdificiis exterius
stare et inhabitari, omne tamen decori
suo atque interior! ornatu tarn in libris
quam et in ecclesiastici ministerii vasis
et vestibus inveniuntur spoliata, ut ex
multis, quae devota antiquitas piis locis
conquisierat vel paraverat, ne quale -
cunque supersit psalteriolum aut fictile
eamiolum seu corporale Linteolum.
Quaedam etiam multis et variis prsediis,
castris, municipiis, familiis et peculiis
olim inclita, nunc ne agellulum qui-
dem nee tuguriolum nee mancipiolum
nee asellulum vel haedulum, sed nee
quicquam eorum quae possederant
retentant, in tantum ut ipsa sanctuarii
atria et christianorum cymiteria alienus
agricola sibi aret atque excolat messi-
busque vel vitibus repleat."
2 Lambert of Hersfeld, 1063:
" Secundas post eum partes age-
bat Wernheri comes, iuvenis tarn in-
genio quam aatate ferox. Hi duo pro
rege imperitabarit ; ab his episcopatua
et abbatiae, ab his quicquid ecclesiasti-
corum, quidquid secularium dignitatum
est, erubatur. Nee alia cuiquam, licet
industrio atque egregio viro, spes adi-
piscendi honoris ullius erat, quam ut
hos prius ingenti profusione pecuni-
arum suarum redemisset. Et ab epis-
copis quidem et ducibus metu magis-
qviam religionetemperabant. In abbates
vero, quod his iniuriae obviam ire non
poterant, tota libertate grassabantur,
illud prae se ferentes, nihil minus regem
in hos iuris ac potestatis habere quam
in villicos suos vel in alios quoslibet
regalis fisci dispensatores."
56 THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY. [PAUT II.
the gratitude which many of the most eminent reformers
express to Henry III. for his work both in this matter, and in
regard to the whole matter of simony. 1
We have a detailed account of the proceedings which Pope
Leo IX. took for the suppression of simony in France. He
summoned a Council of the bishops and abbots at Eheims
in 1049, and invited the attendance of the King of the
French. His courtiers urged upon him that it would be
in the highest degree dangerous to the honour of his kingdom
if he were to support the Pope in holding a Council in
France, and that this had not been permitted by his pre-
decessors, and they urged him to summon the bishops and
abbots to attend him on an expedition against the disturbed
parts of the kingdom, so that they might not be able
to attend the Council. 2 The King accordingly replied to
the Pope that he and his bishops would not be able to attend
the Council, and urged him to postpone his visit to France.
Leo IX. replied that he could not do this, and must hold the
Council with those who could be present. When the Council
met, several bishops and abbots were deposed for various
offences, especially for simony, and the Archbishop of Eheims
was ordered to present himself at a Council to be held later
in Eome, and there to purge himself of the charge of simony
which had been brought against him. 3 The Council issued
a canon, laying down the principle that no one should be
1 See pp. 20, 21. pacis et tranquillitatis congrua sunt
2 Anselmus, Monachus Remensis, tempora, regni autem eius status sit in
' Historia Dedicationis,' 9 ; Migne, P. perturbatione non modica, quibusdam
L., vol. 142 : " Tantse itaque perversi- viris potentibus dominationis eius
tatis viri incentores sui callida sugges- jugum detrectantibus, terrasque et
tione instructi, regi Francorum sugge- castella qurelibet ab ipsius ditione ab-
runt regni sui decus adnihilari, si in eo alienantibus. Quapropter regise digni-
Romani pontificis auctoritatem dom- tati ferunt congruere, . . . principes
inari permit teret ; vel si eidem, ut suos et totius exercitus sui potentiam
decreverat, occurrens prsesentiae suse commovere in rebelles, ipsos etiam
favorem, ad cogendum concilium exhi- episcopos et abbates, penes quos maxi-
beret. Addunt etiam quod nullus ma pars facultatum regni est, consent
antecessorum eius id reperiatur ali- immunes huius expeditione esse non
quando eoncess»e°e ut ob similem debeiv."
causam in Franeiae urbes ingressus 3 Id. Id., 14, 15, 16.
paterot alicui pap* ; his vero agendis
CHAP. I.] SIMONY. 57
promoted to a bishopric without the election of the clergy
and people, that no one should buy or sell Holy Orders or
ecclesiastical office, and that if any one did obtain them
by purchase they should surrender them to the bishop.
The canon also provided that no layman should hold a
benefice, and that the clergy should not bear arms, or hold
secular office. 1 The life of Pope Leo IX. by Wibert, the
Archdeacon of Toul, gives us a further account of the strong
measures which the Pope took, both in Italy and elsewhere,
for the suppression of simony, and relates how he deposed
both archbishops and bishops who had been guilty of it. 2
These severe measures of Pope Leo IX. were only the first
steps in a determined effort of the reforming party in the
Church, now led by the reformed Papacy, to suppress the
buying and selling of spiritual offices. Indeed so severe
was the attitude of some of the reformers that it finally
produced a violent controversy among themselves. Some,
like Cardinal Humbert, maintained that ordination or con-
secration obtained by simony was null and void, 3 while
others, like Peter Damian, maintained that they were valid, 4
1 Id. id., 16: " Ne quis sine eleetione sedis antistes aut metropolitani eorum
eleri et populi ad regimen ecclesiasticum conprovinciales episcopi eos synoda-
proveheretur. Ne quis saeros ordines liter deiciant. Quomodo enim in eis
aut ministeria eeclesiastica, vel altaria perdurare potest, quod nullatenus
emeret aut venderet : et si quis cleri- acceptum est ? "
coram quidlibet eorum emisset, id cum Id. Id., iii. 30, p. 136 : " Sic et
digna satisfactione suo episcopo redde- symoniani seu quilibet heretici cum
ret. Ne quis laicorum ecclesiasticum deponi iubentur, non ab aliqua eo-
ministerium vel altaria teneret, nee clesiastica? ordinationis gratia quam
episcoporum quilibet consentiret. . . . hactenus habeant, deponi iubentur, sed
Ne quis clericorum arma milit aria gesta- tantum ab exteriori specie ecelesiasti-
ret, aut mundana militia? deserviret." coram graduum, qua ad perditionem
2 Leo IX., ' Vita,' ii. 4 and 6. suam populique christiani deceptionem
3 Cardinal Humbert, ' Adversus per imposturam abutuntur."
Simoniacos,' iii. 32 ; M. G. H., Lib. de 4 Peter Damian, ' Liber Gratissimus,'
Lite, I., p. 239: " Itaque his et vi. ; M. G. H., Lib. de Lite, I., p. 23 :
aliis quam pluribus argumentis con- " Quibus (i.e., the simoniacal persons)
stat symonianos nil ecclesiastics tamen si catholica fiat ordinatio, sacrae
dignitatis optinuisse, quamvis eorum dignitatis officium, ad quod non mer-
defensores impudenter persuadere la- entes accedunt, perfecte suscipiunt.
borent honorem in eis acceptum Eiusdem namque virtutis est Spiritus
perdurare, nisi Romana- et apostolu-a- sanct us, cum eius gratia venditur, cuiua
58 THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY. [PART II.
and that while those who were guilty should be deposed,
those who had innocently obtained Holy Orders from such
persons should be aUowed to retain their position. 1 It is
not our part here to discuss the significance of the question
raised in this controversy, we are here only concerned to
observe how great was the evil, and the determination with
which the reformers of the eleventh century set themselves to
root it out.
For our purposes this question of simony is important
chiefly in its relation to the circumstances which brought
about the great conflict between the spiritual and temporal
authorities. As we have seen, until the death of Henry III.
in 1056, the reforming party in the Church had been supported
with an evidently sincere zeal by the secular power in its
effort to suppress simony. Behind this problem, however,
there lay others which, as we have already pointed out,
were even more difficult to deal with. It is very noteworthy
that Peter Damian is very clear that the Church suffered as
much from the promotion of men to bishoprics and abbeys
on account of services which they had rendered in the ad-
ministrative offices of the State as from actual simony. In
a letter addressed to Pope Alexander II. he urges upon him
that no one should be permitted to be made a bishop or to
remain in his office who had obtained this per prcemium, or,
what is even more worthy of condemnation, by service at
court. 2 In a treatise, which is really directed against the
est, et cum gratis datur male mercati sunt, honore permaneant,
Indubitanter igitur credendum est, sed id potius, ne hii, qui ab eis gratuito
quod si consecratio cuiuslibet aecclesi- consecrati sunt, locum sui gradus omit-
astici ordinis intra catholicam fiat tant."
Eecclesiam, in unitate videlicet ortho- Cf., for a very full discussion of
doxse fidei, ut in utroque nimirum this controversy of the time, and the
recta sit fides, quicquid bono per whole question of reordination, a very
bonum traditur, hoc etiam malo per learned and discriminating treatment
malum efficaciter exhibetur, quia of the subject by the Abb6 Louis
sacramentum hoc non ministrantis Saltet, ' Les Reordinations.' Cf. also
vel ministraturi pondet ex merito, C. Mirbt, ' Die Publizistik im Zeitaltor
sed ex ordine secclesiasticse institutionis Gregors VII.,' pp. 372-462.
et invocatione aivini nominis." 2 Peter Damian, ' Ep.,' Bk. i. 13 :
1 Id. id., xxiv., p. 52 : " nos non Migne, P. L., vol. 44 : " Unum in calce
elaboremus, ut symoniaci in eo, quem huius epistoloe sacris clementite vestrae
CHAP. I.]
SIMONY.
59
clergy of the court, lie says that nothing seemed to him
so intolerable as that some men, in their greedy desire for
ecclesiastical office, behaved almost as though they were the
serfs of men in great position ; and urges that it is just
as much an act of simony to obtain a bishopric by service
to the king in his court as to purchase it with money ; and
he warns princes and others who have the power of appoint-
ing to offices in the Church that they must not bestow them
according to their mere will and pleasure. 1
Cardinal Humbert deals with the same subject in fiery and
passionate phrases. He evidently does not wish to condemn
the administrative work of the clergy altogether, indeed he
seems to be conscious that there were occasions when such
work was of great service, not only to the State but to the
Church, but he denounces in emphatic terms the crowds of
greedy clerks who thronged the courts of princes and under-
took long and laborious service that they might at length
obtain some ecclesiastical office. He would indeed term such
men simoniacal above all measure who gave not only money
but themselves, and complains that Italy especially was full
of men who had received Church offices not for their ecclesi-
astical work, but as a recompense for secular services, some-
times even of a scandalous and disgraceful nature. 2
auribus suggero ; ut in quantum
facultas suppetit, numquam vel fieri,
vel esse permittat episcopum, quem
ad honoris culmen constiterit ascen-
disse per premium : vel etiam, quod
damnabilius est, per curialis obsequii
famulatum. Absit enim ut qui
prselationis ambitu ssecularem coluit
principem, spiritalem ecclesiastici cul-
minis obtineat dignitatem."
1 Id., ' Opusc.'xxii., Preface : " Cum
itaque, venerabilis Pater, de modernis
episcopis mihi perplura displiceant,
illud intolerabilius arbitror, quia
nonnulli dum honores ecclesiastieos
Altneis vaporibus testuantius ambiunt,
in clientelam potentium, tanquarn ser-
vos se dedititios obseoene substernunt."
Cf . also Chaps. II. and IV. Chap. II. :
" Neo glorietur metalli se non dedisse
peeuniam, qui, quodpretiosius habebat,
semetipsum venalem prebait."
Chap. IV. : " Principibus quoque, et
quibuslibet ordinatoribus ecelesiarum
summopere cavendum est, ne sacra
loca, non considerato divino judicio, sed
pro arbitrio et ad libitum, prrebeant,
ne ad suam confusionem divinoe legis
ordinem, sacrorum eanonum statuta
confundant."
2 Cardinal Humbert, ' Adversus
Simoniacos,' iii. 20 ; M. G. H., Lib. de
Lite, I., p. 224 : " Inde est quod
nonnulli nostrum cteca ambit ione
ducti, quo maxime malo intra Italiam
laboramus, postpositis ccclesiasticisi
rectoribus, quorum tantiunmodo in-
60
THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY.
[PART II.
These complaints and contentions were no doubt in a great
measure well founded and legitimate, and yet it is also clear
that the question raised was one of great difficulty. The
State had urgent need of the services of men trained in
administrative work, and of men upon whose personal loyalty
the kings or emperors could depend, and it is difficult to see
where they could at that time be found outside of the
ecclesiastical profession.
terest, certatim palatia nee requisiti
nee vocati irruropunt, saeculares po-
testates impudenter adeunt, censum
patrimoniorum auorum et facilitates
principibus eorumque familiaribus
adhoarendo et obsequendo expondunt,
ut vel sero aliquam ecclosiasticam
dignitatem venentur post diuturnas,
maximas et eontinuas augustias, quas
insanissima patientia diebus et nocti-
bus perferunt, patientes exilii, medise,
algoris et vigiliarum supra modum.
Quos quis dubitabit dicere supra
modum symonianos qui non solas
pecunias, sed semet ipsos insuper in
talibus negotiis expendunt ?
Neque tamen haec dicendo illos in-
cusamus, qui suae egregiae indolis
publicceque utilitatis eausa invitations
et petitione prineipum atque suonim
licentia vel prsecepto rectorum in
terreno palatio conversantur et de-
Berviunt atque nonnumquam ab
ecclesiis rectore privatis nee aliquem
suorum, qui proficue succedat, haben-
tibus expetiti regimen suscipiuni ;
nee dicendi sunt labores aliorum
invasisse, sed fratribus in labore
deficientibus accurisse.
Tales profecto tanto magis sunt
reverendi, quanto non sua quasrunt,
sed Christi ; quibus sane bonisque
omnibus iniuriam faciunt, immo om-
nipotentis voluntati, in cuius ditiona
cuncta sunt posita, resistunt, qui-
cumque ob hoc importunos se im-
pudentesque ingerunt ; quorum in-
disciplinatorum et girovagorum tanta
est multitudo, nee tantum nobilium et
litteratorum, quantum et ignobilium
atque inlitteratorum, ut ecclesiis
rlaustrisque vacuefactis et vacant i bus
palatia domusque saecularium vix iam
capere sumciant examina elerieorum.
In quibus nonnulli invoniuntur, qui
ecclesiasticos honores non tantum
clericali officio, quantum medicinali
aut scurrili seu gnatonico aucupantur.
Mentior, si non plures eiusmoidi
promeruit Italia, quos nulla promovit
morum aut litteratorum gratia, sed
aut scurrilitas vel fallax adulatio seu,
quod excusabilius putatur, sola medi-
cina. Quibus cum nullus christian-
orum communicare debeat, ut vere
acephalis et siDe suorum rectorum
litteris et permissu vagantibus, in-
super regimen ecclesiasticum com-
mititm-, quod tandem adept i non
solum tamquam indisciplinati et
stulti confundunt et dissipant, sod
etiam tamquam libidinosi multimoda
fornicatione et fwditate incestant."
61
CHAPTER II.
THE PROHIBITION OF LAY " INVESTITURE.'"
We have thus endeavoured to consider some of the condi-
tions or circumstances out of which the conflict between the
Empire and the Church arose. It is clear that there was a
great evil in the Church, that the buying and selling of
Church offices had grown to a point at which the strongest
measures of reform were not only justified, but were im-
peratively required. It is, however, clear also that during
the reign of Henry III. the imperial authority had been on
the side of reform, and that, while there may have been ques-
tion as to the propriety of some of the actions which had
been taken in promoting reform, on the whole the reforming
party recognised his sincerity, and was grateful for his energy.
We have now to consider the rapid change in the relations of
the spiritual and temporal authorities, which in the course of
some twenty years (from 1056 to 1076) passed from those
of friendly alhance and co-operation to those of a violent
hostility.
The Popes, after Sutri, had set their hands to the work of
reform, and in their efforts they had received the support of
Henry III. Unhappily, he died before the work had been
accomplished, and with his death the ecclesiastical conditions
of Europe relapsed into confusion. We have already cited
the melancholy account of the ecclesiastical condition of Ger-
many during the minority of Henry IV., under the adminis-
tration of the Archbishop of Bremen and Count Werner ; how
they treated all offices, ecclesiastical and secular, as matters of
62 THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY. [PART II.
buying and selling to such a degree that no man could hope
for promotion in Church or State unless he was prepared to
purchase it from them. 1 When Henry IV. took over the
government himself, it would seem that there was little
improvement. The Bishop of Bamberg was summoned to
Borne in 1070, and was charged with having obtained his
bishopric by simony. Lambert of Hersfeld indeed accuses
the Pope, Alexander II., of accepting large presents from
him, and consequently acquitting him of the charge ; but he
also relates that he and the Archbishops of Maintz and
Cologne were severely reproved by the Pope for having sold
Holy Orders, and for having communicated with simoniacal
persons, and were required to take a solemn oath that they
would not do this again. 2
Under the following year Lambert relates that Henry IV.
simoniacaUy appointed an Abbot of Beichenau, and endeavoured
to force upon the Chapter of Constance as bishop a man who
was by them accused of simony and theft. 3 The Pope referred
the question to the Archbishop of Maintz, and we have the
letter in which he represents the great difficulties in which
he was involved on account of his obedience to the Pope — ■
the king had evidently threatened him violently if he should
refuse to consecrate the Bishop-designate of Constance. 4
1 See p. 55. nes in commune acerbe obiurgati, quod
2 Lambert of Hersfeld, 1070 : " Epis- sacros ordines per simoniacam heresim
copus Moguntinus et Coloniensis et venderent, et ementibus indifferentor
Babenbergensis a domino apostolico communicarent manusque imponerent ;
evocati, Romam venerunt. Ibi epis- tandem, aceepto ab eis iureiurando,
copus Babenbergensis accusatus, quod quod hsec ulterius facturi non essent,
per simoniacam heresim data pecunia in sua pace dimissi sunt."
episcopatum invasisset, multa et pre- 3 Id. id., 1071 (p. 1108).
ciosa munera papae dedit, et per hsec 4 Siegfried, Archbishop of Maintz.
efferatam adversum se mentem eius ' Epistoljc,' ii. ; Migne, vol. 46, p.
ad tantam mansuetudinem reduxit, 142 : " Namque mini Rom;e posit o,
ut, qui non sine periculo honoris et viva voce, et postea apostolica lega-
gradus sui evasurus putabatur, non tione, interdixitur, ne eum qui de-
solum impunitatem criminis, quod signatus est in Constantiensem epis-
obiectum fuerat, consequeretur, sed copum, ullo modo consecrarem, quia
etiam pallium et alia quaedam archi- audistis elogio Simoniacse hserescos
episcopatus insignia a sede apostolico euro notabilem. In quo quia vobis
pro benedictione perciperat. . . . Om- obedivi, ruulta, ut piasmissum est, a
CHAP. II.] PROHIBITION OF LAY " INVESTITURE." 63
In a letter of Henry IV. to Gregory VII., of the year
1073, he acknowledged his faults, and among others, that
he had been guilty of simony, and asked the help of his
advice and authority in setting these matters right. He
also speaks of having been guilty of serious faults with regard
to the Church of Milan. 1
Again, under the year 1074, Lambert relates that the
legates of the Apostolic See in Germany were careful not
to associate with Henry IV, as he had been accused of
simoniacal practices. Gregory VII. had sent these legates
to Germany to deal with persons accused of simony, and
they desired to hold a synod. The bishops stoutly re-
sisted this, maintaining that they could not suffer this to
be done except by the Pope himself. The Pope had already
suspended the Bishop of Bamberg and certain others from
the discharge of their sacred functions, until they should
purge themselves in his presence. Henry IV, indeed, accord-
ing to Lambert, was anxious to support the legates, in the
expectation that this would result in the deposition of the
Bishop of Worms and others who had opposed him in the
Saxon war ; it was, however, finally found that the matter
was too difficult for the legates to deal with, and it was
referred to the hearing of the Pope himself. 2
domino meo sustinui, timeoque me auxilium obnixe quperimus ; vestrum
adhuc graviora passurum, et ecclesia; studiosissime praeceptuni servaturi in
meae magnum fere detrimentum, nisi omnibus. Et nunc in primis pro
benignus ille Petrus clave sua me ecclesia Mediolanensi, qua? nostra culpa
defendat, et vestrae auctoritatis potes- est in errore, rogamus : ut vestra apos-
tas adversus regiam potestatem, zelo tolica districtione canonice corrigatur ;
iustitioo me protegendo, se accingat." et exinde ad cseteras corrigondos
1 Gregory VII., Registrum, i. 29 a : auctoritatis vestra; sententia pro-
" Non solum enim nos res ecclesiasticas grodiatur."
invasimus, verum quoquo indignis qui- : Lambert, ' Annales,' 1074 (id., 215) :
buslibet et symoniaco felle amari- " Rex, celebrata in Babonberg pas-
catis et non per ostium sed aliumlo chali solemnitate in Nowrenberg por-
ingredientibus ecclesias ipsas vendi- roxit obviam legatis apostolical sodis.
dimus, et non eas ut oportuit defendi- . . . Nee tamen cum rege sermonem
mils. At nunc, quia soli absque vestra communicare stepius rogati consenser-
auetoritate ecclesias corrigoro non pos- unt, donee secundum ecclesiasticas leges
surnus, super his, ut etiam de nostris poenitentiam professus, per iudicium
omnibus, vestrum una et consilium et corum anathemate absolvoretur, pro
64
THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY.
[PART II.
It was not only in Germany that the question of simony
was urgent. We have already considered the severe measures
which Leo IX. had taken at the Council of Bheims in 1049 to
deal with the matter in France, but it is evident that in spite
of his efforts the evil had not been removed. It was indeed
in Gregory VII. 's correspondence with the French bishops
that he first began to threaten vigorous measures against the
secular authorities. In a letter of the year 1073 to the
Bishop of Chalons he describes Philip, the King of France,
as having gone further in the oppression of the Church
than any other prince of this time, and he threatens that
if Philip would not abandon the heresy of simony, he would
issue such a general excommunication that the French
people would refuse any longer to obey him. 1 In the same
year he instructs the Archbishop of Lyons to consecrate the
Bishop-elect of Autun without waiting further for the consent
eo quod propter vonditas ecclesiasticas
dignitates simoniacne hereseos insimu-
latus fuisset apud sedem apostolicam.
Itaque petiorunt verbis Romani pon-
tificis, ut sinodum tenere intra Gallias
pace episcoporum sinerentur. Vehe-
ment er hoe abnuerunt omnes episcopi
tamquam inusitatam longeque a suis
rationibus alienum, nee se huius auc-
toritatis privilegium ulli alii prater -
quam ipsi Romano pontifici umquam
delaturos affirmabant. Siquidem in-
tenderat Romanus pontifex, ut omnes
episcopos et abbates, qui sacros gradus
precio redemissent, discussione habita,
deponeret ; iamque hac de causa Baben-
bergensem episcopum et alios nonnullos
ab omni divino officio suspenderat, donee
coram venientes inustum sibi crimen
hereseos digna satisfactione purgarent.
Et rex quidem cupide (hoc) volebat
odio Wormaciensis episcopi et quorun-
dam aliorum, qui eum bello Saxonico
offenderant ; quos hac calumpnia in-
volvendos et di'jnitatis suae detrimenta
passuros, spe certissima prsesumpserat.
Sed quia per legatos res tanta coniici
posse desperabatur, consulto in audien-
tiam ipsius Romani pontifn-is dilata
est."
1 Gregory VII., Reg. i. 35 : " Inter
ceteros nostri huius temporis principes,
qui ecclesiam Dei pervasa cupiditate
venundando dissiparunt et matrem
suam, ciu ex dominico prseeepto hon-
orem et reverentiam debuerant, an-
cillari subiectione penitus conculca-
runt, Pliilippum regem Francorum
Gallicanas ecclesias in tantum oppres-
sisse certa relatione didicimus, lit ad
summum tam detestandi huius faci-
noris cumulum pervenisse videatur.
Quam rem de regno illo tanto profecto
tulimus molestius, quanto et prudentia
et religione et viribus noscitur fuisse
potentius et erga Romanam ecclesiam
multo devotius . . . Nam a at rex
ipse, repudiato turpi symoniacse heresis
mercimonio, idoneas ad sacrum regi-
men personas promoveri permit tet,
aut Franci pro certo, nisi fidem chris-
tianam abieere maluerint, generalis
anathematis mucrone percussi, illi
ulterius obtemperare recusabunt."
CHAP. II.] PROHIBITION OF LAY " INVESTITURE.
65
of the King of France. 1 In the following year Gregory wrote
to the archbishops and bishops of France, and denounced
Philip as one who could not be called a king, but only a
tyrant. He blamed them severely that they had not used
their priestly authority to restrain him from his crimes, and
commanded them to meet and jointly to address him and de-
nounce his crimes to his face. If the king should refuse to
hearken to them, he bade them withdraw themselves from his
communion and obedience, and prohibit the public celebration
of all divine service throughout France. If Philip woidd not
even then submit, he gave them to know that he would do all
in his power to take the French kingdom from him. 2
1 Gregory VII., ' Reg.,' i. 36 : " Qui
(i.e., the king) si, in duritia sua perma-
nens, neque necessitate huius ecclesiae
compati neque exhortationi nostras
parere voluerit, praecipimus apostolica
auctoritate, ut fraternitus tua neque
pro odio neque gratia alicuius dimittat,
quin electum ab eis Augustodunensem
Landricum archidiaconum episcopum
seu per te seu per suffraganeos tuos
ordinare studeat ; si tamen auctoritas
sanctorum patrum probatur sibi non
obviare."
2 Id. id., ii. 5 : " Gregorius episco-
pus servus servorum Dei Manasse
Remensi, Richerio Senonensi, Richardo
Bituricensi archiepiscopis, et Adraldo
episcopo Carnotensi ceterisque episco-
pis Franciae salutem et apostolicam
benedictionem. . . . Quarum rerum
rex vester, qui non rex sed tyrannus
dicendus est, suadento diabolo caput
et causa est. Qui omnem actatem suam
flagitiis et facinoribus polluit et, sus-
cepta regni gubernacula miser et infelix
inutiliter gerens, subiectum sibi popu-
lum non solum nimis soluto imperio
ad scelera relaxavit sed ad omnia, quas
dici et agi nefas est, operum et studi-
orum suorum exemplis incitavit. . . .
Vos etenim fratres etiam in culpa estis ;
qui, dum perditissimis factis eius sacer-
dotali vigore non resistitis, procul dubio
VOL. IV.
nequitiam illius consentiendo fovetis.
. . . Nam, si prohibere eum a delictie,
contra ius et reverentiam promissae
sibi fidelitatis esse putatis, longe vos
fallit opinio. . . . Unde rogamus vos
et apostolica auctoritate monemus, ut,
in unum congregati, patriae vestrae
famae atque saluti consulatis et, com-
muni consilio ac coniunctissimis animis
regem alloquentes, de sua eum et regni
confusione atque periculo commoneatis
et, quam eriminosa sint eius facta atque
consilia, in faciem ei ostendentes, omni
exhortatione eum flectere studeatis :
. . . Quodsi vos audire noluerit et,
abiecto timore Dei, contra regium de-
cus, contra suam et populi salutem, in
duritia cordis sui perstiterit, apostolicae
animadversionis gladium nequaquam
eum diutius effugere posse, quasi
ex ore nostro sibi notificate. Propter
quod et vos, apostolica auctoritate
commoniti atque constricti, matrem
vestram sanctam Romanam et apostoli-
cam ecclesiam debita fide et obedientia
imitamini ; et, ab eius vos obsequio
atque communione penitus separantes,
per universam Franciam omne divi-
n nm officium publico celebrari inter -
dicite.
Quodsi nee huiusmodi districtione
voluerit resipiscere, nulli clam aut
dubium esse volumus, quin modis-
E
66 THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY. [PART II.
Gregory's letters indicate that the crimes with which he
charged Philip were not only against the general wellbeing
of the Church — in other letters he refers specially to his
plundering of Italian merchants in France x — but that the
degradation and disorder of the Church in France were caused
especially by the prevalence of simony, and demanded the
most stringent reform ; and it is also clear that it threatened
to produce the same collision between the temporal and
spiritual authorities as in the Empire after the death of
Henry III.
It is thus clear that the relations between the temporal
and spiritual authorities were becoming difficult, and we
think that it is reasonable to say that behind any particular
occasions of difference there lay a more general cause, and this
was the fact that after the death of Henry III. the temporal
authority was no longer co-operating with the spiritual in the
attempt at reform, but seemed rather to be responsible for the
continuance of grave evils, such as simony and the secularisa-
tion of the clergy. It was under these circumstances that the
Papacy began to develop the policy of limiting or prohibiting
the intervention of the secular authority in ecclesiastical
appointments. This may have been justifiable and even
necessary, but it must be admitted that it was a step of an
almost revolutionary character.
In the first part of this volume we have seen that it was
not generally disputed that the king or emperor had a legiti-
mate place in the appointment of bishops and abbots, while
the rights of the clergy and people of the diocese in election,
and of the metropolitan and the other bishops of the province
in confirmation were also generally recognised. In actual fact
no doubt the prince often determined such appointments with
little reference to the wishes of the electors, but it would be
a great exaggeration to say that any responsible person
thought that these were negligible. It is, however, true that
omnibus regnum Franciae de eius • Cf. Gregory VII., ' Reg.,' ii. 18
occupatione, adiuvante Deo, tempte- and 32.
mus eripere."
CHAP. II.] PROHIBITION OF LAY INVESTITURE. 67
it was with regard to the question of the adjustment of these
rights to each other that there first appeared the signs of the
future trouble. We have already seen some clear evidence
of the growing urgency with which the reforming Churchmen
and Church Councils urged the rights of the clergy and the
people of a diocese to be consulted in the appointment of a
bishop. We have seen how emphatically the Council of Rheims,
in 1049, asserted the principle that no one should be ap-
pointed to authority in the Church without the election of
the clergy and people, 1 and we have seen how the Council of
Maintz set aside one of the claimants to the archbishopric of
Besancon on the express ground that he had not been chosen
by the clergy and people. 2 Lambert of Hersfeld relates the
indignation of the clergy and people of Trier, when on the
death of Archbishop Eberhard, in 1066, a certain Cuono was
appointed by the intervention of the Archbishop of Cologne
without reference to them. 3
We have had occasion already to consider some of the
principles of the two most important writers of the re-
forming party — that is, of Cardinal Humbert and Peter
Damian — and we must now turn again to their work as
illustrating the development of this question, but also as
making it clear that at least at the outset, even the most
eminent reformers did not intend to deny the temporal authority
the right to some place in ecclesiastical appointments. In
one place Cardinal Humbert lays down in very emphatic terms
the conditions of a legitimate and canonical appointment. The
man, he says, who is to be raised to the episcopate must first
be elected by the clergy, then asked for by the people, and
then only is he to be consecrated by the bishops of the
province, with the approval of the metropolitan : he who has
been consecrated without regard to any one of these conditions
1 See p. 56. indigne nimis tulit tam elerus quam
2 See p. 28. populus Treverorum, quod ipsi in
3 Lambert of Hersfeld, ' Annales,' electionem admissi consultique non
1066 (M. G. H. ; S. S., p. 173) : " Epis- essent, seque vicissim hortabuntur,
copatum eius per interventum Coloni- ut insignem hanc contumeliam insigni
ensis archiepiscopi suscepit Cuono aliquo exemplo eluerent."
propositus Coloniensis. Graviter et
68
THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY.
[PART II.
is to be reckoned a false, not a true bishop. 1 Humbert's
words, indeed, raise two other questions, the one concerning
the impropriety of the creation of a bishop without a definite
diocese, the other about the relation of the authority of the
metropolitan to that of the Apostolic See, but we cannot here
deal with these.
In another place he denounces the arrogance and avarice
of the princes of his time, who had, in defiance of all divine
and human laws, drawn into their own hands the whole au-
thority of bestowing ecclesiastical appointments, and contrasts
this with the conditions of the " imperium Transmarinum "
(the Eastern Empire), where the control of such appointments
was left to the metropolitans and bishops. 2
If we were to isolate these passages we might conclude that
Humbert meant to exclude the secular authority from any part
in episcopal appointments, but that this is not his intention
1 Humbert, ' Adversus Simoniacos,'
i. 5 : " Quicumque consecratur epis-
copus, secundum decretales sanctorum
regulas prius est a clero eligendus,
deinde a plebe expetendus, tandemque
a comprovincialibus opiscopis cum
metropolitan! iudicio consecrandus.
Neque enim aliter certus et fundatus
vel verus episcopus dici vel haberi
poterit, nisi certum clerum et populum
quibus praesit habuerit et a compro-
vincialibus suis auctoritate metropoli-
tan], ad quern vice apostolicae sedis
cura ipsius provinciae pertinet, con-
secratus fuerit. Qui autem sine
quolibet horum trium capitulorum
consecratus fuerit, nee certus nee
fundatus nee verus, sed pseudoepiscopus
dicendus est et habendus nee inter
canonice plantatos vel factos episcopos
computandus ; quia cum episcopus
dicatur superintendens aut superin-
spiciens, cui clero aut cui populo hie
talis superintendit, qui nullius cleri
nulliusque populi, quibus superin-
tendat, electiouem habuit, insuper et
metropolitan! atque comprovincialium
auctoritate cam it T "
2 Id. id., iii. 10 : " Igitur, ut prae-
dictum est, haec sanctorum patrum et
religiosorum principum statuta de
personis et rebus ecclesiasticis invio-
labiliter hactenus in transmarino im-
perio observantur, et solis metropoli-
tanis vel episcopis ceteris disponenendae
relinquuntur. Unde quaelibet ecclesiae
administratio solo eorum disponitur ar-
bitrio, sive gratis sive non gratis velint
earn committere cuilibet clerico, nee
nisi a metropolitanis aut episcopis
eorumque familiaribus vendi solet
aliquando. Quod quamvis ex sola
venditione sit hereticum et nimium
detestabile, est tamen ecclesiis Dei
illis magis tolerabile quam nostris,
quae, ut superius ostenditur, iugiter
venduntur quater. Neque enim ar-
rogantia et avaritia principum nostri
saeculi et imperii patitur terminis
praefixis coherceri, sed transgressis
divinis et humanis legibus, quae inter
arma silent, etiamsi ecclesiastica, omnia
sibi praesumentes possident, ut in eis
degere aut ex eis vivere sine illorum
datione aut venditione contingat cleri-
corum neminem."
CHAP. II.] PROHIBITION OF LAY " INVESTITURE. 69
is plain when we consider another passage in the same
treatise. Here, indeed, he complains bitterly of the sub-
version of all true order in such appointments : the first had
been last, and the last first ; the secular power claimed the first
place in election, and the people, the clergy, and even the
metropolitan had to accept its decision whether they were
willing or not. It must, however, be observed that he states
the true method of appointment as being that the metropolitan
should confirm the election by the clergy, while the prince
should confirm the demand of the people ; x that is, Humbert
very clearly recognises that the prince is to be consulted and
his approbation secured.
If we turn to Peter Damian it seems clear from the
passages which we have already cited 2 from his works that
his position was the same as that of Humbert. He protests
emphatically against the abuse of the power claimed by the
secular power, and asserts the rights of the clergy and people
in the election of their bishop, but also he very frankly
recognises that the secular power had its reasonable and just
place in such appointments.
The position of the reformers was, we think, clear : they
were determined to vindicate the freedom of ecclesiastical
elections, and to reduce the claims of the secular power to
what they conceive to be reasonable limits, but they did not
propose to repudiate these altogether. We can, however,
carry the matter further, for we think that the corre-
spondence of Gregory VII. himself serves to show that at
least in the first years of his pontificate he did not refuse
1 Id., ' Advorsus Simoniacos,' iii. 6 : stecularis potestas, quam velit nolit
" Hsec cum ita venerabiles omni muiido subsequitur ordinis, plebis clerique
et summi pontifices Spiritu sancto consensus, tandemque metropolitan!
dictante deereverint, ut metropoli- judicium. Unde taliter promoti, sicut
tani iudicio electio cleri, principis superius prsedicatur, non sunt inter
autem consensu expetitio plebis et episcopos habendi, quia substitutio
ordinis confirmetur, ad reprobationem eorum capite pendet deorsum, quia
sanctorum canonum ot totius Christianas quod debuit eis fieri postremum, factum
religionis eonculcationom proepostero est primum et ab illis, quorum iuterest
online omnia fiunt, suntque primi nichilum."
novissimi et novissimi primi. Est 2 See p. 34.
enim prima in eligendo et confirniando
70 THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY. [PART II.
to recognise the claims of the secular authority in episcopal
appointments.
In a letter of the year 1073 to Humbert, the Archbishop
of Lyons, already cited, he instructs him to consecrate a certain
Landric, who had been elected by the diocese to the bishopric
of Autun, without waiting further for the consent of the
King of France. 1 Gregory no doubt sets aside the rights of
the King, but he only does it on account of his negligence
and delay. In a letter of the same year to Anselm, the
Bishop-elect of Lucca, he forbids him to receive the investi-
ture of the bishopric from the king's hand until he had
renounced his intercourse with excommunicated persons and
made his peace with the Eoman See ; 2 but it is noticeable
that the prohibition is related only to the actual circum-
stances of the moment. In a letter addressed, in 1074, to
the Coimt of Die and the faithful people of that church, he
speaks of the Count as having elected the bishop with the
consent of all the others — presumably the clergy and people
of the diocese. 3 Again, in a letter addressed in the same
year to Hubert, the Count, and the people of Fermo, he says
that he had entrusted the church to the archdeacon until by
his own care and the counsel and permission of the king a
suitable person should be found for the bishopric. 4 In a
letter of 1075 to Sancho, the King of Aragon, he discusses
1 See p. 64. navimus. . . . Te autem, praedicte
2 Gregory VII., ' Registrum,' i. 21 : comes, singulariter alloquentes, yalde
" Ut enim viam qua ambules postu- miramur, quod, postquam prasiatum
lasti tibi notificaremus, millam novam, confratrem nostrum instinctu divinse
nullam expeditiorem scimus ea, quam clementise cum consensu aliorum om-
nuper dilectioni tuse significavimus, nium in episcopum elegeras et fideli-
videlicet : te ab investitura episcopatus tatem sibi ex mere feceras ? "
de manu regis abstinere, donee, de 4 Id. id., ii. 38 : " Considerantes
communione cum excommunicatis Deo ergo necessitatem vestrte viduatw
satisfaciens, rebus bene eompositis, ecclesiae, procurationem totius episco-
nobiscum pacem possit habere." patus interim ei (i.e., the archdeacon)
3 Id. id., i. 69 : " Venientem ad commisimus, donee, divina providente
nos Hugonem episcopum vestrum dementia, cum nostra sollicitudine
benigne suscepimus. Et quia vos turn regis consilio et dispensatione
in electionem eius unanimiter con- idonea ad regendam ecclesiam et
venisse audivimus, episcopali conse- episcopalem dignitatem persona rep-
cratione eum vobis in pastorem ordi- periatur."
CHAP. II.] PROHIBITION OP LAY INVESTITURE. 71
the arrangements to be made for a diocese in view of the
failing health of the bishop. The King- and bishop had
proposed to him the names of two clerics of whom the one
should be made bishop. Gregory refuses to accept either of
them on the ground that they were the sons of concubines, but
promises to consider the matter if a man of suitable character
were recommended to him by the King and the bishop with
the approval of the diocese. 1 In January of 1076, in a letter
to Henry IV., while he rebukes him for giving the bishoprics
of Fermo and Spoleto to men who were unknown to him, he
only expresses a doubt whether a church can be given by any
man ; he does not positively say that the King had no rights
in the matter. 2
Even after Gregory VII. had issued the decree against lay
" investiture," we still find phrases in his correspondence which
seem to recognise some place for the secular authority in the
appointment to bishoprics. In a letter of the year 1077 to
Hugh, the Bishop of Die\ he writes that Philip, the King of
France, had asked him to consecrate the Abbot of St Euphemia
in Calabria to the bishopric of Chartres, but says that he will
not do this until he was sufficiently informed about the wishes
of the diocese. 3 And again, in a letter of the year 1079 to
Eudolph of Suabia, who had been elected as King of Germany
1 Gregory VII., ' Reg.,' ii. 50 : sedi eius (oonversationis — Jaffe) tuis et
" Atque ut facilius hoc impetraret, episcopi litteris nee non sub teatimonio
indicavit nobis de duobus clericis, eiusdem ecclesise denuncietur ; et de
quorum alterum in episcopatum eligi, ordinatione ecclesice deliberato consilio
tuam et sui ipsius voluntatom atque certa vobis et salubris annuente Deo
consilium fore nunciavit . . . responsio dabitur."
2 Id. id., iii. 10 : " Et nunc quidem,
ut ipse quantum possit episcopali officio ut vuln.ua vulneri infligeres, contra
in spiritualibus insistens et auxilia statuta apostolica3 sedis tradidisti
comprovincialium episcoporum petens, Firmanam et Spoletanam ecclesiam —
ad peragendas exteriores et interiores si tamen ab homine tradi ecclesia aut
curas talom clericum in ecclesia con- donari potest — quibusdam personis
stituat, qui ad tantam procurationem nobis etiam ignotis ; qui bus non licet,
providus et, si res postulaverit, ad per- nisi probatis et ante bene cognitis,
cipiendam episcopalis officii dignita- regulariter manum imponere."
tem et ordinem sit idoneus . . . 3 Id. id., v. 11: " Verum quia,
sanctorum patrum statuta soqui et
tunc demum, si illius vita mores et observare cupientes, nich.il de eo aut
diseiplina probabilis fuerit, apostolicaj de promotione eius sine election© ec-
72 THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY. [PAET II.
by the Diet of Porchheim in 1077, he discusses the election
of an Archbishop of Magdeburg as a matter with which
Eudolph was concerned, and only suggests that, if they are
willing to take his advice, they will elect one of two ecclesi-
astics whom he recommends, but this must be done with the
consent and election of the archbishop and bishops, and of the
clergy and laity. 1
It would appear then that it would be a mistake to think
that the reforming party in the Church set out to put an end
wholly to the traditional place of the secular authorities in
the appointment of bishops. It would seem that, while they
felt that the actually existing methods and forms through
which this authority had been exercised were inadmissible,
and while the freedom of ecclesiastical elections needed to be
asserted and safeguarded, it was rather the degree and extent
of the authority of the secular power, and the forms through
which it was exercised, than the authority itself which they
attacked.
As we shall see in later chapters, the question of the forms
under which investiture was granted came to play a very
important part in the controversy, and it is therefore con-
venient to consider at this point one of the earliest careful
and reasoned discussions of the question. The treatise of
Cardinal Humbert against simoniacal persons, to which we
have already so often referred, was written in the year
1058-9, and a passage from which we have already cited a
clesise probandum esse iudicavirmis ; nee et electione procurate. Quodsi meis
id ipsum, quod isti nobis de voluntate vultis acquiescere consiliis, audio enim
absentiuni referebant, satis constabat ; inter vos esse quosdam boni testimonii
prudentiam tuam admonemus : ut ec- viros, A. scilicet Goslariensum decanum,
clesiam illam aut per te aut per fidelem G(ebehardum) Bertaldi ducis filium,
et probatam tibi personam visitare H. Sigefridi comitis filium, quorum
studes, et voluntatem omnium tam unum me prcecipiente et consentiente
maiorum quam minorum super hac re eligite et in archiepiseopum praanomi-
diligenti inquisitione cognoscas." natse secclesise ordinate. Si vero in his
1 Gregory VII., ' Ep. Coll.,' 26 : " et tribus qui dignus sit non poterit in-
domus Dei dignum dispensatorem per veniri, in contritione cordis, orando et
ostium introducere, cum communi ieiunando ad Deum convertimini,
omnium religiosTum tam archiepisco- rogantes, ut sua revelante gratia,
porum quam episcoporum nee non persona quae huic negotio sit conve-
etiam clericorum et laicorum consensu nieus, possit ostendi."
CHAP. II.]
PROHIBITION OF LAY " INVESTITURE."
73
few words, deals with the question in detail. Humbert, as
we have seen, admits that the consent of the prince must
confirm the desire of the people, but he complains that in
violation of the canons all proportion and order had been
completely destroyed, the secular authority had claimed the
first and supreme place in the appointment of bishops, and
the consent of the clergy and people and of the metropolitan
had to be given whether they were willing or not, and,
he contends, appointments made under such conditions were
really invalid. It cannot, he maintains, belong to lay
persons to bestow the pastoral staff and the ring, for these
were the sacramental symbols of spiritual powers and offices,
and when they had once been bestowed there remained
no freedom of action, either to the people and clergy with
regard to election, or to the metropolitan with regard to
consecration. 1
1 Humbert, ' Adv. Simon.,' iii. 6 :
" Hiec cum ita venerabiles omni mundo
et summi pontifices Spiritu sancto dic-
tante decreverint ut metropolitan!
iudicio electio cleri, prineipis autem
consensu expetitio plebis et ordinis
confirmetur, ad reprobationem sanc-
torum canonum et totius christians
religionis conculcationem praepostero
ordine omnia fiunt, suntque primi
novissimi et novissimi primi. Est enim
prima in eligendo et confirmando saecu-
laris protestas, quam velit nolit subse-
quitur ordinis, plebis clerique consensus,
tandemque metropolitani iudicium.
Unde taliter promoti, sicut superius
prasdicatur, non sunt inter episcopos
habendi, quia substitio eorum capite
pendit deorsum, quia quod debuit eis
fieri postremum, factum est primum
et ab illis, quorum interest nichilum.
Quid enim ad laicas pertinet personas
sacramenta ecclesiastica et pontificalem
Beu pastoralem gratiam distribuere,
camyros scilicet baculos et anulos,
quiljus prtecipue perficitur, militat et
innititur tota episcopalis consecratio ?
Equidem in camyris baculis, superius
ad adtrahendum et invitandum un-
cinatis et inflexis, inferius vero ad re-
pellendum et feriendum accuminatis
et armatis, designatur, quae in eis
commititur, iura past oralis ; qua?
utique sua compositiono vel factura
admonet pastores, ut recti et plani
sint suteque actionis vel contempla-
tionis arduum et rigidem verticem
causa invitandi et attrahendi ad se
gregem Dei condescendentes leniter
dimittant et inflectant, sic tamen, ut
sibimet ipsis quoque semper intendant
nee unquam a suimet consideratione
mentis obtutu reflectant. Quorum
finis indicat, ut severa increpatione
indisciplinatos terreant, et si perti-
naces fuerint, extrema sententia ab
ecclesia repellant. Quae omnia apos-
tolus breviter insinuat ita : ' Rogaruus
vos, corripite inquietos, consolamini
puwillanimes, suscipite infirmos, pati-
entes estote ad omnes.' Porro anulus
signaculum secretorum caelestium in-
dicat, priemonens praedicatores, ut sec-
retam sapientiam Dei cum apostolo
dissignent et loquantur inter perfectos,
quam velut signatam reticent imper
74
THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY.
Tpart II.
Humbert evidently felt that, when the secular authority
invested with the pastoral staff and ring, this represented a
wholly false conception of its relation to ecclesiastical appoint-
ments : these were the symbols of a spiritual office which
could not be conferred by lay authority, and once given they
superseded and overrode the rights of the electors and of the
metropolitan. It would appear, then, that at least as early as
1058-9 the objections to the investiture of a bishop with the
ring and staff had taken definite form, and it was especially
under these terms that the position of the reforming party,
with regard to the claims of the secular power to authority
in ecclesiastical appointments, gradually took shape. We
must, however, be careful to notice that there runs through
the whole literature of the subject a certain ambiguity
about the term " investiture " : we cannot always be certain
fectis, quibus nondum solido cibo, sed
solo lacte opus est, sive ut tanquam
amici sponsi fidei arram sponsoe ipsius,
quas est ecclesia, sine intermissione
exhibeant et commendent. Quicumque
ergo his duobus aliquom initiant, procul
dubio omnem pastoralem auctoritatem
hoc prsesumendo sibi vendicant. Nam
post hsec encenia quod liberum iudicium
de talibus rectoribus iaru datis clerus,
plebs et ordo seu metropolitanus eos
consecraturus habere poterunt, quis
tantum suporest ve, nisi conivent ?
Sic enceniatus prius violentus invadit
clerum, plebera et ordinem dominaturus,
quam ab eis cognoscatur, quseratur aut
petatur. Sic metropolitanum aggredi-
tur, non ab eo iam iudicandus est,
sed ipsum iudicaturus ; neque enim
iam requirit aut recipit eius iudicium,
sed solum exigit et extorquit servitium,
quod ei solum in oratione et unctione
est rehctum. Quod enim sibi iam
pertinet aut prodest baculum et anu-
lum, quos portat, reddere ? Nunquid
quia a laica persona dati sunt ? Sed
etiam a laico baptisma datum non est
iterandum, sed oratione et unctione a
sacerdote, si supervivitur, supplendum ;
sine quibus, nisi forte supervivatur,
regnum cselorum indubitanter intra-
tur, cum sine aquai lavacro nullus.
Unde palam est omne episcopale offi-
cium in baculo et anulo eis datum, sine
quorum imitiatione et auctoritate epis-
copari nequeunt, cum sine unctione
visibili constet Sanctis apostolis hoc
attributum in sola perceptione curse
pastoralis, quse baculo et anulo visi-
biliter monstratus et datur. Rogo
ergo, cur redditur quod habetur, nisi
ut aut denuo res ecclesiastica sub hac
specie iussionis vel donationis vendatur,
aut ut priori venditioni corroborandse
a metropolitano suisque suffraganeis
subscribatur, aut certe ut prsesumptio
laicse ordinationis pallietur colore et
velamento quodam disciplinas clericalis.
Quod si nee factum est nee fit, me hinc
aliquis mentitum arguat. Sed quod
gravius est, non tantum prioribus tem-
poribus recolitur et praedicatur tale
quid factum, sed nostris quoque cerni-
tur et scitur usitatum. Nonne sa~"culi
principos prius vendiderunt et vendunt
ecclesiastica sub falso nomine investi-
tionis, deinde metropolitani sub tenora
consecrationis."
CHAP. II.] PROHIBITION OF LAY " INVESTITURE." 75
whether it is being used in the technical sense of the bestowal
of the pastoral staff and ring, or in the more general sense of
appointment.
We have then considered the general nature of the circum-
stances out of which the conflict about investiture between
Gregory VII. and Henry IV. arose, but before we deal with
this we must take account of one particular dispute which had
been going on for some time, and which may have had a
considerable importance in producing the final rupture. This
was the question of Milan.
We cannot here deal with the grave troubles which
had been caused in many places, but especially in Milan, by
the determined attempt of the Papacy, especially after Pope
Nicholas's decree of 1059, to suppress the marriage of the
clergy. 1 In the year 1059 Peter Damian and the Archbishop
of Lucca had been sent to Milan to deal with these troubles,
and it is plain that there was great contention in Milan about
the exact nature of the authority of the Papal See in that
city. 2 We are here concerned with the question which pres-
ently arose as to the respective claims of the Pope and the
emperor to the power of ratifying or rejecting the election of
the Archbishops of Milan. We have a detailed account of the
conflict in Arnulf's history of the Archbishops of Milan, and
while it is obvious that he writes as a partisan of the Im-
perialist party, his statements furnish us with an important
account of the standpoints of the conflicting parties. He
contends that the ancient custom of the Italian kingdom had
been that, on the death of a bishop, the king should, at the
request of the clergy and people, appoint a successor. The
Eomans, he says, maintained that this was not canonical, and
Hildebrand, when he was Archdeacon of Eome, endeavoured
to abolish the old custom and to introduce a new rule that
the consent of the Eoman See should be recognised as neces-
sary to an election. 3 On the death of Archbishop Wido in
1 Nicholas II., ' Epp.,' 7, 8. severans usque in hodiernum, ut de-
2 Peter Damian, ' Opusculum,' v. functis ecclesiarum praesulibus, rex
3 Arnulfus, ' Gesta Archiepiscoporum provideat suecessores Italieus, a clero
Mi'diolanonsium,' iii. 21 : " Yet us et populo decibiliter invitatus. Hoc
quippe fuit Italici regni condictio per- Komani canonicum esse negant, sed
76 THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY. [PAKT II.
1071 the conflict broke out. Herlembald, who had been one
of the principal leaders in the agitation against the married
clergy, procured the election of a certain Atto by a part
of the clergy and people, and with the permission of Eome.
Arnulf maintains that the larger part of the clergy and
the wiser people desired to recognise the king's rights and
the older custom, and the bishops of the province having
received the king's mandate, met at Novara and consecrated
a certain Gotofrid as archbishop. Hildebrand, on his accession
to the Papacy in 1073, summoned Gotofrid and his con-
secrators to a synod, and confirmed the election of Atto. 1
For the time being Henry IV. submitted, and in the
letter already cited he acknowledged his faults and ex-
pressed his willingness to accept the papal decision about
Milan. 2
It was in 1075 that Gregory VII. issued the decree pro-
hibiting all lay "investiture." Unhappily we have no
complete account of its terms : it is not contained in Gregory's
Eegister, and our only precise statement with regard to it is
preserved in the work of Arnulf to which we have just made
reference. His report is, however, so brief and summary that
we cannot be certain that it gives us the exact terms of the
decree. He says that Gregory, in a Synod at Eome, forbade
the King (Henry IV.) to have any " ius " in granting bishop-
rics, and that he removed all lay people from the investiture
instantius archidiaconus ille Hilde- spreta vero regum veteri providentia.
prandus ; qui cum abolito veteri novum Verumtamen maior civitatis portio
temptavit inducere constitutum, palam ex clero ac sapienti populo priscte
fatebatur, haud secus sedari posse consuetudini efc regio intendebat
Mediolanensem discidium, quam can- honori."
onicum habendo pastorem, ad quern iv. 3 : " Interea suffraganei sedis
eligendum necessarium dicebat Ro- Ambrosianse pontifices, accepto a rege
manum fore consensum." mandato, apud urbem convenientes
1 Arnulfus, ' Gesta Archiepiscoporum Novariam, Gotefredo manum consecra-
Mediolanensium,' iii. 25 : " lam enim tionis imponunt. . . .
migraverat a steculo archiepiscopus iv. 4 : " Cui parvo dierum inter -
ille Wido (1071). . . . Ab illo etenim vallo succedit Hildeprandus . . .
die Arlembaldus, omni instat cona- coram omni ccetu pra?sentem laudavit
mine, modo cum clero modo cum Attonem, absque nutu regio, absents
populo de eligendo agena episcopo, quoque Ambrosiano clero ac populo."
nova a Romanis accepta liceutia, 2 See p. 03.
))
CHAP, n.] PROHIBITION OF LAY INVESTITURE." 77
of churches. 1 It is possible that it was not intended to
publish the decree at once, and that Gregory was willing to
consider the possibility of modifying its terms — this seems
to be implied in his letter to Henry IV. of January 1076. 2
That Arnulf's statement is substantially correct would seem
clear, not only from the reference just cited, but from
several other distinct references to the subject in his corre-
spondence.
In a letter of March 1077 to the Archbishop of Tours,
Gregory says that he understands that the Princes of Brittany
were willing for the future to give up the ancient but evil
custom of claiming the right to the " investiture " of bishops
and of selling their consent. 3 In a letter of May 1077 to
Hugh the Bishop of Die he deals with the circumstances of
the appointment of Gerard to the bishopric of Cambrai. He
had been elected by the clergy and people, and had then
received the bishopric from Henry IV., and he pleaded that
he had not known of Gregory's decree — the decree forbidding
this — and that Henry had been excommunicated. Gregory
therefore expresses his willingness to accept his election,
but on the condition that Gerard should declare this (i.e., his
ignorance) before a council of the Archbishop and bishops
of the province of Bheims. Gregory also instructs the Bishop
of Die at this council to make it known to all those assembled
1 Arnulfus, ' Gesta Archiepiseoporum adstruere possent, in quo, salvo seterni
Mediolanensium.'iv. 7 : " prsf atus papa Regis honore et sine periculo animarum
habita Romae synodo palarn interdicit nostrarum, promulgatam sanctorum
regi, ius deinde habere aliquod in patrum possemus temperare senten-
dandis episcopatibus, omnesque laicas tiam, eorum comitiis condescend-
ab investituris ecclesiarum summovet eremus."
personas. Insuper facto anathemate 3 Id. id., iv. 13 : " Cum enim audi-
cunctos regis clamat consiliarios, id vimus : principes illius terra? (Brittany)
ipsum regi comminatus, nisi in proximo — contra antiquam et pessimam con-
huic obediat constitute " suetudinem — pro reverentia Dei om-
2 Gregory VII., ' Reg.,' iii. 10 : nipotentis et apostolicse auctoritatis
" Attamen, ne haec supra modum tibi ulterius in ordinandis episcopis nee
gravia aut iniqua viderentur, per tuos dominium investitures tenere nee
fideles tibi mandavimus : ne prava: pecuniae commodum qurerere velle,
consuetudinis mutatio te commoverit ; atque ob hoc ad apostolicam misisse
mittere ad nos, quos sapientes et re- sedem, ut in pra?fato loco iuxta
ligiosos in regno tuos invenire posses ; sanctorum patrum statuta legalis ordi-
qui si aliqua ratione demonstrare vel naretur episcopus."
78 THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY. [PART II.
that no secular authority or person was to interfere with the
bestowing of such offices, and that any metropolitan or bishop
who should consecrate any one who had received a bishopric
from a lay person would be deprived of his dignity and office. 1
In March of the year 1078 Gregory accepted the same excuse,
that he had not known of the papal decree, from Huzmann,
Bishop of Spires, and in view of this confirmed him in his
bishopric. 2
It would seem then to be clear that the statement of Arnulf
is correct, and that Gregory had in 1075 issued a decree deal-
ing with the position of Henry IV. and with the question of
lay appointments to bishoprics in general. In the decree
of the Council held at Eome in November 1078, the con-
demnation of lay " investitures " is clearly expressed. In this
decree it is said that, inasmuch as in many cases the " in-
vestitures " of churches have been made by lay persons,
contrary to the statutes of the Fathers, it is ordained that
no ecclesiastic is to receive the " investiture " of a bishopric,
abbey, or church from the hand of the emperor or king, or
any lay person, man or woman, and that if he should do
this the " investiture " would be void, and the person receiving
1 Gregory VII., ' Reg.,' iv. 22 : " Ger- manum audeat ; nisi dignitatis suae
ardus Cameracensis eleotus ad nos honore officioque carere et ipse velit.
veniens, qualiter in eadem Cameracensi Similiter etiam : ut nulla potestas aut
ecclesia ad locum regiminis assignatus aliqua persona de huiusmodi honoris
sit, prompta nobis confessione manifes- donatione vel acceptione ulterius se
tavit ; non donegans, post factam cleri intromittere debeat ; quod si prse-
et populi electionem donum episcopatus sumpserit, eadem sententia et anim-
ab Heinrico rege se accepisse ; defen- adversionis censura, quam beatus
sionem autem proponens ot multum Adrianus papa in octava synodo de
nobis offerens : se neque decretum huiusmodi prsesumptoribus et sacrse
nostrum de prohibitione huiuscemodi auctoritatis corruptoribus statuit atquo
acceptionis, nee ipsum Heinricum re- firmavit, se astrictum ac ligatum fore
gem a nobis excommunicatum fuisse, cognoscat."
aliqua certa manifestatione cogno- 2 Id. id., v. 18 : " Quodsi, secundum
visse ....... legati tui verba, decretum nostrum
ut, conservanda deinceps in promo- ante investituram pro certo non cog-
vendis episcopis canonica et apostoliea novisti, officium episcopale faciendi
auctoritate ; nullus metropolitanorum facultatem et licentiam tibi conce-
aut quivisepiscopoiamalicui, qui alaica dimus ; eo tamen tenore, ut oportuno
persona donum episcopatus susceperit, tempore nobis vel legatis nostris de
ad consecrandum ilium imponere obiectis te satisfacturum repraesentes."
CHAP. II.] PROHIBITION OF LAY " INVESTITURE.
79
it would be excommunicated. 1 It is also laid down that all
appointments which were simoniacal, or were made without
the consent of the clergy and people, and the approval of
those to whom the right of consecration belonged, were to
be reckoned as void. 2 The Eoman Council of March 1080
repeated this prohibition, and added some very important
provisions. If any person for the future should receive
a bishopric or abbey from the hand of any lay person,
he was not to be reckoned among the bishops or abbots,
and any person either receiving or giving " investiture ' :
was to be excommunicated. 3 When there was a vacancy in
any church the Apostolic See or the metropolitan was to
send a bishop, under whose direction the clergy and people,
without fear or favour of any secular interference, were to
elect a pastor, with the consent of the Apostolic See or
the metropolitan. If they should act otherwise, the election
woidd be void, and they would lose the power of election,
which would pass to the Apostolic See or the metropolitan. 4
1 Greg. VII., ' Reg.' 5. b : " Quoniam
investituras ecclesiarum contra statuta
sanctorum patrum a laicis personis in
multis partibus cognovimus fieri et ex
eo plurimas perturbationes in ecclesia
oriri, ex quibus Christiana religio
conculcatur, decernimus : ut nullus
clericorum investituram episcopatus vel
abbatife vel ecclesia; de manu impera-
toris vel regis vel alicuius laica; persona;,
viri vel feminse, suscipiat. Quod si
praesumpserit, recognoscat : investitur-
am illam apostolica auctoritate irritam
esse, et se usque ad condignam satisf ac-
tionem excommunicationi subiacere."
2 Id. id., 5. b : " Ordinationes,
qua; interveniente pretio vel pre-
cibus vel obsequio alicuius persona;
ea intentione impenso, vel quae non
communi consensu cleri et populi
secundum canonicas sanctiones fiunt,
et ab his ad quos consecratio pertinet
non comprobantur, irritas esse
diiudicamus. Quoniam, qui taliter
ordinantur, non per ostium id est per
Christum intrant, sed, ut ipsa Veritas
testatur, fures sunt et latrones."
3 Id. id., vii. 14 a, p. 398 : "si quis
deinceps episcopatum vel abbatiam de
manu alicuius laica; persona; susceperit,
nullatenus inter episcopos vel abbates
habeatur nee ulla ei ut episcopo seu
abbati audientia concedatur. Insuper
etiam ei gratiam sancti Petri et in-
troitum ecclesia; interdicimus, quo
usque locum, quem sub crimine tam
ambitionis quam inobedient ia; quod
est scelus idolatriae, cepit resipiscendo
non deserit. . . . Item si quis impera-
torum regum ducum marchionum
comitatum vel quilibet sa;cularium
potestatum aut personarum investi-
turam episcopatuum vel alicuius ec-
clesiastics dignitatis dare praesump-
serit, eiusdem sententia; vinculo se
obstrictum esse sciat."
1 Id. id., vii. 14 a, p. 400 : " Quotiens,
defuncto pastore alicuius ecclesia;,
alius est ei canonice subrogandus,
instantia visitatoris episcopi, qui si
80 THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY. [PART II.
With these decrees of the Council of Eome of 1080 the
position of Gregory VII. with regard to the relations of
the secular authority to the appointment of bishops and
abbots was fully developed. This does not mean, however,
that we can be quite certain in our interpretation of his
position. He does dogmatically and clearly prohibit all lay
"investiture," but whether this means that he intended to
forbid the secular authorities to have any place in ecclesiasti-
cal appointments is not quite clear. As we have already
seen, the word " investiture " had a technical sense, but it
was not always used technically, and we cannot be confident
as to the precise meaning of the phrase in these statements
and decrees of Gregory which we have cited. It was only
in the course of the controversy which followed that these
ambiguities were gradually cleared up.
ab apostolica vel metropolitana sede sumpserit, electionis perperam factse
directus est, clerus et populus, remota omni fructu carebit ; et de csetero
omni saeculari ambitions timoro atque nullam electionis potestatem habebit ;
gratia, apostolicas sedis vel metro- electionis vero potest as omnis in de
politani sui consensu pastorem sibi liberatione sedis apostolicse sive metro-
secundum Deum eligat. Quodsi cor- politani sui consistat."
ruptus aliquo vitio aliter agere prae-
81
CHAPTER III.
THE DISCUSSION OF THE " INVESTITURE " QUESTION — I.
We have endeavoured to trace some of the circumstances
which led up to the prohibition of lay " investiture " in the
year 1075. We have now to consider the history of the
controversy which this raised, and to inquire into the
precise nature of the matter in dispute, as it presented
itself to the minds of the disputants. As we shall see, the
controversy frequently tended to turn on the question of
the use of the pastoral staff and the episcopal ring in " investi-
ture," but it is clear that this was not the real subject in
dispute. The matters which were really important were, on
the papal side, the principle that ecclesiastical appointments
should not be absolutely controlled by the secular power ;
on the imperialist, the principle that the secular power was
entitled to some voice in such appointments.
We have a temperate statement of the imperialist position
in the treatise or letter composed in the name of Theodoric,
the Bishop of Verdun, by Wenrich of Trier, in the years
1081-82. * He admits that there is some appearance of
reason in the contention that bishops should not be appointed
by the prince. He complains, however, that the prohibition
of this had been put out with undue violence and haste, and
that the real motive for it was not zeal for religion, but
hatred of the prince (i.e., Henry IV.). Appointments made
by Eudolph of Suabia and by other kings were sanctioned,
1 The date is carefully discussed by Lite,' vol. i. pp. 280-284.
K. Francke in M. G. H., ' Libelli de
VOL. IV. F
82 THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY. [PART II
or at least treated with consideration, while bishops who
were faithful to Henry IV., even though properly elected
and received by the common consent, were condemned and
excommunicated. And, further, he contends that this custom,
that is of appointment by the prince, had at least existed and
been approved for many ages, and he cites the accounts of the
appointments of priests by the Kings of Israel, the precedents
of the Maccabean period, and various passages from the
writings of Gregory the Great and Isidore of Seville. 1
The imperialist position is drawn out much more com-
pletely in a work, written probably in the year 1086, by
Wido, Bishop of Ferrara. 2 He gives a brief account of the
arguments against the imperial " investitures " of bishops, and
specially mentions some passages from the writings of St
Ambrose which might be cited in support of these conten-
tions, but sets them aside as not really relevant to the matter
in dispute. He urges that it is necessary to distinguish
clearly between two aspects of the position of the bishop.
On the one hand his office is spiritual, and all his spiritual
powers are given to him by the Holy Spirit, through the
ministry of other bishops. On the other hand he has
secular authority and possessions, and these are given to him
1 Wenrich of Trier, ' Epistola,' 8 : assensu receptis, laica etiam communio
" Illud sane, quod de aecclesiasticis intordicatur ; et in nulla deprohensi
ventilatur beneficiis ab omni secularium culpa, Heinrico solo quia fidem tenent
iure perpetua emunitate asserendis, de et periurare timent, reprobi iudicentur.
episcopis quoque manu principis in .......
episeopatum minime introducendis, etsi Sane, ut ad propositum revertamur,
pro rei novitate prirno sui aspectu consuetudo ista a sanctios patribus
offensionem generat, aliquatn tamen in nostra tempora permanavit, longa
speciem rationis exhibet, si non res vel iam jetate senuit, sub lege recepta, sub
tali tempore mota vel tali irnpetu pro- gratia roborata, longa status sui diu-
perata vel tali foret contentione agitata. turnitate invaluit. Quod plane ita esse
Quis enim non videat, non ex religionis inveniet, qui scripturas canonicas re-
zelo, sed ex principis odio htec actitari, volvere et eis intendere voluerit."
cum personis per sacram Rodulfi dex- This is followed by references to the
teram non introductis, sed subintro- Old Testament, to the Maccabean
ductis, benedictiones non negentur, period, and to St Isidore of Seville
pallia domum transmittantur ; cum and St Gregory the Great,
his, qui sub aliis regibus degunt, mitius 2 Cf. M. G. H., ' Lib. de Lite,' vol,
agatur, nostris autem episcopis, archi- i. pp. 529-532.
episcopis legitime electis, commun;
CHAP. III.] THE " INVESTITURE " QUESTION — I.
83
by the prince. The spiritual powers given to him by the
Holy Spirit are not subject to the imperial power, but the
tenure of the secular things, as they are granted by the
secular power, must be renewed by the successive holders
of that authority. It is here that he finds the explanation
and justification of the fact that, as he maintains, the power
of " investiture ' : was granted to the emperors by Pope
Hadrian I. and Pope Leo III. He adds that this was
also done in order to prevent the popular disturbances
which were often incidental to episcopal elections. 1
1 Wido, ' De Scismate Hildebrandi,'
' Libelli de Lite,' vol. i. p. 564 : " Qua}
omnia si discrete accipias, nichil impera-
torias investitiones impediunt. Duo
siquidem iura conceduntur episcopis
omnibus, spirituale vel divinum unum,
aliud seculare ; et aliud quidem caeli,
aliud vero fori. Nam omnia quae sunt
episcopalis officii spiritualia sunt, divina
sunt, quia, licet per ministerium epis-
copi, tamen a sancto Spiritu conced-
untur. At vero iudicia secularia et
omnia, quae a mundi principibus et
sccularibus hominibus aecclesiis conced-
untur, sicut sunt curtes et praedia
omniaque regalia, licet in ius divinum
transeant, dicuntur tamen secularia,
quasi a secularibus concessa. Itaque
divina ilia a sancto Spiritu tradita im-
peratoriac potestati constat non esse
subiecta. Quae vero sunt ab impera-
toribus tradita, quia non sunt aecclesiis
perpetuo iure manentia, nisi succeden-
tium imperatorum et regum fuerint
iteratione concessa, dicuntur profecto
quodammodo regibus et imperatoribus
subdita, quia nisi per succedentes im-
poratores et reges fuerint aecclesiis con-
firmata, revertuntur ad imperialia iura.
Sicut enim imperium et regnum non
est succossorium, sio iura quoque reg-
norum et imperatorum succossoria non
sunt, neo regibus et imperatoribus per-
petim manero possunt. Si vero per-
pelim non manent illis, qualitcr Ilia
quibus traduntur, perpetim manere
possunt ? Sicut enim regnum et im-
perium ab homine transit in hominem,
sic iura regni manent cum rege manente
sibi regno, et cum illo non manent non
manente sibi imperio vel regno. Quo-
circa satis visum est utile, ut imperialia
iura et regalia semel aecclesiis tradita,
crebra regum et imperatorum investi-
cione firmentur, quae ex concessione
alicuius unius imperatoris vel regis per-
petim illi manere non possunt. Divina
ergo ilia sancto Spiritu per ministrum
aliquem tradita ad imperatores et reges
non sunt pertinentia ; ilia vero ab im-
peratoribus et regibus concessa et
eorum confirmationibus indigentia, im-
peratoribus sunt et regibus subdita, eo
quod sunt per illos habita et per illos
habenda. Unde succedentibus postea
temporibus salubriter est a posteris
Romanae sedis episcopis institutum et
imperatoribus concessum, ut aecclesi-
arum investituras habeant, non dico
parietum sacrorum et altarium, quae
non sunt eorum, sed aecclesiasticarum
rerum ; quibus investiontibus et pri-
orum confirmatur traditio et affectan-
tium frenatur ambitio et popularia
cessat seditio. Hanc concessionem
Adrianus apostolicus Karolo, Leo
tercius Ludoico, alii vero Romani pon-
tifices aliis atque aliis imporatoribua
conlirmaverunt, eo videlicet consiho,
ut defensores christians roi publicas
84
THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY.
[PART II.
Wido finds a further confirmation of his view of the
legitimate place of the prince in episcopal elections in the
provisions of the decree of Pope Nicholas II., as he under-
stands it, that no one should become Bishop of Eome without
the imperial consent. He attributes this in large measure
to the recognition of the disorders attendant upon episcopal
elections when they were uncontrolled by the secular power,
and especially to the conflict of the three occupants of the
Papal See before the intervention of Henry III., as well as
to the recognition that all the secular authority of the bishop
was derived from kings and emperors, and could not be held
except under their grant ; and he urges that it was only by
this authority that the clergy could claim exemption from
any form of taxation. 1 He then quotes from the correspon-
fierent et in electionibus episcoporum
turbatio popularium conquiescoret."
It is maintained by E. Diimmlor, the
editor of the treatise in the ' Libelli de
Lite,' that this is the earliest reference
to the spurious document here referred
to. E. Bernheim ( ' Forschungen zur
Deutschen Geschichte,' xv. p. 635) en-
deavours to prove that it was pro-
duced between the years 1084 and
1087.
1 Id. id. id., p. 565 : " Hinc etiam
Nicolai papas concilium Romse fac-
tum approbant et commendant, in quo
congregatis centum et octo episcopis
omnibus confirmantibus sancxit, ut
nullus deinceps Romas poneretur epis-
copus, nisi christiano consentiente prin-
cipe, qui regni gubernacula tenuisset
pro tempore. Quod enim ignorabatur
prius temporibus illius Deus voluit
revelari, quodquo fuerat clatisum
erupit, ut universi cognoscerent, quam
multiplices in eligendis episcopis con-
tentiones emergere potuissent, si im-
peratores et reges ordinati non essent.
Nam ante praefati Nicolai pontifitium
tres simul invaserant apostolatum et
omnes apostolici uicebantur. Sed sicut
sepe contigerat temporibus aliorum
imperatorum, quod huiusmodi Rornana)
sedis contentiones per imperatores sub-
latae sunt, sic etiam tres illi certatim
positi et per contentionem electi rogia
potentia turpiter eiecti sunt. Illud
etiam innotuit, quod secularia iudicia
et placita, semel ecclesiis ab impera-
toribus tradita, successorum essent in-
vestitionibus confirmanda, si omnia
regalia et omnia pubhca iura perpetim
ecclesiis manere non poterant, nisi suc-
cedentium sibi regum frequenti fuissent
iteratione concessu. Quod autem
omnia placita secularia et iuditia et
regalia et publica iura et vectigalia
scilicet et tributa regum sunt et im-
peratorum, vel ab illis aliis tradita,
apostoli dicentis verba denunciant :
' Omnis,' inquit, ' anima potestatibus
sublimioribus subdita sit. Non est
enim potestas nisi a Deo, qua) autem
sunt, Dei ordinatione ordinata sunt.'
Item Petrus coapostolus eius : ' Subditi
estote,' inquit, ' omni humanse ereaturaj
propter Deum : sive regi, quasi pra3-
cellenti, sive ducibus, tamquam ab eo
missis.' Quibus verbis innuitur, quod
nullum seculare ius episcopis relin-
quitur nee potestatem aliquam eciam
in colonos et in ecclesise famulos, de-
canos et villicos, si non regia auctori-
tate sit illis concessum. Sod ncc ipsi
CHAP. III.] THE INVESTITURE QUESTION — I. 85
dence of Braulio with Isidore of Seville, some passages to show
that Isidore recognised the authority of the king in the
creation of bishops. Finally, he urges that those who con-
tended that the appointment of bishops belonged only to the
clergy should remember that it was Moses, although he was
not a priest, through whom God gave the law and ordered
the priesthood, and that if this had been permitted to one
who held no sacred office it need not be thought improper
that emperors and kings should appoint to bishoprics, for
they received an unction greater and more honourable in
some respects than the priest, and they were not to be
reckoned as mere laymen. 1
If we endeavour to consider these arguments and to measure
their significance, it would seem that the really important con-
sideration which Wido urged was that the temporalities of the
bishop can only be recognised as his, subject to the secular
authority, and that it is the prince who must grant them.
He was also aware that there was a considerable body of
precedents for the secular claim to authority in the appoint-
ment of bishops, even apart from the evidence of the spurious
documents of Hadrian I. and Leo III., which as it seems he
was the first to use, and he urged that the imperial authority
had been very serviceable in restoring order to the Church.
clerici publicis vectigalibus et tributis considerare, quod Moyses sacerdos non
absolvi possunt, si non eadem auctori- fuerit, quern tamen Dominus Israhel-
tate solvantur. Omnibus enim ab itico populo praposuit et tantam illi
apostolo dicitur : ' Reddite omnibus gratiam contulit, ut per eum legem
debita, cui tributum tributum, cui dederit, per eum sacerdotes ordinandos
vectigal vectigal, cui timorem timorem, instituerit, per eum tabernaculum
cui honorem honorem ' et cetera. Et fieri praeceperit, per ilium quoque vasa
ne quisquam sanctam Dei ecelesiam ab templi et ministros et ministeria et
his diceret liberam, nee regibus et ritus et sacrifitia facienda mandaverit.
imperatoribus obnoxiam, ipse dominus Et si hsec illi nullo sacro functo ofricia
Iesus, qui se nobis in omnibus prsebuit concessa sunt, cur videatur indignum
formam cuiusque vita nobis debet esse si per imperatores et reges fiant ordina-
magistra, pro se tributum solvit et tiones ecclesiarum, cum maiorem unc-
solvendum Petro mandavit, quem tionem et quodammodo digniorem
ecclesiae suae principem fore prse- ipsis eciam sacerdotibus habeant ?
vidit." Unde nee debent inter laicos computari,
1 Id. id. id., p. 566 : " Qui putant sed per unctionis meritum in sorte
ordinationes ecclesiarum sacerdoti- sunt Domini deputandi "
bus pertinere, dignentur etiam illud
86 THE INVESTITIVE CONTROVERSY. [part II.
What importance may belong to his last argument, that the
emperor or king was, in virtue of his anointing, no mere
layman, we shall have occasion to consider again. The most
important contention is the first, for it already foreshadows
the nature of the settlement which was arrived at in 1122
at Worms.
We must now compare with the position of Wenrich and
Wido, the views and arguments of some of the earlier de-
fenders of the action of Gregory VII. in prohibiting lay
" investiture." The first of these is Manegold of Lautenbach,
whose treatise, ' Ad Gebehardum,' was written probably in
1085.
He quotes the prohibition in the form of the decree of the
Eoman Council of 1078, and maintains with characteristic
vehemence that it represents the Catholic tradition, the
decisions of Councils, and the judgment of the Fathers. He
urges especially a regulation of the so-called Apostolical
Canons, the often-quoted affirmation of Pope Leo I. that
no one could be held to be a bishop who had not been elected
by the clergy, demanded by the people, and consecrated by
the bishops of the province with the approval of the metro-
politan, and the equally well-known saying of Pope Celestine
I. (which he attributes to Innocent I.), that no bishop might be
imposed upon an unwilling people ; and he argues that if this
is true it is obvious that bishops cannot be appointed by
kings and princes at their arbitrary will. 1
' Manegold, ' Ad Gebehardum,' 50 : de ipsis contra ius et fas eligerent
" Statutum vero eius de episcopis iudicare. . . .
per manum principis in episcopatum 51. " Nunc vero idem statutum
non introducendis quam sit catholi- ponamus, ut Sanctis patribus quam
cum, quam ecclesiastice dispensationi sit consonum, plenius ostendere vale-
congruum et necessarium, liquido amus. ' Decernimus,' inquid, ' ut
possont cognoscere, si decreta apos- nullus clericorum investituras epis-
tolica, si autentica concilia, si diversos copatus vel abbatie seu prepositure
diversorum patrum tractatus vellent de manu imperatoris vel regis vel
legere, si ea quae ignorant pie querere alicuius laice persone, viri vel femine,
quam que offeruntur mallent repre- suscipiat. Quod si presumpserit, re-
hendere, si secundum leges sacras cognoscat investituram illam apostolica
decernere et non ipsas proscribere vel auctoritate irritam esse.' Quieunque
CHAP. III.]
THE " INVESTITURE " QUESTION — I.
87
A little later he denounces in terms similar to those
of Cardinal Humbert, to which we have already referred,
the ignoble arts by which many curried favour with the
enira canones, qui dicuntur aposto-
lorum, per Clementem Romanura
pontificem prolatos in noticia habuerit,
hec statuta ex eisdem profluxisse
cognoscit. Scriptum est enim capite
xxi : ' Si quis episcopus secularibus
potestatibus usus ecclesiam per ipsos
obtinuit, deponatur et segregetur om-
nesque qui illi communicant.' Hec
enim licet ad testimonium prolate
rei suffecerint, tamen de locandis
episcopis quid sit tenendum, Leo
doctor plenius ostendit. Ait : ' Cum
de summi sacerdotis electione trac-
tabimus, ille omnibus prseponatur,
quem cleri plebisque consensus con-
corditer postulaverit. Metropolitani
iudicio is saltern prteponatur qui mai-
oribus studiis et meritis adiuvatur.'
(Leo. I., 'Ep.,' 14.)
Quicunque enim diligenter et
fideliter prredictam huius sanctissimi
patris sententiam considerat, nequa-
qviam episcopatus ad regie voluntatis
nutum dispensandos ultra pronuntiat,
nisi in apertam corruens insaniam
eandem cassare contendat. Non enim
dictum est : ' Ille omnibus prceponatur,
quem rex voluerit,' sed ' quem cleri
plebisque consensus concorditer postu-
laverit ' ; nee, ' regis arbitrio qui melius
ei servivit,' sed, ' metropolitani iudicio
is preponatur, qui maioribus meritis
adiuvatur.' Si enim alia huius rei
testimonia deessent, sola hac sententia
suam stulticiam conpescere deberent,
que et apostolica auctoritate et plena
viget ratione. Sed et illud eiusdem
patris subnotemus testimonium, quo
sui successoris, nostri videlicet apos-
tolici, firmius roboretur statutum.
Scribit enim Rustico Narbonensi
episcopo dicens : ' Nulla sinit
ratio, ut inter episcopos habeantur,
qui nee a clericis sunt electi nee a
plebibus expetiti nee a comprovinci-
alibus episcopis cum metropolitani
iuditio consecrati. Unde cum sepe
questio de male accepto honore nas-
catur, quis ambigat nequaquam ab
istis esse tribuendum quod non docetur
fuisse collatum ? ' (Leo. I., ' Ep.,'
167.) Si igitur, sicut Leo asserit,
non sunt episcopi, qui a clericis
non sunt electi nee a plebibus expetiti,
quomodo clerici illos eligunt, quos
numquam viderunt ? Quomodo plebes
expetunt, quorum nee famam ali-
quando audierunt, sed velint nolint
coguntur suscipere ? quorum vitam,
actus, mores et ingenium, sepe etiam
genus vel patriam constat eos igno-
rare ? . . .
Incassum enim predieti patres tanta
diligentia eligi episcopos precipiunt,
tanta districtione examinari instituunt,
si ad cuiuscumque regis vel principis
nutum episcopale dispensatur officium.
Hoc enim modo clerus vel populus
non rectores eligere, sed violenta potes-
tate dominos coguntur suscipere. Si
enim reges vel imperatores quoscunque
libuerit, sive corporali servitio deliniti
sive privata aliqua gratia adducti,
regendis populis libere ingerunt ac pro
suo arbitrio ecclesiastica regimina con-
dunt, vacat illud, quod Innocentius
papa hoc super negotio precipit omni-
busque orthodoxis tenendum con-
scribit : ' Nullus,' inquid, ' invitis
detur episcopus. Cleri et plebis et
ordinis consensus et desiderium requi-
ratur. Tunc alter de altera eligatur
ecclesia, si de ipsius civitatis clero,
cui est episcopus ordinandus, nullus
(dignus), quod evenire non credimus,
potuerit reperiri. Primum enim illi
88
THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY.
[PAET II.
secular authorities, and endeavoured to obtain ecclesiastical
offices. 1
Manegold then, with evident reference to the arguments
of Wenrich, discusses the alleged precedents of the Maccabean
period, and contends that these had been misunderstood, but
that, even if this were not so, they would have no authority,
reprobandi sunt, ut aliqui de alienis
ecclesiis merito preferantur. Habeat
unusquisque sue fructum milicie in
ecclesia, in qua per omnia officia suam
transegit etatem. In aliena stipendia
minime obrepat, neque alii debitam
alter audeat vendicare mercedem.'
(Cselostinus I., ' Ep.,' 4.) Predicti
enim patris sententia nulla poterit
ratione constare, si regibus vel qui-
busque potentibus liberum est, ut
isti asserunt, regendis plebibus quos
collibuerit preponere. Notandum
sane quod dicitur : ' Cleri, plebis et
ordinis consensus et desiderium requi-
ratur.' Cur enim principes illorum
consensum quererent, super quos
constituendi quos vellent potestatem
haberent ? Hue enim accedit, quod
pleraque regna et imperia per diversas
linguas et varias nationes amplissima
distenduntur latitudine. In quorum
forsitan termino cum aliquis antis-
titum obierit, rex vel princeps fortassis
in alio tunc regni connnio degens ad
desolatam sedem sepissime destinat,
cuius populus non dico mores et
merita, sed, quod maxime necessari-
um est, locutionem penitus ignorat.
Nequaquam hie cleri, plebis et ordinis
consensus requiritur, sed contra pre-
dicti doctoris sententiam potius op-
pressor quam rector invitis ingeritur.
Nee otiose pretereundum, quod pre-
cipitin*, ut prius clerus ipsius civitatis
examinetur et, si ibi nullus dignus
invenitur, tunc demum alter de altera
ecclesia eligatiir. Cur autem hec
discussio agitur, si nee de propria
civitate nee de alia quem volunt licet
eligere, sed quemcunque princeps
voluerit coguntur suscipere. Ergo si
vestra de potestate regum sententia
constiterit, premissorum patrum testi-
monium de eligendis sacerdotibus
falsum erit. Quod si nullus vestrum
quamvis dementia insaniens audebit
vel muttire, planum immo neces-
sarium est potestatem, quam regibus
de locando sacerdotio datis, vacillare,
immo penitus non existere."
1 Id. id., 53 : " Manifestum est
autem, istos de quibus agimus, non
pro eterna mercede loca docendi
appetere, sed fastu secularis glorie et
potentie cupiditate invadere, qui,
dum nullo religionis cultu, nullo vir-
tutum ornatu ad id optinendum
fulciuntur, secularium atque poten-
tum patrociniis ad supplementum
sue libidinis abutuntur.
Isti ergo, cum omni tempore respectu
potentie curie deserviant, totius humili-
tatis ignari more secularium pompis
vestium, faleris equorum inserviant
et quodam modo muliebribus mun-
diciis delibutei erecto collo, pingui
cervice incedant, nee habitum religionis
saltern assumant, merito iuxta Gre-
gorium pro neophitis sunt habendi et
a locis regiminum penitus arcendi. . . .
Nunquid non aperte hac sententia
denotati sunt, qui presenti etiam tem-
pore, dum omnem etatem multis
lasciviis, ludicris et publicis spectaculis
insirmunt, repente per principum
favorem ad pontificalem celsitudinem
erumpunt, id videlicet suscipientes
docere, quod ipsi nunquam didicere ? "
CHAP. III.] THE INVESTITURE QUESTION — I. 89
for the Books of Maccabees do not properly belong to the
Canon of Scripture. 1 In the same way he argues that the
alleged appointment of Sadoc as High Priest by Solomon
was a mistake ; but that, even if correct, it would not prove
anything, for even if such an authority had been given to
kings under the circumstances of those times, it would not
justify this under the new dispensation. 2
The contention of Wenrich that St Isidore and St Gregory
the Great recognised the rightful authority of kings and
emperors in the appointment of bishops he considers at con-
siderable length, and argues that the passages from their
writings which Wenrich had cited had been misunderstood,
and then brings forward a great many citations to show
that the elections to the Roman See had not been subject
to any secular authority, while, on the other hand, the Pope
had authority in the appointment of bishops, and in the
constitution of new dioceses. 3
Having thus dealt with the arguments which had been
used in defence of the appointment of bishops by the secular
authority, he urges the absurdity as well as the impropriety
of the investiture of bishops by the king with the ring and
staff, for these were the symbols of spiritual mysteries and,
as Manegold says, it was customary that they should be given
again by the consecrating bishops after they had been re-
ceived from the king ; this was a manifest absurdity. 4
1 Id. id., 55. * Id. id., 64 : " Sed diligentius
2 Id. id., 56 : " Si enim hoc regibus intueamur ordinera, quo per seeulares
illis 6ub umbra adhuc aliqua vel potestates locari contendunt honores
temporis vel cause dispensatione con- pontificales. A regibus autem baculos,
cessum esset, non ideo nova lucente pastoralis videlicet sollicitudinis sus-
gratia et veritate ita faciendum exist- tentationem indicantes, solent accipere
eret, reprobato, ut dicit apostolus, et anulos, celestium secretorum signa-
precedente mandato pro infirmitate et cula designantes, eorum traditione
inutilitate eius, per quod nichil ad investire, sed tamen postmodum
perfectum adductum asserit, ut meli- eosdem baculos et anulos cum epis-
oris testament], cuius Christus sponsor copali benedictione iterata commenda-
factus est, participes emciamur, am- tione recipere Aut enim precedens
bulantes videlicet in novitate spiritus a regibus acceptio valet, viget et
et non in vetustate litere." constat, aut sequens episcoporum
3 Id. id., 57-63. commendatio vacat, resolvitur et
90 THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY. [PAKT II.
Manegold urges with vehemence his contention against the
claim of the secular authority to appoint bishops, as well as
against the " investiture " with ring and staff by laymen, but
it is not clear that he intended to maintain that the secular
authority should have no voice in the appointment. It is
the arbitrary action of the prince which he rejects : it does
not seem as though his mind would necessarily have been
closed to some compromise.
In 1087, the year after Wido of Ferrara had written the
treatise which we have considered, Cardinal Deusdedit pro-
duced his ' Collectio Canonum,' in which he set out a number
of authoritative passages which required the freedom of epis-
copal election, and condemned the appointment of bishops by
the secular power. 1 In 1097 Deusdedit set about the com-
position of a work, ' Libellus contra invasores et symoniacos,'
in which he argues the question in detail. He begins by
setting out the purpose of his work, and describes it as a
reply to those simoniacal and schismatic persons who say
that the Church of Christ is subject to the royal power, and
that the king can appoint the ministers of religion at his
discretion, and has the right to transfer the property of the
Church to himself or to others as he pleases. He protests,
however, that in saying this he must not be thought to be
derogating from the royal honour, for the office of the priest
is one and that of the king another. Each has need of the
other, and neither should intrude upon the functions of the
other. 2
vacillat. Ambe enim constare simul immo insanius iudicandum, in divinis
nequaquam possunt. Si enim pre- rebus, in dominicis sacramentis ilia
cedens constiterit, impium et pro- agere, que ipse qui agit postmodum
fanum est sequenter iterari, quod iteranda non ambigit."
prius rite actum potest comprobari. x Cardinal Deusdedit, ' Collectio
Si autem, sicut nee ipsi negant, sed Canonum,' e.g., i. 93, 96, 97, 196;
fatuntur et affirmant, absque ulla iv. 11, 16, 17, 20, 146.
questione eandem commendationem J Deusdedit, ' Libellus contra in-
consecratores episcopos in consecra- vasores,' &c. Prologus : " Opitulante
tione necesse est implere, impium et domini Dei nostri dementia, qui nos
profanum omnique est libertate deri- et sermones nostros suo mirabili nulu
dendurn et omni fatuitate stultius, regit atque disponit, accingimur
CHAP. III.] THE " LNVESTITURE " QUESTION — I.
91
He commences, therefore, by citing the sentence from the so-
called Apostolical Canons : " Si quis episcopus ssscularibus potes-
tatibus usus ecclesiam per ipsis obtineat, deponatur ; et segre-
gentur omnes qui illi communicant." He thinks that this
was promulgated by the Apostles foreseeing that the time
would come when the Temporal power would be converted to
Christianity, and would be tempted to impose its authority upon
the Church, and to appoint its ministers by its own authority
and at its pleasure. He is aware that the authenticity of these
Canons had been questioned, but maintains that they had
been recognised by various Councils and Fathers ; and he
urges that for a long time the Church kept this tradition
inviolate, and the clergy and people of each church elected
their own bishop. 1 This custom continued until the churches
grew numerous and wealthy, and was recognised as binding
by Popes and emperors. The first emperors who violated this
reepondere symoniaeis et scismaticis,
qui dicunt regali potestati Christi
ecclesiam subiacere, ut ei pro suo
libitu vel prece vel pretio vel gratis
liceat pastores imponere, eiusque pos-
sessiones vel in sua vel in cuius libuerit
iura transferre. Quattuor itaque sunt,
de quibus Deo auctore scribere pro-
ponimus. Primum, quod regi non
liceat sacrosanctis ecclesiis episcopos
constituere. Secundum de symoniacis
et scismaticis, et eorum sacerdotio et
sacrificio. Symoniacos autem dicimus
eos hereticos, qui Dei ecclesiam et eius
officia precio mercantur vel vendunt ;
scismaticos vero, quantum ad hoc
attinet opus, eos qui haec eadem non
secundum sacros canones, sed licet
gratis, a regali tamen et laicali
accipiunt potestate. Tertium, quod
clerus a eaecularibus pasci debet acque
honorari, non infamari vel iudicari
aut persequi. Quartum, quod sasculari
potestati non liceat in ecclesiam
clericos introducere vel expellere, nee
res ecclesiasticas regere vel in sua
iura transferre.
" Nemo autem putet nos honori rogio
corrigitur verbo.
iuxta apostolum
' promptu habens :
derogare in hoc quod scribimus, quod
eidem talia non liceat usurpare : aliud
quippe sacerdotum, aliud est officium
regum. Regis enim officium est paci
regni providere et sacerdotem ad
predicta omnia adiuvare, eique resist-
entes opprimere, ut eum rex terreat
vel puniat ferro, qui sacerdotis non
Pugnet sacerdos
gladio verbi, in
iuxta eundem dis-
cere ' ulcisci omnem inobedientiam.'
Pugnet rex gladio materiali, quoniam
Domini minister est et vindex in iram
his qui male agunt. Cum itaque
uterque alterius officio indigeat valde,
neuter alterius officium presumat, ne
quod ab altoro sedificatur, ab altero
destruatur."
1 Id. id., i. 1 : " Porro [eisdem]
apostolis docentibus, ecclesioe ubique
terrarum consuetudinem ab iis tradi-
tam inviolabiliter servaverunt : ut
decedente cuiuslibet ecclesioc pontifice
clerus et populus eiusdem communi
deliboratione de suo vel alterius ec-
clesiae clero sibi pastorem preficer-
eut.'"
92 THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY. [PART II.
tradition were some of those whom he calls Eutychian, like
Zeno and Anastasius, and their example was followed by some
of the later Greek emperors. Deusdedit is aware that at one
time even the Eoman Church notified the election of its
bishop to the emperor before proceeding to his consecration.
He then enumerates a number of papal and conciliar decrees
which required the freedom of election and forbade the
interference of the secular authorities. 1 He finds some diffi-
culty in dealing with the decree about papal elections issued
by Pope Nicholas II., and its provision that the emperors
were to be notified after his election, but before his conse-
cration. He urges first that this provision of the decree, if
indeed it had been thus expressed, had been invalidated by
the conduct of the king and his advisers in attempting to
depose Nicholas II., and later in setting up first Cadalous of
Parma, and then Guibert of Eavenna, as anti-popes. Secondly,
he maintains that the copies of the decree had been so much
tampered with that they were not consistent with each other.
Thirdly, he contends that, if Nicholas did indeed issue such
a regulation, it was invalid ; for he, being only one patriarch,
could not, even with the Council of his bishops, change that
which had been ordained by five patriarchs and more than
a thousand Fathers, and confirmed by the Christian emperors,
for in their decrees no power of interference in the election or
appointment of bishops was conceded to the royal authority. 2
1 Id. id., i. 3-9. huius rei gratia, quantum in se erat,
* Id. id., i. 11 : "Sunt item qui a papatu deposuerunt, nomenque eius-
obiciunt Nicolaum iuniorem decreto dem in canone consecrationis nominari
synodico statuisse, ut obeunte Apos- vetuerunt ; ideoque decretum eiusdem
tolico pontifice successor eligeretur et iure irritum esse debebit, quia cum a
electio eius regi notificaretur ; facta toto orbe papa haberetur, iuxta eorun-
vero electione, ut predictum est, regi dem sententiam eisdem papa non fuit,
notificata, ita demum pontifex conse- quasi non ex Dei, sed ex eorum tantum
craretur. Quod si admittendum est, penderet voluntate, quempiam quod-
ut ratione factum dicatur, obicimus ad libet esse vel non esse. Romanus enim
hoc confutandum prefatum regem et pontifex, ut sapientes norunt, non
optimates eius se ea constitutione in- modo deponi, sed etiam christiano iure
dignos fecesse : primum, quia postea a quolibet non potest iudicari. Deinde
prefatum Nicholaum Coloniensem quia, cum in eodem decreto cautum
archiepiscopum pro suis excessibus esset, ut Romani pontificis electio a
corripuisse graviter tulerunt eumque Romano clero et populo ageretur et
CHAP. III.] THE
INVESTITURE " QUESTION — I.
93
He then cites a number of passages from the writings of the
Popes and from the Eoman law to prove that any action which
has been taken illegally and wrongly must be annulled, and
concludes that the decree of Pope Nicholas was null and
void. He contends that, in maintaining this, he was not
saying anything disrespectful to the memory of Pope Nicholas,
for, inasmuch as he was human, it was always possible that
he might have been persuaded to do something which was
contrary to that which was lawful and right ; and he cites
the case of Pope Boniface II. as having annulled a decree
which he had wrongly made, and urges that Nicholas II.
would have done the same had he seen the opinions of
the Fathers collected and knew that they were contrary to
his decree. 1
postea regi notifiearetur, ipsi prefatum
violantes decretum elegerunt, quod eis
non licebat, prius Cadalaum Parmen-
sem, postea Guibertum Ravenatem,
induentes eos apostolicis insignibus ;
vocantcs apostolicos apostntas Anti-
christi precursores. Preterea autem
prefatus Guibertus aut sui, ut sua)
parti favorem ascriberent, quaedam
in eodem decreto addendo, quaadam
mutando, ita illud reddiderunt a se
dissidons, ut aut pauca aut nulla ex-
emplaria sibi concordantia valeant in-
veniri. Quale autem decretum est, quod
a se ita discropare videtur, ut quid in
eo potissimum credi debeat, ignoretur ?
Sed ut tandem invineibili gladio feri-
amus, prefatus Nicolaus, unus scili-
cet patriareha, cum quolibet episco-
porum concilio non potuit abrumpere,
immo nee mutare non obviantia fidei
prcfata decreta sanctorum quinquo
patriaracharum, scilicet Romani, Alex-
andiini, Antiocheni, Hierosolimitani,
Constantinopolitani, ut ex numero
prefatia synodis adposito colligi potest
sanctorum [patrum] mccl et eo am-
plius : tot quippe leguntur prefata
constitutione suis tomporibus statuisse,
in qui bus nou inveniuntur quidquam
regiae potestati in pontificum electione
seu promotione concessisse ; immo, ut
predictum est considentibus cum eis
christianissimis imperatoribus et non
contradicentibus, leguntur sub per-
petuo anathemate vetuisse. Quod si
hoc vendicandum est, ex Graecorum
imperatorum consuetudine vel ex Am-
brosiana vel ex Gregoriana electione
constat, ut premissum est, eosdem
imperatores hoc veluti Deo adversum
respuisse, oorundem vero pontificum
electionem et promotionem octavae
synodo quamvis prepostere concor-
dasse."
1 Id. id., i. 12: " Et quamvis de-
cretum, de quo agimus, a prefatis ec-
clesiac legibus penitus enervetur, vide-
amns tamen adhuc quid de eo iterum
ecclesiae et sseculi leges censeant, ut
penitus evacuetur. Ex synodo papae
Hilari, cap. iv." &c, &c.
13 : " His itaque decursis, patet
prefatum decretum nullius momenti
esse nee umquam aliquid virium habu-
isse. Et haec dicens non preiudico beatas
memorial papse Nicolao nee quiequam
eiusdem honori derogo, patrum sen-
tentias Dei spiritu conditas sequendo.
94
THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY.
[PABT II.
Deusdedit then deals with the contention that the appoint-
ment of bishops by the secular authority at its pleasure was
sanctioned by long custom, and argues that, in the case of
divergent customs, that must be followed which could be
traced back to apostolic times, and that the perversion of this
by secular princes could not prejudice its authority. 1 Finally,
he urges that it was the appointment to ecclesiastical office
by the prince which was the cause of the prevalence of
simony and of the neglect of their duties by ecclesiastics,
while they crowded to the court to obtain preferment by
what were often unworthy services, and he develops this
into an attack upon the royal chapels and their
clergy. 2
Homo quippe fuit eique, ut contra
fas ageret, surripi potuit. Nee miruni
hoc eidom eontigisse, cum quidam
ipsius decessor invoniatur quiddam de-
crevisse et meliori usus concilio postea
immutasse. Siquidem secundus Boni-
facius legitur ex decreto constituisse
Vigilium diaconum sibi in pontificatu
succedere ; quod quia Romano cloro
visum est canonibus adversari, pre-
sente clero ab eodem subpositum est
igni ante confessionem beati Petri
apostoli. Et certe prefatus Nicolaus
divino metu concussus hoc idem fecisset,
si tunc tot patrum sententias in unum
collectas vidisset easque suo decreto tam
concorditer adversari perpendisset."
1 Id. id., 14 : " De numero vero
annorum, quibus haec dampnabilis con-
suetudo permansisse dicitur, ut sseeuli
potestas pro suo libito pontifices pro-
moveat, iure causari non potest. Nam
de diversis consuetudinibus ilia potis-
simum sequenda est, quse, cum originem
sumeret, catholicos patres suorum
priorum patrum vestigia sectantes
auctores habuit, sicut patres vii. et
viii. synodi secuti sunt statuta patrum
sanctorum pontifioum Romanorum, et
illi consuetudinem ab apostolorum tem-
poribus per omnesecclesias observatam.
Ea vero perversitas, qua? a sfeculi prin-
cipibus superinducta est, non pre-
iudicat eidem sanctse consuotudini,
quantalibet obtinuerit temporum cur-
ricula."
2 Id. id., 15 : " Quis enim [sa-
ntim sapiens] non advertat hanc pestem
seminarium esse symoniacso hereseos
et totius Christianas religionis lamenta-
bilein destructionem 1 Nempe cum
dignitas episcopalis a principe adipisci
posse speratur, contemptis suis episco-
pis a clericis ecclesia Dei deseritur ; et
ab aliis quidem ingens pecunia [non
solum regalibus, sed etiam] aulicorum
marsupiis infunditur, ut eorundem
suffragia ad tam nofariam promotionem
mereantur ; ab allis infinitaj pecuniae
dispendio plus decennio in sseculari
curia deservitur, sestus, pluvise, frigora
et cetera incommoda patientissime
tolerantur ; ab aliis autem vel sui
pastoris vel cuius honorem ambiunt
mors incessanter optatur ; ab alio alii
vehementer invidetur, dum quod sibi
sperat, ab eo surripi posse putatur.
Immo prohe dolor ! in tantam Dei in-
iuriam interdum prosilitur, ut et servis
et fornicariis dignitas ista prestetur.
Tales quippe cum adepti fuerint quod
taliter expetierunt, peccantes sasculi
CHAP. III.] THE " INVESTITURE QUESTION — I. 95
For these reasons then, Deusdedit contends, Gregory VII.
had declared all secular appointments to bishoprics and
abbeys null and void, and that all secular persons who
ventured to give the " investiture " of these should be ex-
communicated, and he quotes the decree of the Council of
Eome of 1080. x
It is noteworthy that Deusdedit applies the same principle
to the question of the private patronage of parish churches,
and maintains that the parish priest should be appointed by
the clergy and people of the parish, and that no one should
be appointed against their will. 2
If we now endeavour to sum up the main points in the
controversial literature, so far as we have examined it, we
may say that while much had been urged by the representatives
of the imperial party which might be interpreted as a defence
of that large power of the secular authority in determining
the appointment of bishops, which they had undoubtedly
exercised for a considerable time, the protagonists of the
imperial party had already recognised that there was an
essential distinction between the spiritual and the temporal
aspects of the episcopal position, and had admitted that the
secular claim to determine ecclesiastical appointments was
related purely to the temporal. On the other hand, the sup-
potestates nullatenus redarguere pre- 2 Id. id., iv. 2 : " Sciendum autem
sumunt, quoniam ab illis se promotos quod sicut clerus et populus episcopum
esse meminerunt, immo, ne redarguere sibi constituendum communiter deli-
presumerent, promoti fuerunt. . . . gunt et expetunt, ita propter pacis
Sed obicitur clericos, ut divina officia et caritatis bonura debet clero et
principibus exhibeant, oorundem populo cuiusque ecclesise et vieinis
curiam inhabitaro oportere ; quasi sacerdotibus concedi, ut presbyteros
non sit iustius apud Deum et apud et inferiores gradus potiores clericos
homines convenientius, [ut nobis sibi eligant : non tamen in ecclesiam
videtur,] quemque episcopum, in cuius ullo modo introducero presumant, nisi
diocesi contingit principem adesse, ab episcopo civitatis vel eius vicariis
eidem idoneos et religiosos clericos juxta apostolum primum probentur ;
ad divina mysteria celebranda dirigere, et sic ab eodem vel suis vicariis
et pro tomporis diuturnitate, qua idem vitse sun; diebus in ecclesiis stabili-
ibidem moratur, alios aliis iubere antur : ne si nolentibus et non petenti-
succedcre." bus ingerantur, ab eisdem vel condem-
1 Id. id., i. 16. Cf. p. 79. nentur vol odio habeantur."
96 THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY. [PABT II.
porters of Gregory VII. had indeed sometimes seemed deter-
mined to refuse to admit that the temporal power could have
any place in ecclesiastical appointments, but their emphasis
had been laid on the denial of any arbitrary authority to ap-
point at their pleasure, and in the assertion of the rights of
the clergy and people of the diocese to a free election ; while
they also laid great stress upon the practical evils which had
arisen from the abuse of the secular authority. So far they
had not discussed and met the contention of the imperial
party, which laid stress upon the secular position of the great
ecclesiastical officers.
With the end of the eleventh century the controversy
began to assume a somewhat different form, and we must
now consider this.
97
CHAPTER IV.
THE DISCUSSION OF THE "INVESTITURE" QUESTION — II.
We must consider the development of the controversy from
the last years of the eleventh century to the time of the
attempt at a settlement by Paschal II. and Henry V. The
period was marked by the development of a mediating opinion,
which recognised iu various terms the elements of reason-
ableness in the contentions of both parties. It is better
to speak of a mediating opinion rather than a mediating
party, for we can find this in men who might, in relation
to the more general conflict of the time, with which we shall
deal later, be described as adhering to either the one or other
of the great parties, or sometimes even as not belonging strictly
to any party.
It might, indeed, seem that the death of Gregory
VII. in 1086, and of Henry IV. in 1106, might have
changed the whole situation, but, so far as the " investi-
ture " question was concerned, this was not the case. The
successors of Gregory VII., and especially Pope Urban
II., firmly maintained Gregory VII. 's prohibition of lay
"investiture," while Henry V., on the death of his father,
maintained his right to it. It is, however, probable that,
though the position of the contending parties might seem
formally and in outward appearance the same, the removal
of the original protagonists did actually in a great measure
alter the conditions, and made it easier for the mediating
tendency to develop and assert itself.
The writer in whom we may perhaps say that this
mediating tendency began to show itself clearly was Ivo,
VOL. IV. G
98 THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY. [PAKT II.
Bishop of Chartres. Ivo was one of the most learned men
of his time, as his great canonical works, the ' Decretum '
and the ' Panormia,' sufficiently show. It is clear from his
letters that he was not satisfied with the conditions produced
by the conflict on " investiture," and that he was not prepared
to accept the total exclusion of the secular authority from
a share in the appointment of bishops. In a letter to Hugh,
the Archbishop of Lyons, of the year 1096(7), whom he
recognises as Primate of France as well as Legate of the
Pope, he discusses a question which had arisen as to the
appointment of Daimbert as Archbishop of Sens. He contends
first that the Archbishop of Lyons claimed an authority over
the Archbishop of Sens which was not warranted by canonical
authority, 1 and then discusses the objection which Hugh had
made to his consecration on the ground that he had accepted
the " investiture " from the King of France. He began by
saying that he had no trustworthy information that Daimbert
had done this, but maintains that even if he had, this was not
a transgression against religion. The Popes themselves had
recognised the right of kings to grant bishoprics (concessio
cpiscopatus) to those who had been canonically elected, and
he understood that Pope Urban II. had only prohibited
corporalis investiture/,, but did not forbid the king, as head
of the people, to take part in the election, or to make the
concessio. He urges that it was quite immaterial under
what form the concessio was made, by hand, or by word,
or by the staff, since kings had no intention of granting any-
thing spiritual, but only meant either to signify their assent
to the desires of the electors, or to grant the estates or other
temporal goods of the churches to those who had been
elected ; and he quotes the well-known words of St Augustine
in which it is stated that all property is held by human law.
Further, while he protests that he had no intention of setting
up his own authority against the decisions of the Papal See,
as far as they were reasonable and in accordance with the
authority of the Fathers, he maintains that these regulations,
that is the prohibition of " investiture " by the king, rested
1 Ivo of Chartres, ' Epistola ad Hugonem,' ' Lib. de Lite,' vol. ii.
CHAP. IV.] THE " INVESTITURE " QUESTION — II.
99
not upon any provision of the eternal law, but only on the
authority of the Popes {quia ea illicita maxime facit presi-
dentium prohibitio). 1
The position taken up by Ivo in the letter is very signi-
ficant and important. In the first place, he looked upon the
1 Id. id. : " Quod autem scrip-
6istis predictum electum investituram
episcopatus de manu regis accep-
isse, nee relatum est nobis ab aliquo
qui viderit nee cognitum. Quod
tamen si factum esset, cum hoc
nuliam vim sacramenti gerat in
constituendo episcopo, vel admissum
vel omissum quid fidei, quid saerae
religioni officiat, ignoramus : cum
post canonicam electionem reges ipsos
apostolica auctoritate a concessione
episcopatuum prohibitos minime videa-
mus. Legimus enim sanctae recorda-
tionis summos pontifices aliquando
apud reges pro electis ascclesiarum, ut
eis ab ipsis regibus concederentur epis-
copatus, ad quos olecti erant, interces-
sisse ; aliquorum, quia concessioner
regum nondum consecuti fuerant, con-
secrationes distulisse. Quorum exempla
supposuissemus, nisi prolixitatem epis-
tola? vitassemus. Domnus quoque papa
Urbanus reges tantum a corporali in-
vestitura excludit, quantum intellexi-
mus, non ab eloctione, in quantum sunt
caput populi vel concessione, quamvis
octava synodus solum prohibeat eos
interesse electioni, non concessioni.
Quae concessio sive fiat manu, sive fiat
nutu, sive lingua, sive virga, quid refert,
cum reges nichil spirituale se dare inten-
dant, sed tantum aut votis petentium
annuere, aut villas ecclcsiasticas et alia
bona exteriora, qu£e de munificentia
regum optinent accclesias, ipsis olectis
concedere ? Undo August inus super
Iohannem parte prima, tractatu sexto :
' Quo iure defendis villas secclesise, divino
an humane' . . . Quod si haac aaterna
lege sancita essent, non esset in manu
presidentium, ut ea in quibusdam
districte iudicarent. quibusdam mise-
ricorditer relaxarent, ipsis in honore
accepto permanentibus, contra quos
ista loquuntur. Nunc vero, quia ea
illicita maxime facit presidentium pro-
hibitio, licita quoque eorundem pro sua
cBstimatione remissio : videmus nullos
aut pene nullos pro huiusmodi trans-
gressione dampnatos, plurimos autem
vexatos, plurimas aecclesias spoliatas,
plurima scandala exorta, divisum reg-
num et sacerdotium, sine quorum con-
cordia res humanas nee incolumes esse
possunt nee tutae. Videmus quoque
miseros episcopos et abbates nee ruinis
morum nee murorum reficiendis velle
vel posse vacare, solum ad hoc intentos,
ut possint sibi aliquam linguam magni-
loquam amicam facere, cuius nundinis
se possint utcumque defensare. Multi
quoque electi, qui gratuitam et canoni
cam habent electionem, quia huiusmod
dilationibus vel fatigationibus impedi-
untur, comparatis sibi pecunia media-
toribus et prolocutoribus, ne turpem
patiantur repulsam, in symoniacam
offendunt aliquando consecrationem.
Cum ergo omnis institutio ascclesiasti-
carum legum ad salutem referenda
sit animarum intarum institutionum
transgressiones aut districtius essent
corrigenda?, ut saluti prodessent, aut
interim silentio premenda?, ne spiritu-
alia vel temporalia commoda supra-
dictis modis impedirent. Nee ista dico,
tanquam velim adversus sedern aposto-
licam caput erigere vel eius salubribus
dispositionibus obviare vel meliorum
sententiis preiudicium facere, si vivis
nitantur rationibus et evidentioribus
voterum patrum auctoritatibus."
100 THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY. [part II.
prohibition of lay " investiture " as what we may perhaps call
an administrative rule, which might be enforced or not, as
might seem expedient, and not as a permanent part of the
law of the Church. Secondly, he did not interpret the pro-
hibition as meaning that the king should have no place in
episcopal appointments : he maintains that as head of the people
he might have his place in the election, and that he had the
right of coniirmation or bestowal (concessio). Thirdly, he con-
siders that the form under which the king might do this
was immaterial : it had no relation to the spiritualities, but
was to be interpreted either as expressing his assent to the
election, or as the form under which he conferred the tempor-
alities of the diocese ; and these, Ivo was clear, must be
granted by the king, for all property was held under the
temporal authority.
Ivo dealt again with the same question in a letter written
by him in the name of the Archbishop of Sens and the
bishops of the province to Ioscerannus, the Archbishop of
Lyons, some years later, probably in the year 1111 or 1112.
Ioscerannus had invited the archbishops and bishops of the
French provinces to a Council to consider the question of lay
"investiture." Ivo, in the name of his province, declines to
attend this, on the ground that it was not competent to
the Primate to summon a council of the kingdom, but he
also objects to any public discussion and condemnation of the
action of Paschal II., who had, in the year 1111, as we shall
see later, conceded the right of " investiture " to the Emperor
Henry V., but had already written to Ivo and other bishops
retracting this concession, and saying that he had only granted
it under coercion. Ivo urges that it was not right that they
should meet in Council to consider the conduct of the Pope,
inasmuch as they had no power to judge or condemn him
unless he had departed from the faith. 1 He urges that the
question of " investiture " was not a question of heresy or of
the eternal law, but, as he had said in the earlier letter, a
question of administrative order, and that it was thus reason-
able that the Pope should have allowed various persons to
1 Ivo of Chartres, Ep. ad Ioscorannum, ' Lib. de Lite,' vol. ii.
CHAP. IV.] THE " INVESTITURE " QUESTION — H.
101
purge themselves of the offence of having received " investi-
ture," by surrendering their pastoral staffs, and receiving them
again from the Apostolic hand. If any lay person thought
that in the giving and receiving of the pastoral staff there was
anything of the nature of a sacrament, or that he could
give the res of an ecclesiastical sacrament, he was indeed a
heretic. Finally, he gives his own ox»inion as being that,
inasmuch as this " investiture " by the hand of a layman was
an invasion of another man's right, it should be abolished,
when this could be done without causing schism, but if it
would have this consequence, such action should be postponed. 1
Ivo thus again made it clear that he looked upon the
question of lay " investiture " as a matter belonging to the
1 Id. id. : " Postremo quod quidam
investituram heresim vocant, cum
heresis non sit nisi error in fide,
sicut enim fides cordis est ad
iustitiam, oris autem confessio ad
salutem : ita heresis error est ad
impietatem, professio vero eiusdem
erroris ad perniciem. Et fides et
error ex corde procedunt. Investitura
vero ilia, de qua tantus est motus, in
solis est manibus dantis et accipientis,
quae bona et mala agere possunt,
credere vel errare in fide non possunt.
Ad hsee, si htec investitura heresis esset,
ei renuncians sine vulnere ad earn
redire non posset. Videmus autem in
partibus Germaniarum et Galliarum
multas honestas personas purgato isto
nevo per quamlibet satisfactionem pas-
torales virgas reddidisse et per manum
apostolicam refutatas investituras ro-
cepisse. Quod summi pontifices minimo
feeissent, si in tali investitura heresim
et peccatum in Spiritum sanctum latere
cognovissent. Cum ergo ea, quae
■a t< ma lege sancita non sunt, sed pro
honestate et utilitate ecclesioe instituta
vel prohibits pro eadem occasione ad
tempus remittuntur, pro qua inventa
sunt, non est institutorum dampnosa
prevaricatio, sed laudabilis et saluber-
rima dispensatio. Quod cum multi
minus studiosi minime attendant, ante
tempus iudicant, spiritus mobilis et
spiritus stabilis non intelligentes differ-
entiam. Si quis vero laicus ad hanc
prorumpit insaniam, ut in datione et
accept ione virga? putet se posse tribuere
sacramentum vel rem sacrament i eccle-
siastici, ilium prorsus iudicamus bereti-
cum non propter manualem investi-
turam, sed propter pmmmptionem
diabolicam. Si vero congrua volumus
rebus nomina dare, possumus dicere,
cjuia manualis ilia investitura per
laicos facta alieni iuris est pervasio et
sacrilega presumptio, qute pro libertate
ecclesiae et honestate salvo pacis vinculo
ei fieri potest funditus abscidenda est.
Ubi ergo sine scismate auferri potest,
auferatur. Ubi sine scismate auferri
non potest, cum discreta reclamatione
dift'eratur. Nichil enim tali pervasione
demitur sacramentis ecclesiasticis.
quominus sancta sint, quia aput quos-
cunque sunt ipsa sunt, sive aput eos,
qui intus, sive aput eos, qui foris sunt.
Haec scripsimus dilectioni vestrae parati
refelli sine contumatia, si melius bis
quae scripsimus nos docuerit vestra
prudentia, quod muni turn sit scriptura
canonica. Valete."
102 THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY. [PART II.
administrative order of the Church, and not to the necessary
and eternal law, for it had no relation to the spiritual office
of the bishop. It would seem, however, that he had come to
the conclusion that lay investiture with the pastoral staff
was a cause of scandal, and that it would be well if it could
be abolished, provided this could be done without causing
serious disorder and strife. Ioscerannus of Lyons, in his
reply, maintains that while the act of investiture was not
heresy, the opinion that it could be permitted was a heresy. 1
If Ivo of Chartres represents a mediating tendency among
those who on the whole supported the Papal party — and, as
we have seen, he is careful to say that he does not presume
to criticise or condemn the judgment of the Pope on lay
"investiture" — we may take Hugh of Fleury as a good
representative of those who were critical of papal action, but
who on the question of " investiture " tended to a mediating
position. His important treatise, ' De Regia Potestate et
Sacerdotali Dignitate,' with which we shall later deal more
fully, was written in the first years of the twelfth century,
and dedicated to Henry I. of England. In this he maintains
that the king has the right to confer the prwsulatus
honor em while the archbishop confers the cure of souls,
and he alleges that this had been the custom until his time.
When the people or clergy elect the bishop according to
ecclesiastical custom, the king should not tyrannically interfere
with the election, but should lawfully give his consent, if the
person elected is properly qualified ; but both the king and the
people have the right to refuse their assent to the election of
an improper person. After the election, the king should
invest with the temporalities, but not with ring and staff,
which should be conferred by the archbishop. Thus, he
maintains, the Temporal and Spiritual powers will each retain
that which belongs to their authority. 2
1 Iosceranni, " Responsio," ' Lib. de nitate,' i. 5 : ■' Igitu;- rex instinctu
Lite,' vol. ii. Spiritus sancti potest, sicut exis-
- Hugh of Fleury, ' Tractatus de timo, prses-ilatus honorem religioso
Regia Potestate et Sacerdotali Dig- clerico tribuere. Animarum vero
CHAP. IV.] THE " INVESTITURE " QUESTION — II.
103
The position of Hugh is, perhaps intentionally, not quite
clear on all points : he does not definitely say that the election
always belongs to the clergy and people, but in his treatment
of the position of the king he is clear that the king must not
act arbitrarily. He also, like Ivo, distinguishes very sharply
between the spiritual office of the bishop, which must be con-
ferred by the archbishop, and his secular position, which he
receives from the king ; and he explicitly condemns the use of
the staff and ring by the king in conferring the temporalities
of the diocese.
There has been preserved a very important treatise on the
" investiture " of bishops which belongs, as it is thought, to
the year 1109. x The author of the work is unknown, but
it is clear that he belonged to the Imperial party ; it has,
indeed, been suggested that the treatise represents a more
or less considered suggestion from that side of the possibility
of a compromise. 2 The author maintains, with an imposing
curam archiepiscopus debet oi com-
mittere. Qua discreta eonsuet/u-
dine usi sunt quondam quique chris-
tianissimi regos et principes in pro-
movendis viris aacclesiasticis atque
sanctissimis usque ad hire tempora
nostra. Clericus vero ille religiosus
videtur existere quern amor pecuniae
minime vexat, nee reprobi mores aut
conversatio reprehensibilem reddunt
vel contempt ibilem. Ubi vero eligitur
episeopus a elero vol populo secundum
morem aecclesiasticum, nullam vim ac
perturbationem eligentibus rationa-
biliter rex per tyrannidem debet in-
ferre, sed ordinationi legitime svium
adhibere consensum. At si reprehen-
sibilis ille qvii eligitur fuerit inventus,
non solum rex, sed nee plebs provintiae
debet election! ipsius suum assensum
favoremque tribuere, sed etiam crimina,
quibus ille detestabili maculatur in-
famia, voce publica denudaro, ut vel
hac contumelia eligentium temeritas
comprimatur. Post electionem antem,
non annulum aut baculum a manu regia,
sed investituram rerum secularium
electus antistes debet suseipero, et in
suis ordinibus per annulum aut baculum
animarum curam ab archiepiscopo suo,
ut negotium huiusmodi sine discepta-
tione pcragatur, ot terrenis et spiritu-
alibus potestatibus suae auctoritatis
privilegium conservetur. Quod si re-
gulariter fuerit conservatum, implebi-
tur illud quod Salvator noster in euan-
gelio pra?cipiens dixit : ' Reddite quae
sunt csesaris eaesari, et quas sunt Dei
Deo,' nee iluctuabit res firmiter et ordi-
nabiliter stabilita, et procul aberit ab
recclesia sancta magnus tribulationum
acervus. Rex enim, sicut iamdudum
premissum est, Dei patris obtinero vide-
tur imaginem, et episeopus Christi."
Cf. ii. 3, 4, 5.
1 Cf. ' Lib. de Lite,' vol. ii. p.
495.
2 Cf. Gerson Peiser, ' Der deutsche
Invest iturstreit miter Konig Hein-
rich V.'
104 THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY. [PART II.
array of precedents, the historical right of the temporal
authority to make appointments to bishoprics ; he cites that
spurious decree of Pope Hadrian I., which had, as we have
seen, been brought forward by Wido of Ferrara, 1 but main-
tains that long before this emperors and kings and mayors
of the palace had appointed and invested bishops, and that the
practice had been recognised by Popes like Gregory the Great. 2
He urges that it is immaterial whether the " investiture " is
made by the king, with a form of words, or with the staff, or
in any other way ; but he suggests that the staff is the more
suitable symbol, for it has a twofold meaning, either spiritual
or temporal. The author seems clearly to connect the right
of the temporal power to invest the bishop with the growth
of the temporal possessions and power of the Church. The
Church, he says, was poor until the time of Constantine, but
when the Christian emperor had conferred upon it so many
properties and rights, it was reasonable that the king, who is
one of the people, and the head of the people, should invest
and enthrone the bishop, to whom he had entrusted so much
power in the State. Had the bishops remained as poor as
the one described by Gregory the Great as lacking even a
winter cloak, the matter might have been different, and there
would have been no need to require homage and the oath of
allegiance from such a man. 3
1 ' Tractatus de Investitura Epis- introierit pure et integre, exceptis quos
coporum,' ' Lib. de Lite,' p. 498 : papa Romanus investire et consecrare
"Ex tone a Giecis in reges Fran- debet ex antiquo dono regum et im-
corum translata est imperatoria dig- peratorum cum aliis que vocantur
nitas, et Adrianus papa, collandan- regalia, id est a regibus et imperatori-
tibus Romanis et plena synodo pri- bus pontifieibus Romanis data in fundis
matum archiepiscoporum, episeoporum, et reditibus. In hac concessione con-
abbatum, ducum et principum accla- tinentur regales abbatie, prepositure."
mante, Karolo magno eiusque succes- Cf. p. 83.
soribus, futuris imperatoribus, sub 2 Id. id., p. 499, 501.
anathemate concessit patriciatum Ro- 3 Id. id., p. 501 : " Nil enim refert,
manum, et per se vel per nuncios suos sive verbo sive precepto sive baculo sive
confirmationem in electione vol in con- alia re, quam in manu teneat, investiat
secratione Romp"ii pontifieis concessit ; aut intronizet rex et imperator episeo-
et invostituras episeoporum eis deter- pum, qui die consecrationis veniens
minavit, ut non consecretur episcopus, anulum et baculum ponit super altare et
qui per regem vel imperatorem non in curara pastoralem singula suscipit a
CHAP. IV.] THE " INVESTITURE " QUESTION — II. 105
The author relates the right of the king to " investiture "
to the possession of the temporalities, and is not greatly
concerned with the form under which this may be made ;
but his reference to the fact that the " investiture," such as
it might be, with the homage and oath, should take place
before the consecration, is significant as indicating that he
was determined to assert the freedom of the royal action
in consenting to an episcopal appointment. How far his
suggestion, that the royal claim might have been dispensed
with had the Church remained poor, may have some relation
to the startling proposal of Paschal II. for the solution of the
conflict, with which we shall deal in the next chapter, we
have no means of judging.
Finally, the author urges that the attempt of the Pope to
take away the ancient rights of kings in the " investiture " of
bishops must cause much fear and hesitation to Christ's
people. He admits that if these rights had been abused,
this should be corrected by the Popes ; but he complains
that the Popes insist that if they shoidd do wrong and act
arbitrarily in the appointment of bishops, they must not be
reproved, saying that the Supreme Pontiff cannot be judged
by any man ; and he reminds them that more than once,
stola et ab auctoritate sancti Petri ; Postquam autem a Silvestro per
sed congruum magis est per baculum, christianos reges et imperatores dotate
qui est duplex, id est temporalis et et ditate et exaltatse sunt ecclesise in
spiritualis. Operarius enim in semin- fundis et aliis rnobilibus, et iura civi-
andis spiritualibus dignus est mercede taturn in theloneis, monetis, villicis et
sua in accipiendis temporalibus iuxta scabinis, comitatibus, advocatiis, syno-
quod Paulus ait : ' Si spiritualia vobis dalibus bannis per reges delegata sunt
seminamus, non est magnum, si carnalia episcopis, congruum fuit et consequens,
id est temporalia a vobis metamus.' ut rex, qui est unus in populo et caput
Precedens investitura per regem in populi, investiat et intronizet episco-
fundis et rebus ecclesia? contra tyrannos pum et contra irruptionem hostium
et raptores quieta et pacifica reddit sciat, cui civitatem suam credat, cum
omnia ; sequitur autem consecratio, ut ius suum in domum illorum transtu-
bannus episcopalis banno regali con- lent. Primus Gregorius conqueritur
veniens in oommunem salutem opere- dolendo de quodam episcopo, qui adeo
tur, et si episcopis faciendum est pauper erat, ut de episcopatu suo
regibus hominium et sacramentum de contra frigus vestem hiemalem habere
regalibus, apt ius est ante consecra- non posset — a tali episcopo forsitan
tionem. sancto non erat regi necessarium exigere
hominium, sacramentum, obsides. : '
106
THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY.
[PART II.
when there had been disputes about the papal elections,
these had only been set right by the intervention of the
Greek or Frank emperors. 1
In the last volume we have considered the position of
Gregory of Catino as the most dogmatic defender of the
conception that it was impious to resist the royal authority, 2
and it is therefore not surprising to find that he maintains
very firmly the royal prerogative of the " investiture " of
bishops. Even in his case, however, it is worth while to
observe what he understands this " investiture " to signify,
and the nature of the arguments with which he defends it.
His treatise, 'Orthodoxa Defensio Imperialis,' was written after
the accession of Henry V., and it is contended that it should
be dated in the year 1111, about the time when Henry V.
compelled Paschal II. for a short time to admit his right to
" investiture."
Gregory is indeed a representative of a very extreme
imperialist position, and describes the king as the head of
the Church, founding this on some places in the Old Testa-
ment, and on a passage which he attributes to St Chrysostom,
which seems to be spurious. 3 We shall have to return to this
1 Id. id., p. 502 : " Si Romani ponti-
fices intendunt regibus auferre antiqua
iura de investiendis episopis, timent,
dubitant, dolent pusilli Christi. Reges
enim, si in episcoporum investituris
excesserint, possunt a timoratis viris
et pontifice Romano argui et ad rectaru
correctionis lineam reduci ; si autem
in promotione et consecratione epis-
coporum pontifex Romanus exorbita-
verit et sub verbo sumrnae prelationis
ad voluntatem suam egerit, non vult,
ut reprehendatur, cum dominus Iesus
se reprehendi concesserit, dicens : ' Si
male locutus sum, testimonium perhibe
de malo ! ' Isti autem : ' Summus,'
inquiunt, ' pontifex a nemine indi-
cetur. . . .'
Notamdum est autem pontificibus
Romanis et eorum civibus, quando
orta fuit divisio in electione pontificaun
vel in communione civium, non est
pax restituta nisi per Grecos impera-
tores, quamdiu imperium ibi fuit,
vel per Francos imporatores, ex quo
imperium Romanum datum est eis."
2 Cf. vol. iii. p. 122.
3 Gregory of Catino, ' Orthodoxa
Defensio Imperialis,' 2 : " Quod vero
caput ecclesise regem debeamus in-
telligere, ammonet script ura divina
inquiens ad Saulem : ' Cum esses
parvulus in oculis tuis caput in Israel
te constitui.' . . . De quo Iohannes
Chrisostomus inquit : ' Habct autem
sancta ecclesia caput quod est reg-
num, habet cor quod est sacerdo-
tium,' " &c.
CHAP. IV.] THE " INVESTITURE " QUESTION — II.
107
conception later. He urges that, if this is so, it is unreasonable
that the emperor should be excluded from the appointment to
office of the prelates of the Church, who are his members, and
that it is suitable that they should be invested with ring
and staff by the emperor before they are consecrated by the
bishop. 1
Again he argues that if the characteristic ornaments of
the Popes were given them by Constantine, quoting to this
effect one part of the " Donation of Constantine," much more
might the emperor grant to the bishops the ring and staff ; 2
but he is careful to explain that this " investiture " does not
represent any spiritual office or authority, but only temporal
possession and authority. 3 Finally, he urges that while the
1 Id. id., 3 : " Ubi animadverten-
dum, quia prius dixit : ' Quae sunt
cesaris reddendum eesari ' ; deinde
vero : ' quse Dei sunt Deo,' ut capiti
ecclesias, videlicet imperatori, debitum
prius reddatur subiectionis, deinde sa-
cerdotibus munus impendatur honoris,
et imperatori quidem terrestria, sacer-
dotibus vero, id est pontificibus vel
reliquis clericis, spiritualia commoda.
In quo otiam precepto Domini non
incongruum videtur si prelati eclosia?
ab imperatore prius suscipiant proprii
honoris, investitura baeuli vel anuli
assensum, quam a pontifice conse-
crentur ; quia si princeps caput eccle-
sias prodicatur, a membrorum suorum
officii sive ministerii creatione nullo
modo est repellendus."
2 Id. id., 1 : " Videamus interea
et consideremus summi pontificis
insignia ornamenta et discamus,
a cuius sublimitatis potestate ac-
ceperit ea. Numquid dominus nos-
ter Iesus Christ us largitus est
ilia beato Petro Apostolo, quando
tribuit ei claves regni celorum ?
Mini me. Sed quis concessit ipsa in-
ignia ornamenta Romano pontifici ?
Relegamus sano decretum Constant ini
magni imperatoris sancto videlicet
papo Silvestro delegatum, et ibi procul
dubio inveniemus. ... In quibus
nimirum verbis audenter et catholice
conicere possumus, quia, si Constan-
tinus, qui utique orat terrcni dominus
tantummodo iuris, super vertice pape
manibus suis posuit imperiale frigium
et non est hoc agere veritus, ym[m]o
benignissima devotione fidelique pere-
git mente, nee papa quoque dedignatus
est suscipere illud : quare orthodoxo
imperatori interdieitur, ut baculum
vel anulum episcopis vel prelatis
ecelesite, qui certe inferioris ordinis
pape sunt, et in eorum manibus non
largiatur ? "
3 Id. id., 5 : " De investitura
ergo baeuli vel anuli, quani rex vel
imperator qui li bet ecclesiaa prelatis
faciunt, exemplo Constantini contenti
imperatoris, adhuc perscrutemur, si
quid inrationabile aut infidele in ipsa
invenire valeamus, et per quam non
sacri honoris gradum, non munus pra?-
lacionis sanctaa, non ministerium
spirituale, non eelesiarum vel cleri-
corvxm consecrationes, nee aliquod
divinum sacramentum. sed potius sui
defensionem tribuunt officii, secularium
rerum seu temporalium atque cor-
poralium possessionem omniumque
ecclesia; eiusdem bonorum iuris con6
mationem ; in qua eciam cernitui
108
THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY.
[PART II.
churches were once poor, now they are wealthy, and hold under
their authority soldiers and counts, and that it would be very
dangerous to the king or emperor if these were not under his
control ; and that therefore the prelate of the Church who
holds this authority from the royal or imperial power must
promise the fidelity of himself and his soldiers to the king
or emperor. 1
There was indeed one writer of the Papal party of this time
whose position might be taken as uncompromising — that is,
Rangerius, Bishop of Lucca. In his versified tractate, ' De
Anulo et Baculo,' he maintains that the ring and staff are
sacred symbols, which must not be accepted from the hands
of a layman ; and he describes what he conceives to be their
spiritual significance — the ring as the symbol of the union be-
tween the bishop and his church, the staff as the symbol of
the pastoral and disciplinary office. 2 In another place, after re-
peating these interpretations, he denies that these had formerly
been given by kings. He maintains that the pastoral staff can
never be subject to the sword, and therefore he objects also
strongly to the bishop taking the oath to the king, and re-
concordia principis, oblatio obsequii
eiusdem potest at is et ministerium
ipsius principis benigne professionis.
Ergo eiusdem ratio invest) turte sanum
sapienti non videtur contra fidem,
quia regibus et imperatoribus quoquo
modo fuit concessum antiquitus, dura
omnimodis venalitas caveatur. Nee
unquam legitur a quoquam sanctorum
catholicorum fuisse interdictum."
1 Id. id., 7 : " In principio de-
nique fidei ecclesie possessiones non
habebant, sed tantum victum et ves-
titum, hisque contente erant. Nunc
autem religione aucta possessiones
creverunt, ecclesie sub se milites,
comites personasque sublimes, qui bus
imperarent, habere ceperunt ; quos si
rex vel imperator in suis contemp-
tores iussis habuerint, magnum im-
mensumque detrimentum capient im-
perii. Necesse est ergo, ut prelatus
eeclesire, qui a suis militibus sacra-
raentum fidclitatis suscipit ex regia
vel imperiali dominacione, ipse militum
suorum fidelitatem suamque spondeat
regali vel imperiali personse."
2 Rangerius, ' Liber de Anulo et
Baculo,' ' Lib. de Lite,' vol. ii. p. 509 : —
14. " Anulus et baoulus duo sunt sacra
signa, nee ullo
De laici manibus suscipienda
modo.
Anulus est sponsi, sponsse datur
anulus, ut se
Noverit unius non alium cupere.
11. At baeulus prefert signum pastoris
opusque,
Ut relevet lapsos, cogat et ire
pigros."
These verses are thought to belong
to the year 1110. Cf. Preface.
CHAP. IV.] THE " INVESTITURE " QUESTION — II.
109
pudiates the notion that the temporalities of the Church could
give the king any authority over it, for these were given to
God, and could be reclaimed. 1 Again, he refers to the
" Donation " of Oonstantine, and the great gifts and honours
which he conferred upon the Pope ; but he denies emphatic-
ally that these conferred upon the Popes their spiritual
authority, which, he maintains, they had always possessed. 2
1 Id. id., 860 :—
" Anulus et baculus in sacra signa
datur.
Anuhis, ut sponsum se noverit et sibi
iunctam,
Non sibi, sed Christo, diligat
ecclesiam.
At vero baculus, ut Christi servet
ovile
Et caveat sevos terrificetque lupos.
871 :—
Contendunt reges hsec signa dedisse
priores :
Ostendant, vel quos vel quibus et
faciant.
Quod si non possunt ostendere, cesset
abusus,
Nee iam sub gladio serviat hie
baculus.
An quia ditavit pia munificentia re-
gum
jEcclesias, debet posteritas rapero ?
Vel quid deterius, et libertatis honorom
Et, quae non tribuit, omnia depri-
mere ?
An non eripitur libertas pontificalis,
Quando iuratur regibus et dominis ?
Quando manus dantur, et per sacra
iura ligantur,
Et ius et ratio subditur imperio.
Subditur et Christus, et Christi iure
soluto
Curia curetur, curia diligitur.
Iain canones sperni decretaque con-
ciliorum,
Qui contra canones dixerit esto
reus.
Hinc ereses nasci iam teiUDOra nostra
queruuLur
Et decus aecclesiae deperiisse dolent.
Dum tamen iste dolor maneat, spes
esse videtur,
Et spes, quae valeat vel revocare
fidem.
Sed dico, si rex aliquis castella vel agros
Contulit ascclesia?, contulit et
Domino.
Si vult servitium, Christum sibi sub-
dere querit,
Qui dicit christos quos levat in
famulos.
Sed Christus liber, et nulli subditur
uraquam,
Et nulli christos subdidit ille suos.
• *....••
901 : —
Denique quod semel est oblatum non
licet ultra
QuaGri vel quaquam conditione piemi.
Si pecus est vel homo, sub libertato
manere
Debet, sive domus aut ager aut
aliud.
Sin alias, non est oblatio gratuitumve
Munus, mercatum forsitan esse
potest,
Quando pauca damus, ut plurima
suscipiamus ;
Quod facit ex animo semper avarus
homo."
2 Id. id., 1107:—
" Nonne dodit Romam ? nunquid non
prestitit illi,
Ut praeter papam non regat alter
earn ?
Nunquid non apicem regni portare
per urbem
Contulit et palmam, quando pla-
ceret ei ?
110 TUE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY. [PART II.
No doubt Bangerius is quite uncompromising about the
" investiture " with ring and staff, and his treatment of the
" temporalities " is not conciliatory.
If now we endeavour to put together the more important
principles of the writers whom we have just considered, it
seems reasonable to say that on the whole they represent a
mediating tendency, or at least a clearer apprehension of the
questions which were at issue. Ivo, although in most respects
an adherent of the Papal party, agrees with the other party that
the prince had the right to some place in ecclesiastical ap-
pointments, while Hugh of Fleury maintains that the form
of " investiture " by the prince with ring and staff should be
given up ; and the author of the ' Tractatus ' is evidently
willing that this should be done. Gregory of Catino alone
maintains that this should be retained, and he sets out a
theory about the position of the prince as head of the Church,
which we shall discuss later ; but even he is clear that the
" investiture " represents no spiritual power, but has relation
only to the temporalities. It is indeed evident that the de-
fenders of the secular claim were becoming more and more
clearly conscious that it was on the political importance of
the position of the greater ecclesiastics that this claim rested,
and this is well expressed by the ' Tractatus ' and by Gregory
of Catino.
Nunquid ob hoc regum preeellentis- Sic est, sic legimus ; sed quid ? non
simus at que antea prsesul
Solus in orbe potens est domin- Romanus leges et sacra iura dedit ?
atus ei ? Nunquid pontifices longe lateque per
Nunquid vel vestem vel lignum prsebuit orbem
illi, A Christo similes non habuere vices ?
Per quod sciretur subditus esse sibi 1 Num iam praefuerat Cornelius et
Denique cum causas habuisset ponti- Ciprianus
ficalis Et plures, quorum nomina nemo
Conventus, voluit eius in arbitrio potest
Ponere, sed timuit et legem fixit , ut Dicere ? tam multi per tempora plurima
ultra passi
Pontificum nuilus curreut ad laicos Emisere animas sponte per ecclesias ?
In rebus dubii^, et clericus omnis Ergo libertas, quae dicitur ecclesiarum
adiret, Nod habet a quoquam principe
Pontificem proprium litis ad arbitrium. principium."
Ill
CHAPTER V.
PASCHAL II. AND HENRY V.
We must now consider the history and character of the first
attempt at a definite settlement of the " investiture " conflict,
an attempt which was indeed startling in its boldness and
audacity. For the proposal of Paschal II. to surrender the
" regalia," that is especially the whole of the quasi-political
position and prerogatives of the bishoprics and abbeys, repre-
sented a definite attempt on the part of that Pope to secure
the spiritual liberty of the Church by the surrender of the
temporal authority which it had come to hold.
Before, however, we discuss the complex history of these
years, it will be well to observe that in France and England
the Papacy and the Temporal powers were able to arrive at an
understanding about the question of the appointment of bishops.
It would seem that in France the papal prohibition of
" investiture " was gradually accepted, and that in principle
the right of election was recognised, though it seems also clear
that the king retained his right of approval or confirmation. 1
In England, Anselm on his return in 1100 after the
death of William Paifus, took up a firm position about " in-
vestiture " and homage ; he would not do homage, and he
refused to consecrate bishops who had received " investi-
ture " with ring and staff from the king. He had to
leave England again in 1103, but the relations between
himself and Henry I. were never broken off, and finally a
1 Cf. the excellent discussion of the de France, du IX" U au XII me Siecle,'
subject in P. Irabcrt de la Tour, iii. 1-6.
' Lts Elections episcopates dans l'Eglise
112 THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY. [part II.
settlement was reached, though we cannot be certain of ah
its details. 1
The one statement in which we may no doubt put complete
confidence is that of Anselm, in a letter to Pope Paschal, in
which he reports that the king had surrendered his claim to
the " investiture of churches," and that the king " in personis
eligendis nullatenus propria utitur voluntate, sed rehgiosorum
se penitus commit tit consilio." 2
Eadmer gives two accounts of the settlement at the Council
in London in 1107 ; in the ' Historia Novorum ' he reports
that the king formally renounced the claim to invest with
ring and staff, while Anselm undertook that no one should be
deprived of his dignity because he had done homage to the
king. In his life of Anselm, he says, " Eex enim, ante-
cessorum suorum usu relicto, nee personas quae in regimen
ecclesiarum sumebantur per se elegit, nee eas per dationem
virga3 pastorabs ecclesiis quibus prseficibantur investivit." 3
This statement about election is supported by a Croyland MSS.
cited by Spelman, 4 but is flatly contradicted by Wilham
of Malmesbury 5 and by Hugo Cantor. 6
It is not easy to arrive at any certainty as to the precise
terms of the agreement between Anselm and Henry, except
that Henry gave up the claim to invest with ring and staff,
while, as Anselm's letter seems to mean, the king abstained
from arbitrary interference in elections, while as would appear
from a letter of 1106 to Anselm, Paschal II. acquiesced
reluctantly in what he hoped would be the temporary
concession, that the bishops should do homage to the king. '
On the death of Henry IV. in 1106, his son, Henry V.,
who had hitherto been in alliance with the Papal party
against his father, seems to have resumed the practice of
1 I owe the references throughout to * Spelman, ' Concilia,' ii. p. 28.
F. Makower, ' Die Verfassung der 5 William of Malmesbury, ' Gesta,'
Kirche von England,' Notes 23, 24, vol. ii. p. 493.
pp. 19, 20. 6 Hugo Cantor, ' History of Four
2 Eadmer, 'Historia Novorum ' (p. Archbishops of York,' p. 110.
191). 7 Eadmer, ' Historia Novorum,' p.
8 Id. id. (p. 186), Vita Ansolmi, 63. 178.
CHAP. V.] PASCHAL n. AND HENRY V. 113
appointing to bishoprics and presumably of giving the " in-
vestiture " of them. Pope Paschal II., who had succeeded
Urban II. in 1099, had maintained the policy of Gregory VII.
and Urban II., and had from time to time repeated the pro-
hibition of lay " investiture." No settlement of the great
dispute had therefore been reached, but attempts were made
after the accession of Henry to arrange for a meeting which
should deal with them and, if possible, discover some solution. 1
We cannot here foUow the events or the negotiations of
these years in detail, but we must notice some of the most
important stages of them. At a Council held at Guastalla in
October 1106, Paschal II. renewed the prohibition of lay
"investiture," but also arranged with the representatives of
Henry V. that he would shortly come to Germany. 2 Find-
ing, however, as Sigebert in his ' Chronicle ' suggests, that the
attitude of the king and of the Germans was uncertain, he
turned off to France. Henry would not assent to a formal
consideration of the " investiture " question, as it related to
Germany, at a Council held outside of German territory. 3 An
informal meeting, however, took place at Chalons early in
May 1107, and at this meeting, of which the Abbot Suger
gives a fairly detailed account, the Archbishop of Trier put
forward a statement of the royal claim which is very note-
worthy. As far back as the time of Gregory the Great, he
said, it was known that it belonged to the lawful right of the
Empire that the following form of election should be observed.
Before the formal election took place the consent of the
emperor to the person to be proposed should be procured,
then the formal election should take place on the demand of
the people, the election of the clergy, and the assent of the
Tionoratiores. After consecration the bishop should go to the
emperor to be invested with the "regalia " by means of the
ring and staff, and should do homage and fidelity. On no
other condition ought he to be in possession of the towns,
1 I must express my very great iinter Konig Heinrich V.,' Berlin,
obligations throughout this chapter to 1883.
the excellent monograph of Dr Gerson 2 Sigebert, " Chron.,' a.d. 1106.
Peiser, ' Der Deutsche Investitur.-stieit 3 Id. id., a.d. 1107i
VOL. IV. H
114 THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY. [PAP.T II.
castles, &c, which belonged to the imperial authority. If, he
said, the Pope would agree to this, the kingdom and the
Church would be at peace. 1
We cannot be certain that Suger's account is in every
detail correct, but there seems no reason to doubt that it is
substantially true, and in that case it has considerable im-
portance, for these proposals represent a substantial advance
on the part of Henry V. towards a settlement. There are
two very significant elements in the statement : the first, that
the king demands not the right of appointment, but the right
to be consulted before the election, and the veto ; the second,
that while Henry holds to the claim to invest with staff and
ring, this was to follow, not to precede consecration, and this
is definitely related not to the general character of the
episcopal office, but to the grant of the "regalia."
It would appear from Suger's narrative that for the
moment the royal proposals received no serious attention. He
represents the Bishop of Piacenza as urging, in the name of
the Pope, that if the Church could not elect a bishop without
consulting the king, it woidd be equivalent to reducing the
Church to slavery — that the royal investiture with ring and
staff was a usurpation of the divine right, and that the cere-
mony of allegiance was contrary to the dignity of the clergy.
The Germans, Suger says, heard the statement with great in-
dignation, and threatened that the quarrel should be settled
" not here, but at Borne and with the sword." 2
1 Suger, ' Vita Lud. VI.' (M. G. H. ; honoratiorum proferre, consecratum
S. S., vol. xxvi. p. 50) : " ' Talis est,' libere nee simoniace ad dominum im-
inquit, ' domini nostri imperatoris, peratorem pro regalibus, ut anulo et
pro qua mittimur, causa. Temporibus virga investiatur, redidere fidelitatem
antecessorum vestrorum, sanctorum et hominium facere. Nee mirum ; civi-
et apostolicorum virorum, Magni Gre- tates eum et castella, marchias, the-
gorii et aliorum, hoc ad ius imperii lonea et queque imperatorise dignitatis
pertinere dinoscitur, ut in omni elec- nullo modo aliter debere oocupare. Si
tione hie ordo servetur : antequam hec dominus papa sustineat, prospere
electio in palam proferatur, ad aures et bona pace regnum ot a?cclesiam ad
i )>
domini imperatoris perferro ot, si honorem Dei inherere.
personam deceat, assensum ab eo ante " Id. id. id. : " Super his igitur
factam electionem assumere, deinde dominus papa consult e oratoris epis-
in conventu secundum canones peti- copi Placentini voce respondit : Ec-
cione populi, electione cleri, assensu clcsiam, precioso Ihesu Christi sanguine
CHAP, v.] PASCHAL II. AND HENRY V. 115
At the end of May Paschal held a Council at Troyes and
there promulgated a decree for the free election of bishops,
and condemned the interference of the laity in ecclesiastical
appointments ; 1 but it was, at the same time, agreed that
Henry V. should come to Italy in the following year, and
that the whole question should then be considered at a
General Council. 2 This arrangement fell to the ground, but
negotiations between the Pope and Henry continued, and
it has been suggested by Dr Peiser that the ' Tractatus de
Investitura,' which we considered in the last chapter, belongs
to this time, and represents a definite movement of the Im-
perial party towards a compromise. 3 In the year 1109
Henry V. sent an embassy, composed of important bishops, to
the Pope to announce his intention of coming to Borne ; the
envoys were well received by Paschal, and were assured by
him, according to the • Annals of Paderborn,' that he would ask
for nothing but that which belonged to canonical and ecclesi-
astical right, and would not in any respect endeavour to
diminish the rights of the king. 4
In August of the year 1110 Henry V. set out on his
redemptam et liberam constitutam, tempore et necessitate corrigenda
nullo modo iterato ancillari oportere ; correxit, sententiam de libera pas-
si aecclesia, eo inconsulto, prelatum toruna electione et de cohercenda
eligero non possit, cassata Christ i laicorum in aecclesiasticas dignitates
morto, ei serviliter subiacero ; si virga presuraptione iuxta predecessorum
et anulo investiatur, cum ad altaria suorum decreta promulgavit."
oiusmodi pertineant, contra Deum 2 Id. id., 1 107 : " Super qua ques-
ipsum usurpare ; si sacratas dominico tione quia in alieno regno quicquam
corpori et sanguini manus laici mani- diffiniri, utpote Romano iam ineipiens
bus gladio sanguinolentis obligando potiri sceptro, Heinricus non patitur,
supponant, ordini suo et sacrse uncti- induciae sibi totum sequontis anni
oni derogare. Cumque hec et his spacium Romam veniendi et eandem
similia cervicosi audissont legati, Teu- causam generali concilio ventilandi
tonico impetu frendentes tumultu- conceduntur."
abant, et, si tuto auderent, convicia 3 Cf. p. 103.
eruetuarent, iniurias inferrent. 'Non 4 'Annates Padebornenses,' 1110:
hie,' inquiunt, ' sod Romas gladiis hie " Ea tantum, quae canonici et eccle-
terminabitur querela.' " siastici iuris sunt, domnum apostoli-
1 Ekkehard, ' Chronicon,' 1107: cum exigoro ; do his vero, quae regii
" tandem circa ascensionem Domini iuris sunt, domno regi se nihil im-
conciliifm non modicum apud Trecas minuero."
habuit, ubi inter multa, quae pro
116
THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY.
[PAKT n.
expedition to Italy accompanied by a large army, and by
the end of the year he had arrived at Arezzo, and from
there entered into communications with Paschal II. ; from
Acquapendente he again sent envoys, and they returned
to him along with the representatives of the Pope at
Sutri.
In considering the main points of the negotiations which
followed it may be well to begin by considering the short
account which is given of them by Ekkehard in his ' Chronicle.'
The envoys of the Pope declared that he was willing to conse-
crate the king, and to render him all honour and goodwill, if
the king would promise liberty to the Church by forbidding
lay "investiture." In return the Pope undertook that the
Church should surrender all duchies, countships, tolls, &c, and
all the other " regalia " which it possessed. The king assented
to this proposal, but on condition that this arrangement
should be established " firma et autentica ratione, consilio
quo que vel concordia totius accclesia; ac regni principum
assensu." That is, the king required that this agreement
should be sanctioned by the counsel and consent of the whole
Church, and the assent of the princes of the Empire. Ekke-
hard adds that the king did not believe that these could be
obtained. 1
We possess the details of the negotiations and of the events
which followed in two forms : the one a narrative, written by
an adherent of Paschal II., who was himself an eye-witness,
which was embodied in the Eegister of Paschal II., and passed
into the ' Annales Eomani ' ; the other an encyclical letter
of Henry V. addressed to all Christian people. These not
only contain accounts of the events, but also reproduce some of
1 Ekkehard, ' Chronicon,' 1111:
" Ibi legati apostolici cum missis regiis
advenientes, promptum esse papain ad
conseerationem et omnem regis hon-
orem et voluntatem, si tamen ipse
sibimet annueret libertatem sccclesi-
arum, laicam ab illis prohibens inves-
tituram, recipiendo nichilominus ab
secclesiis ducatus, raarchias, comitatus,
advocatias, monetas, thelonea, cfeteror-
umque regalitim qua? possident sum-
mam. Prebuit rex assensum, sed eo
pacto, quatinus hrcc transniutatio
firma ot autentica ratione, consilio
quoque vel concordia totius ajcclesias
ac regni principum assensu stabiliretur ;
quod etiam vix aut nullo modo fieri
posse credebatur."
CHAP, v.] PASCHAL II. AND HENRY V. 117
the more important documents in which the attempted agree-
ment was embodied.
The first important documents are those which contain the
reciprocal promises of Henry V. and Paschal II. Henry V.
promised that, when the Pope had carried out what in his
agreement he undertook with regard to the "regalia,"
he would surrender all claim to the "investiture," and that
the Church shoidd go free with the " oblations " and pos-
sessions which did not belong to the kingdom ; and that
he would restore the patrimony and possessions of St Peter,
as had been done by Charles, Louis, Henry, and the other
emperors. 1
Paschal II. promised by Peter Leonis, the Prefect of Eome,
that if the king fulfilled his undertaking, as expressed in the
other document, the Pope, on the day of the coronation of the
emperor, would command the bishops who were present to
surrender to the king and kingdom the " regalia " which had
belonged to the kingdom in the time of Charles, Louis, Henry,
and his predecessors. He undertook that he would, in writ-
ing, command with " authority and justice," and under the
penalty of excommunication, that no one of the bishops,
present or absent, or their successors, should interfere with or
invade these same " regalia " — that is, the cities, duchies, count-
ships, &c, which clearly belonged to the kingdom. 2 Peter
1 M. G. H., Legum, Sect. IV., Con- sessiones beati Petri restituet et con-
stitutions, vol. i. 83, ' Tractatus cum cedet, sicut a Karolo, Lodoico, Heinrico
Paschali II. et Coronatio Romana,' et aliis imperatoribus factum est, et
' Promissio Regis ' : " Rex scripto re- tenere adiuvabit secundum suum
futabit omnem investituram omnium posse."
ecclesiarum in manu domni pape, in 2 Id., 85 : ' Promissio Papae per
conspectu cleri et populi, in die corona- Petrum Leonis dicta.' (" Si rex adim-
tionis sue. Et postquam domnus papa pleverit domno papaj, sicut in alia
fecerit de regalibus sicut in alia carta conventionis cartula scriptum est,)
scriptum est, sacramento firmabit, domnus papa precipiet episcopis pre-
quod numquam se de investituris sentibus in die coronationis eius, ut
ulterius intromittet. Et dimittet ec- dimittant regalia regi, et regno quse
closias liberas cum oblationibus et ad rognum portinebant tempore Karoli,
possessionibus quae ad regnum mani- Lodoiei, Heinrici et aliorum priedeces-
feste non pertinebant. Et absolvet sorum eius. Et scripto firmabit sub
populos a iuramontis que contra epis- anathomate auctoritate (sua) et iustitia,
copos facta sunt. Patrimonia et pos- nequis eorum (vel) proesentium vel
118 THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY. [part II.
Leonis swore that if the Pope should not carry out his pro-
mise he would join the king. 1
With these mutual undertakings we must now compare a
declaration which is included in Henry's encyclical. It is
suggested by the editor of the ' Constitutions ' that Paschal was
to have promulgated this on the day of the coronation. This
document contains not only the formal decree commanding
the restoration of the " regalia," but also a reasoned statement
of the circumstances which had led the Pope to take this
measure. He declares that, while no priest ought to take part
in secular business or attend secular courts, except for the
purpose of assisting any who were oppressed, in Henry's king-
dom the bishops and abbots were continually occupied with
secular affairs because they had accepted from the king, cities,
duchies, and other charges which belonged to the service of
the kingdom. To this cause he traces the growth of the custom
that no bishop should be consecrated till he had received
" investiture " from the king. This had been the cause of
simony, and of appointments to bishoprics without election,
and it was to remedy these evils that Gregory VII. and
Urban II. had condemned all lay "investiture," and that he
had confirmed this action. Therefore he decrees that all the
" regalia " which belonged to the kingdom in the time of
Charles, Louis, Henry, and the king's other predecessors were to
be surrendered, and that no bishop or abbot was for the future
to claim them, unless by some special favour of the king,
and that no one of his successors in the Apostolic See was to
molest him or his kingdom with regard to this matter. He
then decrees that the churches, with the oblations and posses-
sions which clearly did not belong to the kingdom, were to be
absentium vel successores eorum in- inquietabit, et privilegio sub anathe-
tromittant se vel invadant eadem mate confirmabit, ne posteri (sui) in-
regalia, id est civitates, ducatus, quietare praesumant. Regem benigne
marchias, comitatus, monetas, telon- et honorifice suscipiet et, more prae-
eum, mercatum, advocatias regni, ivira decessorum ipsius catholicorum scienter
centurionum et eurtes quae (manifesto) non subtracto, coronabit. Et ad ten-
regni erant, cr*n pertinentiis suis, endnm regnum officii sui auxilio adiu-
m'litiam et castra (regni). Nee ipse vabit."
regem et regnum super his ulterius ' Id., 86.
CHAP. V.]
PASCHAL II. AND HENRY V.
119
free, in accordance with the promise which Henry had made
on the day of his coronation. 1
It is clear that we have in these mutual promises an
1 Id., 90 : ' Paschalis II. Privile-
gium Primae Convent ionis.' " Pas-
chalis episcopus servus servorum
Dei dilecto filio Heinrico eiusque
successoribus in perpetuum. Et
divine legis institutione sanccitum
est et sacratis canonibus interdictum,
ne sacerdotes euris secularibus occu-
pentur, npve ad comitatum, nisi
pro dampnatis eruendis aut pro aliis
qui iniuiiani patiuntur, accedant.
Unde et apostolus Pauius : ' Secu-
laria, inquit, iudicia si habueritis,
contempti biles qui sunt in ccclesia,
illos constituite ad iudicandura.' In
regni autem vestri partibus episcopi
vel abbates adeo euris secularibus oc-
cupantur, ut comitatum assidue fre-
quentare et militiam exercero cogantur.
Que nimirum aut vix aut nullomodo
sine rapinis, sacrilegiis, incendiis aut
homicidiis exhibentur. Ministri enim
altaris ministri curie facti sunt, quia
civitates, ducatus, marchias, monetas,
curtes et cetera ad regni servitium
pertinentia regibus acceperunt. Unde
etiam mos inolevit ecclesire intollera-
bilis, ut episcopi electi nullomodo
consecrationem acciperent, nisi prius
per manum regiam investirentur. Qua
ex causa et symoniace heresis pravitas
et ambitio nonnunquam tanta pre-
valuit, ut nulla electione premissa
episcopales cathedre invaderentur.
Aliquando etiam vivis episcopis in-
vestiti sunt. His et aliis plurimis
malis, qui per investitures plerumque
contigerant, predecessores nostri Gre-
gorius VII., Urbanus II., felicis
memorie pontifices excitati, collectis
frequenter episcopalibus conciliis, in-
vestituras illas manus laice damp-
naverunt, et qui per eas obtinuissent
ecclosias deponendos, donatores quo-
que communione privandos esse cen-
suerunt : iuxta illud apostolicorum
canonum capitulum quod ita se habet :
' Si quis episcopus seculi potestatibus
usus ecclesiam per ipsos obtineat,
deponatur et segregetur, omnesque
qui illi communicant.' Quorum ves-
tigia subsequentes, et nos eorum
sententiam episcopali concilio confir-
mavimus. Tibi itaque, fili Karissime
rex Heinrice et nunc per ofncium
nostrum Dei gratia Romanorum im-
perator, et regno, regalia ilia dimit-
tenda precipimus, que ad regnum
manifesto pertinebant tempore Karoli,
Luduvici, Heinrici et ceterorum pre-
decessorum tuorum. Interdicimua
etiam et sub districtione anathematis
prohibemus, ne quis episcoporum seu
abbatum, presentium vel futurorum,
eadem regalia invadant, id est civi-
tates, ducatus, marchias, comitatus,
monetas, teloneum, mercatum, advo-
catias regni, iura centurionum et
curtes que manifesto regni erant, cum
pertinentiis suis, militiam et castra
regni, nee se deinceps nisi per gratiam
regis de ipsis regalibus intromittant.
Set nee posteris nostris liceat, qui
post nos in apostolica sede successerint,
te aut regnum super hoc inquietare
negotio. Porro ecclesias cum obla-
tionibus et hereditariis possessionibus,
que ad regnum manifesto non pertine-
bant, liberas manere decernimus, sicut
in die coronationis tuas omnipotenti
Domino in conspectu totius ecclesia?
promisisti. Oportet enim episcopos
euris secularibus expeditos curam
suorum agere populorum nee ecclesiis
suis abesse diutius. Ipsi enim iuxtu
apostolum Paulum pervigilant, tarn-
quam rationem pro animabus eorum
roddituri."
120 THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY. [PAET II.
attempt to put an end to the " investiture " conflict in a
manner which was little less than revolutionary. We can
see that it was recognised that the " investiture " conflict had
arisen out of conditions which in some measure justified the
demands of both sides. The Pope admits that it was the fact
that the bishops held great political powers, which had led to
the claim that the bishop could not be consecrated without the
royal consent and "investiture," and he contends that this
had led to simony, and the frequently complete destruction
of the right of free election. It was, therefore, to destroy
the root of the whole trouble that Paschal proposed that the
Church should surrender the regalia, while Henry promised
in return to surrender "investiture." The proposals were
indeed far-reaching and radical. They did not indeed mean
that the Church would have been divested of all property :
it would have retained the tithes and much of its lands ; but
they would, if carried out, have completely altered the politi-
cal position of the Church, especially, no doubt, in Germany,
but in a large measure in all European countries.
The encyclical letter of Henry V. was intended as a
general vindication of his conduct both in regard to these
negotiations and to the events which followed. We must
consider it therefore first as representing what Henry wished
the world to understand as his own attitude to the proposals.
He begins by representing himself as anxious to serve the
Church and to conform to its wishes, so far as was just.
Paschal proposed to him measures which should exalt and
enlarge the kingdom, but in reality was treacherously
endeavouring to destroy the actual position of the kingdom
and the Church. Paschal, he says, proposed without any
formal dehberation (absque omni audientia) to take away from
the kingdom that form of " investiture " of bishops and
abbots which it had possessed since the time of Charles, for
more than three hundred years. When the royal envoys
then asked what would in that case become of the royal
authority, inasmuch as his predecessors had given almost
everything to the churches, Paschal replied that the king
should receive and retain all the estates and " regaba " which
CHAP. V.]
PASCHAL n. AND HENRY V.
121
had been given to the churches by Charles, Louis, Henry, and
his other predecessors, while they should be satisfied if they
retained the tithes and oblations. The royal envoys replied
that the king was unwilling to do such violence to the
churches, and to incur the charge of sacrilege. The Pope faith-
fully promised, and his envoys swore for him, that he would
himself "cum iustitia et auctoritate," take these things from
the churches and transfer them to the king and the kingdom.
The royal envoys therefore promised that if the Pope carried
out his undertaking — though they knew that this could not
be done — the king would surrender the " investitures " of the
churches. 1
It is clear first that Henry V. was anxious that he should
not be held responsible for the proposal to deprive the
bishoprics and abbeys of their political position and authority,
that it was the Pope from whom this had come ; and
1 Id., 100 ; ' Encyclica Heinrici
V.' : " Heinricus Dei gratia Roman-
orum imperator augustus omnibus
Christi et ecclesiae fidelibus. Notum
esse volumus dilectioni et discre-
tioni vestrae ea quae inter nos et
dominum ilium Paschalem erant,
quomodo incepta tractata et peracta
sint, scilicet de conventions inter me
et ipsum, de traditione Romanorum
in me et meos, ut audita intelligat, in-
tellecta examinet, examinata diiudicet,
Igitur cum in eo essem totus, ut me
ad ecclesiae utilitatem et ipsius votum,
si iustum esset, componerem, cepit
dilatationem et exaltationem regni
super omnes antecessores meos pro-
mittere ; studebat subdole tamen,
quomodo regnum et ecclesiam a statu
suo discinderet, tractare. Quod sic
facere aggressus est. Regno nostro
iam a Carolo treeentis et eo amplius
annis et sub sexaginta tribus apos-
tolicis investituras episcopatuum et
abbatiarum, eorumdem auctoritate et
privilegiorum firmitate tenenti, absque
omni audientia volebal auferre. Et
cum per nuntios nostros ab eo quae-
reretur, omnibus his ablatis, quid de
nobis fieret, in quo regnum nostrum
constaret, quoniam omnia fere ante-
cessores nostri ecclesiis concessemnt
et tradiderunt, subiunxit : ' Fratres,
ecclesiae decimis et oblationibus suis
contents? sint ; rex vero omnia praedia
et regalia, quae a Karolo et Lodoyco,
Ottone et Heinrico aliisque suis prae-
decessoribus aecclesiis collata sunt
recipiat et detineat.' Ad haec cum
nostri responderent, nos quidem nolle
ecclesiis violentiam infmrre nee ista
subtrahendo tot sacrilegia incurrere,
fiducialiter promisit et sui sacramento
pro ipso proniiserunt : dominica ' Esto
mihi in Deum,' se omnia haec cum
iusticia et auctoritate ecclesiis auferre
nobisque et regno cum iusticia et
auctoritate sub anathemate confirmare
et corroborare ; nostris it idem firman-
tibus, si hoc, uti prasmissum est,
complesset — quod tamen nullo modo
posse fieri sciebant — me quoque in-
vestituras ecclesiarum, uti quaerebat,
refutaturum, sicut in carta conven-
tionis plenius videre poteritis."
122 THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY. [PART II.
secondly, that he wished it to be believed that he himself
had never thought that the Pope could carry out his under-
taking. Ekkehard, as we have seen, says that the king's
assent was only given on the understanding that the Pope's
promise should be ratified by the counsel and agreement of
the Church and of the princes of the kingdom, and it seems
probable that this is what is meant by the phrase which
Henry reports as having been twice repeated in the papal
promise, namely, that this should be done " cum iusticia et
auctoritate." It is, as we shall see, the resistance of the
bishops and abbots, both German and Roman, which Henry
represents as causing the failure of the proposed arrangement.
We turn then to consider the actual events which followed
on Henry's arrival in Eome. Henry's encyclical represents
himself as having been treacherously attacked when he entered
the city ; but without allowing himself to be disturbed, he
says, he proceeded to the gates of St Peter's and then, to
make it clear that he intended no injury to the Church of
God, promulgated a statement. He then demanded that
the Pope should carry out his promise, as contained in the
" Promissio Papa>," "cum iusticia et auctoritate." When,
however, the Pope attempted to promulgate this, he was
resisted to the face by all the bishops and abbots, both
German and Eoman, and by all the sons of the Church, who
denounced his decree as being mere heresy. 1
1 M. G. H., Legum, Sect. IV., Con- imperator augustus affirmo Deo et
stitutiones, vol. i. 100 con. : " De tradi- sancto Petro, omnibus episcopis, abbati-
tione vero in nos et in nostros sic se res bus et omnibus ecclesiis omnia quae an-
habet. Vix portas civitatis ingressi tecessores me reges vel imperatores eis
sumus, cum ex nostris infra menia se- coneesserunt vel tradiderunt. Et qua;
cure vagantibus quidam vulnerati, alii illi pro spe eterna; retributionis
interfecti sunt, omnes vero spoliati aut obtulorunt Deo, ego peccator pro
capti sunt. Ego tamen quasi pro levi timore terribilis hzdicii nollo raodo sub-
causa non motus, bona et tranquilla trahererecuso." Hoc decreto a me lecto
mente usque ad ecclesise beati Petri ot subscripto, petii ab eo, ut sicut in
ianuas cum processione perveni ubi carta conventionis eius scriptum est,
ut ostenderem, nullam ecclesiarum Dei mihi adimplerit. Hsec est carta conven-
disturbationem ex nostro velle pre- tionis eius ad me [No. 85, see p. 1 17]. . . .
cedere, in cunctorum aslautium oculis Cum ergo supradictce postulationi in-
et auribus hoc decretum promulgavi. sisterem, scilicet ut cum iustitia et
" Ego Heinricus Dei gratia Romanorum auctoritate promissam mihi conven-
CHAP. V.] PASCHAL II. AND HENRY V. 123
Henry's encyclical, unfortunately, is broken off at this
point. Ekkehard's account, which is chiefly based upon a
narrative composed by a certain David the Scot, whom
Henry had brought with him, 1 gives a similar description of
the tumultuous resistance of the " princes " to the proposals
of the Pope, which involved the spoliation of the churches,
and the loss of their " beneficia." 2
The account given in the Roman narrative is more detailed.
After relating the arrival of the king in Rome, and his
reception and designation as emperor by the Pope on the
steps of St Peter's, it proceeds to relate that they all entered
the church, and the Pope then requested Henry to complete
the renunciation of the right of " investiture " and the other
promises which he had made, while he on his part was pre-
pared to fulfil what he had promised. Henry, however,
instead of at once complying, withdrew with his bishops and
princes into a part of the church near the " secretarium, " and
there deliberated with them. At last, after a long delay, the
German bishops returned, and declared that the written
agreement could not be confirmed " auctoritate et iustitia."
The Pope replied by urging that " the things which are
Caesar's should be given to Csesar," and that no one in the
service of God should involve himself in secular matters ; but
they persisted in what the Roman narrative calls their
" deceitfulness and obstinacy." 3
tionem firmavit, universis in faciem tumultuantibus in inflnitum princi-
oius resistentibus et decreto suo planam pibus per aecclesiarum spoliatione, ac
heresim inclamantibus, scilicet episcopis per hoc beneficiorum suorum abla-
abbatibus, tam suis quarn nostris, et tione."
omnibus ecclesiae filiis, hoc, si salva 3 Id., 99 ; Relatio Registri Pas-
pace ecclesiae dici potest, privilegium chalis II. : " Post ingressum basilicas
proferre voluit." (No. 90, see p. cum in Rotam porfireticam per-
119.) venisset, positis utrimque sedibus
1 Ekkehard, ' Chronicon,' a. 1110. eonsedorunt. Pontifex refutationem
2 Ekkehard, 'Chronicon,' a. 1111: investiturac! ot cetera, quae in con-
" Post hsec quae gesta sunt, longissimum ventionis carta scripta fuerant, requi-
est enarrare ; utpote quam immensa sivit, paratus et ipse que in alia
honoriricentia Bit receptus et per Ar- conventionis carta scripta fuerant ad-
genteam portam usque ad modiam ro- implore.
tam antiquo Romanorum instituto de- Ille cum episcopis suis ct principi-
ductus, ibique lectis publice privileges, bus secessit in partem iuxta secre-
124 THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY. [PART II.
The tenor of the arguments which are attributed to the
Pope seems clearly to refer to the surrender of those rights
of the bishops which did not belong to their spiritual office,
and it would seem therefore that, by the agreement which the
German bishops said could not be confirmed, they meant the
agreement to surrender the "regalia," and that, when they
said that it could not be confirmed " auctoritate et iustitia,"
they meant that the consent of the Church was necessary and
would not be given.
The negotiations thus broke down, and we must consider
briefly what followed. The discussions continued all day till
the evening was coming on ; it was then proposed by the
friends of the Pope that he should proceed at once with the
coronation of the emperor, while the further negotiations
should be postponed till the following week. The repre-
sentatives of Henry would not, however, agree to this, and
finally the Pope and his companions were held captive. On
the following day the Romans vigorously attacked the German
forces, and on the third day Henry retreated from Rome,
carrying the Pope and cardinals with him. The Pope was
held in captivity, while Henry demanded that he should
formally recognise the royal right of " investiture " ; but he
also declared that the right which he claimed had no reference
to the churches or the spiritual functions of the bishop, but
only to the "regalia." Finally Paschal, overcome by the
representations which were continually made to him of the
tarium ; ibi diutius quod eis placuit illud, quod condictum fuerat, non
tractaverunt. In quo tractatu inter- posse firman auctoritate et iustitia.
fuerunt Longobardi episcopi tres, Quibus cum euangelica et apostolica
Bernardus Parmensis, Bonus senior obiceretur auctoritas quia et ' reddenda
Regitanus, Aldo Placentinus. Cum sunt cesari qute sunt cesaris,' et
autem longior se hora protraeret, 'nemo militans Deo implicat se
missis nuntiis pontifex conventionis negotiis soecularibus,' cum armorum
supradicte tenorem repetiit adimpleri. usus, secundum beatum Ambrosium,
Tunc episcopi transalpini ad pontificis ab episcopali officio alienus sit. Cum
vestigia corruerunt, et ad oris oscula ha?c et allis apostolica et canonica
surrexerunt. Set post paululum capitula obicerentur, illi tamen in
familiares regi dolos suos paulatim dolositate sua et pertinacia permane-
aperire cceperunt, dicentes : scriptum bant."
CHAP. V.]
PASCHAL IT. AND HENRY V.
125
devastation of the Bornan territory, the ruin of the Eoman
city and Church, and the imminent danger of schism, gave
way, saying that he was compelled to do that for the libera-
tion of the Church which he would never have done to save
his life. 1
The documents containing the actual terms of the agree-
1 Id. id. : " Cum iam dies declinaret
in vespera, consultum a fratribus, ut
rex eodem die coronaretur, ceterorum
traetatus in sequentem ebdomadam
differetur. Illi etiam hoc adversati
sunt. Inter haec tarn pontifex quamque
et profectus et omnes, qui cum eo erant,
a militibus armatis custodiebantur. . . .
Capta est cum eo et diaconorum ac
notariorum et laycorum numerosior
multitude Qui autem evaserurt,
alii expoliati, alii gravius verberati
sunt. Factus est igitur in TJrbe tota
repentinus tumultus, dolor et gemi-
tus.
Postera die Romani adversus Teu-
tonicos acrius pugnaverunt, adeo ut
eos ex porticu pene propulerunt ; ex
qua pugna plures ex utraque parte
mortui fuerunt, set plures ex parte
Teutonicorum. Unde tantus eos terror
invasit, ut per totum sequens biduum
die ac nocte in armis essent.
Porro, cum se Romani die tertio com-
inus pugnaturos pronuntiassent, illi
nocte ipsa tanto metu ex porticu
profugerunt, ut non solum sarcinas set
multos etiam socios in ospitiis reliqui6-
eent.
Dehinc usque ad pedem Soractis
montis progrediens, iuxta beati
Andreas monasterium Tiberis alveum
transierunt et per Sabinos ad Lucanum
pontem iter agentcs, ulteriores Ro-
manas urbis partes aggressi sunt
Traebantur inter hasc et clericorum
ot layeorum nonnuili funibns alligati.
Pontifex autem eum duobus episcopis,
Savinensi videlicet et Portuensi, et
cardinalibus quatuor aput castellum
Trebicum, ceteri vero cardinales aput
Corcodilum in custodia tenebantur.
Itaque cum et agros Romanorum rex
cotidie depopularetur et eorum animos
dolo ac pec\mia pertemptaret, tantam
Deus populo constant iam tribuit, ut
nichil cum eis pacisci sine papas et
cardinalium liberatione potuerunt.
Diversis inter haec consiliis distrse-
batur. Set perpetrati sceleris conscius,
nichil sibi ulterius tutum fore aput
papam arbitrabatur. In hoc tandem
plena deliberatione convenit, ut omnes
quos ceperat liberos faceret, dummodo
securitatem sibi aput papam futuri
temporis provideret. Hoc profecto
per principes suos, hoc per clericos,
hoc per laycos, hoc per cives Romanos
sollicitius satagebat. Ceterum domnus
papa facilitis vitam exponere quam
investituris episcopatuum et abbati-
arum consentire malebat, quamvis ille
per investituras illas non ecclesias, non
oliicia quelibet, set sola regalia se dare
assereret. Proponebatur pontifici cap-
tivorum calamitates, quod ammissis
liberis et uxoribus domo et patria
exules durioribus compedibus arceban-
tur. Proponebattir ecclesias Romane
desolatio, que pene omnes cardinales
ammiserat. Proponebatur gravissi-
mum scismatis periculum, quod pene
universes Latinorum ecclesias immi-
neret. Victus tandem miseriis fili-
orum, laborans gravibus suspiriis
atque gemitibus et in lacrimas totus
effusus : ' Cogor, ait, pro ecclesia 1
liberatione hac pace hoc pati, hoc
permittere quod pro vita mca nulla-
tenui eonsentirem.' "
126 THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY. [PART II.
ment are contained in the Eoman narration and in a second
imperial report. The terms under which the papal con-
cession was first made are very important. The Pope
promises to confirm by a " Privilegium " the following arrange-
ments. The bishop or abbot is to be freely elected without
simony, with the assent of the king. He is then to be
" invested " by the king with the ring and staff. The bishop
or abbot who has thus been freely "invested," is freely to
receive consecration from the person to whom this belongs.
No one, who has not received " investiture " from the king,
may be consecrated, even though he has been elected by the
clergy and people. Archbishops and bishops are to be per-
mitted to consecrate those who have received " investiture "
from the king. 1 The surrender to the imperial claim was
very complete, but it should be noticed that Henry V. con-
ceded in principle the right of a free election, and only
claimed for himself the right to give or refuse his assent.
The concession may be construed as formal, but is not un-
important.
The actual " Privilegium " repeats the terms of the
promise, but it contains some important additions. It
states that the right of "investiture" had been granted
by Paschal's predecessors to former emperors, and thus
apparently admits the authenticity of those spurious docu-
ments according to which this right had been granted
by Pope Hadrian I. and Pope Leo III. We have
already noticed the citation of these by Wido of Ferrara. 2
More important, however, is the reason given for this,
1 Id., 91 : ' Promissio Papse.' " Dom- pertinuerit. Si quia vero a clero et
nus papa Paschalis concedet domno populo eligatur, nisi a rege investiatur,
regi Heinrico et regno eiua et privi- a nemine consecretur. Et arehiepis-
legio suo sub anathemate confirmabit copi et episcopi libertatem habeant
et corroborabit, episcopo vel abbate consecrandi a regi investitos. Super
libero electo sine simonia assensu his domnus papa Paschalis non inqui-
regis, quod domnus rex ilium anulo etabit regem Heinricum nee eius reg-
et virga investiat. Episcopus autem num et imperium."
vel abbas libere investilus libere ac- 2 Cf. p. 83.
eipiat consecrationem ab eo, ad quern
CHAP. V.]
PASCHAL n. AND HENRY V.
127
namely, that the grant of the "regalia" to bishops and
abbots had been on so great a scale that the safety of
the kingdom was dependent on them. 1 This reference to
the importance of the " regalia " to the Empire corresponds
with the statement which we have just noted, that Henry
V.'s claim to the right of "investiture " had reference only
to the " regalia " and not to the spiritual office of the
bishop.
Ekkehard narrates these events briefly, and concludes with
the expression of joy that at last the glory of God and peace
on earth had been reached, and the long scandal of divisioD
1 Id., 96 : ' Privilegium Paschalis II.
de Investituris.' " Paschalis episcopu.-,
servus servorum Dei, karissimo in
Christo filio Heinrico glorioso Teu-
tonicorum regi et per Dei omnipo-
tent is gratiam Romanorum imperatori
augusto salutem et apostolicam bene-
dict ionem. Regnum vestrum sanct»
Romance ecclesise singulariter coherere,
dispositio divina constituit. Prede-
cessores siquidem vestri probitatis et
prudentise amplioris gratia Romans'
urbis coronam et imperium consecuti
sunt. Ad cuius videlicet coronse et
imperii dignitatem tuam quoque per-
sonam, fili karissime Heinrice, per
nostri sacerdotii ministerium maiestas
divina provexit. Illam igitur digni-
tatis prerogativam, quam predeces-
sores nostri vestris predecessoribus
catholicis imperatoribus concesserunt
et privilegiorum paginis confirma-
verunt, nos quoque dilectioni tua3
concedimus et presentis privilegi
pagina confirmamus, ut regni tui
episcopia vol abbatibus libere, preter
violentiam et simoniam, electis in-
vcstituram virgre et anuli conferas.
Tost invest itionem vero canonicc con-
secrat ionem accipiant ab episcopo ad
quem pertinuerit. Si quia autem a
clero et populo preter assensum tuum
electus fuerit, nisi a te investiatur, a
nemine consecretur [exceptis nimirum
illis qui vel in archiepiscoporum vel
in Romani pontificis solent dispositione
consistere]. Sane archiepiscopi vel
episcopi libertatem habeant a te in-
vestitos episcopos vel abbates canonice
consecrandi. Predecessores enim vestri
ecclesias regni sui tantis regalium
suorum beneficiis ampliarunt, ut reg-
num ipsum episcoporum maxime vel
abbatum presidiis oporteat communiri,
et populares dissensiones, que in
electionibus sepe contingunt, regali
oporteat maiestate compesci. Quam
ob rem prudentie et potestati tue
cura debet sollicitius imminere, ut
Romanre ecclesiae magnitudo et ceter-
arum salus tuis prestante domino
beneficiis et serviciis conservetur. Si
qua igitur ecclesiastica secularisve
persona hanc nostre concessionis pagi-
nam scions, contra earn temerario
ausu venire temptaverit, anathematis
vinculo, nisi resipuerit, innodetur
honorisque ac dignitatis perieulum
patiatur. Observantes autem miseri-
cordia divina etistodiat et personam
potestatemquo tuam ad honorem
suum et gloriam feiiciter imporare
concedat."
128 THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY. [PAJRT II.
had been removed ; x but his joy was premature, for the action
of the Pope was almost immediately repudiated by a large
part of the Church, and within a short time Paschal II.
found himself compelled to repudiate the concession which
he had made.
1 Ekkehard, ' Chronicon,' a. 1111,
129
CHAPTER VI.
THE DISCUSSION OF THE ACTION AND THE
PROPOSALS OF PASCHAL II.
For the moment and under coercion Paschal II. had yielded
to the demands of the Emperor Henry V., and had conceded
the right of " investiture " : but it was only for a moment.
Within a year the feeling of the Church as a whole had
declared itself so emphatically against his surrender that
Paschal II. found himself compelled to withdraw it.
It is important to consider the contemporary discussion of
his action, for it indicates that the way of compromise was
not really closed ; and it is also important to consider the
discussion raised or suggested by his proposal to surrender
the " regalia."
The mood of the extreme papal party is well represented in
some letters written at the time by Bruno of Segni. In one
of these, which is addressed to Paschal himself, Bruno, while
protesting his love and devotion to him, urges that he must
love Christ more, and denounces the agreement which had
been made under circumstances of violence and treachery.
He appeals to Paschal's own earlier condemnation of lay
" investiture," which he says was in harmony with the apostolic
order, and he denounces as heretics men who contradict the
faith and doctrine of the Apostolic Church. 1
1 Bruno, Bishop of Segni, ' Epistolpn,' habere volo, sicut ego cum multis aliis
2 : " Ego enim sic te diligo, sicut tibi promisi. Audio tamen Sal valorem
patrem et dominum diligere debeo nostrum mihi dicentem : ' Qui amat
et nullum alium te vivente pontificem patrem aut matrem plus quam me,
VOL. IV. I
130
THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY.
| PART II.
The same point of view is set out in even stronger terms
in a treatise or letter by Geoffrey, the abbot of Vendome,
addressed to Paschal after his concession to Henry V., and
before the Lateran Council of 1112, at which Paschal re-
tracted it. The Church, he says, lives by faith, chastity, and
freedom, but the toleration of lay " investiture " destroys all
of these ; and he bluntly says that though the shepherd
of the Church must be endured, even though his character
should be evil, if he falls into heresy he is no longer
to be reckoned as the shepherd. 1 This is a very uncom-
promising statement, and illustrates forcibly the fact that
there were eminent Churchmen who felt so strongly upon
non est me dignus.' Unde et apos-
tolus dicit : ' Si quis non diligit
dominum Iesum, sit anathema maran-
atha.' . . . Fedus autem illud tam
fedum, tam violentum, cum tanta
proditione factum, tam omni pietati
et religioni contrarium, ego non laudo.
At vero neque tu, sicut a pluribus
referentibus audivi. Quis enim illud
laudaro potest, in quo fides violatur,
aecclesia libertatem amittit, saeer-
dotium tollitur, unicum et singulare
ostium tecclosiae clauditur, aliaque
multa ostia aporiuntur, per quae qui-
cumque intrat fur est et latro. . . .
Constitutio tua et constitutio apos-
tolorum una est, et ipsa quidem
multum laudabilis. Apostoli enim
omnes illos damnant et a fidolium
communione segregant quicumque per
secularem potostatem secclesiam ob-
tinent. Laici enim quamvis roligiosi
sint, nullam tamen disponendi aeccle-
siam habent facultatem. Similiter
et constitutio tua, quae de apostolico
fonto manavit, omnes illos clericos
damnat et a fidelium communione
separat quicumque de manu laici in-
vestituram suscipiunt et quicumque
eis manum imnonunt. Hec namque
constitutio apostolorum et tua saneta
est, catholica est, cui quicumque c«n-
tradicit catholicus non est. Illi enim
soli sunt catholici, qui catholicse
ecclesiae fidei et doctrina" non contra-
dicunt. Sicut eeontra illi sunt
heretici qui catholicae aecclesi» fidei
et doctrinae obstinato animo contra-
dicunt."
1 Godfrey, Abbot of Vendome, Lib-
ellus I. ; " Fide, castitate ac liber -
tate vivit ac viget secclesia : quaa si
non habet, languet et separatur a vita.
. . . Sed cum laicam investituram,
quae secundum traditiones sanctorum
patrum haeresis comprobatur, non con-
tradicit, sed praecipit, cum corrumpitur
ipsa muneribus, cum swculari potestati
subieitur : fides, castitas et libertas ei
simul aufertur, et quae vitam non
habet nee immerito mortua creditur.
Huius mortis auctorem vel novissimum
aecclesia? membrum credere, etiamsi
pastor videatur, errare est. Huic
errori quicumque inhasserit, merebitur
ab ipsa vitae radicc praecidi. Super his
autem si quis aliter senserit, non est
catholicus, manifestetur et veritatis
argumento probabitur esse haereticus.
Tolerandus quidem est pastor, ut
canones dicunt, pro reprobis moribus :
si vero exorbitaverit a fide, iam non est
pastor, sed adversarius, a quolibet pecca-
tore tantum catholico detestandus."
chap. VI.] ACTION AND PROPOSALS OF PASCHAL II. 131
the question that they were prepared even to revolt against
the Pope himself rather than to accept what they con-
ceived to be ruinous to the freedom and purity of the
Church.
This was no doubt the predominant feeling, and it was
to this that Paschal II. was compelled to defer when he
revoked his agreement with Henry V. ; but it would be a
serious mistake if we were to think that the mediating ten-
dency which we considered in Chapter V. had been over-
powered and had disappeared. On the contrary, it survived
in the attitude of Ivo of Chartres, and what is more remark-
able, it began to find expression even in the utterances of men
who urged the prohibition of lay "investiture" with great
determination.
We have already considered the position of Ivo of Chartres
in his letter to Ioscerranus, the Archbishop of Lyons, probably
written before the Council of 1112, and the formal retracta-
tion by Paschal II. of his concession. Ho refuses to recognise
that lay " investiture " could be treated as a heresy, and main-
tains that the permission or prohibition of it belonged to the
administrative order of the Church and not to the " eternal "
law. Possibly we may see the impression made upon Ivo's
mind by the vehement resentment which Paschal's action
had produced, in the fact that he now was disposed to the
view that it would be well that lay investiture should be
abolished ; but he qualifies this by adding the condition
that this should be done if it could be effected without
causing schism. 1
More remarkable, however, is the standpoint of a treatise
written probably shortly after the retractation. The author
states the arguments against lay " investiture ' with ring
and staff with much force, and urges that these were the
symbols of spiritual things, and could not be granted by
kings. On the other hand, he seems to admit that it
is for the king to grant the "regalia," and suggests that
he could do this with the sceptre, the symbol of his
1 See p. 100.
132 THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY. [PART II.
authority over his country, with which he grants dukedoms,
count ships, and the other "regalia." 1 It is noteworthy
that this writer thus suggests the actual form under which
in the settlement of Worms the emperor was to confer the
" regalia." 2
The most noteworthy as well as the most detailed dis-
cussion of the questions raised by the concessions and by
the proposals of Paschal II. is, however, to be found in a
very important work by Placidus of Nonantula, written
apparently towards the end of 1111, 3 for he deals -not only
with "investiture," but also with the whole question of
Church property. His position seems at first sight in the
highest degree uncompromising, for he might seem to deny
altogether that there was any ground for the claims of the
secular power. A closer examination, however, leads us to
modify this judgment, and to suggest that while he demands
the abolition of lay "investiture," he is not unwilling to
accept some middle course upon the matter, and that his
arguments about Church property are directed not so much
against the royal claims as against Paschal's proposal to
surrender the " regalia."
He repudiates, indeed very firmly, the action of Paschal in
granting to the emperor the right of "investiture," and de-
mands that he should repudiate this concession. 4 He denies
that the anointing of the emperor gave him any claim to
1 ' Disputatio vel Defensio Paschalis distinguuntur officia : sic in domilius
Pap;o ' (' Lib. de Lite,' vol. ii. p. 665) : regum et imperatorum illud insigne
" Peccat in Spiritum sanctum, cum sceptrum, quod est imperialis vel
invest it uras, quae Spiritus sancti dona rogalis virga, qua regitur patria,
sunt, sibi usurpare innititur. Novi- ducatus, comitatus et cetera regalia
mus etenim, quod anulus et virga distribuntur iura. Si ergo dixerit,
pontificalia sunt insignia et per ea quod per virgam pontificalem et anulum
spiritualia conferuntur dona, et sua tantum regalia velit conferre, aut
per ea animarum cura et divina desig- sceptrum regale deserat, aut per illud
nantur sacramenta. Hec enim nee regalia sua conferat."
regem tangere nee ad eum pertinere, 2 Cf. p. 162.
cuius manus ylene sunt sanguine, 3 Placidus of Nonantula, ' De Honore
inrefragabili ratione profitemur. Sicut Ecclesia?,' ' Lib. de Lite,' vol. ii. p. 566.
enim in ajcclesia pastoralis virga est Preface by Editor,
necessaria, qua regitur et ecclesiastica 4 Id., 118.
CHAP. VI.] ACTION AND PROPOSALS OF PASCHAL II.
133
appoint bishops or abbots. 1 He was aware of the contention
that Pope Hadrian I. had formally granted the right of
".investiture " to Charles the Great, and he was not appar-
ently in a position absolutely to deny the authenticity of the
grant, though, in referring to it, he frequently suggests a
doubt. He argues, therefore, that it had some other and
innocent meaning, or it was related to some conditions of
that time, and might have been useful then, but must now
be rescinded on account of the mischief which had arisen ;
or it had been granted by Pope Hadrian in human weak-
ness and error, for Hadrian himself, in the Eighth Synod, had
explicitly condemned all interference by the lay authorities in
episcopal elections. The Popes themselves, while they have
authority, " novas condere leges," cannot alter the laws which
the Lord or His Apostles, or the Fathers who followed them, had
established. 2 He is therefore clear and emphatic in demanding
1 Plaeidus »f Nonantula, ' De Honoro
Ecclesiae,' 73 : " Quod enim quidam
aiunt ideo hoc imperatori competere,
quia sacro oleo in regnum unctus est,
omnino veritati non congruit. Non
enim ideo unctus est, ut episcopatus
vel abbatias disponat, sed ut Spiritus
sancti gratia, quae per unctionem illam
signatur, confirmatus iustitiam Dei
rectissime teneat."
Cf. 82 and 118.
2 Id. id., Prologue : " Quod vero
sanctus Adrianus vel alii sancti pon-
tifices dicuntur huic rei assensum
dedisse, si verum est, quomodo in-
telligendum sit docentes, hac occasiono
contra ius divinum fieri non debere
monstravimus.
Id. id., 67 : Non dicant ergo reli-
giosi imperatores : ' Praaiudieium nobis
apostolici faciunt qui non nobis hoc
observant, quod Adrianus sanctissi-
mus papa Carolo dedit.' Non enim
eredibile est sanctum Adrianum hoe
umquuin potuisso concodoro, ut aecclesia
Dei a laicis investiretur, nisi fortasse
tautuinmodo pro signo custodies.
Id. id., C9 : Considerandum autem,
quia, etsi vere imperatoribus haec a
Sanctis concessa fuissent, et eo in
tempore valde, utiliter et recte fieri
potuissent, tamen quia tanta prae-
sumptio exinde est nata, ut oecclesia
Dei veluti secularis res venundaretur,
vel etiam pro humano favore alicui
concederetur, et hoc maxime a laicis
iieret, quod clerici si auderent, ab omni
ordine aecclesiastico deponi deberent,
emendandum per omnia foret. Nam
non solum quod sanctus Adrianus
fecisset emendandum omnimodis esset,
sed etiam, si aliquis apostolorum vel
prophetarum unde aecclesia Dei destru,
eretur, quod absit, dicere inveniretur-
abdicandum radicitus esset. Qua-
propter beatus apostolus Paulus,
aecclosise Dei consulens, pro abdicando
iudaismo beatissimo etiam Petro ne-
quaquam pepercit.
Id. id., 70 : Sunt autem quidam
dicentes Romano pontifici semper bene
licuisse novas condero leges. Quod et
nos non solum non negamus, sed etiam
valde anirmamus. Sed sciendum sum-
mopere est, quia hide novas leges
condere potest, unde sancti patres et
134
THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY.
[PART II.
the abolition of lay investiture, and he cites a number of the
well-known canonical regulations which lay down the prin-
ciple that bishops must be elected by the clergy and people
of the diocese ; x and in another place he adds that the election
of the bishops is to be subject to the judgment of the Pope
and his vicars, or of the archbishops. 2
So far, then, it might well seem that Placidus was
wholly uncompromising, but this impression is corrected when
we look a little further. He admits that there is force in the
contention of those who urge that it is unreasonable that the
emperor or prince should be excluded from any part in the
election of the bishops, while this is permitted to the people,
and he affirms that this is not what he intends. The emperors
or princes have their part in such elections, like the other
prsecipue apostoli vel ouangelistre ali-
quid nequaquam dixerunt. Ubi vero
aperte Dominus vel eius apostoli et
eos sequentes sancti pat res sentcntiali-
ter aliquid diffinierunt, ibi non novam
legem Romanus pontifex dare, sed
potius quod praedicatum est usqvie ad
animam et sanguinem confirmare debet.
Si enim quod docuerunt apostoli et
propheta? destruere, quod absit, nitere-
tur, non sententiam dare, sed magis
errare convinceretur. Sed hoc procul
sit ab eis qui semper Domini recclesiam
contra luporum insidias optime cus-
todierunt.
Id. id., 102 : Non debere se in-
serere imperatores vel principes elec-
tioni pontificum sanctus Adrianus
papa viii synodo praesidens ait :
' Promotiones et consecrationes epis-
coporum concordans prioribus con-
ciliis, electione et decreto fieri epis-
coporvim haec universalis synodus
definivit et statuit atque iure promul-
gavit neminem laicorum, principum
vel potentum semet inserere electioni
vel promotioni p°triarehae vel metro-
politan vel cuiuslibet episcopi.'
Id. id., 103 : Cum igitur ha?c certum
sit beatissimum Adrianum de electione
pontificis docuisse, mirum, quomodo
inveniatur, ut quidam aiunt, Karolo
imperatori investiendi eecclesias licen-
tiam tribuisse. Quid igitur in his
considerandum est, quid a?stimandum,
nisi quia, etsi verum est hoc ei con-
cessum fuisse, non ideo hoc factum est,
ut secclesiam Dei suo iuri in tempore
haberet subiectam, sed ut magis
magisque per hoc signum se ei servire
et earn ab inimicis defendere quodam-
modo piomitteret ?
Id. id., 117 : Quod autem sanctus
Adrianus hoc fecisse narratur, si verum
est aut non ea intentione fecit, qua iati
contendunt, aut sicuti homini surrep-
tum est ei. Quid autem mirum, si beato
Adriano surripi potuit, cum et bea-
tissimo Petro hoc evenisse, etiam post-
quam Spiritu sancto confirmatus est,
legamus."
1 Id. id., 23, 25, 26.
2 Id. id., 73 : " Cuius eleetionis
iudicium domni apostolici et eius
vicariorum seu arehiepiscoporum ita
proprium est, ut nulli non sui ordinis
viro hsoc concedere ulla ratione de-
beant."
Cf. 7-t.
CHAP. VI.] ACTION AND PROPOSALS OF PASCHAL LT.
135
people in the diocese, — that is, in those dioceses of which they
were, more especially, the sons, — but not as masters or lords ;
and they should confirm the election in this sense, that they
should defend it with the material sword, for it is their proper
function to compel those who do not fear the spiritual sword,
by the terror of the material one. 1 This is not unimportant,
though the statement is evidently carefully guarded ; but Pla-
cidus goes much further than this. We shall presently deal
with his treatment of Church property, but in the meanwhile
we must observe that he frankly recognises that the tenure of
this property may involve certain obligations to the secular
power which the Church must fulfil. The Church, he says,
must pay tribute, 2 and it must render other services to the
prince, which Placidus does not specifically define, especially
in those cases where some special rights were reserved by him
when the property was granted to the Church. 3 He admits,
1 Id. id., 37 : " Nunc ista con-
siderete, karissimi fratres, qui noa
reprehendere soletis dicentes : ' Quo-
modo non omnes secclesiae propter
terrenas res quas possident ad ilium
pertinent, cui omnis terra subiecta est ?
Si enim populus in electione pastoris
adesse et consentire debet, quanto
magis imperator vel principes ? ' De
qui bus verbis valde miramur. Nos
enim ab electione pontificum non segre-
gamus principes, sed hoc dieimus, quia
ipsi sua potentia non debent pastores
in aecclesia mittere, neque investiendo
neque aliquo modo dominando, sed
magis communi electione clericorum et
consensu populorum, maiorum scilicet
et minorum, inter quos videlicet tam
reges qviam principes numerantur, — in
eis dumtaxat aecclesiis, quarum speci-
alius filii deputantur — pontifex oligi
debet. Ubi imperator vol eius prin-
ceps non sicut dominus adesse debet,
sed sicut filius. Quae electio dum
taliler facta fuerit, canonica est et
gratia; sancti Spiritus reputatur. Qua;
vero potentia humana contigerit,
gratiae spirituali contraria est. Canoni-
cam itaque electionem religiosus et
pius imperator firmare in tantum debet
ut, si quis contra earn aliquid tempta-
verit, etiam gladio materiali perse-
quendum putet. Quod faciens officium
suum rite implebit. Ideo enim eius
gladius in aecclesia permissus est esse,
ut qui gladium spiritualem non timent
timore materialis gladii ad iusticiam
revocentur."
2 Id. id., Prologue, and 118.
3 Id. id., 56 : " Christiano autem
cesari sua veraciter concedimus, quia
christianum populum ei ad iusticiam
favere omnibus modis prsedicamus. De
nostro etiam ei superaddimus, quia,
cum necesse fuerit, caritatis subsidium
illi impondimus.
(In what the editor judges to be an
earlier form, this passage runs : " Sacra-
tissimo autem imperatori quod suum
est non negamus, quia et militiam
a'cclesia;, cum pro tempore opus fuerit,
ei deservire omnimodis volumus et
ordinatum tributum nequaquam ne-
gamus.")
136
THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY.
[PART II.
in one passage, that if the prince desires to give something of
that which belongs to himself to a bishop, he may properly
invest him with this under the same forms which would be
used in the case of other men, while he must not do this with
the ring and staff ; x and in another place he makes a definite
proposal, and expresses the hope that it may tend to the
establishment of a firm peace between the " regnum " and the
" sacerdotium," if it is arranged that when the bishop has been
canonically elected, invested, and consecrated, be should, either
in his own person or by his representatives, go to the emperor
and ask for the imperial " prrcceptum, " with reference to
the Church property which has been committed to him.
The emperor should then gladly grant and confirm to him
that which his predecessors had granted to the Church,
and promise the bishop and his church the imperial
protection. 2
Id. id., 82 : Ordinatus autem et
sacratus, si quid wcclesia, quam suseepit
antiquitus canonice imperatori debet,
nisi forte imperator pro remedio anirote
suae remiserit, solvere per omnia curet.
Piissimus autem imperator non gravaro
aecclesiam, sed magis ei servire, utpote
suae spirituali matri, devotissime
studeat.
Id. id., 153 : Sane sciendum, quia
sicut mutare quod sui maiores catholici
imperatores fecerunt christianus im-
perator non debet, ita et si quid
fecclesiae eo tempore donatum, ut sibi
aliquid imperator exinde reservaverit,
si contra canones sacros non fuerit,
solvendum ei, nisi forte remiserit, per
omnia est. Sicut enim quae iam Deo
consecrata sunt hominibus seculi assig-
nare non debemus, ita quae illorum
sunt, nisi ipsi donaverint, eis auferro
non possumus."
1 Id. id., 86 : " Si vero imperator
fidelis vel aliquis princeps quod
sibimet iure competit pastori secelesia*
dare voluerit, investitura ceteris homi-
nibus consueta concedere debet, non
pastorali virga seu episcopali anulo,
quibus misteria domini Christ i sig-
nantur, et ideo sacrata verissime com-
probantur. Dignum enim non est, ut
terronarum rerum investitura a ter-
renis principibus episcopalibus in-
signibus detur, quia, ut diximus,
Spiritus sancti donum per haec desig-
natur."
- Id. id., 93 : " Quia vero Dominus
ait : ' Pacem meam do vobis, pacem
relinquo vobis,' studendum est omni-
modis, ut pax inter regnum et sacor-
dotium sit et firmiter Deo auxiliante
permaneat. Quae ita, ut Deo inspir-
ante cognoscimus, fieri potest, si, cum
pastor aecclesise canonice electus, in-
vestitus et consecratus fuerit, tunc per
se vel per suos fideles imperatorem
adeat et de rebus aecclesiae sibi corn-
missis imporiale praeceptum expetat.
Quod ei piissimus imperator amore sua'
spiritualis matris libentissime conce-
dens firmare dignetur, quod sui prae-
decessores illi aecclesiae concessisse
manifestum est, promittens eidem
aecclesiae et eius pastori suam piissi-
mam defensioneru in omnibus."
CHAP. VI.] ACTION AND PROPOSALS OF PASCHAL EL 137
It is clear that the position of Placidus, as well as that of
the author of the ' Disputatio vel Def ensio Paschalis Papae, '
represent a real advance on the part of the supporters of the
papal policy towards an understanding — certainly it is evident
that they appreciate in some measure the more important
aspects of the contention of men like Wido of Ferrara.
We must, however, turn aside for a moment to consider the
whole treatment of the nature of the property of the Church
by Placidus. It seems to us probable that this is in the
main directed against the proposals of Paschal II. for the sur-
render of the "regalia," and these proposals were of so far-
reaching a kind that anything which we can find which will
throw light upon them is of great importance.
In the Prologue to the work with which we are dealing,
Placidus cites the words of some writers, speaking in the name
of the secular rulers who said that, as the Church was
spiritual, it had no property in earthly things, except in the
actual church buildings, and that if Churchmen desired earthly
possessions they could not obtain them by the law of the
Church. If it had not been for the gifts of the temporal
riders the clergy would possess nothing except the oblations
brought to the altar, the tithes and the first-fruits : all other
property belongs to the prince, and therefore those who desire
bishoprics and abbeys must obtain them from him, or cease to
possess what belongs to him. If the clergy were content with
the tithes and first-fruits and oblations, the matter was in
their own hands ; but if they desired to have the property
which was formerly given to the Church, they could only
obtain this from the prince.
Placidus denounces these principles as abhorrent to all true
Catholics, inasmuch as it is the Holy Spirit who has granted
to the Church not only spiritual but also material things, and
wills that bishops should have both the small and the great
possessions which have been dedicated to God in their power.
That which is given to the Church is given to Christ, and
those who take it away are guilty of sacrilege. That which
belongs to the Church ought to be in the power of the bishops,
138
THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY.
[PART II.
who are elected not by any earthly authority, but by the
clergy and laity of the diocese, and are confirmed by the other
bishops. The Church owes nothing to kings except the pay-
ment of " tribute." 1
These positions are further developed in the body of the
treatise. What has once been given to the Church belongs
permanently to Christ. 2 It is impossible to separate the
material possessions of the Church from the spiritual without
rending it in two : for just as a man cannot live without a
body, so the Church cannot exist in the world without
material things. 3 Some, he says, maintained that the Church
possessed in the full sense of the word only tithes, first-
fruits, and oblations, and that immovable property like
castles and estates only belonged to it so far as the bishop
received these from the hands of the emperor. This, Placidus
1 Id. id., Prologue : " Dicobant enim
quidam : ' /Ecclesia spiritual's est, et
ideo nichil ei terrenarum rerum perti-
uet, nisi locus tantum, qui consueto
nomine Eecclesia dicitur. Si quid
autem terrenarum rerum desiderant
qui ei serviunt, iure aacclesise optinere
non possunt. Nisi enim nos dederi-
mus, episcopi vel clerici nil possidere
possunt, exceptis his, quce altari in-
f eruntur, et decimis, et primitiis ; nam
alias possessiones nostra sunt. Igitur
episcopatus et abbatias qui desiderant,
aut per nos optineant aut nequaquam
nostra possideant. Si vero solummodo
decimis et primitiis et oblationibus,
quee sibi ad altare inferuntur, contenti
esse voluerint, eorum in voluntate
pendeat ; sin autem quaj olim data
sunt secclesise habere desiderant, per
nos optineant.' Quam rationem omnes
catholici abhorrentes, utpote donis
sancti Spiritus contrariam, qui non
solum spiritualia, sed etiam corporalia
secclesiae suce donare dignatur et per
se hsec episcopos vult habere, ut qui
consecratus est tarn parvas quam
magnas possessiones, quae Deo sancti-
ficatse sunt, in potestate habeat, se
contra tantam impietatem divinis
verbis armarecurarunt . . . . Deinde
annectere curavi, quia non solum
spiritualibus, sed etiam corporalibus
donis sancta aecclesia honoranda est,
ideoque recte facere eos qui sui iuris
aliquid ei donantes vice Christi earn
honorant. Quod confirmantes pro-
bamus : quia quod tecclesise tribuitur
Christo utique donatur ; quod autem
oacclesise est in potestate praesulum
debere consistere sanctorum pat rum
dictis probantes, pastores ei non ab
aliqua potestate terrena, sed electione
communi clericorum et laicorum de-
cerni docuimus. Quam electionem
iudicio episcoporum firmari oportere
monstravimus, nichilque sanctam
aecelesiam regibus debere, nisi tantum
tributum persolvere. Ubi etiam an-
nectentes de rebus aecclesice non
auferondis, probamus sacrilegos esse
qui quod tecclesiiv donatum est ei
auferre non timent."
2 Id. id., 7.
8 Id. id., 41.
CHAP. VI.] ACTION AND PROPOSALS OF PASCHAL II.
139
maintains, was false, for that which has once been given to
God belongs to Him for ever. 1 Again, he refers to the con-
tention that, while the church itself, being consecrated to God,
belonged only to God and His priests, those things which the
Church in its glory now possessed, such as duchies, countships,
and cities, belonged in such a sense to the emperor, that unless
the grant of them was renewed to each bishop on his suc-
cession he could not have them, and from this it followed that
it was for him to grant " investiture." 2
Placidus repudiates these contentions with great energy,
and maintains that not only the small possessions which the
Church had before Constantine, but the great property which
it had received since his time all belonged to the Church,
because they were all given to God ; 3 and he interprets the rule
that the bishop or abbot should receive the pastoral staff from
the consecrating archbishop, as signifying that he received
not only the authority of riding the people, but also the
temporal possessions of the Church from the Lord Himself. 4
1 Id. id., 43 : " Sunt autem qui dicant
secclesiis non competere nisi decimas,
primitias et oblationes, in mobilibus
tantum scilicet rebus. Nam immobilia,
videlicet castra, villae vel rura ei non
pertinent, nisi de manu imperatoris
pastor susceperit. Quod male eos
dicere multis modis et diversis sanc-
torum sententiis supra docuimus. Sed
tainen et nunc inferamus, quia omne
quod semel Deo offertur in perpetuum
eius iuri mancipatur."
2 Id. id., 151 : " Sunt vero non-
nulli qui dicant : ' iEeclesia quidem et
circuitus eius Deo consecratus vere
hominum nulli pertinet nisi Deo et
eius sacerdotibus, ea vero quae seccle-
sia possidet nunc per orbem glorificata,
id est ducatus, marchias, comitatus,
advocatias, monetas publicas, civitates
et castra, villas et rura et cetera
huiusraodi, ita ad imporatorem per-
tinent, ut, nisi pastoribus a-cclesiae
semper, cum sibi succedunt, iterum
dentur, nequaquam ea habere de>
beant. Et inde est, quod ei ius
in aecclesia deberi in tantum con-
tendunt, ut earn etiam investire
debere dicant."
3 Id. id. id. : " Sed lii, si pacifice ea
quae supra protulimus dignentur ad-
vertere, liquido cognoscent, quia non
solum parva qua; prius aecclesia posse-
derat eius sunt, sed et magna quae
nunc possidet illius sunt. Parvte enim
possessiones, quas ante Constantinum
imperatorem possedit, ideo eius sunt,
quia Deo oblataj sunt, et magna;
possessiones, quas post Const ant inum
possidet, ideo eius sunt, quia Deo
oblatce sunt."
4 Id. id., 55 : " Episcopus etiam,
cum benedicitur, baculum de manu
archiepiscopi accipit, simul et anulum.
Baculum quidem, ut bene populum
regat, anulum vero, ut signum seternj
misterii se percepisse cognoscat. Quae
utraque ex euangelio sumpta cognosci-
140 THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY. [PART II.
Another contention which he put forward is important —
namely, that the property of the Church is the property
of the poor, and could not be taken by the clergy for their
personal use, except to provide themselves with the necessary
food and clothing, and could not therefore be given to
princes. 1
This is all very uncompromising, but we must bear in
mind those passages which we have already considered, in
which Placidus proposed some recognition of the position
of the emperor with regard to those possessions which his
predecessors had conferred upon the Church. The impression
which is left upon us is, that what he is really concerned
to do is to repudiate the principles which may have lain
behind Paschal II. 's offer to surrender the "regalia."
It is most unfortunate that we have practically no other
immediately contemporary discussion of this question. In
the works of Gerhoh of Eeichersberg, written between 1126
and 1169, we have indeed very important discussions of the
whole question, but it seems to us on the whole better to
consider these later. For though it is probable that the
considerations which made him doubt the advantages of
the tenure of the " regalia " by the bishops were of the
same kind as those of Paschal II., we cannot be wholly
confident of this. And in any case, the subject is so large
and important that it requires a separate treatment.
mus. Baculum enim prredicatores licet et eius recclesiae, designari certissi-
Dominus ferre praecepit, ubi, sicuti mum est."
beatus pater Augustinus intellegit, l Id. id., 71 : " Unum tamen est
subsidia temporalia eis ex ipsa pro?- quod christianis principibus debemus,
dicatione deberi monstravit. Unde scilicet ut orando et pnedicando eis
et nos intellegere decet ideo institutum considere non desinamus. Nam res
episcopos vol abbates baculum de pauperum, id est possessiones a?cclesi-
manu episcopi, cum consecrantur, arum, non solum illis tribuere, sed
accipere, ut noverint se terrenarum ne quidem in nostros proprios usus
rerum, qua; ascclesia possidet, de manu convortere debemus, nisi ad hoc tan-
Domini veraciter tunc accepisse do- turn, ut habentes de aacclesia vietura
minium. In anulo vero misterium et vestitum ei servire possimus."
sacratissimce coniuntionis, Christi vide- Cf. 7.
141
CHAPTER VII.
THE SETTLEMENT OF WORMS.
The first attempt at a settlement of the " investiture " ques-
tion had failed, and for a few years it might have seemed as
though no progress had been made. At a Council held in
the Lateran in March 1112, Paschal related the circum-
stances under which he had been coerced into his concession
to Henry V., and, while protesting that he would not excom-
municate him, left it to the Council to determine how it
should be rescinded. On the last day of the Council he
solemnly reaffirmed the decrees of Gregory VII. and Urban II.,
and the Council formally condemned the " Privilegium." l
The more determined Churchmen were not, however, satisfied
with this, and in September 1113, Guido, the Archbishop of
Vienne (afterwards Pope Calixtus II.), held a Council at
Vienne, which declared that lay " investiture " was a heresy,
and formally excommunicated Henry V., and then wrote to
Paschal peremptordy requesting him to confirm their action,
and intimating that a refusal to do this would force them to
1 Mansi, ' Concilia,' xxi. 51 : " Privi- damnamus, et irritum esse judicamus,
legium illud, quod non est privilegium atquo omnino cassamus, et ne quid
(neque vero debet dici privilegium, auctoritatis et efficacitatis haboat
sed pravilegium) pro liberatione eapti- penitus excommunicamus. Quod ideo
vorum, et ecclesiee a domino papa damnatum est, quod in eo privilegio
Paschali per violentiam Henrici regis continebatur, quod electus canonice a
extortum, nos omnes in hoc sancto clero et populo a nomine consecretur,
concilio cum eodem domno papa con- nisi prius a rege investiatur, quod est
gregati, canonica censura et ecclesiastica contra Spiritum sanctum et oanonicam
auctoritate, iudicio sancti Spiritus institutionem."
142
THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY.
[part II,
renounce their obedience to him. 1 Paschal evidently felt
himself compelled to give way, and in his reply to Guido
confirmed the proceedings of the Council at Vienne. 2 In
1116, at a Council held in the Lateran, Paschal again
declared the " Privilegium " given to Henry null and void,
and excommunicated those who gave or received lay " investi-
ture " ; and Cardinal Kuno reported that he had excommuni-
cated Henry V. at various Councils in Hungary, Lorraine,
Saxony, and France. 3 It is clear from the narrative of
Ekkehard that the Papal party was again supreme among
the bishops in Germany, and that the political disorders in
Germany were again growing rapidly. 4
Paschal II. died on January 21, 1118, and it had become
evident that Henry's success at Eorae in 1111 had been
merely apparent, and that a settlement upon these lines was
1 Mansi, ' Concilia,' xxi. 75 : " In
ipsum etiam regem nominatim et
solemniter et unanimiter sententiam
anathematis injecimus. Et nunc,
domme paler, vestram, sicut dignum
est, maiestatem suppliciter exoraraus,
ut quod pro sanctae ecclesiao fidei
robore, pro Dei et vestro honore
feeimus, auctoritate apostolica solem-
niter confirmetis. Cuius confirrna-
tionis argumentum per apertas nobis
litteras significare dignemini ; quas
etiam, ut gaudium nostrum sit plenum,
alter alteri destinare possimus. Et
quoniam principum terra: pars maxima,
et universi fere populi multitudo, in
hac re nobiscum sentit : in remis-
sionem peccatorum suorum omnibus
injungatis, ut, si necesse fuerit,
auxilium nobis et patrise unanimiter
ferant.
Illud etiam cum debita reverentia
vestra: suggerimus pietati, quod si
nobiscum in his steteritis, si hoc, sicut
rogamus, eonfirmaveritis ; si deinceps
ab ipsius crudehssimi tyranni, et nun-
tiorum ejus, litteris, locutione, mun-
eribus abstinueritis, unanimiter nos,
sicut decet, habebitis filios et fideles.
Si vero, quod minime credimus, aliam
viam aggredi coeperitis, et nostra:
paternitatis assertiones prsedictas ro-
borare nolueritis : propitius sit nobis
Deus, quia nos a vestra subjectione et
obedientia repolletis."
2 Id. id., xxi. 76 : " Cum alicu-
jus morbi detentione caput affici-
tur, membris omnibus communiter ac
summopere laborandum est, ut ab eo
penitus expellatur. Fratrum siquidom
relatione comperimus, vos in iimira
convenisse, ac per Dei gratiam Vienna:
concilium celebrasse. In quo nimirum
de augenda religiono, de dispositione
ecclesiastica, seu ecclesiastiearum
rerum, et de correctione pravorum
hominum adversus sanctam ecclesiam
insurgentium disseruistis. Unde Deo
gratias referimus, et qua: statuta sunt
ibi rata suscipimus et confirmamus,
et cooperante Domino Deo illibata
permanere censemus."
3 Ekkehard, ' Chronicon,' a. 1116.
4 Id., a. 1114-1117. Cf. Hauck,
' Kirchengeschichte Deutschlands,' vol.
iii. pp. 899-905.
CHAP. VII.] THE SETTLEMENT OF WORMS. 143
impossible. His successor, Gelasius II., was elected on Jan-
uary 24. According to Ekkehard, Henry V. at first ga\e
his assent, but finding that Gelasius withdrew himself from
communion with him, he set up Maurice, the Archbishop of
Bruges, as antipope. Gelasius and a number of the cardinals
retired to Capua, and on April 7 excommunicated both
Henry V. and the antipope. 1 The Cardinal Legate held
a Council at Cologne in May, and proclaimed the excom-
munication ; and Ekkehard reports that the princes proposed
to hold a meeting at Wurzburg, when Henry should be re-
quested to answer in person, or, if he refused to attend,
should be deposed. 2
Gelasius II. died on January 29, 1119, and on February
22 Guido, the Archbishop of Vienne, who had, as we have
seen, been the most vehement opponent of Paschal's con-
cession to Henry, was elected Pope as Calixtus II. 3 The
election was made by the cardinals and other Eoman clergy
and laity at Cluny, where Gelasius had died, and it was at
once accepted and confirmed by the cardinals who were in
Eome, 4 and by a Council held at Tribur in Germany in June. 5
Calixtus summoned a Council to meet at Eheims in the
autumn, and Henry was compelled to set his face towards
some understanding with the Pope. 6
It was under these conditions that the second attempt to
arrive at a settlement of the "investiture " question was made,
and a detailed account is given of this by Hesso. The initia-
tive was taken by two eminent French Churchmen. William
of Champeaux, now Bishop of Chalons, and the Abbot of
Cluny. They visited Henry V. at Strassburg, and urged
on him the need of surrendering the "investiture " of bishops
and abbots, but William of Champeaux, while he told him
that neither before nor after consecration had he received
anything from the hand of the king, also assured him that
he faithfully rendered to the King of France all those mili-
1 Ekkehard, ' Chronicon,' a. 1118. * ' Monumenta Bambergensia,' pp.
2 Id. id , a. 1119. 348-352.
8 Id. id., a. 1119. 6 Ekkehard, ' Chronicon,' a. 1119.
8 Id. id.
144
THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY.
[PART II.
tary services and dues which the German bishops rendered
to their sovereign. Henry replied that he wanted nothing
more than this, and they undertook to endeavour to bring
about peace. 1 On this basis the negotiations were initiated,
and terms of agreement were drafted and provisionally con-
cluded, which were to be confirmed at a meeting between
Calixtus and Henry, which was to be held at Mouzon
on October 24. Under these terms Henry was to surrender
all "investitures " of all churches, and to make peace with
those who had maintained the cause of the Church, restor-
ing their churches and possessions. Any question arising
out of these terms, if it related to ecclesiastical things,
was to be determined by canonical judgment ; if to secular
things, by the secular judgment. The Pope promised to give
peace to Henry and his supporters, and to restore their
possessions, under the same terms as in the agreement of
the emperor. 2 It seemed for a moment as though a settle-
1 Hesso — Relatio : " Venerunt ad
regern apud Argentinam episcopus
Catalaunensis et abbas Cluniacensis,
acturi cum oo de pace et concordia
inter regnum et sacerdotium.
A quibus cum rex consilium quaere-
ret, quomodo sine diminutione regni sui
hoc exequi posset, assumpta parabola
sua, respondit episcopus : ' Si veram
pacem, domne rex, desideras habere,
investituram episcopatuum et abbati-
arura omnimodis dimittere te opertet.
Ut autem in hoc regni tui nullam
diminutionem pro certo teneas, scito
me, in regno Francorum episcopum
electum, nee ante consecrationem nee
post consecrationem aliquid suscepisse
de manu regis. Cui tamen de tributo,
de milicia, de theloneo et de omnibus,
que ad rem publicam pertinebant
antiquitus, sed a regibus christianis
ecclesise Dei donata sunt, ita fideliter
deservio, sicut in regno tuo episcopi
tibi deserviunt, quos hue usque in-
vestiendo hanc discordiam immo ana-
thematis sententiam incurristi. Ad
hsec rex elevatis manibus hoc respon-
sum dedit ' : ' Eia,' inquit, ' sic fiat.
Non quaero amplius.' Tunc subiunxit
episcopus : ' Si igitur investituras
dimittere volueris ; et possessiones
occlesiarum et eorum, qui pro ec-
clesia laboravorunt, reddere ; et veram
pacem eis dare ; laborabimus, Deo
opitulante huic contentioni finem im-
ponere.' "
2 Id. id. : " Scriptum autem con-
cordise hoc fuit : ' Ego Hfeinricus] Dei
gratia Romanorum imperator augustus
pro amore Dei et beati Petri et domni
papai Calixti dimitto omnem investi-
turam omnium ecclesiarum. Et do
veram pacem omnibus, qui, ex quo
discordia ista ccepit, pro ecclesia in
werra fuerunt vel sunt. Possessiones
autem ecclesiarum et omnium, qui pro
ecclesia laboraverunt, quas habeo,
reddo ; quas autem non habeo, ut
rehabeant, fideliter adiuvabo. Quodsi
qusestio inde emerserit, que ecclesi-
astica sunt, canonico, que autem
secularia sunt, seculari terminentur
CHAP, vil.] THE SETTLEMENT OF WORMS. 145
ment had been reached, but it is clear that there had either
been a misunderstanding about the significance of the terms
used, or that the emperor on reflection became convinced
that he was surrendering too much.
Calixtus II. reached Eheims on October 18, and provision-
ally opened the Council, which was attended by two hundred
and fifteen archbishops and bishops, besides abbots, and the
King of France. He proceeded to Mouzon on October 23,
and Henry V. encamped near. Before, however, they could
meet, doubts had arisen in the papal circle about the real
meaning of the phrases which were to be accepted by Henry.
These stated that Henry was to surrender " all investiture of
all churches," but it was suggested that these phrases were
ambiguous and needed interpretation, lest under cover of
these he should lay claim to the possessions of the churches,
or to the right to invest with these possessions. It was also
urged that the Pope's promise might be construed as meaning
that he would recognise the bishops of the Imperial party
who had been intruded into sees which were already occu-
pied by legitimate bishops, or had been canonically deposed.
William of Champeaux and the Abbot of Cluny, accompanied
by the Cardinal-Bishop of Ostia, the Bishop of Viviers,
and other papal envoys, were sent to the emperor, and they
set out the meaning of the draft agreement in the terms
which had been agreed upon in the papal circle. The
emperor at first flatly denied that he had promised any of
these things. William of Champeaux declared that he was
prepared to swear that the emperor had confirmed all these
promises, and that he had understood the emperor in this
sense. When the emperor was at length compelled to con-
fess that this was true, he complained that these promises
which he had made by their advice could not be carried out
iudicio.' Item scriptum domni pap* : ista pordiderunt, quas habeo, rcddo ;
' Ego Calixtus secundus Dei gratia quas non habeo, ut rehabeant, fidcliter
Romana; ecclesia; episcopus catholicus adiuvabo. Quodsi questio inde emer-
do veram paoom H[einrico] Romaiionim sent, qua; ecclesiastica sunt, canonieo,
imperatori augusto ot omnibus, qui pro quo autom secularia sunt, seculaii
eo contra ecclesiam fuerunt vel sunt. terminentur iudicio.' "
Possossiones oorum, quas pro werra
VOL. IV. K
146
THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY.
[PART II.
without grave injury to the position of the Empire. William
of Champeaux replied by assuring him that the Pope had
no wish to diminish the authority of the Empire, and that
he declared emphatically that the bishops were to render
to the emperor the same services, military and other, as they
had always done. 1 Henry then asked for a day's delay that
he might consult with the princes, but when the papal envoys
returned on the following day he asked for a further post-
ponement, until he could hold a general consultation with the
1 Id. id. : " Cumque lectum fuisset
scriptum regis, diligentius ceperunt
retractaro episcopi, maxime illud
capitnlum ubi dicebatur : ' Dimitto
omnem investituram omnium ecclesi-
arum ' ; dicentes : ' Siquidem rex sim-
pliciter agit, verba ista sufficiunt. Si
autom sub hoc capitulo aliquid cavillaro
conatur, determinatione nobis videntur
indigere ; ne forte aut possessiones
antiquas ecclesiarum sibi conetur ven-
dicare, aut iterum de eisdem episcopos
investire.
Rursum in scripto domni papaj
illud diligentius retractabant, ubi
dicebatur : ' Do veram pacem regi et
omnibus, qui cum oo in werra ista
fuerunt vel sunt ' ; ne forte in danda
pace amplius intelligerent, quam red-
dendam communionem ecclesiae ; et
sub hoc verbo ecclesia cogeretur sus-
cipere, quos aut supcrpositos legitimis
pastoribus, aut canonice depositos,
sine gravi offensione non posset sus-
tinere.
Diligenter igitur omnibus retrac-
tatis, missi sunt ad castra regis
episcopus Ostiensis, Iohannes cardin-
alis, episcopus Vivariensis, episcopus
Catalaunensis et abbas Cluniacensis
et alii multi cum eis, portantes scripta
in manibus. Cumque pervenissent ad
castra, ostenderunt scripta ; deter -
minaverunt capitula, prout omnium
communi consilio diffinitum erat.
Rex autem, his auditis, prima fronte
se nichil promisisse horum omnimodis
abnegabat. Tunc episcopus Cata-
launensis, zelo Dei inflammatus et
gladio verbi Dei accinctus, respondit
pro omnibus : ' Si, domne rex, negare
vis scriptum quod tenemus in mani-
bus, et determinationem, quam audisti,
paratus sum sub testimonio religios-
orum virorum, qui inter me et te
fuerunt, iuraro super reliquias sanc-
torum et super euangelium Christi,
te ista omnia in manu mea firmasse,
et me sub hac determinatione rece-
pisse.
Cumque omnium testimonio convin-
ceretur, tandem compulsus est confiteri,
quod prius negaverat. Verumtamen
conquerebatur de eis graviter, quorum
scilicet consilio promiserit, quod absque
diminutione regni exequi non valeret.
Cui sic respondit episcopus : ' In pro-
missis nostris, domne rex, per omnia
nos fideles invenies. Non enim domnus
papa statum imperii aut coronam regni,
sicut quidam seminatores diseordie
obloquuntur, in quolibet imminuere
attemptat. Immo palam omnibus de-
nuntiat : ut in exhibitione milicisa et
in ceteris omnibus, in quibus tibi et
antecessoribus tuis servire consuever-
ant, modis omnibus deserviant. Si
autem in hoc imperii statum inminui
existimas, quod ulterius tibi episcopatus
vendere non liceat, hoc potius regni
tui augmentum ac profectum sperare
debueras, si, qua3 Deo contraria sunt,
pro eius amore abicias.' "
CHAP. VII.] THE SETTLEMENT OF WORMS. 147
princes of the Empire, without whose consent he could not
venture to surrender the "investiture." William of Cham-
peaux indignantly broke off the negotiations, and the Pope
returned to Eheims, and a few days later, October 29,
brought forward the decrees which he desired the Council
to accept.
In the Council, however, there at once appeared a grave
divergence of opinion. The second decree as proposed by the
Pope read : " Investituram omnium ecclesiarum et ecclesi-
asticarum possessionum per manum laicam fieri modis
omnibus prohibemus," but there was so much opposition
to this on the part of many of the laity, and even of some of
the clergy, that the discussion continued throughout the whole
day. It was contended that under these terms the Pope was
endeavouring to take away the tithes and other ecclesiastical
" beneficia " which the laity had of old time possessed. The
opposition was so determined that on the next day the Pope
proposed the decree in another form : " Episcopatuum et
abbatiarum investituram per manum laicam fieri penitus
prohibemus. Quicunque igitur laicorum deinceps investire
presumpserit, anathematis ultioni subiaceat. Porro, qui
investitus fuerit, honore, quo investitus est, absque ulla
recuperationis spe omnimodis careat." In this form the
decree was unanimously accepted, together with another
decree affirming the right of the churches to all those
possessions which kings and other Christian people had
bestowed on them, and anathematising any one who should
venture to seize them. 1
The attempt to arrive at a settlement had for the time
failed, but it is important to observe the causes and condi-
tions of the failure, so far as we can arrive at them from the
narrative of Hesso. William of Champeaux and the Abbot of
Cluny had proposed a complete surrender of the right to
"investiture," urging upon the emperor that this would
make no difference at all in the political obligations of the
bishops and abbots. Henry had accepted this proposal in
the form that he surrendered the right to invest with the
1 Id. id.
148 THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY. [PART H.
churches. The advisers of the Pope, however, suspected
that this might mean that he reserved the claim to the
temporalities of the Church and the right to invest with them,
and urged that the phrases required interpretation. Hesso
does not say what precisely was the interpretation which
William of Champeaux and his colleagues communicated to
Henry, all that he tells us is that Henry repudiated it ; but
we may conclude that the agreement was construed as im-
plying the surrender of all claim to invest, even with the
temporalities. Henry refused to ratify this, maintaining that
in such a grave matter he must consult the whole body of the
princes. If this interpretation of what passed is correct, it
would seem that though the negotiations had failed they had
brought out the fact that the emperor was willing to consider
the possibility of distinguishing between " investiture " with
the temporalities and " investiture " with the spiritualities — a
distinction which, as we have seen, had been urged by a
number of writers on the subject. The narrative of Hesso,
however, brings out more than this, for it shows that there
was a serious division of opinion among the supporters of
the Pope. This is clear from the fact that Calixtus had to
withdraw the form in which he first proposed his decree
about " investiture " to the Council at Eheims. In the first
form it explicitly concerned lay "investiture," not only of
churches, but also of ecclesiastical possessions ; but the feeling
against this among the clergy, as well as the laity, was so
strong that it had to be withdrawn, and the decree was only
accepted in a form which left this question undetermined.
We shall probably be right in concluding that even in papal
circles the importance of the distinction between " investiture "
with the temporalities and with the spiritualities was being
recognised.
The attempt at a settlement had for the time failed, but
the conditions of the failure were, as we can now see, such as
to suggest the possibility of an agreement upon such terms as
were actuahy accepted at Worms three years later. Formally,
no doubt, the breach was complete, for Calixtus not only ex-
communicated Henry V. and the antipope, but also absolved
CHAP. VII.] THE SETTLEMENT OF WORMS. 149
Henry's subjects from their oath of allegiance, unless he
repented and did satisfaction to the Church. 1 Calixtus thus
reasserted a claim which had not been explicitly made since
the death of Henry IV., but it must be observed that it was
made as against an emperor who, in setting up an antipope,
had himself claimed a similar authority with respect to the
Papacy.
We are, fortunately, able to follow the movement of opinion
during the last years of the pontificate of Paschal II. and the
first years of Calixtus in some contemporary writings. We
have already cited the severe and even violent phrases in
which Geoffrey, the Abbot of Vendome, addressed Paschal II.
when he had yielded to Henry V., 2 and he continued to main-
tain this condemnation of lay investiture in the strongest
terms during the years before 1119. Between the years
1116 and 1118 he wrote a letter to Rainald, who claimed
to have been elected Bishop of Angers, in which he
deals first with the matter of episcopal elections and then
with the question of lay "investiture." Geoffrey urges
that Rainald 's election had been irregular and invalid ; he
had learned that Rainald had been tumultuously elected
by the laity, who had then endeavoured to intimidate and
coerce the clergy into consent. This leads to a discussion of
the principles which determined what was a right election.
The whole appointment of a bishop, Geoffrey says, depends
upon election as well as consecration, for a due election must
precede consecration. The apostles were chosen and conse-
crated by Christ Himself : now this must be done by the
vicars of Christ. The clergy are His vicars in election, and
1 Id. id. : " Allatae sunt denique primi nominati sunt rex Heinricus et
candelae quadringentse viginti septem Roman* ecclesiae invasor Burdinus,
et accensse datae singulae singulis, et prse ceteris et cum ceteris multia
tenontibus baculos, episcopis et abbati- solemniter excommunicati. Absolvit
bus, iniunctumque est eis, ut omnes etiam domnus papa auctoritate apos-
candelas tenentes assurgorent. Cum- tolica a fklelitate regis omnes, quotquot
que astarent, recitata sunt multorum ei iuraverant, nisi forte resipisceret et
nomina, quos praecipue exoornmunicare ecclesiae Dei satisfaceret."
proposuerat domnus papa. Inter quos * Cf. p. K!0.
150
THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY.
[PAKT II.
the bishops in consecration. Others, that is the laity, may ask
for a certain person as bishop, but they cannot either elect or
consecrate. 1 Geoffrey desires clearly to assert very emphatic-
ally the need of election for a valid appointment, and also to
limit the election proper to the clergy. He goes on to deal
very drastically with lay " investiture," and maintains that
the Catholic doctrine was that which Gregory VII. had
declared ; he distinguishes, indeed, between the heresy of lay
" investiture " and that of simony, but he maintains that the
first is even more mischievous than the second, for the only
reason why the secular authority claimed this right was,
either that it might simoniacally extract money, or that it
might reduce the bishop to subjection. Investiture with ring
and staff was, he maintains, a sacramental action. 2
1 Geoffrey of Vendome, ' Libelltis,'
ii. : " Tota itaque ordinatio episcopi
in sola electione consistit et conse-
cratione, si tamen illam eleetio recta
praecesserit. Hsec autem prius per
semet ipsum fecit Christus, deindo
vero vicarii eius. Et in apostolus
quidam a Christo facta sunt, quoniam
ab ipso electi et consecrati fuerunt :
in aliis vero omnibus a nullis aliis fieri
licet, nisi a vicariis Christi. Sunt
autem vicarii Christi clerici in elec-
tione, episcopi in consecratione. Cae-
teri omnes petere quidem episcopum
possunt, eligere vero vel consecrare non
possunt. Quicumque igitur alio modo,
quasi sub nomine pontificis, secclesiam
vel potestatem aecclesiasticam sibi
vindicare prassumit, hie iam non per
hostium intrat, sed aliunde ascendit,
ut merito non inter episcopos com-
putetur, sed inter fures et latrones
connumeretur."
Cf. for discussion of dates, &c, the
introduction of editor in ' Lib. de
Lite,' vol. ii. pp. 676-9.
2 Id. id : " Investituram, quam de
manu laici accepistis per pastoralem
virgam, silere non debeo, nee loqui
sine dolore Quod ad maiorom sanctae
occlesise iniuriam in occulto factum
non fuit, sed publico. Qui autem
cognoscere voluerit, quid catholica et
apostolica aeeclesia de investitura sen-
serit, quid docuerit, quid iudicaverit
et constituent, legat in primo capitulo
illius concilii, quod tempore Gregorii
septimi factum est, et ibi omnes
clericos, qui de manu laici investituram
suscipiunt hereticos vocatos et ideo
dampnatos esse et excommunicatos
invenerit. Licet enim alia heresis de
investitura dicatur, alia symoniaca :
ista tamen, quae de investitura dici-
tur, contra sanctarn secclesiam fortius
iacidatur. .....
Investitura, enim de qua loquimur,
sacrarnenturn est, id est sacrum sig-
num, quo princeps ascclesiae, episcopus
scilicet, a caeteris hominibus secernitur
pariter atque clinoscitur : et quo super
christianam gregem cura pastoralis ei
tribuitur. Hanc investituram ab illo
solo suscipere debet, a quo et con-
secrationem habet. Ilium siquidem
prius oportet consecrari, deinde vero
tamquam ducem 83cclesi83 sacris insig-
nibus decorari. . . . Ha?c praeterea
haeresis de investitura si recte per-
spiciatur, etiam hn-resis symoniaca esse
CHAP. VII.] THE SETTLEMENT OF WORMS. 151
In another treatise which was written, it is thought, a
little later, Geoffrey repeats a great part of what he had said,
and adds an emphatic assertion that not even Rome could
alter the law of the Church on this matter. 1 He refers
clearly to the action of Paschal II., and it may be conjectured
that he also wished to repudiate the position represented by
Ivo of Chartres.
So far, Geoffrey's position was rigorous and uncompromising,
but in a treatise which seems to belong to the year 1119 we
find a new tone and another attitude. It is not easy to
determine the relation of this treatise to the negotiations at
Mouzon and the Council at Rheims, for in some respects its
principles and proposals go far beyond what apparently
Calixtus II. was at that time prepared to concede, and
he evidently deprecates any extreme measures against the
emperor. The treatise exists in two forms 2 — a short one,
which contains an exhortation to Calixtus to stand fast
against the heresy of lay " investiture " with ring and staff ;
and a longer one, in which Geoffrey argues that there was
another sense in which lay " investiture " might be admitted.
He protests, indeed, that there was no legal nor canonical
authority for lay " investiture " with ecclesiastical possessions,
viva et vera ratione probatur. Nam rum minime licet quod Petro non
quae saecularis potestas sibi vindicare licuit. Petro quae liganda erant
nititur investituram, nisi ut per hoc ligandi, et quae solvenda solvendi
aut pecuniam exlorqueat aut, quod est a Christo data potestas, non
est gravius, sibi inordinate subiectam quae liganda solvendi, vel quae erant
efficiat pontificis personam ? . . . solvenda ligandi concessa facultas.
Anulus autem et virga, quando ab illis Petrus etiam si aliquando ignoranter
dantur, a qui bus dari debent, et quando alitor egit, Paulus, licet adhuc in
et ubi et quomodo debent, sacramenta conversatione novicius, ei in faciem
aecclesiae sunt, sicut sal et aqua et resistere minime timuit. Petrus vero
quaedam alia, sine quibus hominum et sui iunioris increpationem libenter
aecclesiarum consecrationes fieri non suscipiens, quod plus iusto fecerat
possunt." diligenter correxit. Romana itaque
1 Id., ' Libellus,' iii. : "Sunt aecclesia (divinarum scripturarum legem
quidam qui Romanae aecclesiae omnia solvere non debet, sed conservare ;
licere putant, et quasi quadam ot tradita sibi a Christo potestate)
dispensatione aliter quam divina non ad suam voluntatem uti, sed
scriptura praecipit earn facere posse. secundom Christi traditionem."
Quicunquo utique sic sapit, desipit. * Cf. editor in ' Lib. de Lite.'
Nam Romanae aecclesiae post Pet-
152
THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY.
[PART II
and he seems to maintain that it is not reasonable that those
things which had been once granted to the Church should be
granted again ; but he admits that all property is held by-
human law. By the divine law men are subject to kings and
emperors, and the Church cannot hold possessions except by
the human law ; and he quotes the most significant phrases
of that discussion of the nature of private property by St
Augustine, to which we have frequently referred. 1 He con-
tends, therefore, that there was no reason why the king
should not, after due canonical election and consecration,
invest the bishop with the property of the Church under
some form, and urges that by this concession peace might be
restored to the Church and the State. He concludes with a
warning against an injudicious use of excommunication, which
was evidently intended to suggest a doubt whether it was
wise to excommunicate the emperor, even if he refused to
come to terms with the Church, and with a reference to the
action of St Peter and St Paul in making concessions to
Jewish prejudices. 2
1 Cf. vol. i. pp. 139-142.
2 Geoffrey de Vendome, ' Libellus,'
iv. p. 691 : "In secclesiasticis posses-
sionibus, quamvis nee in legibus nee
in canonibus inveniatur, tamen prop-
ter scandalem et scisma vitandum
tans regibus investitura concedatur,
ut nee ipsi propter hoc pereant, nee
sancta oecclesia detrimentum patiatur.
Investituram per virgam et anulum
accipere, nisi a suo consecratore, mani-
festum est esse dampnosum, quia nulli
laico licet ilia recclesiae sacramenta dare,
sieut ei non licet episcopum consecrare.
Res etiam, quae semel aecclesise data?
sunt, reges iterum eas dare, vel de
ipsis investire, nee debent nee con-
venientcr possunt. Nam alicui dare
quod habet, et de hoc investire ali-
quem quod ille iam tenet, superfluum
est et vanum ; non tamen videtur
criminosum. Al ; a itaque est investi-
tura, quse episcopum perficit, alia vero
qua; episcopum pascit Ilia ex divino
iure habetur, ista ex iure humano.
Subtrahe ius divinum, spiritualiter
episcopus non creatur. Subtrahe ius
humanum, possessiones amittit, quibus
ipse corporaliter sustentatur. Non
enim possessiones haberet cecclesia, nisi
sibi a regibus donarentur et ab ipsis
non quidem divinis sacramentis, sed
possessionibus terrenis investiretur.
Ex iure divino regibus quidem et
imperatoribus dominamur ; ipsis tamen
ex eodem iure, quia Christi domini
sunt, honorem debemus et roveren-
tiam, sicut dicit apostolus : ' Regem
reveremini.' Ex iure autem humano
tantum illis debemus, quantum pos-
sessiones diligimus, quibus ab ipsis vel
a parent ibus suis secclesia ditata et
investita dinoscitur. Unde beatus
Augustinus super Iohannem sic loqui-
tur : ' Noli dicere : quid mihi et regi ?
quid tibi ergo et possessioni ? Nam
per iura regum possessiones habentur.
Si vero dixeris : quid miehi et regi ?
CHAP. VII.]
THE SETTLEMENT OF WORMS.
153
The position represented by the treatise is very significant.
It recalls the treatment of " investiture " by Ivo of Chartres
in his letters, with respect to the relation of the tem-
Noli iam dicere possessiones tuas,
quia ad ipsa iura quibus possessiones
possidentur, renuntiasti. Nam secun-
dum ius imperatorum possides terrena.
Tolle imperatorum iura, quis audet
dicere : Mea est ilia villa, aut meus
est iste servus, aut moa est ista
domus ? Quo iure defendis villas ?
divino an humano ? Divinum ius in
scripturis habemus, humanum ius in
legibus regum. Unde quisque possi-
det, quod possidet ? Noune iure
humano ? Nam iure divino domini
est terra et plenitudo eius. Pauperes
et divites Deus ab uno luto fecit, et
divites et pauperes una terra supportat.
Iure tamen humano dicis : Haec villa
mea est, haec domus mea, hie servus
meus est. Iure ergo humano, iure
imperatorum, quare ? quia ipsa iura
humana per imperatores et reges
sseculi Deus distribuit aecclesiae suae.'
Possunt itaque sine offensione reges
post electionem canonicam et conse-
crationem per investituram regalem
in aecclesiasticis possessionibus conces-
sionem, auxilium et defensionem epis-
copo dare, quod quolibet signo factum
extiterit, regi vel pontifici seu catholicae
fidei non nocebit. Voluit bonus domi-
nus et magister noster Christus spirit -
ualem gladium et materialem esse in
defensione aecclesiae. Quod si alter ab
altero retunditur, hoc fit contra illius
voluntatem. Hac occasione de regno
iustitia tollitur, et pax de aecclesia,
scandala suscitantur et scismata, et
fit animarum perditio simul et cor-
porum. Et dum regnum et sacer-
dotium, unum ab altero impugnatur
periclitatur utrumque. Nam rex et
Komanus pontifex, cum unus contra
alium, alter pro regni consuetudine
alter pro secclesiae libertate erigitur,
regnum illam consuetudinem obtinere
nee potest nee poterit, et aecclesia suae
libertatis amittit plurimum. Rex prae-
terea sacrosancta communione pariter
et regia dignitate privatur ; a Romano
vero pontifice multis, qui sibi servire
debuerant, necessitate cogente servitur :
et qui a pontifice docendus erat et
ducendus a rege, rex et pontifex popu-
lum sequitur. Habeat autem aecclesia
pacem, et regnum iustitiam ; habeat
rex consuetudinem, sed bonam, et non
ciuam male reposcit, sed quam supra
diximus investituram. Habeat teeclesia
suam libertatem, sed summopere caveat ,
ne, dum nimis emunxerit, eliciat san-
guinem, et dum rubiginem de vase
conatur eradere, vas ipsum frangatur.
Hoc est praecipuum discrecionis mem-
brum, ne quis qualibet actione aeccle-
siae a sathana circumveniatur. Tunc
enim a sathana quis circumvenitur,
quando sub specie iustitiam ilium per
nimiam tristitiam perire contingit qui
potuit liberari per indulgentiam. Prae-
terea bonus et discretus Augustinus
in epistola ad Parmenianum dicit,
' vix aut nunquam excommunicandum
eum esse qui in malo opere obstinatam
multitudinem habet secum.' Nam
tolerabilius videtur uni parcere, ne in
aecclesia scisma seminetur plurimorum.
Et beatissimus doctor et martyr Cipri-
anus asserit, dicens : ' Scisma non est
faciendum, etiamsi in eadem fide et in
eadem traditione non permaneat qui
recedit.' Et Salomon in Ecclesiastice :
' Scindens ligna periclitabitur in eis si
exciderit ferrum.' Item in Exodo :
' In domo una comedetur : non eicietis
de domo carnem foras.' Ex quibus
verbis colligitur eum non excommuni-
candum esse qui multitudinem habet
secum, ne, dum unum corrigere niti-
154 THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY. [PART II.
poralities to the secular power, and also to the possibility
of conceding an " investiture " with the temporalities under
some form ; * and it also corresponds with some of the
suggestions of Placidus of Nonantula ; 2 but it gains an
additional historical significance when we recall the rigorous
position taken up by Geoffrey in his previous writings. We
do not know, as we have said, what relation exactly the
treatise may have had to the deliberations at Mouzon and
Eheims, but it certainly serves to bring out the fact that there
was already in papalist circles a movement towards com-
promise, and may help to explain how it was that Calixtus
was compelled to withdraw his proposal to condemn lay
" investiture " with relation not only to churches, but also to
Church property, and to substitute the ambiguous condemna-
tion of " investiture " of bishoprics and abbeys.
Two shorter treatises which, according to one MS., were
addressed by Geoffrey to Pope Calixtus, may belong to the
same time, or, at any rate, to the years between 1119 and
1122, and may reasonably be interpreted as being related to
the mediating position which Geoffrey had now taken up. In
the first of these he contends that " dispensations " should
sometimes be given by the authorities of the Church, under which
something not wholly perfect might be done or permitted, in
order to avert some grave danger to the Christian faith ; and
he gives as examples the action of St Paul in circumcising
Timothy, and of St Peter in requiring some of the Gentiles to
mur, perditio fiat multorum. Hoc simulans se veteris legis prsecepta
etiam Ieronimus ad Augustinum scribit, servare, ne qui fideles ex Iudaeis facti
dicens, quod secundum beatorum apos- fuerant susceptam veritatis noticiam
tolorum Petri et Pauli prudentiam scandalizati negarent. Fecerunt hoc
dispensationemquehonestam, aliquando sancti apostoli miserioordi et pia
fieri necesse est quod iure reprehen- compassione, non simulatione fallaci,
ditur, ne christian* plebi fidei scan- quamvis legem post euangelium non
dalum oriatur Nam propter metum esse servandam minime dubitarent.
Iudseorum, ne ipsi scandalizarentur, Ubi beatissimae vitae viri intelliguntur
et Paulus post conversionem Timo- non quidem commutasse consilium, sed
theum circuincisum fecit, et csere- ad horam pro aliorum salute sua? doc-
monias etiam exercuit Iudaeorum, et trinse sententiam."
Petrus coagit quosdam iudaizare gen- * Cf. p. 98.
tilium, uterque sanctus apostolus i Cf. p. 136.
CHAP. VII.]
THE SETTLEMENT OF WORMS.
155
observe the Jewish law. Such " dispensationes " might even
change the customs of churches and abbeys. It is true that he
says that these must not permit what is actually evil, and
that if the Vicar of Christ were to do this he would be a blind
leader of the blind ; but it seems fairly evident that he is
retracting or at least restating the judgment which he had
expressed in an earlier treatise. 1
In the second of these treatises Geoffrey states briefly the
chief conditions which he deemed to be essential for the life
of the Church. The Church, he says, must be Catholic, free,
and chaste — Catholic, for it must not be bought or sold ; free,
for it must not be subject to the secular power ; chaste, for it
must not be corrupted with bribes. When a Church is bought
or sold the faith is made void, for men think that what God
has made beyond all price can be bought by men. When the
Church is subjected to the secular power she loses that charter
of liberty which Christ wrote for her on the Cross with His
blood. When the Church is corrupted with bribes she loses
her chastity. 2 These phrases had already been used by
1 Id., ' Libellus,' v. : " Dispen-
sationes aliquando in secclesia faci-
endse sunt, non quidem amore
pecuniae vel quolibet humano favore,
sed pia et misericordi intentione.
Tunc enim a pastore ascclesiaa dis-
pensatio pie et misei icorditer fieri
creditur, cum aliquid minus per-
fects ad tempus fit ab illo vel fieri
permittitur, non voluntate sua, sed
aliorum necessitate, ne in ipsis vide-
licet fides Christiana periclitetur. Sic
igitur facienda est dispensatio ab
secclesia, ut semper fidei nostras Veritas
instruatur, et si quid aliter ad horam
factum fuerit vel permissum, oportuno
tempore corrigatur. Hac discreta et
sancta dispensatione usi sunt beati apos-
toli Petrus et Paulus propter meUun
Iudeorum, ne ipsi scandalizarentur.
Nam super hoc quod ipsi et alii aliter
ferorant, et se et alios postea correxeni nt .
Possunt ' i km 1 1 et debent fieri dispensa-
tiones, quibus aecclesiarum et monas-
teriorum consiietudines immutentur,
sed ubi postponitur minus bonum, ut
quod est melius instituatur. In nullo
autem malum fieri debet vel permitti,
nisi in ea tantum necessitate, ubi
timet ur, ne periclitetur fides, et illud
postmodum corrigatur. Nam qui mala
faciunt, ut veniant bona, horum iustum
esse dampnationem Paulus apostolus
protestatur. Si quis vero aliter in
seeclesia dispensationes fecit, rationi
simul et veritati contradieit. Nee
solum lucernam ardent em non habet,
verum etiam aliorum ardentes extin-
guit. Et ideo non recte dicitur Christi
vicarius, sed dux est caecorum ipse
caecus." Cf. p. 151.
2 Id., ' Libellus,' vi. : " ^Ecclesia sem-
per catholica, libera et casta esse debet.
Catholica, quia nee vendi debet nee
emi ; libera, quia seculari potestati
non debot subici ; casta, quia nulla-
tenus debet muneribus corrumpi
156
THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY.
[PART II.
Geoffrey in earlier treatises, and they may have no special
significance in this place ; but it is also possible that they may
be intended to summarise the essential points which, in
Geoffrey's judgment, would have to be taken account of in any
settlement, and he may possibly intend to suggest that, so
long as these principles were safeguarded, concessions might
be made on other points.
Finally, in a treatise addressed to Cardinal Peter Leonis,
which may belong to the year 1122, Geoffrey put together
the substance of his earlier treatises, that is especially the
condemnation of lay " investiture " as he had expressed it in the
second and third of these, and also the admission, as he had
stated it in the fourth treatise, that a lay " investiture " with
the temporalities, after a canonical election and free consecra-
tion, might be accepted. 1 It should be observed that almost
the only new point urged in this treatise is that consecration
as well as election must be free, and that a consecration which
Quando enim ppcclesia venditur vel
emitur, evacuatur fides, quia quod
incomparabile factum est a Deo ab
homine comparari posse estimatur. . . .
Quando vero aecclesia saaculari potes-
tati subicitur, quae ante domina erat
ancilla effieitur ; et quam Christus
dominus dictavit in cruce, et quasi
propriis manibus de sanguine suo
scripsit, cartam libertatis omittit. . . .
Tunc etiam aecclesiae castitas omnino
periclitatur, cum corruinpitur ipsa
muneribus et ex casta et virgine sponsa
Domini quasi mulier publica veraciter,
facta dinoscitur. . . . Usee tria, quae
diximus, proprie propria fpcclesia hab-
ere debet ; quorum unum si defuerit,
falso nomine dicitur sponsa Christi :
quae velut paralytica iacet, nee ligandi
nee solvendi potestatem habet. Nam
Christus pastor bonus sponsam fidelem
quaerit, respuit infidelem, liberam sibi
sociat, abicit ancillam, castam diligit,
odit corruptam."
1 Id., ' Libellus,' vii. : " Sciendum
vero, quod hie vel ubicurnque de elec-
tione et consecratione episcopi agitur,
canonicam necesse est electionem et
liberam conseerationem intelligi ; ut
qui canonice eligitur, et libere conso-
cretur. Alioquin fit quaedam prava
simulatio in aecclesia. et aecelesiasticae
dignitatis illusio non parva. Quicum-
que igitur canonice non electus quasi
sacrandus accedit, vel qui non est
libere consecratus, etiamsi canonica
praecesserit electio, execratus recedit.
Nam sicut ubi non est vera cordis con-
versio, non sequitur plena remissio,
ita, ubi non sequitur libera conse-
cratio, etiamsi canonica electio prae-
cedat, minime prodest, cum neutra
sola episcopum creare sufiiciat. Nee
est ilia libera consecratio, quam prw-
cedit factum sine iudicio et iusticia
iuramentum, cum beatus Hieronimus
super Ieremiam dicat : ' Iuramentum
non esse faciendum, ubi non est iusticia
simul, Veritas et iudicium.' Quod si
aliter fuerit praesumptum, iuramentum
non erit, sed periurium."
CHAP. VII.] THE SETTLEMENT OF WORMS. 157
is preceded by an oath is not free. It may reasonably be
judged that this has reference to the discussion of the terms
of settlement at Worms.
The change in the position of Geoffrey of Vendome which is
indicated in these treatises is highly significant, and seems to
indicate very clearly that, in spite of the failure of the
negotiations at Mouzon, real progress had been made on both
sides in the apprehension of the possibility of a settlement
which should recognise both the principles for which the Popes
had been contending, and the reasonable claims of the Tem-
poral Power. This impression is confirmed by an examination
of two works which belong to this time — the verses of Hugo
Metellus on the conflict between the Pope and the King, and
the verses of Hunald on the Eing and Staff. These writers
were not men of any great importance, but their attitude
is not the less significant.
Hugo Metellus represents the king as urging that former
Popes had acquiesced in the custom of royal " investiture,"
and that this signified the grant of the " regalia " : what harm,
the king asks, could it do that he should grant these under
the symbol of the pastoral staff ? The Pope replies that his
predecessors had indeed tolerated lay "investiture," but un-
willingly, and only because the kings of those days had been
benefactors of the Church, and maintains that the ring and
staff were the emblems of pastoral office and could not pro-
perly be used to signify the " investiture " with the temporal-
ities. The king then appeals to the concession of Paschal II.,
but the Pope replies that this was invalid, for it was granted
under coercion. The king then suggests that if the Church
were willing to forego the " regalia " he might surrender his
claim to "investiture," and that in ancient times the Church
did not possess these ; but the Pope refuses to entertain this
proposal. The verses end with an agreement on the part of
both that the matter was one for consideration in reason and
wisdom. 1
Hunald describes the papal contention that the ring and
staff are sacred signs of sacred functions. The king agrees to
1 Hugo Metellus, ' Certamen Papas et Regis.'
158 THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY. [PART II.
the principle that it is for priests to give sacred things, and
only claims the right to bestow the "regalia." Hunald con-
cludes that he would venture to say that the Pope and king
were fighting about nothing, for neither sought to injure
the other. 1
The negotiations at Mouzon had broken down, but it soon
became evident that the attempt to find some solution would
have to be renewed. In June 1121 Henry marched to
besiege Maintz, while the Archbishop of Maintz, the leader
of the Papal party in Germany, summoned the Saxon princes
to his help. Before, however, the actual conflict began, the
leaders on each side entered into negotiations with each other,
and Henry was persuaded to agree that the dispute should be
settled by the judgment of the leading men on each side. It
was agreed that a meeting of the princes of the whole king-
dom should be held at Michaelmas in Wiirzburg to determine
this settlement. 2 The Saxon Annalist gives a detailed account
of the conclusions arrived at in this meeting. The emperor
was to submit to the Apostolic See, and the conflict between
him and the Church was to be settled by the counsel and help
of the princes under such conditions that the Emperor should
keep what belonged to him and the kingdom, and the churches
what belonged to them. The bishops who had been canonically
elected and consecrated were to occupy their sees in peace
until the meeting of a council to be held in the presence of
1 Hunald, ' Canon de Anulo ct sangtiinis sui filiisque spoDsae suae
Baculo ' : — dimicans, spiritui superbijc et maligno
" Ergo, si verum fas est dicere pace
duorum :
prevaluit, ut mentibus universorum
iam in uno divinse voluntatis assensu
conexis, ipsorum consilio, suasione ac
Pro nichilo pugnant rox et apos-
.. obsecratione regis indignatio in tan turn
T . mitigaretur, ut ipse presens negoeium
In neutram neuter quisquam peccare , . , .
non suo sed optimatum utnusque
videtur,
Cuique sui fines et sua iura manent.
Rixari cessent, insistent utiliora
Intor eos pax sit — omnia provenient.'
partis arbitrio terminandum decre-
verit. . . . Ad base determinanda
collaudantur conventus totius regni
principum, curia Wircihurg, tompua
2 Ekkebard, ' Cbronicon,' a. 1121: festum sancti Michabelis."
Eousque spiritus Iesu pro precio
CHAP. VII.]
THE SETTLEMENT OF WORMS.
159
the Pope. The princes expressed their intention to settle the
complaints of the Church against the emperor with regard to
" investitures " in such a way that the kingdom should retain
its honour. If in the future the emperor should take measures
against any one for his part in these conflicts, the princes
agreed that, by the consent and permission of the emperor
himself, they would unitedly, though with all care and rever-
ence, admonish him not to act thus. If, however, the emperor
neglected their advice, they would act according to the agree-
ment which they had made with each other. 1
This report is of the greatest importance, especially as
indicating the attitude of the princes — that is, that they were
determined to impose a reasonable settlement both upon the
emperor and upon the Church. Ekkehard summarises the
proceedings, and adds the important information that the
meeting appointed envoys to communicate what had been done
to Eome, and to ask for the convocation of a General Council
by the Pope. 2
1 M. G. H., Lee;em, Sect. IV., ' Con-
stituliones,' vol. i. 106 : " Hoc est con-
silium in quod convenerunt principes
de controversia inter domnum impera-
torem et regnum : (1) Domnus im-
perator apostolice sedi obediat. Et de
calumpnia, quara adversus eum habet
eclesia, ex consilio et auxilio principum
inter ipsum et domnum papam com-
ponatur, ot sit firma et stabilis pax,
ita quod domnus imperator que sua et
que regni sunt habeat, eclesie et unus-
quisque sua quiete et pacifice possi-
deant. (2) Episcopi quoquo in eclesia
canonice electa et consecrati pacifice
sedeant usque ad collaudatam in pre-
sentia domni pape audientiam. Spir-
ensis episcopus eclesiam suam libere
habeat. Wormatiensis similiter, preter
ipsam civitatem, usque ad presentiam
domini pape. (3) Captivi et obsides
ex utraque parte solvantur. (4) De
hereditato palatini comitis Sigefridi,
sicuti Metis inter ipsum ot domnum
imperatorem defmitum fuil, ita per-
maneat. (5) Hoc etiam, quod eclesia
adversus imperatorem et regnum de
investituris causatur, principes sine
dolo et sine simulatione elaborare in-
tendunt, ut in hoc regnum honorem
suum retineat. Interim donee id fiat,
episcopi et omnes catholici sine ulla
iniuria et periculo communionem suam
custodiant. (6) Et si in posterum
domnus imperator consilio sive sug-
gestione alicuius ullam in quemquam
vindictam pro hac inimicicia exsuscita-
verit, consonsu et licentia ipsius hoc
inter se principes confirment, ut ipsi
insimul permaneant et cum omni
caritato et reverentia, ne aliquid horuru
facere volit, eum commoneant. Si
autem domnus imperator hoc con-
silium preterierit, principes sicut ad
invicem fidem dederunt, ita earn
observent."
2 Ekkehard, ' Chronicon,' a. 1121:
" De verbo autem excommunicationis
unde scandala pene cuncta pulula-
verant, niehil est dilliiiitum, tamen ad
160 THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY. [PART II.
There was some delay before the Pope replied to the envoys,
but in February 1122 he wrote to Henry in terms which
were indeed not wholly conciliatory, but represented a new
attempt at an understanding. Calixtus addressed Henry not
only as emperor but as his kinsman, and urged him to grant
peace to the Church, assuring him that he had no desire to
take away anything which belonged to him or to the Empire.
He also, however, warned him that if he still refused to
render to the Church what was its due, he would provide for
the well-being of the Church by religious and wise men,
without regard to the injury which this might inflict upon
Henry. 1
Another embassy was sent by Henry V. and the bishops
and princes, consisting of the Bishop of Spires and the Abbot
of Fulda, who expressed Henry's desire for peace and concord
between the " regnum " and the " sacerdotium," if this could
be obtained without injury to the majesty of the Empire. In
response to this, Calixtus sent Lambert, the Cardinal-Bishop
of Ostia, accompanied by two other cardinals, as his legates to
Germany, with instructions that they were to endeavour to
effect a settlement ; and they invited Henry to meet a council
of the bishops, which, as it was proposed, should meet at Maintz
on the festival of the Nativity of the Virgin. 2
apostolici regiminis audientiam con- esse, qui debes omnibus imperare.
corditer in timoro divino dilatum, Nihil, Henrico, de tuo iure vindicare
denominates in prcsenti legatis, qui sibi quaerit Ecclesia, qua; sicut mater
Romam haec omnia deferront, quatinus, sua omnibus gratuito adminislrat.
indicto per auctoritatem apostolicam Nee regni nee imperii gloriam affecta-
genorali concilio, quaecunque humano mus, sed soli Deo in Ecclesiae suae
non possent, Spiritus sancti iudicio iustitia deservire optamus. . . . Quod
terininarentur." si stultorum, et imperare tibi volen-
1 Calixtus II., ' Epistolae,' 168 tium adulationibus, et pravitatis sug-
(Migne, vol. 163) : " Te igitur sicut gostionibus praccipitanter adhaeseris,
consanguinoum nostrum, quern gemma nee honorem Deo et Ecclesiae debi-
in Christo dilectione diligere, honoraro turn reddideris, per religiosos et
et super oranes exaltare cupimus, com- sapientes viros Ecclesiae Dei non
monemus, ut Ecclesiae pacem ulterius sine laesione tua curabimus provi-
non recuses, pravorum suggestionos, dere, quoniam sic esse diutius non
qui in nostris placere sibi capitibus valemus."
gloriantur, ad cor tuum ascendere non 2 ' Mon. Bambergensia,' p. 383 :
permit tas, nee servus omnium velis " H[einrico] gloriosissimo imperatori,
CHAP. VII.]
THE SETTLEMENT OF WORMS.
161
The Council met at Worms in September, and the delibera-
tions lasted a month or more. We learn from a letter which
Adalbert, the Archbishop of Maintz, wrote to Pope Calixtus
shortly after, that the negotiations were at first difficult.
Henry could not at first be persuaded to surrender what he
considered to be his hereditary right to invest with the ring
and staff, and the laity who were present seem to have sup-
ported the emperor iD his claim. At last, after consultation
with the cardinals, and with what Adalbert represents as
their reluctant consent, it was agreed that the election of
bishops in Germany should be held in the presence of the
emperor ; and we may gather that it was in view of this
concession that Henry waived his right to invest with ring
and staff. 1
The most important provisions of the settlement as finally
agreed upon were as follows : Henry surrendered all claim
N. Dei gratia Ostiensis episcopus et
apostolic® sedis legatus ductum ser-
vitium. Religiosi viri, nuntii vide-
licet magnitudinis vestrae, apostolicam
sedem nuper adierunt, dicentes : pacis
et concordiae inter regnum et sacerdo-
tiiim iam tandem excellentiae vestras
consilium placuisse, si tamen salva ma-
iestate imperii ct absque diminutione
regni fieri potuisset. Quibus audit is,
domnus apostolicus gaudio repletus est
et gratias egit Deo, qui vobis tale con-
silium inspiravit. Nostra; etiam humi-
litati hanc iniunxit obedientiam : ut in
has partes veniremus et pacis et con-
cordise inter vos et ipsum mediatores
essomus ; salva tamen iusticia et ita,
ut nullum maius scandalum ecclesiae
inde proveniret. Rogamus igitur ex-
cellentiam vestram, ut in concilio
episcoporum Moguntiae celebrando in
nativitate sanctae Maria? vestram
dignemini exhibere praesentiam. Mud
autem scitote : nichil ibi contra vos
sed pro vobis omnia, salva tamen
iusticia, nos agero voile ; neque id
intendcro, ut honor imperii vestri
VOL. IV.
aliquod detrimentum paciatur sed per
omnia augeatur."
Cf. Ekkehard, ' Clironicon,' a. 1122,
and Anselmus, ' Cont. Siegeberti
Gemb.,' a. 1122.
1 ' Mon. Bambergensia,' p. 519 :
" Sed quia tam imperium quam im-
porator tamquam hereditario quodam
iure baculum et anulum possidere vo-
lebant — pro quibus universa laicorum
multitudo imperii nos destructores in-
clamabat — nullo modo potuimus his
imperatorem exuere. Donee com-
municato consilio cum his, qui aderant,
fratribus et dominis cardinalibus — -
hinc periculo nostro compacientibus,
inde eclesie censuram verentibus et ob
hoc vix nobis assent ientibus — omnes
pariter sustinuimus : quod in ipsius
presentia eclesia debeat electionom
facere ; nil in hoc statuentes nee per
hoc in aliquo, quod absit, apostolicis
institutis et canonicis trachcionibus
preiudicantes, sed totum vestre pre-
sentio ot vestre deliberationi reser-
vantes."
Cf. Ekkehard, ' Chronicon,' a. 1122.
162
THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY.
[PART II.
to " investiture " with ring and staff, and granted to all
churches in the empire the right of free election and con-
secration. The Pope, on the other hand, granted to Henry
that all elections to bishoprics and abbeys in the German
kingdom, which belonged to the kingdom, should be held in
his presence, but without simony and violence ; and that, in
the case of disputed elections, he should, with the counsel
and judgment of the metropolitan and comprovincial bishops,
give his assent and support to the wiser party. The bishop-
or abbot-elect was to receive the " regalia " from him " per
septrum," and was to fulfil the lawful obligations which he
owed for this. In the other parts of the Empire the bishop
or abbot, within six months of his consecration, was to receive
the " regalia " from the emperor " per sceptrum," and was to
discharge aU his lawful obligations ; the only exception being
in the case of all which belonged to the Eoman Church. 1
1 Legem, Sect. IV., ' Constitutiones,'
i. 107 : " In nomine sanctae et indi-
viduae Trinitatis. Ego Heinrieus, Dei
gratia Romanonim imperator augustus,
pro amore Dei et sanctse Romanae
ecclesiae et domini papae Calixti et pro
remedio animae mew dimitto Deo et
Sanctis Dei apostolis Petro et Paulo
sanctaeque catholics ecclesiae omnem
investituram per anulum ot baculum,
et concedo in omnibus ecclesiis, quae
in regno vel imperio meo sunt, can-
onicum fieri electionem et liberam
consecrationem. (2) Possessiones et
regalia beati Petri, quae a principio
hums discordiae usq\ie ad hodiernam
diem sive tempore patris mei sive
etiam meo ablata sunt, quae habeo,
eidem sanctae Romanae ecclesiae resti-
tuo, quae autem non habeo, ut restituan-
tur fideliter iuvabo. (3) Possessiones
etiam aliarum omnium ecclesiarum
et principum et aliorum tarn clericorum
quam laicorum, quae in werra ista
amissae sunt, consilio principum vel
iusticia, quae habeo, reddam. quae non
habeo, ut reddantur fideliter iuvabo.
(4) Et do veram pacem domino papae
Calixto sanctaeque Romanas ecclesiae
et omnibus qui in parte ipsius sunt
vel fuerunt. (5) Et in quibus sancta
Romana aecclesia auxilium postulaverit,
fideliter iuvabo et, de quibus mihi
fecerit querimoniam, debitam sibi
faciam iustieiam. Haec omnia acta
sunt consensu et consilio principum
quorum nomina subscript a sunt."
Id. 108 : " Ego Calixtus episcopus,
servus servorum Dei, tibi dilecto filio
Heinrico Dei gratia Romanonim imper-
atori augusto concedo, electiones episco-
porum et abbatum Teutonici regni,
qui ad regnum pertinent, in praesentia
tua fieri, absque simonia et aliqua
violentia : ut si qua inter partes dis-
cordia emerserit, metropolitani et
comprovincialium consilio vel iudicio,
saniori parti assensum et auxihum
praebeas. Electus autem regalia per
sceptrum a te recipiat et quae ex his
hire tibi debet faciat. (2) Ex aliis
vero partibus imperii consecratus infra
sex menses regalia per sceptrum a te
recipiat et quas ex his iure tibi debet
CHAP. VII.] THE SETTLEMENT OF WORMS. 163
If we endeavour to estimate the main character of the
settlement which terminated the conflict of fifty years between
the Spiritual and the Temporal Powers with respect to
the appointment of bishops and abbots, we may say that it
is clear that in the main it represents the triumph of that
mediating tendency whose development we have endeavoured
to trace, and not the complete victory of the extremists of
either party. When, however, we attempt to interpret the
principles of the settlement in detail, we have need of great
caution, but we may perhaps reasonably make the following
observations. The emperor, in surrendering the investiture
with ring and staff, and in admitting the right of free election
and consecration, made it plain that he made no claim to
bestow the spiritual office and authority, and that he recog-
nised the rights of the diocese and the province. On the other
hand, the Church recognised the justice of his claim to give
or to withhold the feudal possessions and authority of the
bishops and abbots as exercising temporal lordship. In the
provision that the election should take place in his presence,
the Church recognised that the emperor could not be excluded
from all part in the election to the great ecclesiastical offices,
in which, indeed, on the canonical principles, the laity had
faciat ; exceptis omnibus quae ad reference to the counsel and judgment
Romanam ecclesiam portinere noscun- of the metropolitan and comprovincial
tur. (3) De quibus vero mihi queri- bishops by which the emperor was to
moniam feceris et auxilium postula- be guided in the case of disputed
veris, secundum officii mei debitum elections, the reference to the sceptre
auxilium tibi prcestabo. (4) Do tibi as the instrument of " investiture "
veram pacem et omnibus qui in parte with the "regalia," and the exception
tua sunt vel fuerunt tempore huius of all the rights which belonged to the
discordise." Roman Church. It is in this form that
the settlement is referred to by Otto
We must refer our readers for a full of Fresingen in the ' Gesta Friderici.'
discussion of the text, as well as for an Bernheim argues that this must be a
admirable and detailed treatment of deliberate falsification of the text, and
the agreement, to the monograph of points out that it corresponds with
E. Bernheim, ' Zur Gesehichto des the action of Henry V. with reference
Wormser Konkordats.' We need only to a disputed election to the Abbey
hero point out that there are import- of St Gall in 1123. However this
ant omissions in the text of the may be, we are entitled to assume
Concordat contained in the 'Codex that the loxt, as given above, is sub-
Udalrici ' of Bamberg. It omits tho stantially accurate.
164 THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY. [part II.
their just and lawful place. . In the provision for the de-
termination of disputed elections, the emperor was no doubt to
be guided by the advice and judgment of the metropolitan and
the comprovincial bishops ; but the Church admitted that the
emperor was entitled to an important part in such decisions.
Probably the most important concession of the Church was
contained in the provision that the bishop, or abbot, elect
should ask for and receive the "regalia " from the emperor
before his consecration ; for this probably meant that in the
case of an insuperable objection to the elected person by the
emperor, the whole matter could be reconsidered. On the
other hand, the most important concession of the emperor
was that which dealt with his relation to the bishoprics and
abbeys outside of the German kingdom. Here he made no
claim to a part in the election, and accepted the provision
that the bishop or abbot was to apply for the " regalia "
after the consecration — that is, after the whole process of
appointment was completed ; and this no doubt meant a
very great change in the relation of the emperor to the
Italian bishoprics.
We have reached the end of our consideration of the first
nspect of the great conflict between the Empire and the
Papacy, but in the course of this conflict other questions
had arisen, and other claims had been made which represent
a profounder aspect of the relations of the Spiritual and
Temporal Powers in the Middle Ages, and we must now turn
to the consideration of these.
PART III.
THE POLITICAL CONFLICT OF PAPACY AND EMPIRE.
CHAPTEB I.
THE POSITION AND CLAIMS OF GREGORY VII.
In the first volume of this work we have set out what
appears to us to be a reasonable interpretation of the re-
lations of the Spiritual and Temporal Powers in the ninth
century, and have urged that these represent in substance
the acceptance of the principles set out by Pope Gelasius I.
in the fifth century — that is, that the two authorities are
each divine, and are each supreme within their own spheres,
that neither can claim authority over the other with respect
to its specific functions. It is quite true, and we have en-
deavoured to recognise it frankly, and to illustrate it suffi-
ciently, that in actual fact the spheres of the two authorities
were not in the ninth century thus clearly separate, but that
we find each intervening from time to time in matters which
belonged to the other. It does not, however, appear to us
that this really affected, in the minds of the men of that time,
the validity of their general judgment, or the sincerity of their
conviction that the Spiritual and the Temporal Powers were
autonomous in their relations to each other.
It is, however, true, and we have laid some stress upon it,
that in the ninth-cent my restatements of the Gelasian priii-
166 CONFLICT OF PAPACY AND EMPLRE. [PABT III.
ciples we find some important modifications and additions.
Where Gelasius had said that the burden laid upon the
priest is heavier than that which was laid upon the king,
for in the divine judgment he will have to give account for
the soul of the king, Jonas of Orleans calls the person of the
priest " prsestantior," for he is responsible to see that the king
does his duty even in the discharge of his office ; and Hincmar
of Eheims says that the " dignitas " of the bishop is greater
than that of the king, for it is the bishop who consecrates
the king. But the most fundamental modification of the
Gelasian phrases was made by Jonas of Orleans and the
bishops in the ' Eelatio ' of 829, where they say that the
two great offices of the priest and the king are offices not
in the world, as Gelasius had said, but in the universal
Church, which is the Body of Christ. How far this modifi-
cation was conscious and deliberate we cannot say, but it is
none the less important. It may reasonably be contrasted
with the phrases of Optatus of Milevis, when he rebukes
the Donatists for their want of respect for the Empire : the
Church, he says, is within the commonwealth — that is, the
Eoman Empire — and not the empire within the Church. 1
This conception is indeed one of far-reaching importance,
and is characteristic of the whole political and ecclesiastical
theory of the Middle Ages. In our second volume we have
cited a passage from Stephen of Tournai, one of the most
eminent canonists of the later years of the twelfth century,
which represents this principle very effectively. In the one
Commonwealth, he says, and under the one king, there are
two peoples, two modes of life, two authorities : the common-
wealth is the Church, the King is Christ, the two peoples are
the two orders in the Church — that is, the clergy and the
laity ; the two modes of life are the spiritual and the carnal ;
the two authorities are the priesthood and the kingship
(" sacerdotium et regnum "), the twofold " iurisdictio " is the
divine law and the human : give to each its due, and all
things will be brought into harmony. 2
1 Cf. vol. i. pp. 148 and 255. Decreti,' Introduction. Cf. vol. ii.
* Stephen of Tournai, ' Summa p. 198.
CHAP. T.] POSITION AND CLAIMS OF GREGORY VII. 167
There is only one Commonwealth, that is the Church of
Christ, and of this Commonwealth Christ Himself is the King ;
but He commits his authority to two persons, to the priest
and the king, and not to one alone. There is no question in
Stephen's mind of an authority of the one over the other,
within its own sphere, nor does he even suggest any question
of the priority of the one over the other. And yet it would
seem that when the commonwealth was conceived of as the
Church, it would be difficult to avoid this question completely.
At any rate, even in the ninth century, Jonas of Orleans
and Hincmar of Eheims anticipated in some measure the
actual form which the question was to take. Jonas, as we
have seen, calls the person of the priest " prsestantior, " for
he is responsible to see that the king does his duty ; and
Hincmar calls the " dignitas " of the bishop greater than that
of the king, for the bishop consecrates the king to his office.
It is in these two phrases that we may see the first germs of
those claims of the Church and the Papacy which we have
now to examine.
In the first part of this volume we have endeavoured to
set out briefly some illustrations of the conception of the
superiority of the Spiritual over the Temporal Power, and of
the conception that it had some authority in determining the
claim to secular authority. The most significant phrase is
perhaps that of Eodolphus Glaber, writing towards the end
of the first half of the eleventh century, when he says that
no one can be recognised as emperor who has not been chosen
by the Pope as suitable in character, and unless he has re-
ceived from him the tokens of empire. 1 A little later we
find the reforming Popes and their friends using phrases
whose precise meaning is indeed difficult to determine, bit
which are at least very significant. Pope Leo IX., in a letttr
to the Patriarch of Constantinople, in which he maintaiLS
the authority of the Eoman See over all Churches, also urges
that the Eoman See has an earthly as well as a heavenly
empire, that the Eoman See has a royal priesthood, and he
1 Cf. p. 9.
168 CONFLICT OF PAPACY AND EMPIRE. [PAKT m.
confirms this by a reference to the " Donation of Constantine." 1
Unfortunately, he does not indicate clearly the meaning which
he attached to its phrases. In the first volume we have set
out the reasons which have convinced us that originally, and
in the ninth century, the political authority referred to was
understood to relate to the papal claims on the exarchate
of Eavenna, and the other Byzantine territories in Italy. 2
Whether Leo IX. understood its phrases in this sense, or in a
more general one, is not clear.
A few years later again we find Peter Damian, as we have
already seen, using phrases whose significance it is very
difficult to determine. He recognises indeed very explicitly
that the royal power derives its authority from God Himself,
and he distinguishes very emphatically the nature of the
functions of the king and the priest ; and when he refers to
the two swords, he speaks of them as belonging, the one to
the king and the other to the priest, and does not suggest the
doctrine sometimes maintained later, that both strictly speak-
ing belonged to the priest. 3 On the other hand, in a letter
1 Leo IX., ' Ep.,' 100, 13 : " His regnum sacerdotalis officii sanetitate
et aliis quamplurimis testimonies, iam fuleitur. . . . ut dum regnum ac
vobis satisfactum esse debuit de ter- sacerdotium optata per vos pace
reno et ccelesti imperio, imo de perfuitur, is, qui utriusque dignitatis
regali sacerdotio S. Romanre et apos- auctor est, pacis jeternse digna vobis
tolicoe sedis. . . . Sed ne forte adhuc prremia largiatur."
de terrena ipsius dominationo aliquis Id., Opusc, 57, 1 : " Non omnia
vobis dubietatis supersit scrupulus . . . membra ecclesias uno funguntur officio,
pauca ex privilegio, eiusdem Constan- Aliud nempe sacerdoti, aliud com-
tini manu cum cruce aurea super petit iudici. Ille siquidem visceribus
ccelestis clavigeri venerabile corpus debet pietatis affluere, et in maternae
posito, ad medium proferemus." miserieordias gremio sub exuberantibus
He proceeds to quote a considerable doctrinse semper uberibus filios confo-
part of the " Donation of Constantine," vere. Istius autem officium est, ut
including those sentences which refer reos puniat, et ex eorum manibus
to his handing over his authority in eripiat innocentes," &c.
Italy and the Western regions to the Id., Sermo, 69 : " Felix autem, si
Pope. gladium regni cum gladio iungat
2 Cf. vol. i. pp. 288-9. sacerdotii, ut gladius sacerdotis miti-
3 Peter Damian, ' Ep.,' Bk. III., 6 : get gladium regis, et gladius regis
" Sciebat enim [i.e., Jehoiada] quoniam gladium acuat sacerdotis. Isti sunt
utraque dignitas alternae invicem duo gladii, de quibus in Domini pas-
utilitatis est incliga, dum et sacer- siono legitur : ' Ecce gladii duo hie '
doUum rogni tuitione piotegitur et et respomlitur a Domino : ' Suffieit.'
CHAP. I.] POSITION AND CLAIMS OF GREGORY VII. 169
to Henry IV., exhorting him to help the Eoman See against
the antipope Cadalius, he says that the king is to be respected
when he obeys the Creator ; but Avhen he goes against the
divine commands he is lawfully held in contempt by his
subjects. In another place he speaks of the Pope as the
king of kings and prince of emperors, who excels all living
beings in honour and dignity ; and in another place still he
speaks of the Eoman Church as having been founded by
Christ, who committed to Peter (" beato eternae vita) clavigero")
the laws both of the earthly and heavenly empire, and this
is repeated in another work, tvkere he speaks of Christ as
having committed to Peter the laws both of heaven and of
earth. 1 We have already considered these phrases in Part I.
of the volume, and we have dealt with the interpretation of
some of them by the canonists of the twelfth century in
volume ii., 2 and we can only repeat that it is very difficult
to say what Peter Damian may have meant by them.
Another of the most eminent of the reforming Churchmen
of the time used phrases which are noticeable as indicating
the rationale of the later claim of the spiritual power.
Cardinal Humbert recognises and states very emphatically
the distinction of the spheres of the two orders : the clergy
may not interfere in secular matters, any more than the laity
in ecclesiastical affairs. In another passage, however, he says
that, if we are to find a just comparison between the priestly
Tunc enim regnum provehitur, sacer- vestigia corruit, tanquam rex regum,
dotium dilatatur, honoratur utrum- et princeps imperatorum, cunctos in
que, cum a Domino prtetaxata felici carne viventes honore, ac dignitate
confederations junguntur." prsecellit."
1 Id., 'Ep.,' Bk. VII. , 3: " Sed Id., ' Opusc.,' v. : " Romanam autem
tunc deferendum est regi, curn eeelesiam solus ipse fundavit, super
rex obtemperat Conditori ; alioquin petram (idei mox nascentis erexit, qui
cum rex divinis resultat imperiis, beato vitae eternae clavigero terreni
ipse quoque iuro contemnitur a simul et ccelestis imperii iura com-
subiectis." misit."
Id., ' Opusc.,' 23, 1 : " Ad quod Id., ' Opusc.,' 57, 3 : " Salvator enim
facile respondetur ; quia cum unus nostor, qui tamquam mitis agnus
omni mundo papa proesidcat, reges apparuit, mox ut 1'etro coeli terrceque
autem plurimos in orbo terrarum iura commisit."
sua cujusquo rccrni meta concludat, 2 Cf. pp. 45-43, and vol. ii. pp.
quia quilibot imperator ad papa; 200-209.
170
CONFLICT OF PAPACY AND EMPIRE.
[PART III.
and the royal dignities, we may say that the priesthood
resembles the soul, and the kingdom the body, for they love
each other, and have need of each other. As the soul is
greater than the body and commands the body, so is the
priesthood in regard to kingship ; and thus, that all things
may be rightly ordered, the priesthood like the soul ad-
monishes men what things are to be done ; as the king should
follow the ecclesiastic, so the lay people should follow the
king ; the priest should teach the people, the king should
rule them. 1
We do not feel that it is possible to say exactly what Peter
Damian and Humbert and other reforming Churchmen may
have understood by such phrases, we doubt indeed whether
they attached to them any clearly defined meaning. They
must not therefore be considered unimportant and insigni-
ficant ; and it only needed some new conditions to bring out
their significance, perhaps we should rather say, new conditions
and a more determined temper.
The new conditions developed with that great change which
we have discussed in the last section of this volume. Till the
death of Henry III. it is clear that in the main the reforming
1 Humbert, ' Adversus Simoniacos,'
iii. 9, M. G. H., ' Lib. de Lite,' vol.
i. : " Ex quibus pariter edocemur,
quod sicut clerici sascularia negotia,
sic et laici ecclesiastica pragsumere
prohibentur. . . . Et quemadmodum
clerici a laicis habitu et professione, sic
discreti debent esse actu et conversa-
tione, ut neuter eorum officium alterius
aut hereditariam sortem sibi prajripiat,
sed uterque terminos a Sanctis patribus
et orthodoxis principibus positos at-
tendat. Nam sicut clerici a laicis
etiam intra parietes basilic-arum locis
et officiis, sic et extra separari et
cognosci debent negotiis. Ideo laici
sua tantum, id est ssecularia, clerici
autem sua tantuii, id est ecclesiastica
negotia, disponant et provideant."
Id. id., iii. 21: " Unde qui sacer-
dotalem et regalem dignitatem vult
irreprehensibiliter et utiliter conferro,
dicat sacerdotium in prtesenti ecclesia
assimilari anima 3 , regnum autem cor-
pori, quia invicem se diligunt et
vicissim sese indigent suamque sibi
operam vicissim exigunt et impendunt.
Ex quibus sicut praeminet anima et
prtecipit, sic sacerdotalis dignitas re-
gali, ut puta cadestis terrestri. Sic
ne prapostera, sed ordinata sint
omnia, sacerdotium tanquam anima
pncmoneat qua? sunt agenda ; regnum
deinde tanquam caput sui corporis
omnibus membris prasmineat et ea
quo expedit prascedat. Sicut enim
regum est ecclcsiasticos sequi, sic
laicorum quoque reges suos ad utili-
tatem ecclesioe et patriae ; sic ab una
eorum potestate populus doceri, ab
altera debet regi, quarum neutra
populum inconsiderate sequi."
CHAP. I.] POSITION AND CLAIMS OF GREGORY VII.
171
party in the Church had the general and hearty support of
the imperial authority, but with his death this was changed.
During the minority of Henry IV. the authority of the emperor
became involved in the most glaring abuses, aud when Henry
IV. himself took over the reins of government this was only
confirmed.
It is not our part here to discuss the truth of the charges
which were brought against Henry's personal character — the
statements of his political and ecclesiastical enemies must be
received with caution. But it does not admit of dispute that
both in his private conduct and in his ecclesiastical actions he
gave serious cause of offence. It may suffice here to mention the
great scandal which was caused when, in 1069, Henry made
public his desire to divorce his wife. In a letter of Archbishop
Siegfried of Maintz to Pope Alexander II. he describes the in-
dignation with which this had been received. 1 In another
letter of the same archbishop we have a good example of the
relation of Henry to the ecclesiastical scandals of the time.
Siegfried had been forbidden by Alexander II. to consecrate
the bishop-designate of Constance, on the ground that he was
charged with simony ; and he reports that Henry was much
incensed with him on this account, and that he was afraid
that Henry would take further measures unless the Pope
protected him against the royal anger. 2 Indeed, if we accept
the statements of Henry IV. 's own letter to Gregory VII. of
1073, it would seem evident that he was conscious, or allowed
himself to be represented as being conscious, of grave faults,
both personal and ecclesiastical. 3
1 Siegfried of Maintz, ' Mon. Bam-
bergensia,' p. 65.
2 Id. id., p. 69.
3 Greg. VII., ' Registrum,' i. 29, a :
" Nunc autem divina miseratione
aliquantuhim compuncti et in nos
reverei, peccata nostra priora vestra;
indulgontissima; paternitati nos accu-
sando confitemur : sperantes de vobis
in Domino, ut, apostolica vestra auc-
toritate absoluti, iustifieari mereamur.
Ehou criminosi nos ot infelices, partim
pueritiis blandientis instinctione, par-
tim potestative nostras et imperiosoe
potential libertate, partim etiam eorum,
quorum seductilia nimium secuti
sumus consilia, seductoria deceptione
peccavimus in codum et coram vobis ;
ot iam digni non sumus vocal ione
vestroe filiationis. Non solum onim
nos res ecclesiasticas invasimus, verum
quoque indignis quibuslibet et symo-
niaco fello amaricatis et non per ostium
sed aliunde ingrediontibus occlesiaa
172 CONFLICT OP PAPACY AND EMPIRE. [part III.
When Hildebrand was elected to the Papacy in 1073, as
Gregory VII., the division between the reforming party in the
Church, and the authorities of the State in the Empire, and
also in France, was already very marked ; and while it is true
that for a considerable time Hildebrand had exercised a great
influence in determining the policy of the Papacy, it is also
true to say that with his formal accession to power this policy
became clearer and more determined. Since the Council of
Sutri the Popes had steadily maintained the policy of refor-
mation, and especially with regard to two questions — one,
with which we are not here directly concerned, the marriage of
the clergy, the other the buying and selling of Church offices
or simony. Hitherto this had been expressed mainly under
the terms of stringent proceedings against the clergy who were
guilty of simoniacal practices, but with the accession of Gregory
VII. the Papacy turned its attack upon the secular authorities
themselves as being, in its judgment, mainly responsible for
this condition of things.
It has been sometimes maintained or suggested that this
was due to some more or less definite and conscious intention
to establish the power of the Papacy as supreme over the
Temporal Power : we doubt whether there are sufficient grounds
upon which to found any such judgment, and we think that it
would be wiser for the historian to confine himself to the
observation of the actual development of the new policy of the
Papacy. It is, however, true that the new policy developed
with great rapidity ; that indeed from the first year of his
pontificate Gregory VII. showed that he was prepared to use
every power which the Papacy had ever claimed, or exercised,
to secure reform.
ipsas vendidimus, et non eas ut opor- lanensi quae nostra culpa est in errore
tuit defendinius. At nunc, quia soli roganius : ut vestra apostolica distric-
absque vestra auctoritate ecclesias tione canonice corriga'ur; et exinde
corrigere non possumus, super his, ut ad cseteras corrigondas auctoritatis
etiam de nostris omnihais, vestrum vestrae sententia progrediatur. Nos
una et consilium et auxilium obnixe ergo vobis in omnibus Deo volente
quaerimus ; vestrum studiosissime pra'- non defuerimus ; rogantes id ipsum sup-
ceptum servaturi in omnibus. Et pliciter paternitatem vestram, ut nobis
nunc in primis pro ecelesia Medio- alaeris adsit clementer in omnibus."
CHAP. I.] POSITION AND CLAIMS OF GREGORY VII. 173
The new policy, if we may call it such, took shape first in
relation to the French monarchy ; it was not till 1076 that
the breach with Henry IV. took place. We must therefore
begin by observing the relations of Gregory VII. and France
during the first years of his pontificate.
In an earlier chapter we have dealt with the stringent
measures which Pope Leo IX. had taken against simony in
the French Church. 1 When Hildebrand became Pope he
found the evil still rampant, and in his judgment it was the
king himself, Philip L, who was the real source of the evil.
In December 1073, the year of his accession, Gregory VII.
wrote to the Bishop of Chalons a letter, in which he de-
nounces Philip as being among aU the princes of that time
the greatest offender against the true order and freedom
of the Church, and as being especially guilty of the most
outrageous simony. He expressly lays the blame upon him,
for he speaks of the French kingdom itself as singular in its
piety and devotion to the Eoman Church. He does not,
however, confine himself to denouncing the wickedness of the
king, but threatens, in the plainest terms, that, if Philip would
not amend his evil ways, he would lay the kingdom under a
general excommunication, and thus compel the French people
to withdraw their obedience from the king. 2
We have indeed here startling evidence of a new policy, of
the fact that the Eoman See was now under the control of a
Pontiff who was prepared to use every weapon at his disposal
in order to secure a complete reform in the conditions of the
1 See p. 56. Quam rem de regno illo tanto profecto
2 Greg. VII., ' Registrum,' i. 35 : tulimus molestius, quanto et prudentia
" Inter cieteros nostri huius temporis et religione et viribus noscitur fuisse
prineipes, qui ecclesiam Dei perversa potentius et erga Romanam ecclesiam
cupiditate venundando dissiparunt et multo devotius. . . . Nam aut rex
matrem suam, cui ex dominico praacepto ipse, repudiates turpi symoniacac heresis
honorem et roverentiam debuerant, mercimonio, idoneas ad sacrum regi-
ancillari subiectione penitus concul- men personas promoveri pormittet,
carunt, Philippum regem Francorum aut Franei pro certo, nisi fidem chris-
Gallicanas ecelesias in tantum oppres- tianam abieere maluerint, generalis
isse certa relatione didicimus, ut ad anathematis mucrone percussi, illi
summum tarn detestandi huius faci- ulterius obtenipcrare recusabuut."
noris cumulurn pervenisso videatur.
174
CONFLICT OF PAPACY AND EMPIRE.
[PART III.
Church. The policy and determination which are manifest
in this letter were further developed in the succeeding years.
In September 1074, Gregory VII. wrote to the Archbishops
of Bheims, of Sens, of Bordeaux, to the Bishop of Chartres
and the other bishops of France, reproving them for their
failure to resist the wickedness of the king, and bade them
as one body to remonstrate with him, and to denounce to
him the wickedness of his deeds. If he would not listen to
them they were to warn him that he would not escape the
apostolical sword, and they were, in obedience to Eome, to
separate themselves from his obedience and communion, and
to interdict the public performance of all divine service
throughout France ; and finally, if Philip would not even
then repent, he desired that every one should know that
he would leave nothing undone to deprive him of the French
kingdom. 1
In November of the same year Gregory wrote to Wilham
1 Id. id., ii. 5 : " Quarum rerum
rex vester [Philip] qui non rex sed
tyrannus dicendus est, suadente dia-
bolo caput et causa est. Qui omnem
oetatem suam flagitiis et facinoribus
polluit et, suscepta regni guber-
nacula miser et infelix inutiliter
gerens, subiectum sibi populum non
solum nimis soluto imperio ad scelera
relaxavit sod ad omnia, quae dici
et agi nefas est, operum et studi-
orum suorum exemplis incitavit.
. . . Vos etenim fratres etiam in
culpa estis ; qui dum perditissimis
factis eius sacerdotali vigore non
resistitis, procul dubio nequitiam
illius consentiondo favetis.
Nam, si prohibere eum a delictis,
contra ius et reverentiam promissrc
sibi fidelitatis esse putatis, longe vos
fallit opinio. . . . Unde rogamus vos
et apostolica auctoritate moncmus, ut
in unum congregati, patriae vestrse
famse atque saluti consulatis ot, com-
muni consilio ac coniunctissimis animis
regem ahoquentes, de sua eum et
regni confusione atque periculo com-
monealis et, quam criminosa sunt eius
facta atque consilia, in faciem ei osten-
dentes, omni exhortatione eum flectere
studeatis. . . . Quoclsi vos audire
noluerit et, abiecto timore Dei, contra
regium decus, contra suam et populi
salutem, in duritia cordis sui persti-
terit, apostolicae animadversionis glad-
ium nequaquam eum diutius effugere
posse, quasi ex ore nostro sibi noti-
ficato. Propter quod et vos, apostolica
auctoritate commoniti atque constricti,
matrom vestram sanstam Romanam et
apostolicam ecclesiam debita fide et
obedientia imitamini ; et, ab eius vos
obsequio atque communione penitus
separantes, per universam Franciam
omne divinum offlcium publice celebrari
interdicite.
Quodsi nee huiusmodi distrietione
voluorit resipiscere, nulli clam aut
dubium esse volumus, quin modis
omnibus regnum Franciae de eius
occupatione, adiuvante Deo, tempte-
mus eripere."
CHAP. I.] POSITION AND CLAIMS OF GREGORY VTI. 175
the Count of Poitou, and exhorted him to remonstrate with
Philip on his iniquities, and more especially with regard to his
conduct in plundering Italian merchants in France, and told
him that, while he was prepared to accept his repentance, if
he did not amend his evil ways he would excommunicate him
and all those who continued to render him obedience. Again,
in December of the same year he wrote to Manasses, the Arch-
bishop of Eheims, on the same matter, denouncing the new
and unheard-of crime of the king, that he plundered the
merchants of Italy and other countries, and warns him that if
the king persisted in these crimes he must expect to have the
Eoman Church and the Pope as his determined enemies. In
the Council held at Eome in February 1075, he decreed that,
unless Philip gave security for his amendment to the papal
envoys who were to be sent to France, he was to be held
excommunicate. 1
The terms of this letter of Gregory VII. certainly mark
the appearance both of a new attitude of the Papacy to-
wards the Temporal Powers, the determination to deal
directly, not merely with the clergy who were guilty of
simony, but with the secular authorities, when they were
responsible for this, and also the assertion of the right
1 Id. id., ii. 18 : " Qui si con- ligioni sanctte ecclesiaa inimicus — Italis
siliis vestris acquicverit, nos eum et aliarum provinciarum mercatoribus
qua debemus caritato tractabimus. contra Deum et regni sui honorem
Alioquim, si in perversitate studi- fecit, et alia, quorum ad aures nostras
orura suorum perduraverit et secun- clamores frequent issime venerunt, si,
dura duritiam et impoenitens cor prout iustitia dictaverit, correxerit,
suum iram Dei et sancti Petri sibi nos procul dubio ltetari, gratiarum
thesaurizaverit, nos, Deo auxiliante et actionibus Deum laudare ut pro per-
nequitia sua promerente, in Romana dita et inventa ove, sciat frateruitas
eynodo a corpore et communione tua. Si vero contra hsec, quod nolu-
sanctse ecclesiaj ipsum et, quicumque mus, egerit, Deum procul dubio sibi
sibi regalem honorem vel obedientiam inimicum sanctamque Romanam ec-
exliibuerit, sine dubio si'quostrabimus : clesiam et nos, qui ei licet indigni
et eius cotidie super altare sancti Petri priesidemus, viribus et modis omnibus
excommunicato confirmabitur." sibi adversari promittimus."
Id. id., ii. 32 : " Nunc igitur caute Id. id., ii. 52, a : " Philippus rex
ot diligonter ut debes accipias : malum Frarieorum, si nuneiis papw ad Gallias
inauditum, scelus detestabile, quod ituris do satisfaetione sua et emenda-
I'liilippus rex Francite — immo lupus tione securitatem non fecerit, haboatur
rapax, tyrannus iniquus, Dei et re- excommunicatus."
176 CONFLICT OF PAPACY AND EMPIRE. [PAKT III.
of the Papacy both to excommunicate and to depose princes.
It was not till later that a reasoned justification of these
claims was set out by Gregory, but it is noticeable that
in a letter of 1074 to Sancho, King of Aragon, he asserts
that Christ had made Peter prince over the kingdoms of the
world ; and in a document which has been dated as belonging
to the year 1075, and contains a summary and statement of
the nature of papal authority, we find an explicit assertion
of the principle that the Pope can depose emperors, and
release the subjects of wicked rulers from their allegiance. 1
There is indeed no doubt that the Church had constantly
claimed a full spiritual authority over kings as much as
over lesser men, but the conception that this involved the
right to depose kings was a somewhat different matter. In
our first volume we have cited certain passages which in-
dicate that the conception was not unknown, and had been
at least sometimes recognised in the ninth century ; but the
determined phrases of Gregory VII. certainly seem to repre-
sent a new confidence as well as a new policy. 2
If the new policy became apparent first in the relations of
the Papacy to the French monarchy, it was in its relations with
the Empire that it was developed. We do not pretend here
to relate the history of the great conflict between Gregory VII.
and Henry IV. in detail, but we must follow its course, so
far as is necessary to understand the principles which were
at issue. We have already mentioned the grave scandal
caused by Henry IV. 's proposal in 1069 to divorce his wife,
and by his connivance with simony. When Hildcbrand suc-
ceeded to the Papacy in 1073, Henry IV. had not been per-
sonally and explicitly excommunicated ; but he had refused or
1 Id. id., i. 63 : " Esto, itaque ad honorem desiderii tui adducet,
constans ot fiduciam firmam habeas ipse te victoreni de adversariis tuis
et quod cepisti perficias ; quia in efficiet."
domino Jesus Christo confidimus, Id. id., ii. 55, a : " Dictatus papse."
quia beatus Petrus apostolus, ..." Quod illi liceat imperatorcs
quem dominus Iesus Christus rex deponere. . . . Quod a fidelitate
gloriac prineipem super regna mundi iniquorum subiectos potest absolvere."
constituit, cui te fidelem exhibes, te * Cf. vol. i. pp. 282-287.
CHAP. I.] POSITION AND CLAIMS OF GREGORY VTI.
177
neglected to separate himself from the society of excommuni-
cated persons, and was therefore indirectly under the ban of
the Church. It should, however, be observed that Hildebrand
was careful to avoid giving offence to Henry IV., and seems
to have recognised his claim to be consulted before his actual
consecration. 1
Gregory's attitude to Henry on his accession to the Papal
See is well illustrated by a letter to Godfrey, Duke of Lor-
raine. He assures him that no one could desire Henry's
wellbeing more than he does, and that he would greatly
rejoice if Henry would follow his admonitions and counsels
in maintaining justice ; but he also says very plainly that
no respect of persons would withhold him from exercising
justice upon him who held God in contempt. 2 Again, in
a letter of September 1073, to Anselm, the Bishop-elect of
Lucca, he bids him not to receive investiture from Henry
until he had done satisfaction to God for his communion
with excommunicated persons, and had made his peace with
the Papacy. 3
Gregory's accession to power was almost simultaneous
with the outbreak of the great revolt of the Saxons against
Henry IV. In the third volume of the work we have dealt
with its significance in relation to the history of the develop-
ment of political ideas. We cannot here repeat what we have
said, nor can we discuss in detail the circumstances, but it is
necessary to bear in mind the political situation in Germany,
1 Lambert of Hersfeld, ' Annales,'
a. 1073: Bonizo, 'Liber ad Amicum,'
vii.
2 Gregory VII., ' Registrum,' i. 9 :
" De rege vero mentem nostram et
desiderium plene cognoscere potes ;
quod, quantum in Domino sapirnus,
neminem de eius prsesenti ac futura
gloria aut sollicitiorem aut copiosiori
desiderio nobis pra-ferri credimus. . . .
Quodsi nos audierit, non aliter do eius
quam do nostra salute gaudemus ;
quam tunc cortissimo sibi lucrari
poterit, si in tenenda iustitia nostris
monitia et eonsiliis acquioverit. Sir.
VOL. IV.
vero, quod non optamus, nobis odium
pro dilectione, omnipotenti autem Deo
pro tanto bonore sibi collato, dissimu-
lando iustitiam eius, contemptum non
ex requo reddiderit, interminatio qua
dicitur : ' Maledictus homo, qui pro-
liibet gladicum suum a sanguine,'
super nos Deo providente non veniet.
Nequo enim liberum nobis est, alicuius
personal] gratia legem Dei postpoDere
aut a tramite rectitudinis pro humano
favore recedere, dicente apostolo : ' Si
hominibus placere vellem, servus Doi
non essem.' "
3 Id. id., i. 21.
M
178 CONFLICT OF PAPACY AND EMPIRE. [PABT ill.
as it doubtless c< ntributed much to the development of the
papal position. It was no doubt, in part at least, the serious
danger of the revolt which induced Henry to express himself
so humbly and penitently as he did in that letter of the year
1073, which we have already cited. He acknowledged very
humbly that he had misused his powers, and that he had been
guilty of simony, and he begged Gregory to counsel him, and
promised obedience. 1 In a very important letter, written in
December 1073 to the Archbishop of Magdeburg and the
other Saxon princes who were in revolt against Henry, we have
the first important example of Gregory's intervention between
Henry and his subjects. He laments the hostilities which had
arisen between them, and the consequent devastation of Ger-
many, and was evidently genuinely desirous to restore peace ;
but it is noteworthy that from the first he assumed towards
them and the king a position of authority as well as of medi-
ation. He tells them that he has entreated and admonished
the king, in the name of the Apostles Peter and Paul, to
abstain from hostilities until he could send envoys to inquire
into the causes of the conflict and to restore peace ; and he
admonishes them to observe the same truce ; he assures them
that he would endeavour to establish justice, and that he
would, without fear or respect of persons, give the favour
and the protection of the apostolic authority to that party
which had suffered injury and injustice. 2 The tone of the
letter is courteous but also authoritative,
1 Seo p. 63. bellorum infestations contineat, donee
2 Gregory VII., ' Registrum,' i. 39 : tales ad eum ab apostolica sede nun-
" Verum inter ceteras curarum anxie- cios dirigamus, qui tantae dissensionis
tates ea nos maxime sollicitudo coartat, causas et diligenter inquirere et an-
quod inter vos et Henricum regem, ves- nuente Deo ad pacem et concordiam
trum videlicet dominum, tantam discor- sequa valeant determinatione per-
diam et tarn inimiea studia exhorta esse ducere. Atque itidem vos exoratos et
cognovimus, ut exinde mult a homicidia apostolica auetoritate commonitos esse
incendia deprsedationes ecclesiarum et volumus, ut, ex vestra parte omni
pauperum ac miserabilem patriae vasti- motions sopita, easdem pacis inducias
tatem fieri audiamus. Qua de re regi observetis nee aliqua occasione nobis
misimus exhorti.ntes et ex parte apos- cum Dei adiutorio adstruendae pacis
tolorum Petri et Pauli eum admon- impedimentum opponatis. Cum et-
entcs, ut interim sese ab armis et omni enim, ut scitis, nobis mentiri, sacri-
CHAP. I.] POSITION AND CLAIMS OF GREGORY VII.
179
It would seem that Henry had been unreconciled to the
Church, but from a letter of Gregory to the Empress Agnes, the
mother of Henry IV., written in June 1074, it is clear that by
this time Henry had been restored to the communion of the
Church, and thus a grave danger to his kingdom had been, as
Gregory says, averted ; for Gregory could not meet Henry while
he was outside of this communion, and his relations to his
subjects were very difficult. 1 In a letter written by him
to Henry in December 1074, we have a statement, friendly
but severe, in which he warns him that he could only hold
legium, deserere iustitiam, animse sit
naufragium : neminem vestrum dubi-
tare volumus, quin super hac re,
veritate discussa, quicquid a?quum
videbitur, providente Deo decernere et
stabili pactione studeamus efficere ; et
quamcunque partem iniurias et con-
culcatse iustitia; violentiam pati cogno-
verimus, illi procul dubio, omni timore
et respectu personalis gratia; post-
habito, favorem et apostolicre auctori-
tatis pra'sidia eonferremus."
We may compare with this the terms
in which Gregory VII. wrote to Geuza
of Hungary in 1075 with respect to
the conflict between him and Solomon
for the kingdom of Hungary. He
claims that it is the duty of the Papal
See to defend men's lawful rights and
to establish peace and concord. We
shall return to the letter when we
consider the feudal authority of the
Popes, but in the meanwhile it is
HOticeablo for its claim to a more
general authority.
Id. id., ii. 70 : " Si officii nostri
est, omnibus sua iura defendere ac
inter eos componere pacem et stabilire
concordiam, multo magis ratio exigit
atque usus utilitatis exposcit, ut
seminemus caritatem inter maiores,
quorum pax aut odium redundat in
plurimos. Unde nobis cura est et corcli
pia sollicitudo inrucret, quatenus inter
tu et consanguincum tuum Salomonem
regem faciamus pacem, si possumus :
ut iustitia utrimque servata, sufRciat
unicuique quod suum est, terminum
iustitia; non transeat, metam bone con-
suetudinis non excedat ; sicque sit in
pace nobilissimum regnum Ungariae,
quod hactenus per se principaliter viguit,
ut rex ibi, non regulus fiat. Verum
ubi — contempto nobili dominio beati
Petri apostolorum principis, cuius reg-
num esse prudent iarn tuam latere non
credimus — rex subdidit se Teutonico
regi, et reguli nomen obtinuit. Domi-
nus autem, iniuriam suo illatam principi
pervidens, potestatem regni suo ad te
iudicio transtuht. Et ita consan-
guineus tuus, si quid in obtinendo
regno iuris prius habuit, eo se sacrilega
usurpatione privavit. Petrus enim
a firms petra dicitur, quae portas
inferi confringit, atque adamanfino
rigore destruit et dissipat, quicquid
obsistit."
1 Id. id., i. 85 : " Quorum quidem
quod maximum est et unitati dilec-
tionis coniunctissimum, iam peregistis :
videlicet filiiun vestrum Heinricum
regem communioni ecclesias restitui,
simulque regnum oius a communi peri-
culo liberari. Quoniam illo extra com-
munionem posito, nos quidem timor
divinaj ultionis secum convenire pro-
hibuit : subditos sibi vero quotidie eius
praesentia quasi necessitas qua'dam in
culpa ligavit."
180
CONFLICT OF PAPACY AND EMPIRE.
[part in.
his kingdom rightly if he used his power for the restoration
and defence of Christ's Church. 1 In another letter of the
same time, we seem to have an expression of Gregory's
feelings towards Henry when ho was completely assured of
his repentance and reformation. He expresses his constant
affection for Henry, laments that men sow discord between
them, and urges him to turn away his ears from such men.
He tells Henry that his own desire was to accompany an
army to the sepulchre of the Lord, and to bring help to
the oriental Christians ; and that if by God's help he was
able to do this, he desired to leave the Church in Henry's
care, that he might guard it as his mother, and defend its
honour. He concludes by praying that God would absolve
him from all his sins, and lead him in the way of His
commandments, and bring him to eternal life. 2 In a
letter written to Henry after his victory over the Saxons
on the Unstrut, he expresses his joy that the divine judg-
ment should have given him this triumph over the Saxons,
who were unjustly resisting him, while he laments that so
much Christian blood should have been shed ; and he
assures him that he was willing to open the Church to him,
and to receive him as one who was at the same time lord
and brother and son, on the condition that he would consult
his own salvation and give glory and honour to God. 3
1 Id. id., ii. 30 : " Et tunc demum
regiam potestatem recte te obtinere
cognoscas, 6i regi regum Christo ad
restaurationem defensionemque eccle-
eiarum suarum faciendam domina-
tionis tua? altitudinem inclinas et
verba ipsius dieentis cum tremore
recogitas : ' Ego diligentes me diligo,
et honorificantes me honorificabo ;
qui autem me contemnunt, erunt
ignobiles.' "
2 Id. id., ii. 31 : "si illuc favente
Deo i vero, post Deum tibi Romanam
ecclesiam relinquo, ut earn et sicut
sanctam matrem custodias et ad eius
honorem defendas. . . . Omnipo-
tens Deus, a quo cuncta bona pro-
cedunt, meritis et auctoritate beat-
orum apostolorum Petri et Pauli a
cunctis peccatis te absolvat et per
viam mandatorum suorum incedere
faciat atque ad vitam ceternam per-
dueat."
3 Id. id., iii. 7 : " Ego autem, ut
paucis loquar, horum consilio paratus
sum : Christo favente, gremium tibi
sanctae Romanse ecclesiae aperire, teque
ut dominum fratrem et filium susci-
peie, auxdiumque prout oportuerit
praebere ; nichil aliud a te quserens,
nisi ut ad rnonita tuae salutis non con-
tempnas aurem inclinaro et creatori
CHAP. I.] POSITION AND CLAIMS OF GREGORY VH. 181
In January of 1076, however, we find that the relations
between Gregory and Henry were seriously strained. On
the 8th of that month he exhorted him again to separate
himself from the excommunicated persons, and complained
of his conduct in bestowing the bishoprics of Fermo and
Spoleto on persons who were not even known to Gregory. 1
It was only a few weeks later that the final rupture
took place, and Gregory VII. and Henry IV. were
arrayed in open war against each other. The circum-
stances of this are set out by Lambert of Hersfeld, by
Gregory VII., and by Bruno. According to Lambert the
papal legates appeared in Germany, and summoned Henry
to appear at a Council to be held in Rome in the
second week of Lent to answer to the charges brought
against him, and declared that, if he failed to do
this, he woidd without further delay be cut off from
the Church by this apostolic sentence. Henry was pro-
foundly moved by this announcement, and at once, dis
missing the legates with contumely, summoned all the
bishops and abbots of the kingdom to meet at Worms on
Septuagesima Sunday, to consider the deposition of Gregory,
for this was necessary for the safety of himself and the
kingdom. Gregory, in his letter to the faithful in Germany
of August 1, 1076, after a long account of his relations with
Henry IV., relates that he had written to him warning him
that if he would not separate himself from the society of
excommunicated persons he would have to reckon him as one
separated from the Church, and that Henry, indignant at
being rebuked, had persuaded many of the bishops in
tuo, sicut te decet, non contradicas ut vulnus vulneri infligeres, con-
oflerre gloriam et honorern. . . . De tra statuta apostolieae sedis tradidisti
superbia vero Saxonum vobis iniuste Firmanam et Spoletanam ecclesiam
resistentium, quae divino iudicio a facie — si tamen ab homine tradi ecclesia
vestra contrita est, et gaudendum est aut donari potest — quibusdam personis
pro pace ecclesiae, et dolendum quia nobis etiaru ignotis ; quibus non
inultus christianoruin sanguis effusus licet, nisi probatis et ante bene
est." cognitis, regulariter nianum im-
1 Id. id., iii. 10 : " Et nunc quidoni, ponore."
182
CONFLICT OF PAPACY AND EMPIRE.
[PART III.
Germany and Italy to renounce their obedience to the
Apostolic See. 1
The Council met on the appointed day, and its action will
be best understood by considering the letters which the bishops
themselves and Henry IV. issued announcing its decisions.
We cannot here discuss all the points raised in the letter
of the bishops, but the most noteworthy are the following.
They complained that he had stirred up strife in all the
churches, setting the people against the bishops and clergy ;
that he had arrogated to himself the right of sanctioning or
annulling the appointment of bishops ; that he had forbidden
them to bind or loose any one whose offeDce had been in any
way brought before him. They suggested that his election to
the Papacy had been irregular, and contrary to the decree of
Pope Nicholas II. ; and they charged him with a scandalous
familiarity with some woman and with allowing her to
interfere in ecclesiastical affairs. They concluded, therefore,
that they would no longer recognise him as Pope. 2
1 Lambert, ' Annales,' 1076 (M. G. H.,
S. S., vol. 5, p. 241) : " Aderant praeterea
Hildebrandi papae legati, denunciantes
regi, ut secunda feria seciindae ebdo-
madae in quadragesima ad sinodum
Romse occurreret, de criminibus quae
obicerentur causam dicturus ; alioquin
sciret, se absque omni procrastinatione
eodem die de corpore sanctse ecclesias
apostolico anathemate abscideDdum
esse. Quae legatio regem vehementer
permovit ; statimque abiectis cum
gravi contumelia legatis, omnes qui in
regno suo essent episcopos et abbates,
Wormacise dominica septuagesimae con-
venire praecepit, tractare cum eis volens,
ad deponendum Romanum pontificem si
qua sibi via, si qua ratio pateret ; in hoc
cardine totam verti ratus salutem
suam et regni stabilitatem, si is non
esset episcopus."
Greg. VII., Reg. Ep. Coll. 15.
Cf. Bruno, ' Do Bell. Sax.,' 621.
2 M. G. H., Legum, Sect. IV., Con-
stitutiones, vol. i. 58 : " Sublata
enim, quantum in te fuit, omni potes-
tate ab episcopis, quae eis divinitus per
gratiam sancti Spiritus, qui maiime in
ordinationibus operatur, collata esse
dinoscitur, omnique rerum ecclesiasti-
carum administratione plebeio furori
per te attributa, dum iam nemo alicui
episcopus aut presbyter est, nisi qui
hoc indignissima assentatione a fastu
tuo emendicavit, omnem apostolicae
institutionis vigorem illamque pul-
cherrimam membrorum Christi distri-
butionem, quam doctor gentium tociens
commendat et inculcat, miserabili con-
fusione miscuisti. . . . Quis autem
illud pro indignitate rei non stupeat,
quod novam quandam indebitamque
potentiam tibi tisurpando arrogas, ut
debita universae fratermtati iura de-
struas ? Asseris enim, cuiuscunque
nostrum parrochiani aliquod ad te
delictum vel sola fama perveniat, ultra
iam non habere quemquam nostrum
aliquam potcstatem vel ligandi eum vel
solvendi, prater te solim aut eum
CHAP. I.] POSITION AND CLAIMS OF GREGORY VII.
183
Henry, in his letter to Gregory, says that he had attacked
the bishops who were his friends, and then had turned upon
the head himself, and had threatened to take from him his
soul and his kingdom. He had in consequence summoned a
general meeting of all the chief men of the kingdom, and
by them it had been decided that Gregory could no longer
be recognised as Pope. Henry had assented to their judg-
ment, repudiates Gregory's claim to the Papacy, and bids him
descend from the see of that city of Eome, of which by the
grant of God and the sworn assent of the Eomans he was
Patrician. 1 In his letter to the Eoman people Henry trans-
mits to them the previous letter, and urges them to rise
quem tu specialiter ad hoc delegeris.
. . . Praeterea cum tempore Nicolai
papse synodus celebraretur, in qua
cxxv episcopi consederaDt, sub ana-
themate id statutum et decretum est,
ut nullus unquam papa fieret, nisi per
electionem cardinalium et approba-
tionem populi et per consensum auc-
toritatemque regis. Atque huius con-
silii seu decreti tu ipse auctor, persuasor
subscript orque fuisti. Ad hoc quasi
fetore quodam gravissimi scandali to-
tam ecclesiam replesti de convictu et
cobabitatione alienae mulieris familiari-
ori quam necesse est. In qua re vere-
cundia nostra magis quam causa labo-
rat, quamvis haec generahs querela ubi-
que personuerit, omnia iudicia, omnia
decreta per fominas in apostolica sede
actitari, denique per hunc feminarum
novum senatum totum orbem ecclesiaj
administrari. Nam de iniuriis et con-
tumeliis episcoporum, quos filios mere-
tricum et cetera id genus indignissime
appellas nulla querimonia sufficit.
Quia ergo introitus tuus tantis per-
iuriis est initiatus et ecclesia Dei tam
gravi tempestate per abusionem tuarum
novitatum periclitatur et vitam con-
versationemque tuam tam multiplici
infamia dehonestasti, obedientiam,
quam nullam tibi promisimus, nee de
caetero ullam servaturos esse renunti-
amus, et quia nemo nostrum, ut tu
publico declamabas, tibi hactenus fuit
episcopus, tu quoque nulli nostrum
amodo eris apostolicus."
1 Id. id., 60 : " Quae omnia cum
ego quadam pacientia dissimularem,
tu hoc non pacientiam sed ignaviam
aestimans, in ipsum caput insurgere
ausus es, mandans que nosti, scilicet
ut tuis verbis utar, quod aut tu
morereris aut michi animam reg-
numque tolleres. Hanc inauditam
contumaciam ego non verbis sed re
confutandam diuidicans, generalem
conventum omnium regni primatum
ipsis supplicantibus habui. Ubi cum
ea quae hactenus metu et reverentia
tacebantur, in medium deducta fuis-
sent, veris assertionibus illorum, quas
ex ipsorum litteris audies, palam factum
est, te nullatenus in apostolica sede
posse persistere. Quorum sententiae,
quia iusta et probabilis coram Deo
hominibusque videbatur, ego quoque
assentions omne tibi papatus ius,
quod habere visus es, abrenuntio
atque ut a sede urbis, cuius michi
patriciatus Deo tribuente et iurato
Romanorum assensu debetur, ut de
scendas edico."
184 CONFLICT OF PAPACY AND EMPIRE. [PAKT III.
against Gregory and compel him to descend from the papal
throne, so that another Pope might be appointed by Henry,
with the consent of all the bishops and of the Eoman citizens,
who might heal the wounds of the Church. 1
It is perhaps deserving of notice that the letter of the
bishops lays stress in the main upon alleged ecclesiastical
grievances, and the alleged irregularity of Gregory's election ;
while Henry deals mainly with the threat to excommunicate
him, and the alleged threat to depose him. Whether he
means that this was implied in the threat of excommunica-
tion, which is all that is mentioned by Lambert, or whether
there had been some other statement by Gregory, as may
be meant by Henry's words in his letter to him, " scilicet ut
tuis verbis utar," we cannot tell. Henry clearly alleges that
Gregory had threatened to depose him. It is beyond the
scope of this work to deal with the question how far the
contention of the bishops, that Gregory was claiming new
powers over them, was well founded or not. It is no doubt
true that the Papacy in its attempt to reform the conditions
of the northern churches was extending its activity to an
immense extent, but how far this represented innovations
in principle is another matter.
We are concerned here with the question of the relations
of the Spiritual and Temporal powers, and we must turn
from the proceedings of the Council of Worms to those of
Gregory in the Council which met in Eome in February. In
this Council, and under the terms of an invocation addressed
to St Peter, Gregory solemnly excommunicated Henry, deposed
him from the kingdoms of Germany and Italy, and absolved
1 Id. id., 61 : " Inter quos (inimicos) natione. Non autem ut sanguinem
scilicet Hildebranduni monachum no- eius fundatis dicimus, qiiippe cum
tantes, vos in eius inimicitam excita- maior sibi sit post depositionem poena
mus, quia hunc et ecclesioe invasorem vita quam mors, sed ut eum, si nolit,
et oppressorem et Romanse reipublicse descendere cogatis et alium communi
vel regni nostri insidiatorem depre- omnium episcoporum et vestro con-
hendimus, ut in subsequenti epistola silio a nobis electum in apostolieam
sibi a nobis directa pernoscere in sedem recipiatis, qui quod iste in
promptu est (i.e., No. 60). . . . ecclesia vulneravit curare et velit et
Exurgite igitur in eum fidelissimi, et sit possit."
primus in fide primus in eius damp-
CHAP. I.] POSITION AND CLAIMS OF GEEGOET VII. 185
all his subjects from their oath of allegiance. He did this on
the ground that Henry had refused to obey the Lord, had
joined himself to those who were excommunicated, and had
attempted to divide the Church ; and he claimed this authority
in the name of Peter, to whom Christ had given the power
of binding and loosing in heaven and upon earth. 1
The conflict had at last become open war, and the greatest
Temporal power in Europe was arrayed against the Spiritual
power of Rome. We must now examine the documents in
which Henry and Gregory justified their action. The first
important statement which we must consider is contained
in a letter written by Henry to Gregory on March 27, 1076,
presumably on hearing the news of his excommunication and
deposition at the Council of Rome in February. He addresses
his letter to him not as Pope but as the false monk Hilde-
brand, and accuses him first of having overturned all due order
in the Church and treated the bishops as his slaves ; he had,
he says, patiently endured all this, but Hildebrand, mistaking
his humility for fear, had at last turned upon the royal
authority which had been given him by God, and had threat-
ened to take it away from him, as though Henry had received
the kingdom from him. The tradition of the holy Fathers had
1 Gregory VII., ' Reg.,' iii. 10 a : dico. Dignum est enim, ut qui studet
" Beate Petre apostolorum princeps, honorem ecclesiae tuae imminuere, ipse
inelina, qua?so, pias aures tuas nobis honorem amittat, quern videtur habere,
et audi me servum tuum, quem ab Et quia sicut christianus contempsit
infantia nutristi. . . . Specialiter pro obcodire nee ad Dominum rediit quem
vice tua michi commissa et michi tua dimisit — participando excommunicatis ;
gratia est potestas a Deo data ligandi et multas iniquitates faciendo ; meaque
atque solvendi in celo et in terra. monita, quae pro sua salute sibi misi
Hac itaque fiducia fretus, pro ecclesiae te teste, spernendo ; seque ab ecclesia
tuae honore et defensione, ex parte tua, temptans earn scindere, separ-
omnipotentis Dei Patns et Filii et ando — vinculo eum anathematis vice
Spiritus sancti per tuam potestatem tua alligo. Et sic eum ex fiducia tua
et auctoritatem Heinrico rogi, filio alligo : ut sciant gentes et comprobent,
Heinrici imperatoris, qui contra tuam quia tu es Petrus et super tuam petram
ecclesiam inaudita superbia insurrexit, films Dei vivi asdificarit ecelesiam suam
totius regni Teutonicorum et Italiae et porte infer i non prae valebant ad-
gubernacula contradico ; et omnes versus earn."
christianos a vinculo iuramenti, quod Cf. Lambert of Hersfeld, ' Annales,'
sibi fecerunt vel facient, absolvo ; et, 1076.
ut nullus ei sicut regi sorviat, inter-
186
CONFLICT OF PAPACY AND EMPIRE.
[PAKT HI.
taught that the anointed king could be judged only by God,
and could not be deposed for any crime except heresy. He
therefore, and all his bishops, bids Hilde brand descend from
the apostolic throne and make way for another. 1 The letter
sets out two very important principles or claims : the first, that
Henry had been appointed by God, and was subject only to the
judgment of God, and could be deposed only if he forsook the
faith ; the second, that the king and the bishops had the right
to judge and depose the Pope : but this is more vaguely put,
and the grounds and conditions of the claim are not expressly
stated.
Henry's position is more carefully set out in another docu-
ment, which is thought to be a summons addressed by him
to the bishops to attend a council to be held at Worms at
Whitsuntide. In this 
