« PoprzedniaDalej »
whose close intimacy with Gregory led to too well founded suspicions of his virtue, enjoyed the exquisite pleasure of seeing an emperor in sackcloth and bareheaded at his gate. At length the persons of distinction who were with Gregory, affected at the sufferings of the king, began to complain of the severity of his holiness, which they said was more becoming a tyrant than an apostolical father or judge: these reports were carried to the pope, who, on the fourth day, admitted the king, and after much difficulty granted him absolution. That Gregory had formed the audacious plan of subjecting all the thrones of Europe to the Roman see is undoubtedly evident, both from his own epistles and also from other authentic records of antiquity. The nature of the oath he drew up for the king or emperor of the Romans, from whom he demanded a profession of subjection and allegiance, shows abundantly the arrogance of his pretensions. The despotic views of this lordly pontiff were, however, attended with less success in England than in any other country. William the Conquerer was a prince of great spirit and resolution; extremely jealous of his rights, and tenacious of the prerogatives he enjoyed as a sovereign and independent monarch; and, accordingly, when Gregory wrote him a letter demanding the arrears of the Peter-pence, and at the same time summoning him to do homage for the kingdom of England as a fief of the apostolic see, William granted the former, but refused the latter with a noble obstinacy: declaring that he held his kingdom of God only, and his own sword. Nothing was transacted in the church but by his directions: by his sole authority he banished or imprisoned the bishops whom he did not like, without waiting for a canonical sentence. He went still farther, and set himself in some measure above the popes, by forbidding his subjects to receive their orders or acknowledge their authority, without his permission. “I will never,’ said the monarch, “suffer any person who refuses me the securities of a subject to enjoy estates in my dominions.' He separated the ecclesiastical from the civil courts, with which they had hitherto been conjoined; and he deprived the clergy of many of their lands, and subjected the rest to military service. Obliged to yield to the obstinacy of the English monarch, whose name struck terror into the boldest hearts, the restless pontiff addressed his imperious mandates where he imagined they would be received with more facility. Had the success of that pontiff been equal to the extent of his insolent views, all the kingdoms of Europe would have been, at this day, tributary to the Roman see, and its princes the soldiers or vassals of St. Peter, in the person of his pretended vicar upon earth. But, though his most important projects were ineffectual, many of his attempts were crowned with a favorable issue; for, from the time of his pontificate, the face of Europe underwent a considerable change, and the prerogatives of the emperors and other sovereign princes were much diminished. The first idea of reconquering Palestine from the Arabs and the Turks, by an army of Christians, is attributed to Gregory VII. To him also may be ascribed the origin of indulgencies; of those Vol. XVIII.
to. for another life, whatever crimes might commited in this; of those bills of exchange on heaven, for which, in the end, the popes paid so dearly on earth, and the traffic in which, carried to a disgusting excess, became the first accidental cause of the Reformation. Mosheim has thus summed up the character of this celebrated pontiff:-‘He was,’ says that author, “a man of uncommon genius, whose ambition in forming the most arduous projects was equalled by his dexterity in bringing them into execution; sagacious, crafty, and intrepid, nothing could escape his penetration, defeat his stratagems, or daunt his courage; haughty and arrogant, beyond all measure; obstinate, impetuous, and intractable, he looked up to the summit of"universal empire with a wishful eye, and labored up the steep ascent with uninterrupted ardor and invincible perseverance. Void of all principle, and destitute of every pious and virtuous feeling, he suffered little restraint in his audacious pursuits from the dictates of religion or the remonstrances of conscience.' The death of Gregory neither restored peace to the church nor tranquillity to the state; the tumults and divisions which he had excited still continued, and they were augmented from day to day by the same passions to which they owed their origin. During the pontificate of Urban II., successor to Gregory, the project of reconquering Palestine from the Mahometans was renewed by the enthusiastic zeal of an inhabitant of Amiens, who was known by the name of Peter the Hermit, and who suggested to the Roman pontiff the means of accomplishing what had been unluckily suspended. If we examine the motives that engaged the Roman pontiffs, and particularly Urban II., to kindle this holy war, which in its progress and issue was so detrimental to almost all the countries of Europe, we shall probably be persuaded that its origin is to be derived from the corrupt notions of religion which prevailed in these barbarous times. It was thought inconsistent with the duty apd character of Christians to suffer that land that was blessed with the ministry, and distinguished by the miracles of the Saviour of men, to remain under the dominion of his most inveterate enemies. It was also looked upon as a very importanch branch of true piety to visit the holy place of Palestine; which pilgrimages, however, were extremely dangerous while the des— potic Saracens were in possession of that country. Urban was, indeed, inferior to Gregory in fortitude and resolution; he was, however, his equal in arrogance and pride, and surpassed him greatly in temerity and imprudence. Gregory had never carried matters so far as to forbid the bishops and the clergy to take the oath of allegiance to their respective sovereigns. This rebellious prohibition was reserved for the audacity of Urban, who published it as a law in the council of Clermont. In the same spirit he seduced Conrad, the son of Henry IV., into rebellion against his father, by persuading him that it was lawful for subjects to break their oath of allegiance to all such as were excommunicated by the pope. Two years afterwards, in 1099, both Conrad and the pope died; the latter being 2 U
succeeded in the papal chair by Paschal II. (another Gregory), and the former by his younger brother Henry, as king of Italy. Paschal, unwilling to let pass unimproved the present success of the papal faction, renewed in a council assémbled at Rome, A. D. 1102, the decrees of his predecessors against investitures, and the excommunications they had thundered out against Henry IV. ; and used his most vigorous endeavours to raise up on all sides new enemies to that unfortunate emperor. Henry, however, opposed with great constancy and resolution the efforts of this violent pontiff, and eluded with much dexterity and vigilance his perfidious stratagems. But his heart, wounded in the tenderest part, lost all its firmness and courage, when, in the year 1106, an unnatural son, under the impious pretext of religion, took up arms against his person and his cause. Henry V., so was this monster afterwards named, seized his father in a most treacherous manner, and obliged him to abdicate the empire; after which the unhappy prince retired to Liege, where, deserted by all his adherents, he departed this life in the year 1106. It has been a matter of dispute, whether it was the instigation of the pontiff, or the ambitious and impatient thirst after dominion that engaged Henry V. to declare war against his father; nor is it, perhaps, easy to decide this question. One thing, however, is certain, and that is, that Paschal II. dissolved the oath of fidelity and obedience that Henry had taken to his father; and not only so, but adopted the cause, and supported the interest of this unna‘ural rebel with the utmost zeal, assiduity, and tervor. The revolution that this caused in the empire, was, however, much less favorable to the views of Paschal, than that lordly pontiff expected. The pope had the mortification to find that the new emperor was determined, equally with his predecessors, to maintain his right to investitures. Nor was the king of England more disposed to a surrender of his rights. On a reference by Anselm, archbishop of Canterbury, to the pope, on the subject of doing homage for the temporalities of his see, the messengers returned with an answer, in which the pope insisted on this point, and supported it by the strangest distortion of scripture: “I am the door; by me if any man enter in he shall be saved. He that entereth not by the door into the sheep-fold, but climbeth up some other way, the same is a thief and a robber.” “If kings,’ says the pope, “take upon themselves to be the door of the church, whosoever enter by them become thieves and robbers, not shepherds. Palaces belong to the emperors, churches to the priest; and it is written, “render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God’s.” How shameful is it for the mother to be polluted in adultery by her sons ! If, therefore, O king, thou art a son of the church, as every Catholic Christian is, allow thy mother a lawful marriage, that the church may be wedded to a legitimate husband, not by man, but by Christ. It is monstrous for a son to beget his father, a man to create his God: and that priests are called Gods, as being the vicars of Christ, is manifested in scripture.'
Such arguments were more likely to incense than satisfy a prince of Henry Beauclerc's understanding. He commanded Anselm either to do homage or leave the kingdom, and Anselm with equal firmness replied that he would do neither. A second reference to Rome ensued: two monks were deputed thither by the primate, three bishops by the king. The pope on this occasion acted with a consummate duplicity, for which the motive is not apparent. To the bishops he said that, as their king was in other respects so excellent a prince, he would consent to his granting investitures; but he would not send him a written concession lest it might come to the knowledge of other princes, and they should thereby be encouraged to despise the papal authority. By the monks he sent letters to Anselm, exhorting him to persist in his reBoth parties made their report before the great council of the realm; the prelates solemnly asseverating that they faithfully repeated what had passed between them and the pope, the monks producing their letters. On the one part it was contended that oral testimony might not be admitted against written documents; on the other, that the solemn declaration of three prelates ought to outweigh the word of two monks and a sheet of sheep's skin with a leaden seal. To this it was replied that the gospel itself was contained in skins of parchment. If, however, it was not easy to determine what had been the real decision of the pontiff, his double dealing was palpable; and Anselm may have been influenced by a proper feeling of indignation when he so far conceded to the king as no longer to refuse communion with those bishops who had received investiture from his hands. At length, by Henry's desire, Anselm went to Rome to negociate there in person; and the matter ended in a compromise, that no laymen should invest by delivery of the ring and crosier, but that prelates should perform homage for their tempo. ralities. During these disputes no council had been held in England, and therefore a great decay of discipline was complained of. The mar: riage of the clergy was what Anselm regarded as the most intolerable of all abuses. This real abuse had grown out of it, that the son succeeded by inheritance to his father's church, a custom which, if it had taken root, would have formed the clergy into a separate caste. This, therefore, was justly prohibited ; but it was found necessary to dispense with a canon which forbade the ordination or promotion of the sons of priests, because it appeared that the best qualified, and the greater part of the clergy were in that predicament. Canons, each severer than the last, were now enacted for the purpose of compelling them to celibacy. Married priests were required immediately to put away their wives, and never to see, or speak to them, except in cases of urgent necessity, and in the presence of witnesses. They who disobeyed wer: to be excommunicated; their goods forfeited, and their wives reduced to servitude, as slaves to the bishop of the diocese. The wife of a priestwo to be banished from the parish in which her husband resided, and condemned to slavery is sheever held any intercourse with him; and no woman might dwell with a clergyman, except she were his sister or his aunt, or of an age to which no suspicion could attach. In 1107 the pope presided in a council at Troyes, consisting of the bishops from many places, who proved themselves to be wholly subservient to the ambition of the court of Rome, by confirming all the decrees relating to the pretended papal right to investitures. Henry set out for Rome at the head of a formidable army, and effected a compromise, A. D. 1110. This transitory peace, however, was followed by greater tumults and more dreadful wars than had yet afflicted the church. Immediately after the conclusion of the treaty Rome was filled with the most vehement commotions, and a loud clamor was raised against the pontiff, who was accused of having violated, in a scandalous manner, the duties and dignities of his station; and having prostituted the majesty of the church by his ignominious compliance with the demands of the emperor. To appease these commotions, Paschal assembled in the year 1112 a council in the Lateran church, and not only confessed, with contrition and humility, the fault he had committed in concluding such a convention with Henry, but submitted the question to the determination of the council, who accordingly took that treaty into consideration, solemnly annulled it, and sanctioned the excommunication of the emperor. Hostilities were carried on by both parties till 1117, when Henry resolved to bring matters to a crisis, and set out a second time for Italy at the head of a numerous army. But in the midst of these warlike preparations, which drew the attention of Europe, and portended great and remarkable events, the military pontiff yielded to his fate, and concluded his days, A.D. 1 118. A few days after the death of Paschal, John of Gaieta, a Benedictine monk of Mount Cassin and chancellor of the Roman church, was raised to the pontificate under the title of Gelasius II. In opposition to this choice, Henry elected to the same dignity Maurice Burdin, archbishop of Braga, in Spain, who assumed the denomination of Gregory VIII. ; upon this Gelasius, not thinking himself safe at Rome, or indeed in Italy, set out for France, and soon after died at Clugni. The cardinals who accompanied him in his journey, elected to the papacy immediately after his decease, Guy, archbishop of Vienne, count of Burgundy, who was nearly related to the emperor, and is distinguished in the list of the Roman pontiffs by the name of Calixtus II. The elevation of this eminent ecclesiastic was in the issue extremely fortunate. Remarkably distinguished by his illustrious birth, and still more by his noble and heroic qualities, this magnanimous pontiff continued to #P. the emperor with courage and success. He made himself master of Rome, threw into prison the pontiff that had been chosen by the emperor, and fomented the civil commotions in Germany. But his fortitude and resolution were tempered with moderation, and accompanied with, a spirit of generosity and compliance, "high differed much from the obstinate arrogance of his lordly predecessors. Accordingly, he lent **ar to prudent councils, and was willing to
relinquish a part of the demands upon which the former pontiffs had so vehemently insisted, that he might restore the public tranquillity, and satisfy the ardent desires of so many nations, who groaned under the dismal effects of these deplorable divisions. Calixtus did not long enjoy the fruits of the peace to which he had so much-contributed by his prudence and moderation, for he died A. D. 1120. The warm contest between the emperors and the popes, which was considered as at an end since the time of Calixtus II., was unhappily renewed under the pontificate of Adrian IV., who was a native of England, and whose original name was Nicholas Breakspear. Frederick I., surnamed Barbarossa, being placed in 1152 on the imperial throne, publicly declared his resolution to maintain the dignity and privileges of the Roman empire in general, and more particularly to render it respectable in Italy; nor was he at all studious to conceal the design he had formed of reducing the over-grown power and opulence of the pontiffs and clergy within narrow limits. Adrian, perceiving the danger that threatened the majesty of the church and the authority of the clergy, prepared himself for defending both with vigor and constancy. The first occasion of trying their strength was offered at the coronation of the emperor at Rome, in the year 1155, when the pontiff insisted on Frederick performing the office of equerry, by holding the stirrup to his holiness. This humbling proposal was at first rejected with disdain by the emperor. An open rupture between the emperor and the pontiff was expected as the inevitable consequence of such measures, when the death of Adrian, which happened on the 1st of September, 1159, suspended the storm. Guy, cardinal of St. Calixtus, was elected pontiff A. D. 1164, under the auspices of the emperor, by the title of Paschal III. In the mean time Alexander III., who had been chosen by the cardinals, recovered his spirits, and, returning into Italy, maintained his cause with uncommon resolution and vigor, and not without some promising hopes of success. He held at Rome, in the year 1167, the Lateran council, in which he solemnly deposed the emperor, whom he had upon several occasions before this period publicly loaded with anathemas and execrations; dissolved the oath of allegiance which his subjects had taken to him as their lawful sovereign, and encouraged and exhorted them to rebel against his authority, and to shake off his yoke. But soon after this audacious proceeding Frederick made himself master of Rome; upon which the insolent pontiff fled to Benevento, and left the apostolic chair to Paschal his competitor. The affairs of Alexander soon after took a more prosperous turn, and the emperor, after having, during the space of three years, been alternately defeated and victorious, was at length so fatigued with the hardships he had suffered, and so dejected at a view of the difficulties he had yet to overcome, that, in the year 1177, he concluded a treaty of peace at Venice with Alexander, and a truce with the rest of his enemies. It was not only by force of arms, but also by uninterrupted efforts of dexterity and artifice, by wise counsel and prudent laws, that Alexander III. maintained the pretended rights of the church and extended the authority of the Roman pontiffs. For, in the third council of the Lateran, held at Rome A. D. 1179, the following decrees, among many others upon different subjects, were passed by his advice and authority:-1st. That, in order to put an end to the confusion and dissensions which so often accompanied the election of the Roman ntiffs, the right of election should not only be invested in the cardinals alone, but also that the person in whose favor two-thirds of the college of cardinals voted should be considered as the lawful and duly elected pontiff.' This law is still in force; it was, therefore, from the time of Alexander that the election of the pope acquired that form which it still retains, and by which not only the people, but also the Roman clergy, are excluded entirely from all share in the honor of conferring that important dignity. 2dly. A spiritual war was declared against heretics, whose numbers increasing considerably about this time created much disturbance in the church in general, and infested, in a more particular manner, several provinces in France, which groaned under the fatal dissensions that accompanied the propagation of their errors. 3dly, The right of recommending and nominating to the saintly order was also taken away from councils and bishops; and canonisation was ranked among the greater and more important causes the cognizance of which belonged to the pontiff alone. To all this we must not forget to add, that the power of erecting new kingdoms, which had been claimed by the pontiffs from the time of Gregory VII, was not only assumed but also exercised by Alexander in a remarkable instance; for, in the year 1179, he conferred the title of king and the ensigns of royalty upon Alphonso I. duke of Portugal, who under the pontificate of Lucius II. had rendered his province tributary to the Roman see. It was during this pontificate that the claims of the Roman priesthood of exemption from temporal jurisdiction, became, in the person of Thomas à Becket, matter of serious dispute between the king of England and Alexander; the latter refusing to ratify the constitutions of Clarendon; by which it was enacted “that no appeal in spiritual causes should be carried before the holy see;' and, “that churchmen accused of any crime should be tried in the civil eourts.” Although the papal sanction was refused, still much was gained by even the agitation of the question, .."by the proof which it afforded of the independence of the English, and its superiority over all papal doctrines and spiritual canons. Rapin says that above 100 murders had been committed by ecclesiastics, not one of whom was so much as 'punished with degradation; hence the necessity of the king's determination. In reviewing the state of the church in this <entury it will appear surprising that the religion of Jesus was not totally extinguished. Relics, which were for the most part fictitious, or at least uncertain, attracted more powerfully the confidence of the people than the merits of Christ. The opulent, whose circumstances enabled them to erect new temples, or to repair or
embellish the old, were looked upon as the happiest of mortals, and were considered as the most intimate friends of the Most High. While they whom poverty rendered incapable of such pompous acts of liberality contributed to the multiplication of religious edifices by their bodily labors, expecting to obtain eternal salvation by these voluntary and painful efforts. This universal reign of ignorance and superstition was dexterously improved to fill the coffers of the church. Indeed all the various ranks and orders of the clergy had each their peculiar method of fleeci
the people. The bishops, when they wan
money for their private pleasures, or for the exigences of the churches, granted to their flocks the power of purchasing the remission of the penalties imposed upon transgressors by a sum of money, which was to be applied to certain religious purposes; or, in other words, they published indulgences, which became an inexhaustible source of opulence to the episcopal orders; until the Roman pontiffs, casting an eye upon
the immense treasures that the inferior rulers of
the church were thus accumulating by the sale of indulgences, thought proper to limit the power of the bishops in this respect, and assumed almost entirely this profigate traffic to themselves. In consequence of this new measure the court of Rome became the general magazine of indulgences; and the pontiffs, when either the wants of the church or the demon of avarice prompted them to look out for new subsidies, published not only a universal, but also a complete, or what they called a plenary, remission of all the temporal pains and penalties which the church had annexed to certain transgressions. They went still farther, and not only remitted the penalties which the civil and ecclesiastical laws had enacted against transgressors, but audaciously usurped the authority which belongs to God alone, and impiously pretended to abolish even the punishments which are reserved in a future state for the workers of iniquity; a step this which the or. with all their avarice and presumption, never once ventured to take. To justify these measures of the pontiffs a most monstrous and absurd doctrine was now invented, which was modified and embellished by St. Thomas in the following century, and which contained among others the following opinions:—“That there actually existed an immense treasure of merit, composed of the pious deeds and virtuous actions which the saints had performed, beyond what was necessary for their own salvation, and which were therefore applicable to the benefit of others; that the guardian and dispenser of this precious treasure was the Roman pontiff; and that, of consequence, he was empowered to assign to such as he thought proper a portion of this inexhaustible source of merit suitable to their respective guilt, and sufficient to deliver them from the punishment due to their crimes.’ It is a most deplorable mark of the power of superstition that a doctrine so ab– surd in its nature and so pernicious in its effects should yet be retained and defended in the church of Rome. The most illustrious and resolute pontiff that filled the papal chair during this century, and whose exploits make the greatest noise in Europe, was Lotharius of Segni, cardinal deacon, otherwise known by the name of Innocent III. This pontiff, who was placed at the head of the church in the year 1198, followed the steps of Gregory VII, and not only usurped the despotic government of the church but also claimed the empire of the world, and thought of nothing less than subjecting the kings and princes of the earth to his sceptre. He was a man of learning and application; but his cruelty, avarice, and arrogance, clouded the lustre of the good qualities which his panegyrists have thought proper to attribute to him. In Asia he gave a king to the Armenians; in Europe he usurped the same extravagant privilege in the year 1204, and conferred the regal dignity upon Primislaus duke of Bohemia. The same year he sent to Johannicius, duke of Bulgaria and Walachia, an extraordinary legate, who in the name of the pontiff invested that prince with the ensigns and honors of royalty; while, with his own hand, he crowned Peter II. of Arragon, who had rendered his dominions subject and tributary to the church, and saluted him publicly at Rome with the title of king. We omit many other examples of this frenetic pretension, which might be produced from the letters of this arrogant pontiff, and many other acts of despotism, which Europe beheld not only with astonishment, but also, to its eternal reproach, with the ignominious silence of obedience. The ambition of this pope was not satisfied with the distribution and government of these petty kingdoms. He extended his views farther, and resolved to render the power and majesty of the Roman see formidable to the greatest European monarchs. When the empire of Germany was disputed, towards the commencement of this century, between Philip duke of Suabia, and Otho IV. third son of Henry the Lion, he espoused at first the cause of Otho, thundered out his excommunications against Philip, and upon the death of the latter, which happened in the year 1209, placed the imperial
diadem upon the head of his adversary. But as
Otho was by no means disposed to submit to this pontiff's nod, or to o to the full his ambitious desires, he incurred, of consequence, his lordly indignation; and Innocent, declaring him by a solemn excommunication unworthy of the empire, raised in his place Frederick II. his upil, the son of Henry VI. and king of the two Sicilies, to the imperial throne in the year 1212. of a prince attempted to withdraw from this authority, received from heaven, the pontiff anathematised him, expelled him out of the communion of the faithful, and his deluded subjects avoided him like a pestilence. In general he went and solicited the pardon of the irritated vice-god, appealed to him by the most abject submission, and by the acknowledgment of all his rights which the arrogant pontiff demanded; After which the repentant sovereign was re-established in his charge and his honors; and at each similar attempt the power of the popes, sanctioned and increased, became still more strengthened. In the third canon of the fourth Lateran council, which was holden by this pope in 1215, entitled De Hereticis, the church excommuniCates and anathematises every heresy which op
posed the faith which had been established in that church, and condemns all heretics by whatever name they are called. The secular legislatures, whatever be their power or titles, are admonished, and if necessary are, in order to be considered faithful to the church, to exert themselves to the most to exterminate all those whom the church defines to be heretics. If the princes to whom this decree of the church shall come neglect to obey they are subject to excommunication. If it be notified to the pope that the contumacy of any prince be continued more than one year, his vassals may be absolved from their allegiance and his territory be allotted to another who shall exterminate heretics and maintain the faith in its purity. “Under this young and ambitious priest,’ says Gibbon, “the successors of St. Peter attained the full meridian of their greatness; and in a reign of eighteen years he exercised a despotic command over the emperors and kings whom he raised and deposed over the nations; whom an interdict of months or years deprived, for the offence of their rulers, of the exercise of Christian worship. In the councils of Lateran he acted as the ecclesiastical, almost as the temporal, sovereign of the east and west. But of all the European princes none felt in so dishonorable and severe a manner the despotic fury of this insolent pontiff as John, surnamed Sans Terre, king of England.’ See our article ENGLAND. Innocent may boast of the two most signal triumphs over sense and humanity, the establishment of transubstantiation by the councils of Lateran in 1215, and the origin of the inquisition. At his voice two crusades, the fourth and the fifth, were undertaken: but, except a king. of Hungary, the princes of the second order were alone at the head of the pilgrims; the forces were inadequate to the design; nor did the effects correspond with the hopes and wishes of the pope and the people. Innocent did not confine his efforts to the holy land, he promoted. a crusade against the Albigenses. He first attempted to convert them by his missionaries, one of whom was murdered, which was the signal for the display of all his wrath; he did not even deign to institute an enquiry, but ordered the whole race to be pursued with fire and sword, and to be treated with more severity than the Saracens themselves. About 200,000 lives were sacrificed in the terrible war in a few months, and barbarities practised, before unheard of; but the perpetration of them was applauded or rewarded by the cruel pontiff, and the infernal spirit by which they had been actuated was impiously called zeal in supporting the cause of God and of the church. In the year 1216 Innocent undertook a journey to Pisa; but on his arrival at Perugia he was attacked with a violent disorder, which put an end to his life in a few days. Mr. Berington observes of this pope that ‘the prerogative of the holy see, built up by adulation and misjudging zeal, filled his mind; and the meteor of universal empire gleaming on his senses did not permit the operation of a dispassionate and unbiassed judgment. No tears were shed when Innocent fell, but those which religion wept, too justly pained by the inordinate exertions and worldly views of her first minister.”