countering not only isolated results, but the fundamental principles of the Papal system, first found vent,27 while the extravagant assumptions of the Papacy were laid bare to the view of all.28

actiones et onera gravissima pecuniarum per Curiam Romanam Ecclesiae Regni nostri impositas vel imposita, quibus Regnum nostrum miserabiliter depauperatum extitit, sive etiam imponendas vel imponenda, levari aut colligi nullatenus volumus, nisi duntaxat pro rationabili, pia et urgentissima causa, et inevitabili necessitate, ac de spontaneo et expresso consensu nostro et ipsius Ecclesiae Regni nostri. The conclusion runs: Harum tenore universis justitiariis, officiariis et subditis nostris-mandamus, quatenus omnia et singula praedicta diligenter et attente servent, atque servari-inviolabiliter faciunt: nec aliquid in contrarium quovis modo faciant vel attentent, seu fieri vel attentari permittant: transgressores aut contra facientes-tali poena plectendo, quod caeteris deinceps cedat in exemplum. E. Richer hist. concill. general. lib. ii. c. 7. The genuineness of this document, which is attacked especially by P. Daniel, has been demonstrated in Libertés de l'église Gallicane, edit. ann. 1771, iii. 633, 667. Velly hist. de France, iii. 239. [On the Pragmatic Sanction of Lewis IX., comp. Prof. W. G. Soldan, in Niedner's Zeitschrift fur die hist. Theol. 1856, s. 377-451. Prof. Soldan reviews the objections lately urged by ultramontane writers against the genuineness of this document, viz.: R. Thomassy, de la Pragm. Sanction, Paris, 1844, and Karl Rosen, die Pragm. Sanction, Munchen, 1853. In opposition to them he shows: 1. That this Sanction has its basis in the events of the period; 2. That the omission of reference to the Regalia is not against its authenticity; 3. That it is in harmony with the spirit of the times and the character of Lewis; 4. That in its form it is not liable to suspicion; 5. That there is abundant historical evidence of its genuineness.]

27 Johannes de Parrhisiis de potest. regia et papali (see above, ◊ 59, note 36), cap. xi. in Goldasti monarchia, ii. 120: Potestas Praelatorum inferiorum non est a Deo mediante Papa, sed immediate a Deo, et a populo eligente vel consentiente. Non enim Petrus, cujus successor est Papa, misit alios Apostolos, quorum successores sunt alii Episcopi: nec LXXII. discipulos, quorum successores sunt Presbyteri Curati; sed eos Christus immediate misit (Joann. 20, et Luc. 19). Nec Petrus insufflavit in alios Apostolos, dans eis Spiritum sanctum, et potestatem dimittendi peccata, sed Christus (Joann. 20, et deinde 21). In novo (i. e. Gratiani Decr. dist. xxi. c. 2) dicitur, quod omnes a Christo simul eandem et aequalemn acceperunt potestatem. Paulus etiam dicit, suum apostolatum non accepisse a Petro, sed a Christo, seu a Deo immediate ad Gal. 1, etc.

28 Compare the remarkable expression of William Durant, bishop of Mende, otherwise so devoted to the hierarchy, in his tractatus de modo celebrandi generalis concilii (1311, written in preparation for the Council at Vienne, printed more than once, among other places in the Tractatus illustrium Jurisconsultorum, Tome xiii. P. i. Venet. 1584. fol., f. 159.) Part ii. rubr. 7: Proverbium vulgare est: qui totum vult, totum perdit. Ecclesia Romana sibi vindicat universa: unde timendum est, quod universa perdat nam, sicut Salomon Proverb. xxx. [v. 33]: qui multum emungit, sanguinem elicit. Sicut habetur exemplum de Ecclesia Graecorum, quae ex hoc ab Ecclesiae Romanae obedientia dicitur

recessisse.

[In the inedited documents for the History of France, now in the course of publication, a volume, edited by J. Tardi, has just been issued (1855) on the "Privileges accorded to the crown of France by the Holy See," from the original documents in the archives of the empire.]

SECOND CHAPTER.

HISTORY OF THE HIERARCHY OF THE CHURCH IN OTHER LANDS.

§ 63.

THEIR RELATIONS TO THE STATES.

While in the great struggles of this age, in which Church and State strove for the chief power, the Popes made themselves masters of both, the hierarchies of the Church in the different countries could only attain that independence of all secular power1 at which they aimed, so far as the existing feudal relations allowed.2 The earlier influence of the lords of the soil over the appointments to bishoprics and abbacies vanished altogether in Germany from the time of Otto IV.,3 and was straitened by degrees in other countries also. But in all cases, even when appointed on the side of the Church, the prelates had to take the oath of fealty, as before," to discharge their feudal obligations, and in all causes relating to fiefs to acknowledge the right of their feudal lord." On these

6

How this was striven for, see above, § 48, note 12. Comp. Urbani II. epist. 14, ad Rodulphum Comitem (Mansi xx. 659): Nosse te volumus, quia nulli saecularium domino potestatem in clericos habere licet; sed omnes clerici Episcopo soli esse debent subjecti. Quicunque vero aliter praesumpserit, canonicae procul dubio sententiae subjacebit. 49, notes 14 and 15, § 50, note 8 toward the end.

2 Comp. above, ◊ 49, note 5, § 50, note 8.

In the 12th century imperial nominations of bishops, or imperial influence over the elections, came into vogue, see Sugenheim's Staatsleben des Klerus im Mittelalter, Bd. 1 (Berlin, 1837), s. 153; also Sugenheim's Kirchenstaat, 1854. Otto IV. and Frederick II. had, however, to disclaim this right (§ 54, notes 17 and 20).

In France, England, and Spain, there was a regulation established by law, that the King's permission to elect, and afterward his confirmation of the election, must be obtained. In Naples, Hungary, Denmark, and Sweden, nomination by the King continued till the 13th century. Staudenmaier's Gesch. d. Bischofswahlen (Tubingen, 1830), s. 249. Sugenheim, i. 197.

This was acknowledged by Innocent III. in Conc. Lateran. ann. 1215, c. 43 (Decr. Greg. lib. ii. tit. 24 c. 30). Even in Germany the Prelates could not assume the regalia before doing so. Sugenheim, i. 162.

• Thomassin. P. iii. lib. i. c. 45-48. Hullmann's Gesch. d. Ursprungs d. Stande in Deutschland, 2te Aufl. s. 272 ff. Montag's Gesch. d. deutschen staatsburgerl. Freiheit, ii. 447.

This right was recognized by Alexander III. Decr. Greg. lib. ii. tit. 2, c. 6 (the rubric also runs thus: Si quaestio feudalis est inter clericum et laicum, cognoscet dominus feudi) and c. 7. Thus Innocent III. interceded with King Philipp II. of France (lib. viii. ep. 190) for the Bishops of Auxerre and Orleans: dum eorum saisiri fecisti regalia,

8

feudal relations the lords of the soil grounded also the right of Regalia (jus Regaliae) and the right of spoils (jus spolii or jus exuviarum). Although these rights were disallowed by the Popes," the German Emperors were not compelled to resign them until the time of Otto IV.10 Even then they were generally maintained by the German Princes," by the rest of the monarchs, and also by their most powerful vassals. 12 The German Emperors

immo etiam quaedam alia praeter illa,-levi occasione praetensa, quod quidam eorum milites in tuo exercitu constituti ad locum, quem eos adire praeceperas, ire cum aliis nolue. rint, absentibus eisdem Episcopis per licentiam a te liberaliter impetratam. Et cumtibi humiliter supplicaverint, ut faceres eis reddi regalia sic subtracta, paratis postmodum curiae tuae subire judicium, sicut in talibus fieri consuevit, tu supplicationes corum admittere noluisti, etc. Cf. lib. xiv. ep. 52.

• Compare on this head De Marca de conc. Sac. et Imp. lib. viii. c. 1 ss., especially c. 17 ss. Natalis Alex. hist. ecclesiast. ad saec. xiii. et xiv. diss. viii. Meibomii rerum Germ. iii. 185 ss. Planck, IV. ii. 79. Sugenheim's Staatsleben des Klerus im Mittelalter, i. 267. Traces of both are to be found even earlier than this. From the daring robbery of the ecclesiastical heritage (Thomassini vetus et nova disciplina de beneficiis, P. iii. lib ii. c 51 ss.), the right of spoils developed itself, and was already old in the time of Frederick I., see ◊ 53, note 6. Probably the most ancient hint about the Regalia in Germany is to be found in Frider. Archiep. Colon. epist. ad Otton. Bamb., see above, 49, note 21. On the ground of the Regalia, see the declaration of Philip the Fair to the Bishop of Auxerre (quoted by De Marca from the Act of Parliament, lib. viii. c. 22, 6): Sicut feodum vassallo vacans interim cum suis reditibus a domino licite occupatur, et propter defectum hominis, ut vulgari nostrae patriae verbo utamur, de jure et generali consuetudine Regni nostri per dominum, quousque superveniat persona, quae illi serviat, licite detinetur: sic nos et nostri antecessores vacante Ecclesia Carnotensi et temporalem jurisdictionem et bona temporalia accipimus, et nostros facimus omnes fructus, qui proveniunt ex eisdem. Non solum autem nostram potestatem in bonis episcopalibus exercemus; imo bona temporalia praebendarum et dignitatum, sive sit jurisdictio temporalis, sive alia bona temporalia, quae possint ad aliquem pertinere, cum vacante praebenda vel dignitate concedimus, et de eis, praedicto tamen modo, disponimus nostro jure.

Conc. Claromont. ann. 1095, can. 31. Conc. Toiosan. ann. 1119, can. 4.

10 By Otto IV. and Frederick II., see § 54, notes 17 and 20, by Rudolph of Hapsburg, 58, note 8.

11 Sugenheim, i. 289. Frederick II.'s universal prohibition of the spoils in the Con federatio cum Principibus ecclesiasticis, Frankfort 1220, in Pertz, iv. 236, was never observed. When the Margraves of Brandenburg, in 1244, renounced all claim on the right of spoils, nevertheless bailiffs and patrons continued to exercise it. Spieker's Kirchenu. Reformationsgesch. d. Mark Brandenburg, i. 412, 585.

12 Sugenheim, 1. 294. The Conc. gener. Ludg. ann. 1274, can 12, in Mansi xxiv. 90. pronounces sentence of excommunication (as Guil. Durantis sen., who was present at it, says, in his comm. ad canones Conc. Ludg. ad clamorem Praelatorum Franciae et Angliae) against those, who, regalia, custodiam, sive guardiam advocationis, vel defensionis titulum in ecclesiis, monasteriis, sive quibuslibet aliis piis locis, de novo usurpare conantes, bona ecclesiarum, monasteriorum, aut locorum ipsorum vacantium occupare praesumunt. On the other hand: Qui autem ab ipsarum ecclesiarum caeterorumque locorum fundatione, vel ex antiqua consuetudine, jura sibi hujusmodi vindicant: ab illorum abusu sic pruden ter abstineant, et suos ministros in eis solicite faciant abstinere, quod ea, quae non per. tinent ad fructus sive reditus provenientes vacationis tempore, non usurpent; nec bona VOL. II.-25

retained the jus primarum precum,13 as a pitiful remnant of the Regalia.

Since even the clergy in the 12th century were taxed by their secular lords, not unfrequently in an unjust and violent manner,14 Alexander III. (in 1179) decreed that all contributions to the necessities of the State which were not founded on feudal obligations should depend upon their own free grant;15 Innocent III. (1215) made them dependent on the Pope's permission.16 Though

caetera, quorum se asserunt habere custodiam, dilabi permittant, sed in bono statu conservent. However, the Regalia were again made a subject of contention with Philip the Fair by Boniface VIII., but without result, see above, ◊ 59, note 13, and note 21, no. V. 13 The first known documents on this head in Germany are by Conrad IV., king of Rome, in the year 1242 (found in Senkenberg Cod. Probationum, p. 9), and by King Richard (in Guil. Durantis specul. juris lib. iv. P. iii. tit. de dignitat. et praeb. § 2, note 7, and in Aventini antiqu. Altah. in Oefele scriptt. rer. Bavar. i. 728). He, however already makes use of the expression: vestigia praedecessorum nostrorum et imperatorum Romanorum inhaerentes. Rudolph of Hapsburg writes to an abbot in the Paraleipomena ad chron. Ursperg. ann. 1286, and quoted thence in Goldast. const. Imp. iii. 446: Cum ex antiqua et approbata, ac a divis Imperatoribus et Regibus ad nos producta consuetudine quaelibet Ecclesia in nostro Romano Imperio constituta, ad quam beneficiorum ecclesiasticorum pertinet collatio, super unius collatione beneficii precum nostrarum primarias admittere teneatur, Devotionem tuam rogamus, quatenus huic clerico de ecclesiastico beneficio, quod ad tuam collationem attinet, ob reverentiam sacri Imperii, studeas liberaliter providere. Cf. Wurdtwein subsid. dipl. ii. 1. On the whole question, Thomassinus P. ii. lib. i. c. 54, especially H. C. de Senkenberg de jure primarum precum Regum Germaniae Imperatorumque, indulto papali haud indigente tract. ed. R. C. de Senkenberg. Francof.

ad M. 1784. 4.

14 Concerning the taxes and immunities of the clergy at this time, consult particularly Thomassin, P. iii. lib. i. c. 41-44. Planck, iv. ii. 158. Bernard of Clairvaux, in his letter of thanks to the Duke of Lorraine for the release from taxation (epist. 119), writes about it like Ambrose (vol. i. part 2, § 91, note 2): Alioquin non renuimus Domini nostri sequi exemplum, qui pro se non dedignatus est solvere censum, parati et nos, libenter quae sunt Caesaris Caesarı reddere, et vectigal cui vectigal, et tributum cui tributum: praesertim quia juxta Apostolum non tam debemus requirere datum nostrum, quam vestrum lucrum (Phil. iv. 17).

15 Conc. Lateran. III. can. 19, in Mansi xxii. 228 (Decr. Greg. lib. ini. tit. 49, c. 4) : in diversis partibus mundi rectores et consules civitatum necnon et alii, qui potestatem habere videntur, tot Ecclesiis frequenter onera imponunt, et ita gravibus eas crebrisque exactionibus premunt, ut deterioris conditionis factum sub eis sacerdotium videatur, quam sub Pharaone fuerit, qui divinae legis notitiam non habebat.-Universa fere onera sua imponunt Ecclesiis, et tot angariis eas affligunt, ut illud eis, quod Jeremias deplorat, competere videatur: Princeps provinciarum facta est sub tributo (Thren. i. 1). Sive quidam fos sata, sive expeditiones, sive quaelibet sibi arbitrentur agenda: de bonis Ecclesiarum, cle. ricorum et pauperum Christi usibus deputatis cuncta volunt fere compıları.-Quocirca sub anathematis districtione severius prohibemus, ne de caetero talia praesumant attentare, nisi Episcopus et Clerus tantam necessitatem vel utilitatem aspexerint, ut absque ulla coactione ad relevandas communes necessitates, ubi laicorum non suppetunt facultates, subsidia per Ecclesias existiment conferenda.

16 Conc. Lateran. IV. can. 46, in Mansi xxii. 1030 (Decr. Greg. lib. iii. tit. 49, c, 7), with reference to Alexander's decree: Verum si quando Episcopus simul cum Clericis tantam necessitatem vel utilitatem prospexerint, ut-subsidia per Ecclesias duxerint confe

even now the clergy were often burdened with heavy imposts in favor of individual princes with the Pope's concurrence," still the fundamental principle could now be maintained that the clergy should never be taxed by secular princes. 18 Only in the free towns there was developed an opposition, more active as issuing from the people, against the freedom from taxation usurped by the clergy. 19

In the same manner the clergy claimed immunity from all secular tribunals,20 especially in personal cases. But since the lenity

renda praedicti laici humiliter et devote recipiant cum actionibus gratiarum. Propter imprudentiam tamen quorumdam Romanum prius consulant Pontificem, cujus interest communibus utilitatibus providere.

17 There are instances of Papal grants above, ◊ 56, note 17, § 57, note 2, § 59, note 10. Cf. Thomassin. P. iii. lib. i. c. 41, § 6 ss. c. 43, § 5 ss.

18 Many Prelates indeed still sought to obtain immunity from taxation by privilege from their sovereign lord (see Hullmann's Gesch. d. Ursprungs d. Stande, 2te Ausg. s. 235): others, however, demanded this as a right in the widest signification. Cf. Cone. Narbon. ann. 1227, can. 12, in Mansi xxiii. 24: Item statuimus, ut clerici occasione patrimonii sui vel personae nullatenus tallientur, etc. In like manner, Conc. Tolosan. ann. 1229, can. 20, 21. Conc. Biterrense ann. 1246, can. 22. Conc. Nannet. ann. 1264, can. 7. Conc. Colon. ann. 1266, can. 8. Conc. Budense ann. 1279 can. 59 ct 60 (in Mansı xxiv. 300). Compare the attempts of Boniface VIII., above, § 59, note 6 and the following.

19 Compare note 15. In this point the Lombard cities came first with their example, Raumer's Hohenstaufen, v. 110. Hullmann's Stadtewesen, iv. 127. Hurter's Innoc. III. iii. 288. In the year 1230 the men of Zurich agreed on the law that priests also should pay taxes, keep watches, repair walls and moats, and bear other common burdens, see Tschudi's Schweizerchronik for the year 1230.

20 This was claimed in its widest signification by Urban II. See above, note 1. Cf. Conc. Nemausense ann. 1096, can. 14 (Mansi xx. 936): Nullus-nec clericos, nec monachos in curiam suam ad saeculare cogat venire judicium: quoniam hoc rapina esset et sacrilegium. However, Gratian, under caus. xi., qu. 1, c. 30, thus states the practice of the courts in his time on this point: Ex his omnibus datur intelligi, quod in civili causa clericus ante civilem judicem conveniendus est. In criminali vero causa non nisi ante Episcopum est clericus examinandus. On the other hand, Alexander III. already declares once more, Conc. Lateran. ann. 1179, can. 14: Sane quia laici quidam ecclesiasticas personas, et ipsos etiam Episcopos, suo judicio stare compellunt; cos, qui de caetero id praesumpserint, a communione fidelium decernimus segregandos. And Innocent III. (Decr. Gregor. lib. ii. tit. 2, c. 12) upbraids the Archbishop of Pisa with this charge: asseruisti, te usque ad haec tempora tenuisse, quod licitum sit cuilibet clerico renunciare saltem in temporalibus causis juri suo, et sibi laicum judicem constituere, praesertim ubi adversarii voluntas accedit, and disclaims this opinion, cum non sit beneficium hoc personale, cui renunciari valeat, sed potius toti collegio ecclesiastico sit publice indultum, cui privatorum pactio derogare non potest. Frederick II., on his coronation at Rome 1220, granted the widest exemption to the clergy, by the constitution which was adopted also into the cod. Justin. under lib. i. tit. iii. 1. 33 (Pertz, iv. 244): Statuimus, ut nullus ecclesiasticam personam in criminali quaestione vel civili trahere ad judicium saeculare praesumat, contra constitutiones imperiales (see vol. i. Part 2, § 113, note 14) et canonicas sanctiones. Quod si fecerit, actor a suo jure cadat, judicatum non teneat, et judex sit ex tunc potestate judicandi privatus. On the whole subject, comp. Thomassin. P. ii. lib. iii. e.

112-114.