YALE
DIVINITY SCHOOL
LIBRARY

HISTORY

CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

BY

HENRY C. SHELDON,
AUTHOR OF "HISTORY OF CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE," AND PROFESSOR
IN BOSTON UNIVERSITY.

Vol. II.
THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.

NEW YORK: 46 East 14th Street.
THOMAS Y. CROWELL & CO.
BOSTON: 100 Purchase Street.
1894.

Copyright, 1894,
By Henry C Sheldon.

SHnitorsitrj jirtss:
John Wilson and Son, Cambridge, U. S. A.

CONTENTS.

first Petiob (590-1073). Page
INTRODUCTION  3

CHAPTER I.
THE BARBARIAN TRIBES  7
CHAPTER II.
EXTENSION OF CHRISTIAN TERRITORY BY MISSIONARIES 23
CHAPTER III.
LIMITATION OF CHRISTIAN TERRITORY BY MOHAMME
DANISM  50
CHAPTER IV.
CIVIL PATRONS OF CHRISTIANITY  58
CHAPTER V.
CONTROVERSIES  67

iv CONTEXTS.
CHAPTER VI.
CHURCH CONSTITUTION AND DISCIPLINE. Page
I. The Relations between Church and State ... 93
II. The Clergy in General  105
III. The Papacy  Ill
IV. Discipline  125
CHAPTER VII.
WORSHIP AND LIFE  131

Sramti Pertoti (1073-1294).
INTRODUCTION  149
CHAPTER I.
POLITICAL STATUS OF THE PRINCIPAL COUNTRIES OF
EUROPE  151
CHAPTER II.
THE PAPAL THEOCRACY AND OTHER FEATURES OF
CHURCH CONSTITUTION.
I. Gregory VII. and his more immediate Successors . 165
II. Alexander III. and Thomas Becket  191
III. Innocent III  209
IV. The Papacy from Innocent III. to Boniface VIII. . 239
V. Various Features of Church Constitution . . . 248
CHAPTER III.
THE CRUSADES  259

CONTENTS. V
CHAPTER IV.
MONASTICISM. Page
I. The Cistercians and their great Representative . 271
II. The Mendicant Orders  237
CHAPTER V.
SCHOLASTICISM AND MYSTICISM  302

SHjtrt) Pmco (1294-1517).
INTRODUCTION  319
CHAPTER I.
CHIEF POLITICAL DEVELOPMENTS  323
CHAPTER II.
POPES AND COUNCILS  331
CHAPTER III.
REPRESENTATIVES OF CRITICISM AND REFORM .... 380
CHAPTER IV.
THE WALDENSES  391
CHAPTER V.
JOHN WYCLIFFE AND HIS FOLLOWERS  400

VI CONTENTS.
CHAPTER VI. Page
JOHN HUSS AND THE HUSSITES  427
CHAPTER VII.
THE MYSTICS  460
CHAPTER VIII.
SAVONAROLA  473
CHAPTER IX.
THE MEDIAEVAL GREEK CHURCH  481
CHAPTER X.
MEDIAEVAL HYMNS, ARCHITECTURE, AND PAINTING.
I. Hymns  490
II. Architecture  513
III. Painting  522

APPENDIX.
I. The Seven Sacraments  541
II. Genuineness of the Famous Bull of Adrian IV. . 544
III. Sorcery and Witchcraft  54,6
IV. Popes and Emperors  54,9
Index  555

FIRST PERIOD.
590-1073.

INTRODUCTION.

THE stream is apt to imbibe, to some extent, the
color of the soil through which it flows. So it
has been with historical Christianity. If the life-stream
has been divine, the channels have been human. The
current has reflected the civilization through which
it has passed. Apostolic Christianity, springing up on
the soil of Judaism, exhibited, notwithstanding its dis
tinctive character, something of a Jewish tinge ; post-
apostolic Christianity, in its more speculative attempts,
took a coloring from the philosophic thought of the
classic systems ; and post-Constantinian Christianity,
imbibing the leaven brought in by heathen multitudes
suddenly professing conversion, admitted elements af
filiating with the common heathenism of the classic
world. A deplorable taint of idolatrous superstition
was carried forward into the next period. But this is
no disproof either of the pure essence of Christianity
in itself, or of the providence of God. The Author
of Christianity must take such conditions as a world of
free agents affords. He cannot be asked to keep the
stream, as it flows through earthly soil, free from all
mixture of earthliness. He can only be asked to keep

4 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
the stream moving on down through the centuries to
wards those better conditions which His power, wisdom,
and love may be able progressively to introduce.
In the period upon which we now enter, Christianity
strikes upon a new soil, goes forward into the midst of
a new series of modifying conditions. These may be
described by a single comprehensive term, barbarism.
The encounter of Christianity with barbarism is the
next great phase of history. This encounter, we can
readily believe, was no easy one. It was not a station
ary barbarism by which Christianity was confronted, —
not a passive subject waiting quietly in its own domain
to be leavened by the gradual absorption of religious
truth. It was rather a moving barbarism, rushing on
tumultuously into the domain of Christianity itself.
There was no remaining at a distance ; intermingling
was unavoidable. The contact was of necessity inti
mate, and it might be expected that the modifying
influence would be correspondingly apparent.
Barbarism in itself is not specially interesting. The
curious exhibitions of human nature which it affords
may excite and gratify the attention for a time ; never
theless, it is comparatively a barren field. But barba
rism coming into contact with Christianity, hordes of
rude warriors bringing their spears and battle-axes
into the presence of the cross, men of the forest crossing
the threshold of the sanctuary and passing under the
shadow of Christian and classic institutions, — in this
there is manifest such a crisis in history, such a group
of fruitful beginnings, that the most interested atten
tion is warranted, and cannot fail of being repaid.
Here was laid the foundation of the modern world to

INTRODUCTION. 5
which we belong. Both as students of the Christian
religion and as students of modern civilization, we can
not afford to neglect this era of the juncture of Chris
tianity and barbarism, this age of transition, of new
departures, of the germs of things to come.
We may find much of darkness and confusion, but we
shall not find a state of continuous stagnation. There
was plenty of movement. A variety of important
events claim our attention, such as the migration and
conquests of the barbarian tribes, great missionary en
terprises, the rise, spread, and encroachments of Mo
hammedanism, long-waged and significant controversies
like the Iconoclastic, the alliances of Church and State,
the opposing claims and mutual usurpations of Church
and State, the growth of the papal power, and the con
struction, or at least outlining, of the whole framework
and enginery of mediseval discipline and worship.

THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.

CHAPTER I.
THE BARBARIAN TRIBES.
AS if called of God to hasten toward the risen light
of Christianity, the nations of the North and the
East began to press toward the Roman Empire. Even
before the OhristiaiTera, there were premonitions of
the coming inundation. A fearful one was that which
occurred a little more than a century before the birth
of Christ, when the Cimbrians and Teutons appalled
the veterans of Rome with their wild battle-cries and
gigantic forms, annihilated army after army, and first
met with a check upon the soil of Italy and at the
hands of such a general as Marius. Half a century
later, Julius Csesar found it an arduous task to drive
the German invaders from Gaul. In the time of
Marcus Aurelius, aggressive movements on a large
scale were again inaugurated. From that time the
threatening cloud was never off the horizon of the
Roman world, and ofttimes sent forth tokens of its
destructive energy.
The bulk of the invading tribes was of the same

8 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
general stock, the Germanic. A glance at their native
characteristics will be appropriate before giving an ac
count of their inroads upon Christian territory. The
description of a contemporary is provided in the writ
ings of Tacitus. A wish to rebuke the corruptions of
Roman civilization by contrast with the customs of
barbarians may have given color to some items in his
account, but in general it may be regarded as trust
worthy. He says of the bodily characteristics of the
Germans: "A family likeness pervades the whole,
though their numbers are so great: eyes stern and
blue ; ruddy hair ; large bodies, powerful in sudden
exertions, but impatient of toil and labor, least of all
capable of sustaining thirst and heat. Cold and hun
ger they are accustomed by their climate and soil to
endure." Their government concedes a large range to personal
liberty. " In the election of kings they have regard
to birth ; in that of generals, to valor. Their kings
have not an absolute or unlimited power; and their
generals command less through the force of authority
than of example. If they are daring, adventurous,
and conspicuous in action, they procure obedience from
the admiration they inspire." In affairs of importance,
the whole community of warriors is consulted. They
come armed to the assembly. " Then the king, or chief,
and such others as are conspicuous for age, birth, mili
tary renown, or eloquence, are heard, and gain attention
rather from their ability to persuade than their author
ity to command. If a proposal displease, the assembly
reject it by an inarticulate murmur ; if it prove agree
able, they clash their javelins, for the most honorable

THE BARBARIAN TRIBES. 9
expression of assent among them is the sound of arms.
Before this council, it is likewise allowed to exhibit
accusations, and to prosecute capital offences. Punish
ments are varied according to the nature of the crime.
Traitors and deserters are hung upon trees ; cowards,
dastards, and those guilty of unnatural practices, are
suffocated in mud under a hurdle." To add a divine
sanction to the administration of justice, the visiting of
penalties is intrusted to the priests.
War is the principal occupation of those having the
strength to bear arms. " Nay, they even think it base
and spiritless to earn by sweat what they might pur
chase by blood. During the intervals of war they pass
their time less in hunting than in sluggish repose,
divided between sleep and the table. All the bravest
of the warriors, committing the care of the house, the
family affairs, and the lands to the women, old men,
and weaker part of the domestics, stupefy themselves in
inaction." Their military equipment is simple, consist
ing of spears, missile weapons, and shields. " Their line
of battle is disposed in wedges. To give ground, pro
vided they rally again, is considered rather as a prudent
stratagem, than cowardice. The greatest disgrace that
can befall them is to have abandoned their shields. A
person branded with this ignominy is not permitted to
join in their religious rites, or enter their assemblies ; so
that many, after escaping from battle, have put an end
to their infamy by the halter."
The women vie -with the men in courage, accompany
them to the battle-field, meet the fugitives with re
proaches, and endeavor to drive them back to the con
flict. The men, on their part, entertain a high respect

10 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
for their women. " They even suppose somewhat of
sanctity and prescience to be inherent in the female
sex ; and therefore neither despise their counsels, nor
disregard their responses." In their mutual relations,
both are honorably distinguished by the virtue of
chastity. Polygamy is practised only by a few, whose
alliance is solicited on account of their rank. " The
matrimonial bond is strict and severe among them.
Men and women alike are unacquainted with clandestine
correspondence. Adultery is extremely rare among so
numerous a people."
The most glaring vices of the barbarians are drunk
enness and gambling. They consider it no disgrace to
pass days and nights, without intermission, in drinking,
and frequently pay the penalty of intoxication with
bloodshed. " They play at dice, when sober, as a seri
ous business ; and that with such a desperate venture
of gain or loss, that, when everything else is gone, they
set their liberties and persons on the last throw."
Tacitus gives us also some account of the religion of
the barbarians ; but his information, evidently, was but
partial upon this topic. In completing the picture of
the early religion of Germany, we need to have recourse
to that later elaboration of the Germanic mythology
which appears in the Scandinavian Eddas. The system
contained in the latter, if not identical at all points with
the former, is at least closely akin, and so affords much
aid in filling up the gaps in the older accounts.
The religion of the Germans appears to have been a
polytheism, in which the gods stood in close relation
with the powers of nature. Caesar calls attention to
this feature in his remark that the Germans acknowl-

THE BARBARIAN TRIBES. 11
edge only such gods as are visible, and whose might
renders a perceptible aid, such as manifest themselves
through the orbs of heaven and the element of fire.1
In their worship of the gods, they were accustomed to
discard for the most part both temples and images.
Sacred groves took the place of the former, and symbols
of the latter. This absence of images, as Wilhelm Miil-
ler judges, betokens not so much an approach to high
spiritual conceptions, as the stage of indefiniteness in
the growth of polytheism. The Scandinavians in later
times used images, and their employment seems to have
been on the increase among the German tribes when
Christianity came across the natural development of
their polytheism.2 The good will of the gods was so
licited by sacrifices, though the Germans were not spe
cially lavish in this kind of tribute. Sometimes human
victims were sent to the altar : this was not an unusual
fate for prisoners of war. Where the sacrificial rites
concerned only a family, they were performed by the
father of the household ; where they represented the
state or tribe, the priest alone was qualified to act.
The priests formed no separate caste ; but as special
servants of the gods, and bearers of judicial functions,
they commanded no small degree of reverence.
Among their deities were Wuotan, Donar, Zio, Fro,
Frouwa, and Paltar, corresponding to the Scandinavian
Odin, Thor, Tyr, Freyr, Freyja, and Baldur. A con
spicuous place was also occupied by Loki, the fire god ;
but his honor by no means equalled his prominence, and
he is represented as causing unbounded mischief through
i Bella Gallorum, vi. 21.
2 Geschichte und System der Altdeutschen Eeligion.

12 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
his unprincipled wiles.1 Much account was made, in
their mythology, of giants, pygmies, spirits of forests,
mountains, and streams.
In the oracles of the North, some interesting glimpses
are given of barbarian beliefs respecting the beginning
and the end of things. First (so their thought ran)
there was a wide-reaching, empty chasm. At a later
stage, toward the northern end of the abyss was formed
a world of darkness and cold ; at the southern end
appeared a world of light and fire. Out of the inter
mingling of ingredients from these two worlds came life
in the shape of the huge being, Ymir, the progenitor
of the giants ; and also in the form of the cow, which
by licking the ice-blocks disengaged the progenitor of
the gods. The body of the slain Ymir supplied the
gods with materials for the formation of the earth.
From his blood came the sea and all waters ; from his
flesh, the soil; from his bones and teeth, mountains and
rocks ; from his skull, the dome of the sky ; from his
brain, the clouds.2 In the general cast of their cos
mogony, we may discern tokens of a vivid impression
of the clash and struggle of opposing forces in nature.
As, in the first picture of the gods, they are rep
resented as confronted by the race of the giants, so
in the closing scene of the present dispensation they
appear in conflict with mighty and raging foes. The
victory now turns against them. All are overpowered,
1 Loki holds a place in a measure analogous to that of the Devil.
Still he does not appear such an embodiment of unmixed evil as is de
noted by this term. As Grimm contends, the proper notion of devil had
no place in Germanic paganism. (Teutonic Mythology, p. 984 in Eng,
trans.) 2 Simrock, Handbuch der Deutschen Mythologie.

THE BARBARIAN TRIBES. 13
and the earth sinks down in fire and blood. However,
the desolation continues only for a space. There rises
out of the wreck a purified world, upon which are
discerned Baldur, the beloved son of Odin, a few other
descendants of the fallen gods, and an innocent human
pair. A new dispensation is begun, over which presides
an unspeakable being standing above the old genera
tion of gods. The account reads almost as if the North
men entertained a premonition that the curtain would
descend upon their ancient mythology, and faith in a
God of supreme and unrivalled dominion take its place.
In their conception of the future life awaiting men,
these warlike tribes naturally glorified the warrior's
virtues. Heaven, as they pictured it, is the abode of
the brave and the true, where heroes revel in the alter
nate joys of the battle and the feast; hell, with its
dark, cavernous depths, and chilling mists, the prison-
house of the cowardly and the false.
Among the barbarian tribes of the third and fourth
centuries we find several confederacies occupying a con
spicuous place, such as the Alemanni, the Franks, the
Saxons, and the Goths.
The Alemanni inhabited the territory between the
Rhine and the Danube, in the southwest corner of the
Germanic domain. Not content with their bounds, they
began in the last half of the third century to make in
roads into Gaul, and contested the field with various
of the Roman Emperors in the next century. A memo
rial of the alarm and distress which they caused to the
people of Gaul is seen in the fact that they supplied
the name Allemands, by which the French to this day
speak of the Germans in general. The conversion of

14 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
this people to Christianity is placed in the sixth
century. The Franks, as they came upon the stage of history,
were a confederation of several tribes, dwelling along
the Lower Rhine. It was in the reign of Gordian (238-
244) that they made their first incursion into Roman
territory. " Clothed in the spoils of the bear, the urus,
the boar, and the wolf, they looked at a distance like a
herd of wild beasts. Each man bore in his right hand
a long lance, in the left a buckler ; in his girdle, a two-
edged axe, which was their peculiar weapon, and which
they either used in hand to hand encounters, or hurled
from a distance with unerring precision. In migrating
to new homes, they carried their wives and children
and rude household goods in rough wagons with great
wheels of solid wood, drawn by oxen. The wagons,
ranged in a circle, formed a protection to their camp
when needful. Again and again, during two centuries,
attracted by the rich prey which the towns and villas
of the wealthy provincials offered, they repeated their
raids ; and again and again the imperial legions defeated
them with great slaughter, and chased the survivors out
of the empire." But continued pressure overcame the
barriers. By the beginning of the fifth century, a con
siderable body of the Franks had settled upon the left
bank of the Rhine. A century later they were found
in possession of a large part of Gaul, and no longer sub
sisting as a loose confederation, but united (at least for
an interval) under a single rule. The agent of this uni
fication was the powerful and grasping Salian prince,
Clovis. Under Clovis, the Franks in large part em
braced Christianity. They embraced it as might be

THE BARBARIAN TRIBES. 15
expected of uncivilized warriors. Clovis himself, while
he may have been influenced to some extent by the per
suasions of his Christian wife, the Burgundian princess
Clotilda, found the decisive argument for the new re
ligion upon the battle-field. Being hard pressed by the
Alemanni, he appealed to the God of the Christians,
and vowed that he would submit to baptism if victory
were granted him. His arms were completely suc
cessful ; and soon after, with several thousand of his
warriors, he received the Christian rites.1 But the bap
tismal water seems to have been accompanied by no
effectual inward cleansing. Treachery and bloody vio
lence marked the course of the new convert. While
he is praised in the annals of the time as a champion of
the orthodox faith against the Arianism of contiguous
tribes, these very annals have offset their own lauda
tions, and drawn the marks of an ineffaceable infamy
across his name. Many of the successors of Clovis
were as remote as he from being examples of Christian
living. The court of the Merovingian princes con
tinued to present the spectacle of polygamous excess,
unrestrained license, intrigue, and assassination. Some
of the characters nurtured in this hotbed of corrup
tion cannot easily be paralleled for viciousness. If
one half is true in the apparently unvarnished story of
Gregory of Tours, then Fredegonda will stand in the
front rank of the evil women who have combined the
cunning of the serpent with the malice of the fury.
The Saxons, like the Franks upon their first appear
ance, were a confederation of tribes. Their original
seat was beyond the Franks, on the Weser and the
1 Gregory of Tours, Historia Francorum, lib. ii. §§ 81, 32.

16 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
North Sea. At an early date they began to engage in
predatory excursions. Near the middle of the fifth
century, together with the Jutes and the Angles (or
Engles), they commenced their descent upon England.
The conquest advanced slowly, but with great thorough
ness. " Field by field, town by town, forest by forest,
the land was won. And as each bit of ground was
torn away by the stranger, the Briton sullenly with
drew from it only to turn doggedly and fight for the
next. . . . How slow the work of English conquest
was may be seen from the fact that it took nearly thirty
years to win Kent alone, and sixty to complete the con
quest of Southern Britain, and that the conquest of
the bulk of the island was only wrought out after two
centuries of bitter warfare." 1 The subject of the
introduction of Christianity among the Saxons may
conveniently find place in a succeeding chapter.
The Goths appeared at the end of the second cen
tury, on the Black Sea and the Lower Danube. They
were already a very numerous people. Two principal
branches were distinguished, the Eastern and the West
ern. By the early part of the third century, they had
become such an object of dread that Roman Emperors
were found willing to purchase peace with them at the
expense of tribute. In the third quarter of the same
century, they extended their desolating marches into
Greece, Macedonia, Asia Minor, and Italy, plundering
on their way many famous cities. Again, in the latter
part of the fourth century, they began a series of
far-reaching invasions. In this instance the primary
impulse came from the Huns, a wild race from the up-
1 Green, History of the English People.

THE BARBARIAN TRIBES. 17
lands of Asia, ugly in countenance and short in stature,
but broad-shouldered, and skilled in horsemanship as
men who had spent their lives upon the backs of their
steeds. The East Goths were put to rout. The West
Goths also were hard pressed, and craved the privilege
of crossing the Danube, to find refuge within Roman ter
ritory. Ulfilas, the apostle of Christianity among them,
carried their request before the Emperor Valens, and
obtained a favorable answer. The way, having been
once opened, was not easily closed up again. The Goths,
finding themselves ungenerously treated and short of
supplies, felt no longer obliged to keep the peace, and
precipitated a war which overwhelmed Valens. The
skill and energy of the great Theodosius availed indeed
to confine them within bounds, but not to crush their
power. The peace, too, which he was instrumental in
establishing, lasted but a short space. .Incited by a dis
appointed councillor at Constantinople, the West-Gothic
king, Alaric, started upon a plundering expedition
(395-396). Greece was ravaged, and its fairest shrines
were laid waste. A first incursion of Alaric into Italy
was repulsed ; but during his second invasion, the capi
tal of the West fell before his assaults (410). Alaric
died soon after ; and the Goths, retiring into Gaul,
founded a kingdom covering the southwestern part of
that province, and extending into Spain.
Nearly contemporary with the invasions of Alaric, in
roads were made by several tribes akin to the Goths ;
namely, Vandals, Suevi, Alani, and Burgundians. The
first three of these tribes settled in the Spanish penin
sula ; the last, in the territory bordering the Alps and
the Upper Rhine. Like the Goths, they embraced Chris-
2

18 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
tianity in the form of Arianism. The Burgundians, it
is true, may have been instructed for an interval in the
Catholic faith ; but as a body they came to espouse
Arianism, and adhered to the same till the sixth century.
In 429 the Vandals, under their leader, Genseric, crossed
into North Africa, and conquered the country. To sever
more effectually the bond of connection between Africa
and the Roman Empire, they sought to make Arianism
completely dominant, and so assailed the Catholics, who
refused to be converted, with a severe persecution. In
the fourth decade of the sixth century, Belisarius, the
renowned general of Justinian, put an end to the Arian
rule ; and by the close of the next century, Catholic
and Arian alike, throughout the whole region of North
Africa, had been overpowered by the Mohammedans.
Near the middle of the fifth century, the Huns were
again the cause of a great commotion. In an over
whelming mass they poured through the region of the
Rhine, leaving death and desolation in their track. At
the terrible battle of Chalons on the Marne1 (451), they
received at the hands of Goths, Franks, and Gauls a
severe chastisement, but were not prevented from con
tinuing their devastating march. Many cities of Italy
shared the fate of those upon the banks of the Rhine.
Rome itself seemed exposed to inevitable ruin. But
the ruthless chief, who feared no instrument of war,
was turned back by a religious dread reinforced by the
1 Thomas Hodgkin remarks on the place of the encounter : " Pos
terity has chosen to call it the battle of Chalons, but there is good
reason to think that it was fought fifty miles distant from Chalons-sur-
Marne, and that it would be more correctly named the battle of Troyes,
or, to speak with complete accuracy, the battle of Mery-sur-Seine."
(Italy and her Invaders, vol. ii. p. 138.)

THE BARBARIAN TRIBES. 19
intercessions of the Pope. " He was admonished," says
Gibbon, " by his friends as well as by his enemies, that
Alaric had not long survived the conquest of the Eternal
City. His mind, superior to real danger, was assaulted
by imaginary terrors. The pressing eloquence of Leo, his
majestic aspect and sacerdotal robes, excited the venera
tion of Attila for the spiritual father of the Christians.
The apparition of the two apostles, St. Peter and St.
Paul, who menaced the barbarian with instant death if
he rejected the prayer of their successor, is one of the
noblest legends of ecclesiastical tradition. The safety
of Rome might deserve the interposition of celestial
beings; and some indulgence is due to a fable Which
has been represented by the pencil of Raphael and the
chisel of Algardi." 1 Attila retired, and died beyond
the Danube soon after. His retreat, however, did not
save the Italian capital from the hand of the spoiler.
Immediately after his departure, the Arian Vandals from
North Africa, bearing hearts less placable than that of
the heathen warrior, glutted themselves with the pillage
of Rome (455) ; sparing indeed the buildings, but car
rying off such treasures as they could gather together in
the space of fourteen days.
By these repeated strokes of barbarian fury the Ro
man Empire in the West was reduced to a feeble and
tottering power. It only needed another blow to com
plete the downfall. In 476 that blow was given.
Odoacer, leader of the German troops in the Roman
service, and himself a German, put aside the shadow of
1 Chapter xxxv. See Jordanes, Historia de Getarum sive Gothorum
Origine et Rebus Gestis, cap. xlii. (apud Huratori, Rerum Italicarum
Scriptores, torn. i.).

20 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
the Caesars, which was then holding the imperial scep
tre. There was no one now in the West bearing the
imperial name, for Odoacer styled himself simply King
of Italy.
After ruling twelve or thirteen years, Odoacer found
himself confronted by a powerful rival, as Theodoric
with a great multitude of East Goths pressed forward
into Italy. The stout walls of Ravenna enabled him
indeed to keep the invaders at bay for several years, but
at length he was obliged to succumb. Theodoric ruled
as a wise and capable prince, and the Ostrogothic king
dom which he founded flourished till the middle of the
next century. It was then overthrown by the generals
of Justinian, and the exarchate of Ravenna, as a depen
dency of the Eastern Empire, was established in its
place. A speedy rival of the exarchate appeared in a
new swarm of invaders, destined to take a conspicuous
part in Italian history, the Lombards. Northern Italy
fell a prey to them, and the previous occupants of the
soil were reduced to a servile rank. The Lombards
came as Arians. The presence of such neighbors was
one of the difficulties which faced Gregory the Great
as he ascended the papal throne.
How different the field of vision here from that which
lay before us at the opening era of Christianity ! In
stead of a world united under a single rule, and every
where displaying the tokens of culture and civilized
skill, we have an empire broken into fragments, law
giving place to disorder, and deepening shadows of
ignorance spreading over broad regions. To be sure,
some of the invading tribes were not in a state of sheer
barbarism. Contact with the Empire had given them a

THE BARBARIAN TRIBES. 21
measure of civilization. Still, on the whole, the new
comers were rude successors to Roman rule. An ob
server, looking out upon the destruction wrought and
the commotions still in progress, could hardly refrain
from gloomy reflections over the prospects of the Chris
tian religion.
The prospects, in truth, had their shadowed side.
The rudeness and credulity of barbarism might be ex
pected to offer a fine field for the growth of superstition.
If contact with classic heathenism had already given
to Christianity a certain tinge of polytheism, it might
be expected that this phase would not be eliminated, but
rather increased, by the tastes of tribes which had been
accustomed to a multitude of gods. On various points
it might be expected that fantasy would get the better
of criticism, and that extravagant views, especially when
reinforced by the interests of prominent parties, would
command a ready suffrage. It would not be surprising
if, under some of the current beliefs and customs of
later times, a close scrutiny should discern the image of
the old barbaric faith and practice. And this is un
doubtedly the case. For example, in some of the me
diaeval representations we find unmistakable indications
of a transference to the devil of features and doings that
were formerly connected with the gods. Legends re
specting a league with the devil took shape in certain
particulars from the old mythology. " That the devil,"
says Wilhelm Miiller, " in such legends frequently took
the place of the heathen god appears from this, that an
offering, particularly of fowls, must be brought to the
same at the cross-ways, these old sacrificial sites, in
order to obtain his help." The same writer notes many

22 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
later customs which reveal a trace of the old heathen
practice. For instance, corresponding to the heathen
custom of carrying the god or his symbol around a field
in order to make it fruitful, we have the practice of the
Christian Germans in carrying around the image or
symbol of a saint for the same purpose.
But, on the other hand, the outlook may be regarded
as containing highly encouraging features. The bar
barians were a sturdy race. They brought in a fresh
life, and an intense love of personal liberty. Herein
was a prophecy of a better ultimate development than
could come from a declining civilization, however pol
ished and refined. ^The^ bounding life, and zest for per-
_gonal liberty, may have wrought destructively at first ;
but they were at the same time a pledge that things
should not remain at a stand-still, that erelong a con
structive work should be begun, thal^freedom in action
should be followed by freedom in thougnt, that a vigor-
ous canvassing of the whole field of Christianity should
finally be undertaken in spite of any and every barrier
which tradition and priestcraft might have interposed.
In fine, Christianity encountered in the barbarism of
these vigorous tribes a less permanent obstacle than it
would have met in the inertia of a worn-out civili
zation. Under the conditions, the purity of primitive
Christianity could probably be reached more speedily
through the forests of Germany than along the high
ways of Rome.

CHAPTER II.
EXTENSION OF CHRISTIAN TEEEITOEY BY MISSIONAEIES.
IN the latter part of the sixth century, a great mis
sionary era was inaugurated. Men taking their
lives in their hands began to penetrate the encompass
ing circle of heathenism. One field after another was
gained; but it was several centuries before Europe as
a whole had passed under the dominion of Christianity.
The way of victory was at the same time a way of
hardship and martyrdom.
A conspicuous part in this aggressive movement was
taken by the Roman bishop and the monks, the one
serving as the patron and the others as the agents of
the work. A genuine Christian zeal cannot be denied
to either party. At the same time, it must have been
perfectly evident to the Roman bishop that his patron
age of missions would be a very effectual means of
extending his power.
Among the monks the most noted evangelists came
from the cloisters of Great Britain and Ireland. The
latter country won early the praise of exemplary zeal,
both for the cause of learning and of missions. As the
night of ignorance was deepening in other quarters, the
light of a liberal scholarship shone in the Irish cloisters.
" At a time when Pope Gregory the Great was obliged

24 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
to acknowledge that he was ignorant of Greek, there
were ministers in Ireland quite competent to read the
New Testament in the original language. In the larger
monasteries, the disciples were instructed in mathemat
ics and astronomy, as well as in the ancient classics." 1
A striking memorial of the eminent place which Ireland
then occupied in the religious world is given in the
name, insula sanctorum, with which the land was hon
ored. All this, however, is not to be taken as evi
dence of any ideal state of society. Alongside of
marked exhibitions of learning and piety, there was
much of turbulence. Bloody feuds were of frequent
occurrence. The first of the pioneers from this field whose labors
are recorded was Columba, or Columbkille. He was
of royal birth, commanding presence, and effective ad
dress. Possessing the generous impulses native to his
countrymen, he possessed also, as it would seem, their
hot temper. By some it is supposed that he precipi
tated a war, and at the instance of the defeated sov
ereign was excommunicated by an assembly of clergy.
The fact of excommunication is quite certain, since it
is mentioned by so admiring a biographer as Adamnan.2
In 563 Columba set out for Scotland. As yet Chris
tianity had gained but a part of this country. Ninian,
son of a British prince, had made converts, in the early
part of the fifth century, among the southern Picts,
who dwelt between the Frith of Forth and the Gram
pians. There was also a settlement of Scots, who had
received Christian teaching, on the west coast. But
1 W. D. Killen, Ecclesiastical History of Ireland.
2 Life of St. Columba, edited by William Reeves.

CHRISTIAN MISSIONARIES. 25
the northern Picts were still heathen. With the ap
proval of Conall, the King of the Scots, a small island
lying off the coast was given to Columba, and made
the seat of a cloister destined to stand for centuries as
a missionary fortress and training school. This rocky
island scarce exceeded three miles in length by one and
a half in breadth. In the language of the country it
was called Hy. The name Iona, by which it is com
monly known, is regarded by Reeves as a corruption of
Ioua used as an adjective before insula. By the labors
of Columba the Picts were converted, and their king
seems to have confirmed the grant which was made by
Conall. Though but an abbot in rank, the founder of
Iona was really the ecclesiastical sovereign of the adja
cent territory. His successors also stood, in point of
jurisdiction, above the bishops of the country, — a pecu
liar feature in church polity, which will again command
our attention. As is apparent from this item, the com
munity of Iona, like the early Celtic churches gener
ally, had little notion of any supremacy in the Roman
bishop. They did not regard themselves as bound to
follow the Roman model.
Columba died while on his knees at the altar, in the
year 597. Authentic history records little concerning
him ; still, we shall not be at fault in concluding from
the work that he accomplished, and the impression that
he made, that he was a man of unusual force of charac
ter. Like Patrick, and Martin of Tours, he was a
strong personality, and as such received the inevitable
tribute of mediaeval admiration, a great throng of
legends having the one object of glorifying their hero.
The life written by Adamnan, the ninth abbot of Iona,

26 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
a century after the death of Columba, makes him the
agent in a constant succession of miracles. Even down
to the present century, the virtue of the name of Co
lumba has continued to be celebrated in the Highlands
of Scotland. The Roman Catholic Highlander about
to set out upon a journey utters the invocation, " May
the servant of Columba of the cell protect and bring
me safe home." A small pebble from Iona, called the
stone of Icolmkill, is worn as an amulet. At least,
such customs were in vogue in the early part of the
century.1 In the ninth century the primacy passed from Iona to
Dunkeld. In the next century St. Andrews became
the ecclesiastical metropolis of Scotland. For an in
terval before, as well as after, this transfer, we meet
with an order bearing the name of Culdees. They
seem to have been quite a conspicuous factor in the
Scottish Church till the reign of Malcolm Canmore in
the eleventh century, when the marriage of this king
with the English princess Margaret prepared the way
for the predominance of the English regime. Their
name probably signifies " servants of God," the Scottish
term Keledei being the equivalent of the Continental
Deicolce. Various theories have been entertained as to
their origin and characteristics. "It may reasonably be
inferred, that the Culdees were generally the successors
of the family of Iona and other monastic communities,
under a new name, and with a relaxed discipline."2
In certain points they contradicted the very notion of
1 John Jamieson, An Historical Account of the Ancient Culdees of
Iona. 2 George Grub, Ecclesiastical History of Scotland.

CHRISTIAN MISSIONARIES. 27
monasticism. As is remarked by a learned authority,
" The particular Keledean laxity appears to have been,
that, precisely like their Irish and Welsh congeners, they
gradually lapsed into something like impropriators, mar
ried, and transmitting their church endowments as if
they had been their own to their children, but retaining,
at any rate in most cases, their clerical office ; although
the abbots, as, e. g., at Dunkeld and Abernethy, be
came in some cases mere lay lords of the church lands
thus misappropriated, leaving a prior to be the spiritual
superior." l In some quarters the Culdees have been
credited with quite a close approximation to primitive
Christianity; but it may be doubted whether in the
sum total of their beliefs and practices they were much
superior to the average Romanism of their time.
While thus the surrounding populations were being
instructed in Christianity, the Anglo-Saxons were still
in the bonds of their heathenism. The intense na
tional hatred which the Britons cherished toward them
stood in the way of missionary effort from that quarter.
Indeed, some of the Britons may have thought of get
ting even with their conquerors, as has been charged
against them, by leaving them to the hopeless doom of
the unbaptized and the unbelieving. But in another
quarter the agency for bringing them the gospel mes
sage was being prepared. While yet an abbot, the
Roman Gregory was led to cherish a strong interest in
the Anglo-Saxons. The occasion which first directed
his attention to them is thus described by Beda : " It is
1 Haddan and Stubbs, Councils and Ecclesiastical Documents relating
to Great Britain and Ireland, vol. ii. pt. i. pp. 175-182. Compare W. F.
Skene, Celtic Scotland.

28 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
reported that some merchants, having just arrived at
Rome, on a certain day exposed many things for sale
in the market-place, and abundance of people resorted
thither to buy. Gregory himself went with the rest ;
and, among other things, some boys were set to sale,
their bodies white, their countenances beautiful, and
their hair very fine. Having viewed them, he asked, as
is said, from what country or nation they were brought;
and was told, from the island of Britain, whose inhab
itants were of such personal appearance. He again in
quired whether those islanders were Christians, or still
involved in the errors of paganism ; and was informed
that they were pagans. Then fetching a deep sigh from
the bottom of his heart, ' Alas ! what pity,' said he,
' that the author of darkness is possessed of men of
such fair countenances ; and that, being remarkable for
such graceful aspects, their minds should be void of in
ward grace.' He therefore again asked what was the
name of that nation, and was answered that they were
called Angles. 'Right,' said he; 'for they have an
angelic face, and it becomes such to be co-heirs with the
angels in heaven.' " 1
Once seated upon the papal throne, Gregory im
proved his opportunity to give the Christian religion to
the people who had so effectually enlisted his sympa
thies. In 596 he sent out the. Roman Abbot Augustine,
with several companions. Finding that their hearts
began to sink within them over the unknown perils of
the journey, and of the strange land for which they
had started, he revived their courage by his paternal
exhortations, and aided them so far as possible by
1 Book i. chap. 1,

CHRISTIAN MISSIONARIES. 29
letters of commendation to the princes and nobles of
Gaul. A welcome had been prepared for the missionary
party by the marriage of Ethelbert, king of Kent, to
the Frankish princess Bertha, who came to the English
court as a Christian, and was allowed to take with her,
as a religious guardian, the Bishop Luidhard. The king
received Augustine and his companions with suitable
kindness, though taking the precaution to liave the first
meeting! in the open air, where he would be less exposec
to any instrument of magic which the strangers might
have brought, with them. In response to their repre
sentations he said, " Your words and promises are very
fair ; but as they are new to us, and of uncertain im
port, I cannot approve of them so far as to forsake that
which I have so long followed with the whole English
nation. But because you are come from far into my
kingdom, and, as I conceive, are desirous to impart to
us those things which you believe to be true, and most
beneficial, we will not molest you, but give you favor
able entertainment, and take care to supply you with
your necessary sustenance ; nor do we forbid you to
preach, and gain as many as you can to your religion." 1
Erelong the king added to his courteous reception of
the ambassadors of the new faith his personal adhesion
to that faith. Great numbers followed his example,
insomuch that Augustine is said to have baptized ten
thousand on a single occasion. The work of organiza
tion kept pace with that of conversion. According to
the plan of Gregory, two metropolitan sees were to be
constituted, one having its seat at London, and the
1 Beda, i. 25.

30 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
other at York. But neither the Pope nor the mission
ary saw this scheme fulfilled. Canterbury took the
place of London, and York failed as yet to obtain the
metropolitan dignity. Before the death of Augustine,
in 605, Christianity had secured a good footing in Kent.
There was indeed a reaction to heathenism under the
next king, and evidence was given that the number of
baptisms was no accurate measure of the genuine con
versions. But the lapse was only temporary. The
current had set in the direction of the- Christian faith.
In Northumberland, as in Kent, a Christian princess
served as a forerunner of missionary work. This was
Ethelberga, daughter of Ethelbert. On her marriage
with King Edwin, she was guaranteed the free use of her
religion, and was allowed to retain the Bishop Paulinus.
For a time Edwin was proof against all persuasions ;
but at length he so far yielded as to call a council
of his chief men to consider the question of accepting
Christianity. The deliberations of the council showed
that there were minds which had become dissatisfied
with the old religion. Even Coifi, the chief of the hea
then priests, testified against his former faith, alleging
that the gods had made manifest their impotence in
their failure to aid their most zealous votaries, and ad
vising to try the benefits of the new religion. " Another
of the king's chief men, approving of his words and
exhortations, presently added, ' The present life of
man, O king, seems to me, in comparison of that time
which is unknown to us, like the swift flight of a
sparrow through the room wherein you sit at supper
in winter, with commanders and ministers, enjoying the
warmth of the fire in the hearth, whilst the storms of

CHRISTIAN MISSIONARIES. 31
rain or snow prevail abroad ; the sparrow, I say, flying
in at one door, and immediately out at another, whilst
he is within, is safe from the wintry storm ; but after a
short space of fair weather, he immediately vanishes
out of your sight into the dark winter from which he
had emerged. So this life of man appears for a short
space ; but of what went before, or what is to follow,
we are utterly ignorant. If, therefore, this new doctrine
contains something more certain, it seems justly to de
serve to be followed.' The other elders and king's
counsellors, by Divine inspiration, spoke to the same
effect." 1 Coming to minds thus prepared, the message
of Paulinus could not longer fail of acceptance. " King
Edwin," as Beda adds, " with all the nobility of the
nation, and a large number of the common sort, re
ceived the faith and the washing of regeneration, in the
eleventh year of his reign, which is the year of the
incarnation of our Lord 627." Triumph, however, was
soon mixed with defeat. Penda, the heathen king of
Mercia, and the Briton Ceadwalla, combining against
Edwin, compassed his downfall. For an interval Nor
thumberland fell a prey to anarchy and pillage. The
Roman clergy were driven out, and heathenism began
to revive. But the valor and wisdom of the good
prince Oswald came to the rescue. Anxious to restore
the ascendency of Christianity, Oswald appealed to
Iona for missionary laborers. Corman, the first who
was sent, was lacking in the art of gentle and persua
sive address. The Northumbrians answered his auster
ity with so much indifference, that he concluded that
nothing could reclaim them from their obduracy, and
* Beda, ii. 13.

32 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
left the field in disgust. As he made his report to the
fraternity, a voice was heard remarking, " It seems to
me, brother, that you have been too severe with your
unlearned hearers, in that you did not, conformably to
the apostolic discipline, give them the milk of more
gentle doctrine, till, having been gradually nourished by
the word of God, they should be able to receive more
advanced teachings, and to practise God's sublimer
precepts." 1 All eyes were turned upon the speaker.
With unanimous consent he was fixed upon as the
proper agent to gain access to the closed hearts of the
Anglo-Saxons. The result justified the wisdom of their
choice ; for Aidan, as Bishop of Lindisfarne, proved
himself a man who was wise to win souls and a faithful
shepherd of the sheep. Beda, while he could not for
get that Aidan was out of accord with Rome on the
time of celebrating Easter, could not at the same time
restrain his admiration for the saintly life and character
of the man, " his love of peace and charity ; his con
tinence and humility ; his mind superior to anger and
avarice, and despising pride and vainglory ; his industry
in keeping and teaching the heavenly commandments ;
his diligence in reading and watching; his authority be
coming a priest in reproving the haughty and powerful,
and at the same time his tenderness in comforting the
afflicted and relieving the poor." 2 Among the success
ors of Aidan, Cuthbert, a native of Northumberland,
won an enthusiastic esteem. Beda recounts how an
angelic brightness was wont to come into his face as
he was enforcing the truth of the gospel, and how he
delighted in particular to teach the ignorant and bar-
1 Beda, iii. 5. " Book iii. chap. 17.

CHRISTIAN MISSIONARIES. 33
barous people in remote and inaccessible places seated
high up amid craggy and uncouth mountains.1
From Kent and Northumberland, Christianity spread
into the adjacent regions. Before the close of the
seventh century it had become well established in all
the kingdoms of the Anglo-Saxons. The people of
Sussex, owing perhaps to the fact that their land was
cut off from communication with other sections by
downs and marshes, were the last to become evangel
ized. A principal instrument in their conversion was
Wilfrid, the most accomplished of the native English
clergy in his time, but who from some cause earned
much ill-will from those in power, and led a life
in which preferment and persecution were strangely
mixed. The missionaries from Rome brought with them, very
naturally, a preference for Roman customs. On the
other hand, the Scots and Britons — who in their loose
connection with Rome had developed some divergent
customs, especially on the time of celebrating Easter,
the form of the tonsure, and certain points in the bap
tismal ceremonial — cherished quite a stubborn prefer
ence for their peculiarities. The differences in them
selves were of no vital moment : still, they had quite a
decided practical bearing, inasmuch as they involved
the question of obligation to conform to the Roman
model. As early as the time of Augustine, the Easter
question became an occasion of dispute and heart-burn
ings. The drift was naturally in favor of the Roman
custom, since Rome had taken the initiative in planting
the mission. In the synod of Whitby in 664, the claims
1 Book iv. chap. 27, 28. Compare his Vita S. Guthberti, cap. ix., xvi.
3

34 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
of Rome were effectually championed by Wilfrid. The
decision, in fact, was so far adverse to the Scotch prac
tice, that its chief advocate in the synod, Colman, Bishop
of Lindisfarne, felt obliged to lay down his office, as he
was not willing to surrender the ancestral custom.
The vantage-ground thus obtained was well improved
by Theodore, who was sent out from Rome as Arch
bishop of Canterbury in 668. Administering his office
in the Roman interest, he secured the ascendency of
the papal regime in the English Church. By 716 the
monks of Iona surrendered so far as the special customs
in question were concerned. The churches in Ireland
had generally yielded at an earlier date. Theodore, who
was of Greek antecedents, was an influential patron of
learning. From him came the initial impulse to the
culture which in the next century could boast such dis
tinguished representatives as Beda and Alcuin.
The christianizing of Great Britain and Ireland gave
to their peoples a catholic outlook. Their thoughts be
gan to transcend their insular position. In return for
the tide of heathen barbarism which had swept across
the Channel to their shores, they now began to feel it
their behoof to send back a tide of gospel light and life
to the still unconverted tribes on the Continent.
The first of the missionaries to cross over to the Con
tinental side of the Channel was Columbanus, an Irish
monk, who had been educated in the cloister of Bangor.
About the year 590 he started forth with twelve young
men as his companions. His first settlement was in ter
ritory nominally Christian, but still sorely in need of
example and instruction in pious living. On the bor
ders of Austrasia and Burgundy, in the woody moun-

CHRISTIAN MISSIONARIES. 35
tains of the Vosges, he gathered the numerous disciples
who came to place themselves under his monastic rule.
The fame of his sanctity endeared him to the people ;
but at the same time the austere piety which he incul
cated, his persistent attachment to Irish as opposed to
Roman customs, and his fearless rebuke of sin in high
places, made him obnoxious to many of the clergy and
to the royal family. At length matters were brought
to a crisis by his uncompromising opposition to the
iniquities of the Burgundian king, Thierry. " The in
trepid abbot, like another John the Baptist, denounced
the vices of the monarch, and sternly condemned the
shameless manner in which he lived in the midst of his
mistresses. He refused to bless the king's children, the
fruits of his amours ; declined to partake of the viands
of a royal banquet set before him ; and threatened
Thierry with excommunication. The prince, under
other circumstances, would at once have consigned the
man who acted thus to the hands of the executioner ;
but he was awed by the sanctity of Columbanus, and,
irritated as he was, he exclaimed that he was not mad
enough to give him the crown of martyrdom. He merely
commanded him to be dragged from his convent, and
sent back to Ireland. The officers intrusted with the
execution of these orders approached the abbot on their
knees ; and so greatly did the mass of the people
venerate him for his piety, that he was conducted in
a species of triumph to the borders of Thierry's do
minions." 1
Columbanus was brought to the coast; but the at
tempt to ship him to Ireland miscarried, and he was
1 Killen, Ecclesiastical History of Ireland.

36 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
allowed to go the way of his choice. We find him next
laboring among the heathen population in the region of
Zurich, and a little later at Bregenz. Anticipating an
outbreak of violence in the latter place, he crossed over
into the Lombard territory in Italy, and founded the
celebrated monastery of Bobbio, near Pavia.
Among the writings of Columbanus, his letters to the
Roman Bishop are not the least interesting. Notwith
standing the superabundance of complimentary phrases
which they contain, their undertone bespeaks a man
who would exercise his own discretion in taking com
mands from Rome.1
As Columbanus proceeded to Italy, his most dis
tinguished companion, Gallus (St. Gall), was detained
by sickness. Continuing in that region, he founded the
monastery which bore his name, and labored for the
conversion of the Swiss and the Swabians till his death
(640-650). A weird story symbolizes the impression
1 The freedom with which he addressed Boniface IV. may be seen
from the following extracts : —
" Vigila itaque, quaeso, papa, vigila ; et iterum dico : vigila ; quia
forte non bene vigilavit Vigilius, quern caput seandali isti clamant, qui
vobls culpam injiciunt."
" Dolendum enim ac deflendum est, si in sede apostolica fides catholica
non tenetur."
" Roma orbis terrarum caput est ecclesiarum, salva loci dominicae
resurrectionis singulari praerogativa, et ideo sicut magnus honor vester
est pro dignitate cathedra?, ita magna cura vobis necessaria est, ut noft
perdatis vestram dignitatem propter aliquam perversitatem. Tandiu
enim potestas apud vos erit, quandiu recta ratio permanserit : ille enim
certus regni ccelorum clavicularius est, qui dignis per veram scientiam
aperit, et indignis claudit. Alioquin, si contraria fecerit, nee aperire,
nee claudere poterit."
" Rogo vos, quia multi dubitant de fidei vestrae puritate, ut cito tol-
latis hunc naevum de sancta? cathedrae claritate." (Epist. v.)

CHRISTIAN MISSIONARIES. 37
made by his attack upon heathenism. As he was fish
ing one silent night — so the legend runs — on a Swiss
lake near his monastery, he heard a voice descending
from a neighboring peak. It was the Spirit of the
Mountains calling upon the Spirit of the Waters to join
in expelling the intruder. The Spirit of the Waters
rose from the depths, and responded to the summons ;
but in a tone of failing confidence, as of one confessing
himself baffled by the prevailing Name which the in
truder was perpetually invoking.
Others followed the example of these pioneers. The
Irish Kilian labored in Franconia soon after the middle
of the seventh century. Toward the end of the same
century, two natives of England, by the name of Hew-
ald, found the martyr-death while attempting to preach
the gospel to the Saxons. Some converts were made
among the Frisians in the Netherlands by Wilfrid, who
was unexpectedly cast upon their coast by a storm at
sea, as, expelled from his bishopric, he was journeying
to Rome. He was followed in the field by Willibrord,
who was of Anglo-Saxon birth, but had been educated
in the cloisters of Ireland. Under the patronage of
Pepin, Mayor of the Palace, he was able to achieve a
measure of success.1 Willibrord even penetrated into
' From the time of Wilfrid's labors (677-678) to 719 the opposition
of the heathen King Radbod was » serious obstacle to the progress of
Christianity in this region. One ground of Radbod's obstinate adhe
rence to heathenism has been given as follows. He had thoughts of bap
tism, and had already approached the font at the instance of Bishop
Wulfram of Sens, when it occurred to him to inquire where his ancestors
might be supposed to have gone, whether to the Christian's heaven or to
hell. The Bishop answered, that, inasmuch as they had died unbaptized,
they had undoubtedly been doomed to hell. At this, Radbod withdrew
his foot from the font, saying that he could not dispense with the society

38 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
Denmark ; but he found it an unpromising field, and
could make no other gain than the opportunity to edu
cate some youths whom he purchased from slavery.
The names of other missionaries, Irish, English, or
Continental, might be mentioned. Not a few of them
wrought to good effect. But still the field was much
broader than the harvest. No extended, well organized
church had been founded upon German soil. The
apostle of Germany had not yet appeared, but he was
already in training in the country which had supplied
heroic laborers to this field.
That apostle was Winfrid, or Boniface as he is usually
called. He was born in 680, near Crediton, in Devon
shire, England. Zeal for the monastic life early drove
him to the cloister, notwithstanding the opposition which
at first he encountered from his father. Having passed
his thirtieth year, received ordination to the priesthood,
and been honored with some special marks of confidence
by his brethren, he began to turn his thoughts towards
the missionary field. His first attempt was in Frisia, in
716. It fell at an unfortunate juncture, the war be
tween Charles Martel and the stubborn heathen King
Radbod leaving little opportunity to insinuate Chris
tian teaching. Forsaking this field for the time being,
he returned to England.
of his forefathers for the sake of the Christian's heaven with its beggarly
contingent, — "cum parvo numero pauperum." (Rettberg, Kirchenge-
schichte Deutschlands, Band ii. § 77.) The story has an air of credi
bility, but is none too well authenticated. The difficulty involved in the
eschatology of Wulfram is said to have been ameliorated by Clemens —
an Irish missionary in Germany whom Boniface brought to task — by
the supposition that the preaching of Christ in Hades applied to its
inhabitants generally.

CHRISTIAN MISSIONARIES. 39
Boniface now determined upon a new point of de
parture in his enterprise. Considering that the sanction
of the Roman pontiff would add weight to his mission,
he proceeded to Rome (719), and presented himself
before Gregory II. The Pope gave a hearty welcome
to his scheme, and sent him forward with his com
mendations. Boniface selected Thuringia as the first
scene of his labors ; not neglecting meanwhile to confer
with Charles Martel, and to solicit whatever advantage
might be derived from his patronage. Learning that
Frisia, on account of the death of Radbod, had become
a hopeful field, he proceeded thither, and for three
years labored in connection with Willibrord. The
latter, anticipating that his labors must soon come to a
close, expressed the earnest desire that Boniface should
become his successor in the bishopric. The honor, how
ever, was modestly declined. Boniface retraced his
course, and labored in Thuringia and Hessia. A report
of his successes, which he sent to Rome in 723, was
answered by a summons thither to be consecrated to
the office of bishop. Returning again to Germany, he
continued for a series of years in the successful prose
cution of the work of converting the heathen. Among
the Hessians, a bold stroke against an object of super
stition gained him many converts. Finding that it was
difficult to win the people of that region from their idol
atrous veneration of an enormous oak-tree which was
esteemed sacred to Thor, the god of thunder, Boniface
decided to lay the axe to the tree. The awe-struck
heathen stood around, expecting that their deity would
take vengeance upon the authors of the sacrilege. They
only saw the tree come crashing down, and riven into

40 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
four pieces. Of these Boniface constructed an oratorium
and dedicated it in honor of St. Peter. Impressed by
such a palpable indication of the impotence of their
gods, many of the heathen turned to the Christian faith.1
We may judge somewhat respecting the measure of
success which attended the missionary, from the report
that before the year 739 he had baptized about a hun
dred thousand converts. Naturally new honors came
from Rome to such an efficient propagandist. He re
ceived the pallium of an archbishop (some years before
745, when he fixed his metropolitan seat at Metz), and
in the latter part of his career exercised extensive pow
ers as the papal vicar.
Converting the Germans to Christianity was only one
part of the work of Boniface. He was the organizer
of the German Church. In this office he acted as the
agent of Rome, suppressing dissenters, and adminis
tering with continual reference to the Roman model.
Indeed, it must be allowed that his conduct was con-t
formable to the strong terms of the oath which the
Pope exacted from him as he was promoted to the epis
copal rank. These terms were as follows : " I, Boniface,
bishop by the grace of God, promise to thee, O blessed
Peter, prince of the apostles, and to thy vicar the
blessed Pope Gregory, and his successors, through the
Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, the insepara
ble Trinity, and this most sacred body of thine, to show
the Catholic faith in its purity, and by the help of God
to persist in the unity of that faith, and in no way to
give consent to anything from any source contrary to
the unity of the common and universal Church, but
1 Willibaldus, Vita S Bonifacii, cap. viii.

CHRISTIAN MISSIONARIES. 41
to show in all things my pure faith and my accord with
thee and the needs of thy Church, and with thine afore
said vicar and his successors. And if I shall find prel
ates who act contrary to the ancient institutes of the
holy fathers, I will have no communion or connection
with them, but rather, if able, I will prohibit the same ;
otherwise, I will report faithfully and at once to my
apostolical lord." 1 But while Boniface administered
the Church of Germany in the spirit of fidelity to this
oath, his allegiance to the Pope did not descend into
abjectness. On occasion, he could complain, in very
explicit terms, of affairs in Rome that were not to his
mind. In his closing years, Boniface found a useful ally in
Pepin, the son of Charles Martel. It has commonly
been assumed that it was by his hand that Pepin was
anointed king at Soissons in 752 ; but some of the most
careful of recent investigators have declared that this
conclusion is without good foundation.2
The last enterprise of Boniface was in the field to
which his earliest efforts had been directed. As if in
testimony that his ambition was for souls rather than
for power, he resigned his place as the primate of Ger
many, and started upon a fresh attempt to evangelize
the Frisians. Great success attended his labors. Thou
sands, as it is said, gave effectual heed to his message.
On an appointed day, the 5th of June, 755, Boniface
was to meet a large company of them for administering
the rite of confirmation. But instead of his converts,
1 Migne, Patrologia, torn, lxxxix.
2 Hefele, Conciliengeschichte, § 373. Compare article on Boniface
in Herzog ; Rettberg, Kirchengeschichte Deutschlands, Band i. § 67.

42 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
there came a raging crowd of heathen. Boniface, as
he saw their approach, surmised their intent, and, stim
ulating the hearts of his companions with the hope of
the heavenly rewards, calmly awaited the stroke which
should bring him the crown of martyrdom. The body
of the great missionary found repose at the monastery
of Fulda, one of the notable institutions which his zeal
and tireless activity had given to Germany.
Of all the tribes bordering on Christian territory, the
Saxons presented the most unyielding front to Christian
ity. Their hostile attitude, however, admits of expla
nation. The fact that their rivals, the Franks, were
in their eyes the most conspicuous representatives of
Christianity, was not helpful to their prejudices. As a
warlike and independent race, they scorned everything
that seemed to imply an unworthy subjection. They
feared that the Christian yoke would be a yoke of
bondage. And, in truth, after the policy of Charle
magne became manifest, they could not help associating
the acceptance of Christianity with the double humilia
tion of bowing to the rule of the Franks, and being
compelled to pay tithes to the Church. In the view of
Charlemagne, the refractory Saxons, who yielded to his
arms only to gain the needed respite in which to prepare
for a fresh outbreak, could not be effectually subdued
save as they were Christianized. He therefore brought
forward the sword as the ally of the preacher. " If
Boniface," says Milman, " was the Christian, Charle
magne was the Mohammedan, apostle of the gospel."
Indeed, he gave the Saxons less discretion than ofttimes
was conceded by the devotees of the Koran. They
were given to understand that heathenism was abol-

CHRISTIAN MISSIONARIES. 43
ished, and that in practising its rites they were mak
ing themselves liable to the death penalty. Happily,
in connection with this rude means of propagandism,
there was a manifestation of a better spirit, and
the use of- better ways of commending the gospel.
Alcuin, notwithstanding his intimate relations with
Charlemagne, did not hesitate to criticise his methods,
and to give strong emphasis to the truth that only by
the use of spiritual weapons could heathenism in the
hearts of its votaries be effectually vanquished. More
over, there were noble missionaries, such as the Frisian
Liudger and the Northumbrian Willehad, who went
among the Saxons, and labored in the spirit of patience
and love. The first years of the ninth century may be
regarded as the era of the firm establishment of Chris
tianity among the Saxons.
The Scandinavian peoples first made themselves con
spicuous in European history as pirates and plunderers.
The stormy sea was their favorite element. Wherever
the wind and the waves prepared them a way, from the
Baltic and the British Isles round to the coasts of Italy,
they penetrated. They drove their barks far up the
rivers and streams, so that many inland cities fell a
prey to their unsparing hands. Towns as far inland as
Orleans, Tours, Chartres, and Bourges found no secu
rity. Churches and monasteries in particular, as being
least protected and offering most booty, were pillaged
and destroyed by these ruthless invaders.
Charlemagne, who foresaw with anguish of spirit
these desolating inroads from the North, had it in mind
to anticipate them, and to break their force so far as
possible by Christianizing the Scandinavians. But he

44 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
was not able to carry out his purpose. First under
his son Louis a beginning was made in that direction.
It was only a beginning. Neither in Denmark, Nor
way, nor Sweden were the people converted in a day.
Heathenism was parted with reluctantly. Many who
became at length willing to receive Christ as an object
of worship were disposed still to retain their old gods
alongside of the Christian's Saviour. Only by slow
advances, and at the expense of many reactions to
paganism, did Christianity at length acquire an undis
puted title to these lands.
The most eminent missionary to the Scandinavians,
the Apostle of the North as he has been called, was
Anschar (also written Ansgar or Anskar). He was
preceded, it is true, by Ebbo, Archbishop of Rheims, as
respects the work in Denmark ; but this prelate, on the
whole, appears rather as a patron of the enterprise than
as an active and constant participant in the same.
Anschar began his labors in Denmark in 826. The
seeming preparation for his coming in the conversion
of the King Harald, who was baptized at Mentz in the
same year, proved delusive. The Christianity of Har
ald was the reverse of a commendation in the eyes of
the people, and he was driven from his kingdom. The
missionary, too, was obliged to retire, though not with
out the satisfaction of having gathered some fruit, as a
number of the people had been converted, and youths
purchased from slavery had been initiated into the ele
ments of a Christian education.1
Soon after retiring from Denmark, Anschar found
an opportunity to plant the cross in Sweden. On his
1 Rembertus, Vita Anscharii, § 14.

CHRISTIAN MISSIONARIES. 45
return (about 832) he was raised to the rank of arch
bishop, with Hamburg for his head-quarters. At the
same time he visited Rome, and was forwarded in his
enterprise by the Pope, who intrusted to him and to
Ebbo the missions of the North. Many clouds swept
over his chosen field. In both Sweden and Denmark,
what had already been accomplished seemed destined at
times to be completely undone. But Anschar was a
man who could persevere through defeat after defeat.
He had an elastic temper, and a faith which triumphed
over the most dismal surroundings. As the Northern
pirates plundered Hamburg, burning church, cloister,
and library, and sending him forth with a destitute
band, his comment was, "The Lord has given, and the
Lord has taken away: blessed be the name of the
Lord.'" x His confidence was nurtured by a peculiarly
intimate communion with God. It is recorded that
on the eve of great crises in his work, when every
thing seemed to hang in the balance, he was able to
come from the place of wrestling with a serene and
joyful countenance, as one who felt that God had
given him the inward pledge of a favorable issue.
Combining with his steadfastness a certain emotional
warmth and liveliness of imagination, he was well
qualified to win and to impress men. At his death,
in 865, Christianity in Sweden and Denmark had not,
it is true, been placed beyond the reach of serious
reverses ; nevertheless, it had acquired a hold never
thereafter to be relinquished.
In Norway a beginning was made for the Christian
Church near the middle of the tenth century, by the
i Ibid., § 22.

46 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
King Hacon, who had received a Christian education
in England. Apprehending that he could not easily
surmount the force of heathen prejudice, he waited for
a season before publicly recommending the acceptance
of Christianity. Even then he found the current too
strong for him. In order to retain his crown, he was
obliged to participate in some of the heathen rites.
But at heart he was never alienated from the Chris
tian faith, and at his death he bitterly deplored his
compliance with the idolatrous demands of his sub
jects. Among his successors, Olaf Tryggvason and
Olaf Haroldson were energetic, not to say violent
and tyrannical, supporters of Christianity. In the
eleventh century the Christian Church became firmly
founded in Norway.
Christianity was introduced into Iceland in the last
quarter of the tenth century. The first evangelists
were the Saxon prelate Friedrich, and the native Thor-
wald, who had interested Friedrich in the spiritual wel
fare of the Icelanders. A number were converted, but
the ears of the majority seemed closed to the message
of the missionaries. After their departure, new labor
ers entered the field under the patronage of Olaf Trygg
vason. By the year 1000, public opinion had been so
far changed that Christianity could be adopted as the
public religion, though the practice of heathen rites in
private was still condoned.
About the time that Iceland adopted Christianity, it
was carried also to Greenland, which had recently been
colonized by Eric the Red. Leif, a son of this Eric,
brought the first Christian priest to Greenland. Refer
ences are made in the account of Leif, and several of

CHRISTIAN MISSIONARIES. 47
those who followed him, to a land which has been sup
posed by some to be identical with Massachusetts and
Rhode Island. That the American coast was reached
by these voyagers is entirely credible, but the point of
visitation is still a subject for inquiry.1
Among the Slavonian races, the missionary era was
the ninth, tenth, and eleventh centuries. Moravia re
ceived the gospel in the latter half of the ninth century,
through the Greek missionaries Cyril and Methodius,
the latter of whom was awarded the metropolitan dig
nity from Rome. The movement in Moravia reinforced
the beginning which had been made shortly before in
Bohemia. From Bohemia, Christianity was carried,
after the middle of the tenth century, into Poland.
The Bulgarians, Slavonian in language but not in
race, first learned of Christianity from captives taken in
the early part of the ninth century, among whom was
the Bishop of Adrianople. They generally clung, how
ever, to their old religion till after the middle of the
same century. As the agency by which they were
finally persuaded to a change of faith came from Con
stantinople, it was but natural that their allegiance
should gravitate thither. However, for a brief interval
there was a serious consideration of the question of
union with Rome. An embassy was sent thither about
865. The Pope in response despatched his legates into
Bulgaria, and returned answers to a long list of ques
tions which had been propounded respecting worship
and life. The answers, on the whole, were very credit
able, and such as might have been expected from the
1 See Narrative and Critical History of America, edited by Justin
Winsor, vol. i.

48 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
sagacious pontiff, Nicolas I., who then occupied the
chair of Peter. The Bulgarians, however, were not
sufficiently grateful for the paternal offices of the Pope
to attach themselves to Rome.
If a statement sent forth in 866 by Photius, Patriarch
of Constantinople, could be taken in its full breadth,
it must be concluded that the Russians had already
in large numbers embraced the gospel. But Photius
wished to magnify the missionary activity of the East,
and so in all probability gave too high a color to his
picture. The positive establishment of Christianity
in Russia was more than a century later. In 955, as
we read, Olga, widow of the Russian King Igor, was
baptized in Constantinople under the Christian name
Helena. Her grandson Vladimir was baptized in 988.
Like a genuine Russian autocrat, he ordered his sub
jects to follow his example. His son and successor
was also a zealous patron of Christianity ; and churches,
schools, and monasteries were multiplied throughout
the country.
The Hungarians, or Magyars, the last and fiercest of
the great swarms of invaders which poured through
Central Europe, after spreading the terror of their
name into Southern Gaul and Italy, were finally con
fined by the victories of Henry the Fowler and Otho
the Great (933, 955) to their present bounds upon the
Danube. Very soon thereafter the feeble beginning of
Christianity, which had been received through connec
tion with Constantinople, was supplemented by mission
aries from the German Empire. At the end of the tenth
century, King Stephen, who came to be honored by the
Hungarians as a saint, was a zealous patron of the

CHRISTIAN MISSIONARIES. 49
Christian Church among his subjects. His efforts, how
ever, did not secure to it such a place in the affections
of the people as to prevent a subsequent reaction to
heathenism. Thus, from the time that the conversion of Constan-
tine inaugurated the open triumph and ascendency of
Christianity in the Roman Empire, seven centuries
elapsed before all of the prominent tribes of Europe
had consented to take the Christian name. In obscure
quarters, at a still later date, there were professed
heathen within European bounds.

CHAPTER III.
LIMITATION OF CHRISTIAN TEEEITOEY BY MOHAMMEDANISM.
IN the first part of the seventh century, a power arose
in Arabia which despoiled Christianity of much of
its territory and cast a menacing shadow over the rest
for centuries.
The founder of so great, and, relatively speaking, so
permanent a power, could not have been an ordinary
man. As we consider the breadth and self-propagating
force of Mohammed's influence, we are compelled to
rank him among the most noteworthy actors upon the
field of Oriental history.
The prophetic vocation came to Mohammed in part
as a demand of his age and country, and in part as a
result of his peculiar mental and physical constitution.
Tokens of a religious ferment had appeared among his
countrymen. The presence of a considerable Jewish
and Christian population had probably acted upon some
minds as a leaven of unrest. The reliability of the old
faith began to be questioned, and there were instances
in which its former devotees passed over into scepti
cism. In this unrest and dissatisfaction, none shared
more deeply than Mohammed. But his ardent nature
could not abide in mere doubt or denial of the old idol-

MOHAMMEDANISM. 61
atrous faith. He pondered intensely upon the problems
of religion. Seeking a place congenial to his burdened
soul, he retired often to a lonely cave. Gradually his
mind became established firmly in the conviction of the
nothingness of idolatry, and in the acknowledgment of
one supreme God, the Creator, Ruler, and Judge of the
world. In a nature so intense and poetic as was his,
the new belief could not lie dormant. It fired his im
agination, and commanded his thoughts. At the same
time, his physical constitution gave him a peculiar apti
tude for vision and trance. So the epilepsy of child
hood became the prophetic swoon of the mature man ;
Mohammed believed himself to be the recipient of reve
lations, a prophet sent from God to turn the Arabs from
their idols. After spreading his views in private for
an interval among his near friends, he called upon the
people at large to give heed to his message. But the
inhabitants of Mecca proved to be a gainsaying people.
They responded with indifference, and finally with wrath
and persecution. Meanwhile pilgrims from Medina had •
become favorably impressed with his claims, and pre
pared for him a refuge in that city. The result was
the Hejira so celebrated in Mohammedan annals, — the
flight of the prophet, in 622, from Mecca to Medina. In
the latter city he easily gained complete ascendency.
Other means besides spiritual weapons were now at his
command, and he made no delay in using them. The
sword was welcomed as the most effective instrument
of persuasion. By its aid Mohammed's power had so
far advanced by 630, that he was able to take Mecca ;
and in the next year came the unsparing edict for the
complete extirpation of idolatry in Arabia. " When

52 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
the sacred months," so reads the edict, "are passed
away, kill the idolaters wherever ye may find them,
and take them and besiege them, and lie in wait for
them in every place of observation ; but if they repent,
and are steadfast in prayer, and give alms, then let
them go their way." l At the death of Mohammed, in
632, little more remained to be done to complete the
dominion of his faith in Arabia.
As Mohammed professed in all varieties of matters
to be guided by revelations, his decisions as a ruler, as
well as his earlier prophetic messages, were at the same
time oracles of religion. So the Koran was prepared.
It is simply a collection of the prophet's utterances,
without respect to chronology in its arrangement, — a
feature not a little embarrassing to the interpreter ; for,
it being a settled rule among the Mohammedans that
in case of disagreement a later revelation must be re
garded as cancelling an earlier, an unsettled chronology
is equivalent to an unsettled authority. In fact, the
outlines of the faith in the Koran have not appeared so
distinct to its votaries as to prevent much diversity
of opinion, and much division into sects. The advice
of the prophet, " Take tight hold of God's rope alto
gether, and do not part into sects,"2 has been very
poorly followed.
Great originality cannot be claimed for the prophet
of the Koran. He drew both from Judaism and from.
Christianity. His borrowings, however, evidently were
not made on the basis of an accurate acquaintance with
the oracles of either. The sources of which he availed
himself were extra-biblical, the popular traditions found
1 Koran, Sura ix. 2 Sura iii.

MOHAMMEDANISM. 53
among the Arabian Jews and Christians in his time.
These he interwove at considerable length with his rev
elations. At first he acknowledged both Jews and
Christians as representatives of the true religion, and
even instructed his followers to turn their faces towards
Jerusalem in prayer. Later he regarded them in a
much less friendly light, though still giving a place to
Moses and Jesus as the great prophets of the past, and
reckoning himself as the end of the succession to which
they belonged.
The Koran is not without reference to the Divine
compassion, the freedom of man, and spiritual rewards
in the hereafter. But, after all, the charge is well
founded, that it sets forth the God of might and judg
ment rather than the God of love, lays the foundation
for a fatalistic conception of man's relation to the Divine
sovereignty, and encourages the anticipation of a sen
sual paradise. On the latter point, the mild comments
of some recent writers are hardly adequate to the case.
In the light of such passages as are found in Suras xliv.,
Iv., and lxxviii., it cannot well be denied that a full
counterpart of the Oriental harem is transferred to the
hereafter. With some passages noble in content as well as in
style, and not unworthy of a prophet, the Koran com
bines others which bespeak a man weakly given over to
delusion, or consciously devoted to fraud and trickery.
The revelations by which he justified his marriage with
Zeinab, the divorced wife of his freedman and adopted
son, as also that by which he endeavored to silence the
complaints of his wives over an unequal share in his
attentions, give us a picture of inspiration descending

54 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
into a poor and transparent burlesque. Even critics
who judge Mohammed in general with great charity are
obliged to confess that in his later years he was not
unstained by the arts of the impostor. " It is hard to
think," says Stanley Lane-Poole, " that he could really
believe in the inspired source of some of his revelations.
He may have thought the commands they convey neces
sary, but he could hardly have deemed them Divine.
In some eases he could scarcely fail to be aware that the
object of the ' revelation ' was his own comfort or pleas
ure or reputation, and not the major Dei gloria, nor the
good of the people." J
The Koran embodied not only a religion, but a social
system. In respect to the latter, it no doubt intro
duced much improvement upon the previous customs
of the Arabians. At the same time it built enor
mous barriers against future progress. By giving the
sanction of religion to the cardinal vices of Eastern civ
ilization, — polygamy, unlimited license in concubinage,
and slavery, — it mortgaged unnumbered generations
to degradation.
Mohammed's commendation of the sword by word
and deed found a ready response in the hearts of his
followers. Under the double impulse of a fresh reli
gious zeal and military ambition, they sallied forth to
the work of conquest. And where these two motives
failed, a third came in to urge on the halting, — the love
of plunder, so strongly rooted in the Arabs of that as
of other ages. To use the graphic description of Sir
William Muir : " The marauding spirit of the Bedouin
was in unison with the militant spirit of Islam. The
1 Studies in a Mosque.

MOHAMMEDANISM. 55
cry of plunder and of conquest reverberated throughout
the land, and was answered eagerly. The movement
began naturally with the tribes in the North, which had
been first reclaimed from their apostasy, and whose rest
less spirit led them over the frontier. Later on, in the
second year of the Caliphate, the exodus spread to the
people of the South. At first the Caliph forbade that
help should be taken from such as had backslidden.
But step by step, as new spheres opened out, and the
cry ran through the land for fresh levies to fill up the
martyr gaps, the ban was put aside, and all were wel
come. Warrior after warrior, column after column,
whole tribes in endless succession, with their women
and children, issued forth to battle , and ever, at the
marvellous tales of cities conquered, of booty rich be
yond compute, of fair captives distributed on the field,
— ' to every man a damsel or two,' — and, above all, at
the sight of the royal fifth of spoil and slaves sent to
Medina, fresh tribes arose and went. Onward and still
onward, like swarms from the hive, one after another
they poured forth, pressed first to the north, and spread
thence in great masses to the east and west." 1
So far as Christian territory was concerned, in large
sections an easy victory for the Islamite warriors had
been prepared by the great schisms which had grown
out of the Christological controversies. Large popula
tions in Egypt and Syria were not at all loath to change
from the hated government at Constantinople to the
yoke of Mohammedan rule. Both of these countries
had been conquered by 640. Persia was added by 651.
Northern Africa was invaded in 647, but not fully sub-
1 Annals of the Early Caliphate.

56 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
dued till the first years of the next century. The
conquest of Spain was begun in 710. The capital of
Eastern Christendom was twice assailed (669, 717), and
owed its safety only to the strength of its fortifications
and the use of the Greek fire. The Western capital
was also threatened. Indeed, in the space of a century
Mohammedanism had stretched its borders along the
whole extent of Christian territory, and seemed destined
to make still further acquisitions. But the reserved
power was wanting to follow up the early victories. So
the rugged peoples which had settled in the Western
Empire were able both to check, and in a measure to
turn back, the advancing wave.
In most countries, Mohammedan possession meant the
limitation rather than the complete destruction of the
Christian Church. In Arabia the policy was broached
by the second Caliph, Omar, of tolerating no religion
but that of the Koran. But elsewhere the attempt was
not made — at least, it was no part of a settled scheme
— to proscribe Christianity and Judaism. The alterna
tives presented were Islam, tribute, and the sword. By
the payment of tribute the Christians could purchase
for themselves the privilege of practising their religion,
only subject to social degradation and often assailed
with ridicule. To those at all open to temptation, there
were plenty of motives for apostasy. The simple accept
ance of the Koran raised the conquered to the rank of
the conquerors. Prisoners who had forfeited their lives,
as having been taken in battle, could redeem themselves
by a change of faith. Polygamy, and the unrestrained
right of the master to use every bondwoman according
to his pleasure, brought multitudes of women under a

MOHAMMEDANISM. 57
heavy domestic constraint, against which it was no easy
matter to preserve their religion. Before excessive in
dulgence had enervated the conquerors, these features
of their social system were no doubt effectual means for
swelling their own ranks at the expense of the tributary
Christians. In some quarters Christianity was reduced
almost to the vanishing point. " Out of four hundred
sees that once shed a salutary light on Africa, four only
were surviving in the eleventh century. The rest had
been absorbed in the vortex of Islamism." 1
In return for its work of destruction in general, and
for its enormous crime and folly in particular in the
burning of the Alexandrian library, Mohammedanism
began to give back the fruits of learned industry. After
the conqueror came the scholar. By the eighth century
the Arabic mind began to yield to the stimulus of Greek
culture. Metaphysics attracted some attention ; but it
was in the line of mathematical and physical studies
that the most noteworthy achievements were made. In
Spain the tenth century was the golden era of this
Arabic learning. 1 Hardwick, Christian Church in the Middle Age.

CHAPTER IV.
CTvTL PATBONS OF CHEISTIANITY.
WHILE the memory of the Roman Empire perpetu
ated in the times of disruption a high conception
of order and of empire, there came at intervals men who
had the ambition and the talents to realize in a measure
the ideal. Such in a pre-eminent sense were the early
Carlovingians. The Merovingian dynasty reached the natural out
come of luxury and license. The material for real
kingship became exhausted. Hois fainiants, do-nothing
kings, mere figure-heads, sat upon the throne. A line
of able and energetic men, commonly designated Mayors
of the Palace, rose in the course of the seventh century
to the place of actual sovereignty. Among these a dis
tinguished place was held by Pepin d'Heristal, who be
came master of France in 687. Shortly after his death
in 714, his illegitimate son Charles, to whom the glori
ous surname of Martel, or Hammer, was added as a
memorial of his triumph over the Saracens, took the
reins of government.
Charles Martel was not in all respects a wise and
generous patron of the Christian Church. Not only
did he seize upon church property in order to provide a
recompense for his soldiers, but he indulged the utterly

CIVIL PATRONS OF CHRISTIANITY. 59
demoralizing expedient of appointing his chief officers
to high ecclesiastical trusts, merely for the sake of the
ample revenues connected therewith. But after times
made little account of this trespass, in consideration of
the services of Charles in turning back the tide of Mo
hammedan invasion. As early as 719 the Saracens of
Spain had penetrated beyond the Pyrenees. In 731
they came in full force, purposing nothing less than to
extend their rule over the whole of France. Charles
Martel chose his ground at a point between Tours and
Poitiers. For six days the two hosts confronted each
other (October, 732). On the seventh day the battle
began in earnest. The stalwart Franks met without re
coil the impetuous charge of the Saracens. At length
a detachment which had reached the enemy's rear
threw them into confusion by an attack in that quar
ter. The Franks, now charging in their turn, drove
the opposing ranks to their tents, and filled them with
such alarm that they fled under cover of the night,
leaving behind them immense spoils. The victory was
decisive, and determined that the crescent should sink
behind the Pyrenees as speedily as it had risen above
them. Reports of the battle ran up the loss of the
Saracens to the incredible figure of three hundred thou
sand slain. Charles stood now, though without a
crown, in the front rank of European princes. The
Pope confessed his eminence by seeking his alliance,
and promising to bestow upon him the title Patrician
of Rome.
Charles Martel died before the results of the negotia
tions had matured. The proposed scheme, however, was
carried out by his son Pepin, who not only secured the

60 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
honorary title Patrician of the Romans, but also the
acknowledged rank of sovereign of the Franks. By
papal consent he took the crown. In answer to the
question propounded by the ambassadors of Pepin, the
Pope replied that he who wielded the authority and
fulfilled the duties of a king should also bear the name.
So the helpless Merovingian Childeric was sent to the
cloister, and Pepin was crowned at Soissons in 752. In
return for favors from Rome, Pepin drove the Lombards
from their usurped possession of the exarchate, and
made a grant of this territory to the Pope. The nature
of this grant, which was renewed by Charlemagne, we
shall have occasion to consider in a subsequent con
nection. The foundations laid by Charles Martel and Pepin
were built upon by a man of much greater breadth
and genius than either of them. Charlemagne, the first
Germanic ruler of pre-eminent greatness, on the death
of his father, Pepin, in 768, shared the kingdom with
his brother Carloman. Three years later he became
sole ruler.
It was the grandeur of Charlemagne's ambition, that
he aimed to restore an image of the Roman Empire.
And it must be allowed that he went far toward the
fulfilment of his ambition. He pushed out his borders
on every side. He gained supremacy over a large part
of Italy. He acquired a portion of Spain. He con
quered the Saxons, though at the expense of seventeen
campaigns and upwards of thirty years of struggle.
He gained the sovereignty over Bavaria, penetrated
into Pannonia and conquered the Avars, the descend
ants of the Huns whose invasions had terrified Europe

CIVIL PATRONS OF CHRISTIANITY. 61
in the fifth century. In fine, his empire was made to
cover a large part of Western Europe, reaching from
the Baltic to the Ebro, from the British Channel to the
southern part of Italy, from the Atlantic to the Lower
Danube and the mountains of Moravia. In order to
gain an outward badge suitable to express so great a
stretch of authority, Charlemagne received the imperial
crown from the hands of the Pope. The ceremonial of
coronation took place on Christmas day in the year
800. Thus the ancient order of things was recalled.
The West had once more its Christian Caesar.
Hand in hand with the work of conquest, Charle
magne endeavored to carry on the work of civilization.
He patronized scholars, founded schools, collected libra
ries, and gave to his people in his own habits an exam
ple of zeal and industry in study. He endeavored to
inform himself about the state and the wants of the
people in all parts of his dominions, and was unwearied
in efforts to provide them with suitable laws. On the
whole, he used a wise discretion in adjusting his at
tempts to improve his people to their native character
istics. " Other barbarian princes," says Henri Martin,
" have cast themselves with ardor into the work of civ
ilization: but that which distinguishes among them all
the great Charles is that he substituted an intelligent
imitation for a servile copying ; that he borrowed from
Roman traditions only ideas and information, and not
impracticable political forms ; that he wished finally to
civilize the race of Franks and Germans by developing,
and not by destroying, its native genius. In that lay its
force, and he never forgot the fact." 1
1 Histoire de France.

62 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
The personal appearance of Charlemagne was well
suited to add to the impression made by his magnificent
achievements. It is not strange, therefore, that promi
nent faults were made little of by his contemporaries,
especially as they were such as royalty not uncom
monly exhibited in that age. History records in par
ticular, to his dishonor, that he gave way to a savage
ferocity in executing at one time four thousand and five
hundred of the rebellious Saxons ; and that in his do
mestic life he was guilty of concubinage, as well as of
an arbitrary use of the prerogative of divorce.1 Such
blemishes must be regarded as a serious detraction from
true greatness ; nevertheless, in eminent respects, the
first Germanic Emperor was not unworthy of the title
which has become incorporated with his name. Con
sidering his resources, he accomplished an astonishing
work. " He stands alone," says Hallam, " like a bea
con upon a waste, or a rock in the broad ocean. His
sceptre was as the bow of Ulysses, which could not be
drawn by any weaker hand. In the dark ages of Euro
pean history, the reign of Charlemagne affords a solitary
resting-place between two long periods of turbulence
and ignominy, deriving the advantage of contrast both
from that of the preceding dynasty, and of a posterity
for whom he had formed an empire which they were
unworthy and unequal to maintain." 2
While the empire of Charlemagne soon went to pieces,
the fruits of his labors were not by any means wholly
swept away. The pieces were far different from what
1 For a summary of Charlemagne's domestic record see Einhard, Vita
et Conversatio Caroli Regis Magni, cap xviii.
2 Europe during the Middle Ages.

CIVIL PATRONS OF CHRISTIANITY. 63
they would have been but for his powerful impress.
His work survived in the more progressive elements of
the states into which his empire was dismembered.
It was in the lands over which the sovereignty of
Charlemagne had extended, that the feudal system had
its most conspicuous development. The germs of the
system, no doubt, were earlier than the age of the great
Carlovingian. In the disorders which followed close
upon his relinquishment of the sceptre, a great impe
tus was given to its growth. The act of Charles the
Bald in 877, in making the government of the counties
hereditary, thus converting these districts into great
fiefs, decidedly favored its complete ascendency. In
the tenth, century, feudalism appears as the dominant
rSgime. Its essential characteristic was the grant, by a
superior, of property or privilege, under the condition
of service. Primarily the grant consisted of lands,
upon which the holder exercised more or less of the
rights of sovereignty ; and service was principally dis
charged in rendering military aid to the patron or suze
rain. In course of time, however, a variety of rights
and privileges, as well as landed estates, passed under
the feudal tenure. The relation of lord and vassal was
held not only by the lay nobles, but also by prelates and
abbots ; not only by individuals, but also by cities and
towns. It was a kind of neighborhood system, which
was rapidly promoted by the absence of a strong central
government. After Charlemagne, the next illustrious patron of
Christian civilization was Alfred the Great of England,
— a name that will suffer no eclipse when placed beside
that of any prince of the period. He moved indeed in

64 THE MEDIJEVAL CHURCH.
a much narrower circle than did the ambitious restorer
of the Roman Empire. In intellectual force and daring
very likely he was not his equal. But he was more
than his equal in the highest and finest traits. In purity
of life and symmetry of character he bore a title to last
ing reverence and affection such as Charlemagne was
never able to earn. He gained the heart of England for
all time, and an Englishman must exercise self-restraint
not to kindle to eloquence as he mentions his name.
" Alfred," says Green, " was the noblest, as he was the
most complete, embodiment of all that is great, all that
is lovable, in the English temper. He combined as no
other man has ever combined its practical energy, its
patient and enduring force, its profound sense of duty,
the reserve and self-control that steadies in it a wide
outlook and a restless daring, its temperance and fair
ness, its frank geniality, its sensitiveness to affection,
its poetic tenderness, its deep and passionate religion.
Religion, indeed, was the groundwork of Alfred's char
acter. Everywhere throughout his writings that remain
to us, the name of God, the thought of God, stir him to
outbursts of ecstatic adoration. But he was no mere
saint. He felt none of that scorn of the world about
him which drove the nobler souls of his day to monas
tery or hermitage. Vexed as he was by sickness and
constant pain, his temper took no touch of asceticism.
His rare geniality, a peculiar elasticity and mobility of
nature, gave color and charm to his life. A sunny frank
ness and openness of spirit breathes in the pleasant chat
of his books, and what he was in his books he showed
himself in his daily converse." 1
1 History of the English People.

CIVIL PATRONS OF CHRISTIANITY. 65
Alfred came to the throne (871) at. a time of great
national peril and distress. The inroads made by the
Danes in the closing years of the preceding century had
been followed by new and greater invasions, until at
length they seemed ready to gain complete mastery over
England. In this crisis the valor and patience of Alfred
came to the rescue. He inspired the hearts of the
people with his own hopefulness, met the enemy in bat
tle after battle, and saved the country from the yoke of
their dominion. He was not able, indeed, to expel the
Danes ; but he held them in check, and laid the foun
dation for that work of his successors by which the
strangers became incorporated into the English people,
instead of taking its place or reducing it to a subordi
nate rank. England, it is true, came in time to have
its Danish sovereign ; but Canute and those of his house
who succeeded him for a brief interval brought about
no ascendency of the Danes in England at large. They
were Danish rulers over an English people.
But the sword was by no means the only weapon
with which Alfred served his people. He had a care to
provide them with improved laws, and with new means
of religious and intellectual training. He beheld with
grief the gross ignorance which had been settling upon
the nation since the Northern pirates had begun to lay
the torch to cloister and church. Teachers were called
in from abroad. Nor did the King stop with patronizing
instructors : he turned instructor himself, and wrought
diligently at the translator's task, rendering into Eng
lish for the benefit of the unlearned the work of Boethius
on the Consolation of Philosophy, the Pastoral of Pope
Gregory, the Universal History of Orosius, and the His-
5

66 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
tory of the Anglo-Saxon Church by Beda. In fine, we
see in Alfred a consecration of princely talents that has
rarely been equalled in the history of royalty.
The Norman conquest effected a great revolution in
the political and social state of England, and had also
an important bearing upon its ecclesiastical affairs. But
the effects of the Norman ascendency may better be
considered in the following period.
Germany presents us next with an example of illus
trious sovereigns. On the deposition of Charles the
Fat in 888, Germany returned to the status of a sepa
rate realm which had been assigned to her in the treaty
of Verdun in 843. The first of her rulers were of no
special note. But with the introduction of the Saxon
house, in 919, came men who knew how to add honor
to the imperial dignity. The most distinguished in this
line of rulers were the first two, Henry the Fowler and
Otho I. The former won the gratitude of Europe by
the effectual check which he put upon the inroads of
the Hungarians. The latter in ambition and personal
force recalled the image of Charlemagne. No less than
the mighty Frank he aimed to restore the Roman Em
pire. Having consolidated his rule in Germany, he
pushed on into Italy, received the imperial crown from
the hand of the Pope, exercised his pleasure in filling
the papal office, and established his supremacy over a
large part of the peninsula. He may be regarded as
the chief founder of the power which before the expira
tion of the next century was to match arms with the
papacy. Three rulers followed him from the Saxon
house ; namely, Otho II., Otho III., and Henry II,
Then came (1024) the Franconian house, represented by
Conrad II., Henry III., Henry IV., and Henry V.

CHAPTER V.
CONTROVERSIES.
HPHIS period presents no such fruitful activity in the
-*¦ sphere of doctrine as appeared in the preceding.
As it was the darkest and most confused of the Chris
tian ages, so it was the least competent and the least
disposed to accord a searching attention to the prob
lems of the faith. While there were some men of fair
sholarship, such as John of Damascus and Photius in
the East, Isidore of Seville, Beda, Alcuin, and Rabanus
Maurus in the West, these had more of the spirit and
talent of the compiler than of the energetic and original
thinker. In John Scotus Erigena alone do we behold
any outburst of speculative genius; and his writings,
with their manifold aberrations from the commonly
accepted system of belief, were rather a warning to
men to bridle their thoughts, than an encouragement
to give them a loose rein.
Still the age had its controversies. Two of these, the
Monothelite and the Iconoclastic, were on a scale which
made them great public events. They fall therefore
properly within the scope of this work. We may also
devote a few words to points in dispute between the
East and the West, to the local controversies of the
West, and to those heretical sects which were regarded
as quite without the pale of Catholic Christianity.

68 THE MED1J2VAL CHURCH.
1. The Monoihelite Controversy. — This was the end
of the chain whose beginning reaches back into the
later stages <5f the Arian strife. The preceding links
were Apollinarianism and its condemnation ; Nestori-
anism and its condemnation ; Eutychianism, its con
demnation, and again its apparent victory through the .
patronage of the Alexandrian Patriarch Dioscurus ; the
formulation of the orthodox christology at Chalcedon ;
the rise and persistence of a large sectarian body in
Egypt, Syria, and the neighboring territory to the east
ward, known as the Monophysites, who refused to ac
cept the creed of Chalcedon ; and the agitation, largely
without fruit, but in a measure favorable to the Mono
physites, which disturbed the reign of Justinian. The
chain had already been drawn out across the breadth of
two centuries and a half, when a scheme was broached
-which added upwards of half a century more.
The scheme was an expedient for reconciling the
Monophysites to the Church, — the scheme of which
the Emperor Heraclius became enamored. In his cam
paign against the Persians, his attention had been spe
cially directed to the Monophysites. He bethought
himself that it would be a glorious thing for the integ
rity of the Empire, as well as for the unity of the Church,
to bring back this large body of schismatics into the
Catholic fellowship. By communication with the Mono-
physite bishops, and those who were anxious for their
pacification, the idea of a compromise was suggested to
his mind. He thought it would take off the edge of
their opposition to the creed of Chalcedon, if it were
allowed that in Christ there is but one indivisible
operation of will. Such a concession, as he properly

CONTROVERSIES. 69
judged, could not be otherwise than welcome to their
zeal for the complete unity of Christ's person. But it
was necessary to consult the theologians. Here the
result was at first all that the Emperor could have de
sired. Sergius, the Patriarch of Constantinople, became
his industrious ally. Indeed, he is supposed by some
historians to have been a chief instrument in suggesting
to the Emperor the plan of compromise.1 He helped
to quiet the scruples of Cyrus, Bishop of Phasis, who,
as he was promoted to the patriarchate of Alexandria,
gave a practical application to the scheme of reconcilia
tion, and brought many of the Monophysites into the
Catholic Church. Still further and of more significance,
Sergius won over Honorius I., Bishop of Rome, to a
commendation of the new formula. As the Patriarch
of Antioch was also favorable to the imperial project,
victory seemed well assured.
But something more than skilful diplomacy is neces
sary to fix dogmas in any age and people not given
over to complete indifference and passivity. Schemes
of compromise are only schemes for complicating and
prolonging discussion. An ambiguous formula is no
basis for a stable equilibrium. So it proved in this
case. Resolute voices began to assail the plan of pacifi
cation, as a surrender to Monophysite heresy. Sophro-
nius, Patriarch of Jerusalem, issued a circular letter in
defence of the opposing doctrine of two wills in Christ.
As an offset to this, Heraclius sent forth a decree (638).
This document, which was probably composed by Ser
gius, and is known as the Ecthesis, commanded silence
on the points in dispute ; but it was in no wise calcu-
1 Hefele, Conciliengeschichte, § 291.

70 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
lated to induce silence, since it manifestly departed
from the neutral standpoint, and put in an apology for
the Monothelite teaching. An edict issued ten years
later by Constans, and called the Type, was more genu
inely neutral. But neutrality was now as much out of
the question as the positive enforcement of the Mono
thelite formula. Men of weight and influence stood
forth as stubborn opponents of all compromise and
ambiguity. Such was the attitude in particular of the
Roman Bishop Martin I., and the monk Maximus, both
of whom were rewarded for their courage and stead
fastness with the honors of martyrdom. The former,
through a council convened at Rome in 649, formally
sanctioned the doctrine of two wills in Christ, and con
demned not only the opposing doctrine, together with
its upholders, but also the two imperial decrees. The
last item was declared to be a crime against the imperial
majesty. Martin accordingly was seized in Rome by the
emissaries of the Emperor, and carried to Constanti
nople. The peril of a death sentence was turned aside
by the request of the Patriarch of Constantinople, who
was then in his last sickness. But treatment the equiv
alent of execution, to one pressed by infirmities as was
the aged Pope, was awarded him. After being harshly
used, he was sent (655) to Chersoh on the Black Sea,
where a few months of deprivation served to waste
away his life. Maximus was the victim of even greater
barbarity. As flatteries, threats, and banishment were
found powerless to bend his resolution, he was brought
to Constantinople, scourged, deprived of his tongue
and right hand, and sent to die of his injuries in
renewed exile (662).

CONTROVERSIES. 71
The cause of these martyrs was the cause of victory,
not merely as being sustained by their powerful witness,
but as being most in accord with the preceding drift in
doctrine, especially as represented by the great Council
of Chalcedon. Consequently the Sixth Ecumenical
Council, convened at Constantinople in 680, found little
difficulty in condemning Monothelitism, and uniting
upon the assertion that there are two natural wills and
two natural operations in Christ, though these are never
in antagonism. The decision of the council substan
tially ended the controversy. There was, however, an
abortive attempt under the Emperor Bardanes (711-713)
to restore the proscribed teaching, and it continued to
find refuge among the Maronites in the Lebanon region.
The Monothelite controversy has great interest apart
from its bearing upon the subject of christology. Its
record affords one of the most conspicuous of the test
cases of the dogma of papal infallibility. While the
dogma would in no wise be proved by the absence of ex
cathedra decrees in conflict with the accepted tenets of
the Roman Catholic system, inasmuch as that system it
self by no means bears the stamp of infallibility, a single
ex cathedra decree from any pope in violation of any
tenet of this system would, even on Romanist princi
ples themselves, disprove the dogma. Now, it has been
a notorious fact, ever since the days of Heraclius and his
scheme of reconciliation, that the name of the Roman
Bishop Honorius I. has been intimately associated with
the Monothelite heresy. There can be no question at
all that he was implicated in its patronage, and was
anathematized for his fault by the highest authorities of
the Church.

72 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
These are facts which call for a careful scrutiny.
A mooted question is whether Honorius ex cathedra
sanctioned heresy. As bearing upon this question, we
may consider the nature and extent of the condemna
tion visited upon him, the evidence of his own writ
ings, and some of the more noteworthy verdicts of
scholars. The nature and extent of the condemnation are per
tinent to the question, as serving in some measure to
express the impression of the age respecting the tres
pass of Honorius. It is not to be assumed that councils
presided over by Roman legates, and moreover a long
line of Roman bishops, Would be so careless of the honor
of the Roman see as to anathematize a Roman bishop
for heresy, except on the basis of the most serious con
viction that he had abased his high office to the positive
patronage and inculcation of heresy. Now, the anath
ema against Honorius was quite as broad as these terms
indicate. After laying Sergius and others under anath
ema, the decree of the ecumenical council of 680 pro
ceeds : " We have provided that together with these,
Honorius, who was Pope of ancient Rome, should be
cast out of God's holy Catholic Church and anathema
tized, because we have discovered, through the writings
which he addressed to Sergius, that in all things he
followed his view, and confirmed his impious dogmas."
The two following ecumenical councils, the seventh and
eighth, repeated the anathema. Pope Leo II. confirmed
the action of the council of 680 in these unequivocal
terms : " We equally anathematize the inventors of the
new heresy, that is, Bishop Theodore of Pharan, Cyrus
of Alexandria, Sergius, Pyrrhus, Paulus, Petrus, way-

CONTROVERSIES. 73
layers rather than overseers of the church of Constan
tinople ; also Honorius, who has not illuminated this
apostolic Church with the doctrine of apostolic tradition,
but by a profane betrayal has endeavored to subvert the
immaculate faith." 1 A whole line of popes, extending
over no less an interval than three centuries, affixed also
their signatures to the anathema. " In the Liber Diur-
nus," says Hefele, " that is, the Book of Formularies of
the Roman Curia (from the fifth to the eleventh cen
tury), is found the old formula for the pontifical oath,
prescribed without doubt by Gregory II. (at the begin
ning of the eighth century), according to which every
new pope at his entrance upon his office is bound to
give oath that he acknowledges the Sixth Ecumenical
Council, which laid an eternal anathema upon Sergius.,
Pyrrhus, etc., together with Honorius, because he gave
encouragement to the depraved assertions of heretics." 2
As is indicated in the above, the writings in which
Honorius patronized the Monothelite heresy, and for
which he was placed under anathema, were his epistles
to Sergius. In these epistles he assumes that unity of
person implies oneness of will, reprobates mention of
either one or two energies in Christ, and accepts the
Monothelite formula in these plain terms : " We confess
also one will of our Lord Jesus Christ." 3
Some of the most eminent exponents of Roman Cath
olic scholarship have avowed that it is impossible to
excuse Honorius from an ex cathedra sanctioning of
heresy. Db'llinger, writing several years before the
1 Mansi, Hefele, Gieseler.
2 Conciliengeschichte, 2d ed., 1877, § 324.
8 Mansi, Hefele.

74 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
Vatican Council of 1869-70, declares that he was just
as much a heretic as Sergius, and others of the Oriental
bishops who championed the Monothelite heresy, and
can be exempted from the odium of that name only on
the same ground on which they can be exempted ;
namely, that their erroneous views were given forth
in connection with a subject upon which the Church
had not yet rendered any authoritative decision. In
confirmation of the conclusion, that Honorius was es
sentially agreed with the Patriarchs of Constantinople
and Alexandria, he points to the fact that the Roman
Bishop, in entire harmony with their view, interpreted
the two passages of Scripture which most clearly dis
tinguish between the human and the Divine will in
Christ, as being in the mouth of Christ a mere " econ
omy," or accommodated mode of speaking, used for
the purpose of admonishing us to submit our wills to
the Divine. On the question whether Honorius in his
epistles rendered an ex cathedra decision, Dollinger
says, " If the conception of an ex cathedra decision is
given the requisite breadth, and only those dogmatic
declarations are reckoned to this category which a pope
issues not in his own name or for himself, but in the
name of the Church, with the sure consciousness of the
teaching prevailing in the Church, consequently after
foregoing inquiry or conciliar discussion, then — but
also only then — can it be said that Honorius did not
render an ex cathedra decision." x
1 Die Papst-Fabeln des Mittelalters, 1863. Any one who will honestly
examine the text of the Vatican decrees of 1870 cannot fail to see that
they assert for the Pope dogmatic independence or absoluteness. The
authority of his decisions is in no wise made to depend on " foregoing

CONTROVERSIES. 75
Hefele, while he insinuates the charitable thought
that Honorius was not at heart a heretic, cannot deny
the fact that he so expressed himself as in his highest
official capacity to patronize heresy. In his Causa
Honorii Papce, written before the Vatican Council, he
sums up the tenor of the Pope's epistles in this way :
" Honorius rejected the technical orthodox term of two
energies, and declared the specific heretical term, one
will, to be correct, and prescribed this twofold error as
an article of faith to the church of Constantinople."
In the same treatise he pronounces for the ex cathedra
character of the papal documents. Answering the ob
jection that they were not formally addressed to the
whole Church, he says, " I do not know that a formal
address to the whole Church is absolutely necessary to
an ex cathedra definition ; for in that case the famous
dogmatic epistle of Leo I. to Flavian was not given ex
cathedra." In his references to the subject subsequent
to the Vatican Council, Hefele, if more careful to give
prominence to the utmost allowance for Honorius that
the facts may permit, does not depart essentially from
his former position. He allows the faults which appear
upon the surface of the epistles to Sergius, and declares
explicitly for the ex cathedra character of those epis
tles. On the latter point, speaking of Pennachi as a
prominent supporter of the affirmative, he says, " I,
for my part, confess my agreement in this connection
with Pennachi, since Honorius designed to give to
the church of Constantinople immediately, and to the
inquiry or conciliar discussion." Hence, in the light of the existing
definition, Dollinger appears as asserting unqualifiedly the ex cathedra
character of the teaching of Honorius.

76 THE MEDIJEVAL CHURCH.
whole Church implicitly, a prescription respecting doc
trine and faith ; and in his second letter employed the
very expression, ' Ceterum, quantum ad dogma ecclesias-
ticum pertinet, • • • non unam vel duas operationes in
mediatore Dei et hominum definire debemus.' " x
Before leaving this historical episode, we should ob
serve that its significance is by no means dependent
upon the conclusion which may be reached as to whether
in strictness an ex cathedra character belonged to the
heretical teaching of Honorius. Even though a nega
tive should be pronounced here, the case presents a
fatal obstruction to the doctrine of papal infallibility.
As the New Testament does not mention the Bishop of
Rome, it says of course nothing about his infallibility.
Accordingly, the dogma of papal infallibility, if it has
any foundation at all, has only a traditionary basis.
Now the facts cited show that it cannot claim even such
a basis. That long succession of anathemas, reaching
over the breadth of centuries, unrelieved by a single
suggestion that the honor of the Roman see could be
saved by the supposition that Pope Honorius had not
transgressed against the faith in his highest official ca
pacity, — what does it prove ? It proves that the
Church of that era as represented by its supreme au
thorities did not entertain the theory of an ex cathedra
infallibility. That theory lacks, therefore, the marks of
a valid tradition, and has no genuine historical basis.
2. The Iconoclastic Controversy. — A special interest
pertains to this long-continued strife. The subject was
one which invited the attention of the common man, as
well as of the cultured theologian. It had to do with
i Conciliengeschichte, 2d ed., § 298.

CONTROVERSIES. 77
the every-day practice of the masses, with their cher
ished associations, with the satisfaction of feelings to
which habitual indulgence had given an inveterate bias.
A passionate warmth, therefore, characterized the dis
pute. Argument often passed over into popular uproar
or tyrannical violence. Both people and rulers were
put to the test ; and in the changing scenes of the
drama we gain a living picture of the age in general,
and of the Byzantine court in particular. The contro
versy, too, was one of far-reaching consequence, being
accessory to the political separation of the East and the
West, and so hastening the unrestricted development of
Latin Christianity towards its peculiar type.
The iconoclastic war had its origin in a revolutionary
attempt, — the attempt of the Byzantine ruler, with an
army at his back, to root up an established custom. It
may be, indeed, that within the ecclesiastical sphere
there was somewhat of a reaction against the worship of
images ; but it was not of notable extent. The whole
current of thought and practice in the East was in the
direction of image-worship at the beginning of the
eighth century, when the government attempted to turn
back the stream. In the West, the cause of images
claimed at the same time a less unanimous suffrage.
Though moving, on the whole, toward the same goal,
the West moved more slowly. Gregory the Great, at
the close of the sixth Century, while he gave a place to
images as being suited to stimulate religious contempla
tion, seems not to have favored the bestowing any form
of worship upon them. In his epistles to Serenus, the
iconoclastic Bishop of Marseilles, he approves, not in
deed his breaking and banishing of images, but his zeal

78 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
in prohibiting adoration of them. Neander, in his com
ments on the language of the Pope, remarks, " Since
Gregory here expresses himself so unconditionally
against the adoratio imaginum, so is it to be concluded
therefrom that he repudiated not merely an idolatrous
direction of the inward feelings, but also every outward
token, like prostration or kneeling, which was customa
rily rendered before idols." 1 A considerable part of
the West, as we shall observe later, still adhered to this
position after the outbreak of the controversy in the
East. It was mainly that part, however, which had
not been under Eastern rule. The Popes, from the early
part of the eighth century, appeared as zealous cham
pions of the cause of image-worship. Accordingly, so
far as his own domain was concerned, the Byzantine
ruler began his crusade against a custom substantially
universal. As to the merits of the opposing parties, they are
best described in the statement that the controversy
was a struggle of one extreme against another, — a
struggle between a superstitious valuation of images,
and a fanatical opposition to them.
The latter extreme can no doubt claim the palliation
that it was provoked by existing abuse. To men like
Leo the Isaurian, the current worship of images seemed
a dire reproach to Christianity. They did not see how,
in the face of a practice having so much of the sem
blance of idolatry, they could answer the taunts of
Jews and Mohammedans. It struck them, that in this
matter the infidel opponents had the better side of the
case. 1 Kirchengeschichte, vol. v.

CONTROVERSIES. 79
Thus the iconoclasts charged the image-worshippers
with being the occasion of a grievous scandal. They
also held up against them the prohibition contained in
the second commandment given at Sinai, and referred
to the act of Hezekiah in casting the brazen serpent out
of the temple as a warrant for a summary dealing with
any material object which seduced the people to an
undue reverence. They argued that it belongs to the
spirituality of Christian worship to rise above the visi
ble and tangible ; that the proper objects of adoration
lie, for the most part, in the unseen realm, and to at
tempt to give a visible representation of them is to dis
honor them. As respects the person of Christ, they
attempted to construct a dilemma for their opponents,
maintaining that it savored of Nestorianism to repre
sent only the humanity of Christ, as if the humanity
could be separated from the divinity, whereas to mingle
the humanity and divinity would involve the heresy of
Eutychianism. The subtlety of this last argument,
such as it was, being its only recommendation, it
probably accomplished little toward begetting any real
conviction upon the subject.
As contending against practical idolatry, the Icono
clasts had a cause that was worthy, and capable of being
well sustained before the bar of reason and Scripture.
But they marred their opportunity by the extreme to
which they carried their opposition. In warring upon
images, instead of seeking simply to mend the abuse of
images, they entered upon untenable ground. It was
also a breach in the rational basis of their cause, that
they tolerated the worship of the creature on the one
hand while reprobating it on the other, commanding

80 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
homage to saints while destroying their images. The
Iconoclasts, moreover, were placed at a great practical
disadvantage, in that they provided no adequate substi
tute for what they took away, no positive source for
any sustained religious enthusiasm. " There was this
irremediable weakness," says Milman, " in the cause of
Iconoclasm. It was a mere negative doctrine, a pro
scription of those sentiments which had full possession
of the popular mind, without any strong countervailing
religious excitement. There was none of that appeal
to principles like those of the Reformation, to the Bible,
to justification by faith, to the individual sense of re
sponsibility. The senses were robbed of their habitual
and cherished objects of devotion, but there was no
awakening of an inner life of intense and passionate
piety. The cold naked walls from whence the Scrip
tural histories had been effaced, the despoiled shrines,
the mutilated images, could not compel the mind to a
more pure and immaterial conception of God and the
Saviour. It was a premature rationalism, enforced
upon an unreasoning age, an attempt to spiritualize by
law and edict a generation which had been unspiritual-
ized by centuries of materialistic devotion. Hatred of
images, in the process of the strife, might become, as it
did, a fanaticism: it could never become a religion.
Iconoclasm might proscribe idolatry, but it had no
power of kindling a purer faith." J
In supporting their side of the case, the image-wor
shippers were able to adduce some very plausible con
siderations. They rebutted the charge of idolatry with
the declaration that the image was in no case the ulti-
1 History of Latin Christianity, vol. ii.

CONTROVERSIES. 81
mate object of devotion, but only the medium of calling
the object vividly before the mind. To the quotation
of Old Testament prohibitions, they replied that these
prohibitions were aimed, not against the use, but against
the abuse of images, as might be judged from the fact
that the divinely instructed artisans of the tabernacle
and the temple introduced certain images into these
sanctuaries, adorning the hangings with figures, and
surmounting the mercy-seat with the cherubim. They
claimed, moreover, that a different order of things is
appropriate under the Christian dispensation from that
which was admissible under the disciplinary Jewish
dispensation. The religious mind, matured by Chris
tian teaching, does not need the same safeguards against
heathenism as were demanded by earlier times. It may
nOw subsidize to its own uses whatever nature and art
afford. The material is not to be disdained, since the
Son of God has assumed a body. Those who disparage
matter really approve the odious Manichaean heresy.
The material is capable of affording most fruitful sug
gestions of the spiritual and divine. Pictures take the
place of books with the unlearned, and the ornamented
wall of the church preaches to them more effectually
than words. In the eloquent apology of John of
Damascus, one of this class urges the plea : " I am too
poor to possess books, I have no leisure for reading ; I
enter the church, choked with the cares of the world ;
the glowing colors attract my sight and delight my
eyes, like a flowery meadow, and the glory of God
steals imperceptibly into my soul. I gaze on the forti
tude of the martyr, and the crown with which he is re
warded ; and the fire of holy emulation kindles within
6

82 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
me, and I fall down and worship God through the
martyr, and I receive salvation." 1
But with all their fair-sounding arguments, the image-
worshippers were not able to conceal the defects of
their position. Indeed, some of the very arguments
which they paraded are a standing witness to the crude
and superstitious excess which they indulged. What
is to be thought of a cause which its ablest champion,
the learned John of Damascus, supported by the story
of the tempted recluse ? As the legend runs, the
recluse was beset by the demon of licentiousness. At
length the demon promised to leave him in peace if he
would cease to worship the image of the Virgin, to
which he was devoted. This conference was reported
soon after to a certain abbot. Better, said the abbot
to the recluse, to visit every brothel in the city than to
keep such an engagement. The obvious conclusion,
which, indeed, is drawn by the scholarly commentator,
is that the demon was well aware that the crime of
forsaking the worship of the image would be more
deadly to the recluse than that of fornication.2 Now,
when a distinguished scholar could give place to such a
representation, it is quite evident that the practice of
the masses must have been tinged with gross supersti
tion. No speculative refinements can hide the facts.
The dogmatic theory might declare the image a mere
symbol or memorial, but in the popular conception it
was something more : it was a thing in which super
natural virtue was localized, a species of fetich. This
is manifest from the miracles that were attributed to
images; from the distinctions that were made, as re-
1 Milman's rendering. 2 De Imaginibus, Orat. i.

CONTROVERSIES. 83
speets virtue, between different images of the same
subject ; from the opinion that certain images had been
sent down from heaven ; from the singular practice of
selecting images to serve as sponsors at the baptism of
children ; and from other beliefs and practices savoring
almost as little of intelligent piety. There was abun
dant cause for a righteous indignation. The fault of
the Iconoclasts was not their endeavor to effect a
reform, but rather their one-sided views and their
tyrannical measures.
Leo the Isaurian, who began the onslaught against
images, was a resolute and an able commander. As
such he rendered great service to the state. But for the
odium awakened by his iconoclastic measures, his name
might have been celebrated alongside that of Charles
Martel in the list of the great benefactors of Christen
dom. "Leo the Isaurian," says Freeman, "by preserv
ing Byzantium and the Byzantine Empire preserved
Christianity and civilization. Never were they in such
awful peril as when Moslemah landed before Constanti
nople." a Taking his standard from the sphere in which
he was most at home, Leo was inclined to administer
the affairs of the Empire in general with military rigor.
Of this disposition we have a striking example in his
attempt to Christianize the Jews and to make ortho
dox Catholics of the Montanists by means of compulsory
baptism. It was quite in accordance, then, with his
approved tactics, that he undertook to banish image-
worship by edict and force. The first edict was issued
about the tenth year of his reign, or in 726. This,
historians have generally assumed, was not so much
1 History and Conquests of the Saracens.

84 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
against images as against outward tokens of worship
before them ; but Hefele infers that even the first edict
was genuinely iconoclastic. Such undoubtedly was the
nature of the decree which was issued in 730. It pro
scribed images for religious uses, and ordered that the
churches should be cleansed from all traces of their
contaminating presence. Opposition was naturally ex
cited by such summary measures. In some quarters the
popular agitation passed on to the stage of open rebel
lion. But Leo pursued his chosen policy, against all
clamors. The aged and worthy Patriarch Germanus
was retired from the episcopal throne of Constantino
ple, and one who was pliant to the imperial will was put
in his place. Insurrection was crushed in the East ; but
in the West the Emperor found opportunity to repay
the defiant attitude of the Pope only by cutting off the
revenues which he derived from Calabria and Sicily.
Constantine Copronymus (741-775), the son and suc
cessor of Leo the Isaurian, inherited both the military
talent and the hatred of images which had distinguished
his father. In the first part of his reign he proceeded
rather quietly ; but the uncompromising nature of his
design was fully revealed in 754, as he assembled a coun
cil at Constantinople to place upon images a final and
authoritative seal of banishment. About three hundred
and forty bishops assembled. Few of them were Icono
clasts by conviction; but the whole body succumbed
to the imperial will, declared that the bread and wine
of the eucharist are the only proper image of Christ,
denounced all material representations of the saints
and the Virgin, and even cast a slur upon art itself by
characterizing the craft of the painters as a "godless

CONTROVERSIES. 85
and blasphemous art." But while affecting on one side
such abhorrence of tying worship down to the creature,
the council hurled its anathema at those who should
not seek the intercessions of the Virgin, as of one above
every visible and invisible thing, and having boldness
of access to the God whom she bore.
To execute the decisions of the council was found
to be no easy task. The obsequiousness of the bishops
was in no wise shared by the monks. They kept up a
stubborn and vexatious opposition. At length Constan
tine became so exasperated, that he cast off all restraint
in his dealing with the monks. They were scourged,
mutilated, banished, and even killed. An oath was
exacted from the people of Constantinople, if not, in
deed, of other regions, binding them henceforth to
renounce image-worship. In fine, Constantine did his
work as thoroughly as it could be done by force. Only
a few years, however, were required to show how little
had been accomplished toward the cure of the disease.
During the short reign of Leo IV. (775-780), little
change was effected, except that there was a relative
cessation of violence. Leo himself adhered to the icon
oclastic maxim. His wife Irene, on the other hand,
was devotedly attached to images. On the death of
her husband, as Constantine her son was in his minority,
the control of affairs came into her hands. After a few
years of dexterous management, the preparation for the
reinstatement of images seemed complete. Accordingly,
in 787 the assembly was convened at Nicaea which passes
as the Seventh Ecumenical Council. It declared as
emphatically in favor of images as the council of 754
had declared against them ; ordaining that images of

86 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
Christ, of the Virgin, of saints, angels, and holy men,
as well as the cross, whether in colors, mosaic-work, or
other material, whether on the sacred vessels and vest
ments, on walls and tablets, in houses and in highways,
should be honored with the kiss and prostration, and
worshipped, but without that peculiar adoration which
is properly offered to the Divine nature alone. The
council also included the gospel books, and the relics
of martyrs, among the proper objects of veneration.
Among the laudatory acclamations of the council of
787 was one which hailed Irene as the new Helena, and
her son as the new Constantine. A poor tribute to the
mother of the first Christian Emperor ! This " new
Helena " was soon to appear as the author of one of the
darkest crimes of history. Having ruled for her son
during his minority, she became his rival as he came
to years, and finally gave the climax to the unnatural
struggle by causing his eyes to be put out. The barba
rous deed is said to have been committed in the same
chamber in which she gave him birth.
While the restoration of images was acceptable to the
great mass of the clergy and the people, there were
some, especially among the soldiers, who had been too
long and too thoroughly educated in the principles of
iconoclasm to look with complacency upon the reinstate
ment in the churches of the banished ornaments. So
there was material for a reaction at hand. Two Emper
ors of the ninth century, Leo the Armenian (813-820)
and Theophilus (829-842), renewed the decrees and
the harsh measures of their iconoclastic predecessors.
The reaction, however, was entirely futile, as became
manifest immediately after the death of Theophilus.

CONTROVERSIES. 87
His widow, Theodora, who was as much attached to
images as her husband had been opposed to them, forth
with convened a synod, and reinstated the decrees of
the Second Council of Nicaea. This was substantially
the end of the battle. The grand procession which
on the 19th of February, 842, marched to the church of
St. Sophia, and there paid homage to the images of that
sumptuous temple, may be regarded as having celebrated
the permanent triumph of the cause of image-worship
in the Greek Church. It should be noticed, however,
that Greek custom bore a mark of compromise. Only
images on plane surfaces, in painting or mosaic, claimed
recognition. Sculptures, which the West had no scru
ple about employing, were excluded from religious uses
by the East.
It remains to take note of that intermediate position
which was patronized by Charlemagne, and for a time
was accepted by a considerable portion of the West.
This found its most elaborate exposition and defence in
the " Libri Carolini," which were issued in the name of
Charlemagne. How far he was their author stands in
question. The suggestion that Alcuin rendered large
assistance to his sovereign is so inherently probable
that history practically assigns to him a foremost place
in the composition of these books. Their teaching was
approved by the Council of Frankfort, held under the
auspices of Charlemagne in 794 ; and either the books
in full, or extracts from them, were sent to the Pope.
The response of the Pope was an apology for image-
worship, but it had little weight with the Church in
the Frankish domain. A synod convened at Paris in
825 followed the Council of Frankfort in repudiating

88 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
the doctrine and the authority of the Second Council of
Nicaea. It is reported, also, that the same ground was
taken by an English synod. The prominence of the
Englishman Alcuin in the counsels of Charlemagne
gives a certain color of probability to the report. Con
temporary testimony, however, is wanting. Simeon of
Durham, who lived not far from 1100, was the first, so
far as is known, to record the supposed event. Hefele,
accordingly, remarks of the report, that it does not have
full claim to credence (hat nicht vollen Anspruch auf
(xlaubwiirdigheiV) ?¦
The " Libri Carolini," while taking pains to disown
the iconoclastic standpoint, are mainly occupied with a
polemic against image-worship. The tenor of their
teaching is well indicated in the following sentence :
" Often in this special work of ours respecting images,
we are compelled to confess that we inhibit, not the pos
session, but the adoration of images, and that the viewing
of them as they are placed in the churches for ornament
or for commemoration of deeds is not to be eschewed,
but the most presumptuous or rather superstitious ado
ration of them." 2 Under the category of superstitious
adoration or worship, the " Libri Carolini " reckon all
acts of devotion, such as prostrations, burning lights,
presenting incense. They consider in detail the argu
ments of the image-worshippers. In some instances the
reply is put with as much discretion as vigor. For ex
ample, the plea that homage may as fitly be rendered to
the images of saints as to the busts of the Emperors, is
answered with the declaration that one evil custom,
the product of unholy pride and pomp, cannot be made
1 Conciliengeschichte, § 403. 2 Lib. ii. cap. 13.

CONTROVERSIES. 89
an excuse for another evil custom.1 Again, to the argu
ment that images are necessary to revive the memory
of the Saviour's sufferings and works, it is replied that
believers instructed in the gospel history have a perpet
ual memorial of Christ placed before the inner vision ;
whereas those who depend upon outward memorials are
liable, through blindness or other mischance, to be
robbed of the means of remembering Christ.2 While
images may be used as simple memorials, to assert their
necessity is to assert a degrading dependence of Chris
tians upon externals. As for prodigies that are said to
have been wrought through images, it should be known
that there is no warrant to worship everything that
may happen to be instrumental in a wonderful event ;
otherwise we should be compelled to bow the knee to
the jaw-bone of the ass with which Samson slew a thou
sand of the Philistines.3 Another specimen of cutting
criticism is contained in the following comments passed
upon the advice of the abbot to the tempted recluse :
" He says that it is more fitting to violate the temple
of God, than to reject the worship of things insensate.
He says that it is more fitting to take the members
of Christ, and make them the members of a harlot,
than to contemn the worship of any craftsman's work
manship."4 The " Caroline Books," while the ablest exponent of
the cause to which they were devoted, failed to attain
a thoroughly consistent and rational basis for opposition
to image-worship, since they failed to repudiate the ven
eration of saints and their relics, as also of the cross
i iii. 15. 2 iv. 2. 3 iii. 25. 4 iii. 81.

90 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
symbol.1 There were two men, however, who lived and
wrote in the closing stages of the iconoclastic controversy
who had the boldness to declare against the worship
of saints as well as against that of images. These two
men were Agobard, Archbishop of Lyons, and Claudius,
Bishop of Turin.2
3. Disputes between the Greek and the Latin Church. —
The most important doctrinal difference between the
East and the West is implied in the fact that the Augus-
tinian anthropology never became current in the former
section. This difference, however, was not made the
ground of strife. The battle was waged over points of
far less significance. Among these the most important
was the question whether the Spirit, as to the eternal
mode of His personal subsistence, proceeds from the
Father alone, or from both Father and Son. The Latin
Church became attached to the latter position. As
early as 589 a synod at Toledo inserted the filioque
clause in the Nicaeno-Constantinopolitan Creed, thus
making the creed to affirm a double procession. A synod
held under Charlemagne in 809 decided likewise for the
double procession. The Popes at this date were indeed
averse to changing the Nicene formula, but they favored
the doctrine embodied in the filioque clause, and erelong
i ii. 28, iii. 24.
2 Agobard indicates unmistakably his position in the following : " Dicit
forsitan aliquis non se putare imagini quam adorat aliquid inesse divi-
num, sed tantummodo pro honore ejus, cujus effigies est, tali earn vene-
ratione donare. Cui facile respondetur, quia si imago quam adorat,
Deus non est, nequaquam veneranda est, quasi pro honore sanctorum qui
nequaquam divinos sibi arrogant honores, sicut multis jam supra testi-
moniis est ostensum." (Lib. Cont. eorum Superstit., etc. Compare
Claudius, Migne, torn. civ. col. 827.)

CONTROVERSIES. 91
the Popes and the West in general laid aside all scruple
about inserting the clause in the Creed. The East also
objected to the enforced celibacy of the clergy below
the rank of bishop, and criticised the Western use of
unleavened bread in the eucharist. There were, be
sides, some minor differences respecting the observance
of fasts. Such matters, it would seem, should not have
been made a ground of separation. And, in truth, it
may be doubted whether they would have effected a
schism, had they not been reinforced by causes of a
much greater practical force. The entering wedge was
supplied, above all, by the political separation of the two
sections, and the rivalry between the bishops of the two
capitals. This rivalry, which early made its appearance,
was naturally imbittered as the papal claims were dis
tinctly asserted. The East, whatever flattering tributes
or concessions it may have made under stress of tempo
rary exigencies, was never actually willing to accept a
constitutional headship in the Roman Bishop. Hence
minute differences were made an occasion of sharp
polemics, and disagreement was aggravated into schism.
The separation was a thing of gradual accomplishment.
Perhaps the crisis is most suitably located at the middle
of the eleventh century, when Michael Cerularius, the
Patriarch of Constantinople, complained of the Latin
customs, and closed the churches in Constantinople in
which worship was celebrated according to the Latin
rites. 4. Local Controversies of the Latin Church. — Here
belong the discussions evoked by adoptionism, the
question of a double predestination, and transub
stantiation.

92 THE MEDIJEVAL CHURCH.
The term Adoptionism describes a peculiar christo-
logical development which found in the last half of the
eighth century considerable currency among Spanish
Christians, under the tuition of Elipandus of Toledo
and Felix of Urgelis. Its special tenet consisted in
the affirmation that Christ, as to His humanity, not
being naturally the Son of God, needed to be adopted
in order properly as man to bear this title. As the new
teaching appeared to be spreading in his domain, Char
lemagne thought it incumbent upon himself to place
it under censure. It was accordingly condemned by
several synods convened under his auspices in the last
decade of the eighth century.
The controversy on the subject of predestination in
the ninth century was excited by the zealous and stub
born defence which the monk Gottschalk gave to his
assertion that the wicked, or the non-elect, are predes
tinated to eternal death, as well as the righteous to eter
nal life. His teaching, though perhaps diverging from
the form of statement most customary with Augustine,
did not differ materially from the Augustinian platform.
Gottschalk, however, was called to account ; and, while
distinguished sympathizers with his doctrines as well as
with his personal fortunes were not wanting, he was
obliged to suffer a rigorous prosecution for heresy at
the hands of Rabanus Maurus, Archbishop of Mentz,
and Hincmar, Archbishop of Rheims. He was" cruelly
scourged (849), and then sent to the prison in which he
wore out the last twenty years of his life. Through all
his sufferings Gottschalk retained the same unbending
mien ; even refusing upon his death-bed to renounce
aught of his teachings in order to receive the com-

CONTROVERSIES. 93
munion, and gain the privilege of burial in consecrated
ground. This controversy was not specially fruitful,
and, aside from the personal fortunes of Gottschalk, is
of interest only as indicating the attitude of the age
toward strict Augustinianism.
As the theory of transubstantiation was formally
enunciated and defended in the ninth century by Pas-
chasius Radbertus, the leading scholars of the time, such
as Ratramnus, were free to controvert the same, and
could do so without molestation. But the drift was
such through the following era, that in the eleventh
century the book of Ratramnus at one of the synods,
which treated of the eucharistic question, was cast into
the flames ; and Berengar, the spirited and somewhat
violent opponent of transubstantiation, could escape a
kindred fate only by recantation. Even the good will
of the powerful Hildebrand was ineffectual to shield
him, for Hildebrand found the current of opposition to
Berengar so strong that he could not stem it without
endangering his own reputation for orthodoxy. Being
destitute of the true martyr courage, Berengar twice
(1059, 1079) yielded to the mandate of a Roman coun
cil, and subscribed to the irrational dogma which in his
heart he loathed. Berengar's own view of the eucha-
rist was of the same order as had been largely current
among the fathers. He allowed that Christ is in the
holy supper; only maintaining that he is there after
the analogy of a spiritual power or energy, and not in
the way of a bodily presence. Some have supposed that
Hildebrand's sympathies were with the same view,
rather than with transubstantiation. Certainly he was
not so strongly attached to the latter dogma as to

94 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
be concerned for his own part to persecute Berengar's
dissent therefrom. However, there is no adequate war
rant for a positive assertion that Hildebrand disbelieved
transubstantiation. 5. Heretical Sects. — The most important of these
were the Paulicians. They originated in Armenia, in
the seventh century. Before the close of the same cen
tury the Byzantine government began to persecute
them, and during the following centuries they were
made the victims of destructive onslaughts. As their
name is supposed to indicate, the Apostle Paul was their
chief authority. In the spirit of Marcion, with whose
type of Gnosticism they had a close affinity, they re
jected the Old Testament and the Epistles of Peter.
Ultra spiritualism, dualism, and docetism were distinc
tive features in their system. They discountenanced
all outward sacraments, at least all those which were
practised by the Catholic Church ; imputed the physi
cal world to an evil deity ; and denied the reality of the
incarnation. In their total drift, therefore, they were
far from the path of genuine reform, though they de
clared against the worship of saints and relics. The
Paulicians are said to have taught an absolute dualism.
The Bogomiles, on the other hand, who arose within
the bounds of the Greek Church in the eleventh cen
tury, inculcated, like the earlier appearing Euchites, a
modified dualism. The evil deity, as they conceived,
is the eldest son of God, who became an apostate from
his first estate. They were also less radical than the
Paulicians in dealing with the Biblical canon, since they
accepted some portions of the Old Testament as well as
the entire New Testament.

CONTROVERSIES. 95
Views similar to those of the Paulicians and Bogo
miles were held by the obscure sectaries in the West,
who were discovered at Orleans, Arras, and in the
neighborhood of Turin in the early part of the eleventh
century. At Orleans thirteen of them were burned at
the stake in 1022. But persecution did not expel the
leaven of their teachings. Sectaries holding kindred
views were found in the following centuries. Among
the various names by which they were called, that of
Cathari was perhaps the most common. An account of
the crusade against the Albigenses will give occasion for
a reference to Catharist belief and practice in the next
period.

CHAPTER VI.
CHUECH CONSTITUTION AND DISCIPLINE.
I. THE RELATIONS BETWEEN CHURCH AND STATE.
AS the preceding chapter has indicated, the Eastern
branch of the Church continued to be largely
under the sway of the Emperor. He was not strong
enough, indeed, to give a settled ascendency to a scheme
of doctrine or practice that was contrary to the convic
tions and sympathies of the majority of the people.
This was strikingly illustrated by the Monothelite and
Iconoclastic controversies. But the same controversies
show how wide a scope individual Emperors gave to
their interference in church affairs, and to how large an
extent they were able to enforce their pleasure while the
sceptre was in their hands. The general loss of inde
pendence on the part of the bishops was but poorly
compensated by some special concessions, such as the
decree of Heraclius, that clergy and monks were to
an'swer for crime, not before the civil, but before the
episcopal tribunal.
In the West we observe a very mixed state of affairs.
If the barbarian tribes were capable of a superstitious
reverence for the priestly representative of God, and
gave a ready assent to any specious token of super-

CONSTITUTION AND DISCIPLINE. 97
natural agency, they were at the same time extremely
fond of personal liberty. If the one trait made them
fit subjects for the encroachments of the ecclesiastical
power, the other inclined them to usurpations against
that power. The history, in fact, is a history of mutual
encroachments and mutual concessions, of alliance and
antagonism. Church and State alike passed through
the whole scale from an attitude of flattering subservi
ency to that of dictatorial assumption.
A measure of charity may be awarded to either party.
The Church certainly could plead the weightiest mo
tives for laying her hand upon the administration of the
State. How else could she maintain her integrity
against the rude tribes which had come within her
borders ? The temporal power with which she stood
face to face was often little better than brute force.
Princes who had not yet gotten out of sight of hea
then customs and traditions needed to be guided and
restrained by Christian preceptors. The dignitaries of
the Church were the most competent educators. Not
only were they the chief oracles of religious truth, but
they held a chief place as respects acquaintance with
Roman jurisprudence and Roman administration. So
the demands of her security and the sense of her
superiority combined to urge the Church to strive
for superiority of prerogative.
Among the subjects which the Church regarded as
falling under her supervision was the marriage relation.
She claimed the right to declare the conditions of law
ful wedlock. Thus the Synod of Mentz in 813 forbade
marriages within the fourth degree of relationship.
Another synod convened at the same place in 847 re-
7

98 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
peated the prohibition. The Synod of Bourges in 1031
extended the prohibition to the sixth or seventh degree ;
and the Synod of Rouen in 1072 excluded the seventh
from the permitted degrees.1 In England, as a tem
porary concession, Gregory the Great allowed marriage
after the second degree ; in the eighth century the
fourth degree was inhibited ; in the eleventh, the sixth
degree.2 The Church claimed also the right to regulate matters
of testament in which her own interests were involved.
The Synod of Paris in 614 declared that no one, even
under color of a royal order, is to be allowed to touch
the goods of a deceased bishop, or of any other de
ceased member of the clergy, till the proper agent of
the Church has ascertained the provisions of his will;
and that lack of exact accord with the civil form is not
to invalidate the bequests of the clergy.
The payment of tithes was set forth by two councils
in France, in the latter part of the sixth century, as ob
ligatory upon the faithful ; but it was not till the civil
power gave its aid, under the Carlovingians, that the
system of tithes became general and regular.
The Church claimed the exemption of her consecrated
servants from the ordinary tribunals of justice. The
synods of Paris and Rheims in 614 and 624 declared for
the excommunication of the secular judge who, with
out the knowledge of the bishop, should for any cause
1 Hefele, Conciliengeschichte.
2 Lingard, Hist, and Antiq. of the Anglo-Saxon Church. The Peni
tential of Theodore says : " In tertia propinquitate carnis licet nubere
secundum Gracoa, in quinta, secundum Romanos . tamen in quarta non
solvunt, postquam factum fuerit."

CONSTITUTION AND DISCIPLINE. 99
undertake to punish one of the clergy. Other synods
laid down the maxim, that crimes of the clergy should
be judged by the clergy, and not by laymen. Important
as was this claim, it seems to have been conceded by a
capitulary of Charlemagne.
In some instances the dignitaries of the Church were
accorded the position of advisers or associates of the
secular judges. Under Reccared in Spain it was or
dained that judges should attend the synods of the
Church, that they might learn how to administer piously
and justly. In France bishops and nobles frequently
sat together in council, and legislated on affairs both of
Church and State. In England the bishops ranked with
the nobles, and were regular attendants at the courts of
justice. " In some respects," says Lingard, " the arch
bishop enjoyed privileges in common with the monarch ;
for his word, like that of the king, was received in
courts of justice as equivalent to his oath, and he pos
sessed the right of granting nine days' grace to the of
fender whose life was sought by the family of an injured
or murdered man. In all other respects he was placed
on the same footing with the etheling, or princes of the
blood. Other bishops ranked as ealdormen above the
king's thanes, and exercised all those rights and en
joyed all those emoluments to which the ealdormen
were entitled. . . . Each bishop attended, either person
ally or by his archdeacon, the chief courts of justice
within his diocese, particularly the shiremotes, which
were regularly held twice in the year. There he pre
sided in company with the ealdormen, ' that they might
expound God's law and the world's law.' " 1
1 Hist, and Antiq. of the Anglo-Saxon Church, chap. ii.

100 THE MEDIMVAL CHURCH.
Instances were not wanting in which the Church
assumed to approach directly to the person of the sov
ereign, and to impose upon him, not merely spiritual
censures, but sentence of deposition. The Pope, as
we have seen, sanctioned the transfer of the crown to
Pepin. In this instance, it is true, there was the
rendering of an opinion, rather than the assumption of
plenary authority. But in the next century there was
an open show of authority to transfer crowns. An as
sembly of bishops adjudged Lothaire unworthy to reign,
and ordained that his territories should be divided be
tween the two brothers who had driven him from his
dominions, — Charles the Bald and Louis of Bavaria.
Some years later another assembly of bishops assumed
to discrown Charles the Bald, declared his subjects re
leased from their allegiance, and transferred his realm
to Louis.1 The case is noteworthy, as showing that the
utmost stretch of ecclesiastical prerogative has not been
arrogated by the Popes alone.
The pressure of the Church upon the civil domain
was evidently attended with some good results. It was
an ameliorating force in legislation. This appears very
distinctly when we compare the Visigothic code, which
was largely shaped by ecclesiastics, with the other bar
baric codes. " It is incomparably more rational," says
Guizot, " more just, more precise ; it shows a better un
derstanding of the rights of humanity, of the duties of
government, of the interests of society ; it strives to
attain an end more elevated and more complex than all
the other barbarian codes. But at the same time, under
the political point of view, it leaves society less provided
1 Hallam, Europe during the Middle Ages.

CONSTITUTION AND DISCIPLINE. 101
with guaranties ; it delivers it on the one hand to the
clergy, on the other to royalty." x The drawback men
tioned by Guizot is of course to be estimated in connec
tion with the peculiar conditions of the age. When the
tendency was to anarchy, centralization of power in
king or clergy was no such calamity as it would be
in a more settled state of society. Among the special
results of church influence, we may note the progress
that was made toward the abolition of slavery. The
Church steadily encouraged emancipation. The eccle
siastics themselves may not always have been forward
to set the example, the slaves whom they possessed
being regarded in many instances as corporate property
which it was not exactly lawful to alienate ; but they
encouraged the practice in laymen, and by laws for the
protection of the slave, as well as by the frequent prac
tice of lifting him out of the servile state to the honored
rank of the priesthood, abridged the gulf between him
and other men. Gradually the right of sale was limited,
and slavery passed over into serfdom. " Towards the
end of the eighth century, the sale of slaves beyond
their native provinces was in most countries prohibited.
... In the twelfth century, slaves in Europe were very
rare. In the fourteenth century, slavery was almost
unknown."2 The State, on its part, had obvious motives for tres
passing upon the domain of the Church. The sovereign
saw in the Church, not merely the representative of
spiritual rule, but a wealthy corporation armed with
abundant means of temporal influence. As the barba-
1 Hist, de Civ. en France, lecon x.
2 Lecky, History of European Morals.

102 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
rian tribes were converted, great wealth poured into the
Church. Under their old heathen rSgime, they were
accustomed to make satisfaction for a great variety of
crimes by the payment of fines. The idea, therefore,
of compensating for their sins by offerings to the
Church was congenial to their traditions, and more
over was kept in lively remembrance by their clerical
instructors. The language of the Merovingian King Chilperic is a
striking indication of the direction of the stream in his
day. As reported by Gregory of Tours, he was wont
to complain in terms like these : " Behold, our treasury
is impoverished; behold, our riches have been trans
ferred to the churches ; bishops alone have complete
rule ; our honor has perished, and has been transferred
to the bishops of the cities." By gifts, legacies, and
purchase, the Church came into the possession of im
mense landed estates. In the opinion of Hallam, at the
maximum of her ownership she held nearly one half
the soil of England, and a still greater proportion in
some countries of continental Europe.
In dealing with such a rival, the State was not un
naturally tempted to the use of some rather arbitrary
expedients. Sometimes the sovereign had the bold
ness to help himself to a share of ecclesiastical prop
erty. More frequently the nobles laid violent hands
upon the estates and the riches of the Church. " Both
the bishops and convents were obliged to invest pow
erful lay protectors, under the name of advocates,
with considerable fiefs, as the price of their assist
ance against depredators. But these advocates became
too often themselves the spoilers, and oppressed the

CONSTITUTION AND DISCIPLINE. 103
helpless ecclesiastics for whose defence they had been
engaged." 1
The chosen expedient of the temporal rulers for ex
tending their influence over the ecclesiastical domain was
the control of the higher offices. Among the Franks, in
particular, the royal patronage governed wellnigh the
whole episcopal domain. The successors of Clovis gave
the bishoprics to their favorites, to those who made
them valuable presents, in some cases to those who, in
the open practice of simony, made the highest bid.
Protests by synods, or distinguished Popes like Gregory
the Great, effected little toward checking the abuse.
Charlemagne restored by enactment the canonical mode
of election, but in practice seems to have given a wide
sweep to his own will and pleasure in the choice of
bishops. In the disturbed era that followed, instances
of a glaring abuse of patronage were frequent. " A
child five years old," says Hallam, " was made Arch
bishop of Rheims. The see of Narbonne was purchased
for another at the age of ten." The Roman Catholic
historian Alzog makes this broad statement : " Charles
the Bald and many other princes, on their sole motion,
sent priests of the court to the metropolitans for ordi
nation. Just as pliant creatures and vicious boys were
set over the church at Rome in the tenth and eleventh
centuries, so fared it often with the bishoprics." 2 In
individual instances the controlling hand of the prince
reached even to the papacy itself. Otho the Great, for
example, used his influence to drive out one Pope, and
sustained the one installed under his patronage against
1 Hallam, Europe during the Middle Ages.
2 Kirchengeschichte, vol. i. § 192.

104 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
rival claimants. An equal stretch of prerogative was
exemplified by Otho III. and Henry III.
Lay patronage reached also to the lower clergy. In
many instances the privilege which a law of Justinian
had given to those founding or endowing a church, en
titling them to a certain voice in the choice of pastors,
was used in a way which left to the bishop little au
thority in the settling of priests.
The effect of this encroachment was in large part
disastrous to the interests of the Church. The royal
control tended at once to secularize the episcopacy, and
to promote the practice of simony. The bishops were
often of a thoroughly worldly temper, feudal lords not
only in position but also in spirit. Judging from the
repeated instances of legislation against the bearing of
arms by ecclesiastics, some of them yielded to their
fighting propensities, and appeared on the field as mili
tary captains. Those who had purchased their episco
pal rank were naturally none too honorable to endeavor
to recompense themselves by the sale of such offices as
came within their control. This Simon Magus opera
tion was shamefully prevalent in the tenth century.
No wonder that the more thoughtful minds began to be
greatly exercised over the subject, and that some, like
Hildebrand, set forth, as the first demand of a reform
movement, the expulsion of the State from its control
ling influence over the offices of the Church. The
mutual aggressions of the spiritual and the temporal
power were preparing for a great struggle.

CONSTITUTION AND DISCIPLINE. 105

n. THE CLERGY IN GENERAL.
While the clergy embraced the larger part of the
learning of the times, it was a very humble share which
fell to many of them, ^njffprpnr. ^synods thought it
necessary to recommend to the priests an acquaintance
with the Lord's Prayer and the Apostles' Creed. As is
intimated by prohibitions that were issued from time to
time, not a few in holy orders had more interest in the
hunt or in the adventures of war than in study or any
spiritual task. The custom of the nobles to have pri
vate chapels, over which they appointed their own
clients, choosing often those who had no fitness for the
office, and holding them in a subservient relation,
brought many unworthy members into the ranks of
the clergy.1
Among the noteworthy attempts to give the clergy
a better education and discipline was that which was
embodied in the canonical institutes of Chrodegang of
Metz, at the middle of the eighth century. This man,
who was at once a prelate and a statesman, was one of
the most enlightened and influential ecclesiastics of the
age. To secure a better oversight and training for his
clergy, he conceived the plan of gathering them into a
kind of college, where they should live as a fraternity
with common interests, and under a uniform system of
rules. The rules which were adopted differed little
from those which governed Benedictine monasteries,
except that a strict renunciation of private property was
1 See Agobard of Lyons, Ad Bernardum Episcopum, De Privilegio et
Jure Sacerdotii, § 11.

106 THE MEDIMVAL CHURCH.
not required. The reform scheme of Chrodegang was
copied in various quarters. Under Charlemagne and
Louis the Pious, an attempt was made by the govern
ment to extend its application. But the improvement
achieved was only local and temporary. In the tenth
century the canonical institutes themselves became sub
ject to great abuse. An attempt in the eleventh and
twelfth centuries to effect a reform by excluding private
property gave rise to a new order of canons, who, in dis
tinction from the old, were called canons regular.
One of the most troublesome tasks in connection with
the clergy grew out of the celibate scheme to which the
Church in the West was committed. The clergy, in
one form or another, refused to conform to this scheme.
By sins of impurity, by secret wedlock, or by open wed
lock, many broke through the restraints imposed upon
them. In Wales an attempt to enforce celibacy in the
latter part of the tenth century entirely miscarried.
"The priests," says a Welsh chronicle, " were enjoined
not to marry without the leave of the Pope, on which
account a great disturbance took place in the diocese of
Teilaw, so that it was considered best to allow matri
mony to the priests." l In England, at the close of the
tenth century, a large proportion of the priests lived in
relations of marriage. iElfric, a noted ecclesiastic of
the time, confessed that he could not cope with the
practice. Though he earnestly opposed it, he still
writes, " Beloved, we cannot now force you of neces
sity to chastity, but we admonish you nevertheless that
ye live chastely as God's ministers ought."2 Cunibert,
1 Haddan and Stubbs, i. 285.
2 Lingard, Hist, and Antiq., chap. iv.

CONSTITUTION AND DISCIPLINE. 107
Bishop of Turin, carried concession still further, and
freely allowed marriage to his clergy, as the most fea
sible safeguard against prevalent immorality.1 In Ger
many many openly avowed the marriage bond, and
were ready to defend their practice as consonant with
the precepts of the New Testament.
The history of the councils gives ample evidence as to
the strength of the current which ecclesiastical authority
undertook to turn back. It shows also how restraint
was apt to be avenged by unhallowed license. A large
number of synods, such as that at Toledo in 633, at
Rome in 743, at Soissons in 744, at Riesbach and at
Freisingen in 799-800, and at Mentz in 813, forbade
that any women should live in the dwellings of the
clergy, except a near relative, more especially a mother
or sister. Several synods, as that of Nantes in 658,
and those of Mentz and Metz in 888, forbade that even
near relatives of the female sex should have any place
in the dwellings of the clergy ; the first two declaring
that occasion had been given for the prohibition by the
practice of incest. Other synods, as that of Friaul in
796 and of Pavia in 876, forbade, in general terms, the
presence of any women in the abodes of the clergy.
The Synod of Toledo in 655, and that of Pavia in 1018,
ordained that the children who might be born to those
in holy orders, whether their mothers were bond or
free, should remain in slavery, and be the property of
the Church.2
As regards the general state of the episcopacy, much
has been indicated by the previous section. We notice
here only a few special features.
1 Neander. 2 Hefele.

108 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
The maxim had been established in the preceding
period, that there should be no bishops at large, no
ordination to the episcopal office except in connection
with a specific diocese. In the present period we find
the same rule repeated ; as, for example, by the Synod
of Aachen in 789. But the peculiar conditions of mis
sionary work made it convenient at times to break over
the rule. The precedent being thus supplied, advantage
was taken of it in cases where there was no demand
for departure from the general custom ; and unworthy
aspirants, gaining ordination by simony, made a trade
of their office.
References to country bishops (chorepiseopoi) indicate
that this class of dignitaries still held a place in the
Church. But the motive for referring to them was the
desire to emphasize their inferiority, and to limit their
powers. The Synod of Paris in 829, after designating
the bishops as successors of the apostles, and the country
bishops as successors of the seventy disciples, declared
that some of the latter were guilty of usurpation in that
they assumed to administer the rite of confirmation.
The Synod of Metz in 888 pronounced the country
bishops incompetent to dedicate churches, since in
reality they are the same as presbyters (iidem sunt
qui et presbyteri)?-
A peculiar infringement upon the episcopal preroga
tives had place for a large part of the period in Scotland
and Ireland. In both of these countries, monasticism
gave the standard by which official eminence was esti
mated, and the bishop was subordinated to the abbot.
The Abbot of Iona was the ecclesiastical chief, not only
i Hefele.

CONSTITUTION AND DISCIPLINE. 109
of the monks upon that island, but also of the neighbor
ing Scots and Picts. This fact was noticed by Beda.
"That island," he says, "has for its ruler an abbot,
who is a priest, to whose direction all the province, and
even the bishops, contrary to the usual method, are
subject, according to the example of their first teacher,
who was not a bishop, but a priest and monk." a Under
this regime, it would seem that the bishop ordinarily,
perhaps exclusively, discharged the function of ordain
ing; but in general authority and jurisdiction he stood
below the abbot. Another peculiarity was the absence
of definite gradations among the bishops, and of dioce
san superintendence. " Archbishop " at this time was
only an honorary title in Ireland. The country was not
divided up into dioceses, and the bishops were in gen
eral scarcely more than pastors of single congregations.
Two or more bishops often were found in connection
with the same town, church, or monastery. These ir
regularities were taken note of in other countries, and
canons were passed to the disparagement of the Scot
tish ecclesiastics (including the Irish under this term,
as Ireland rather than Scotland was called Scotia far
into the Middle Ages). The Synod of Chalons on the
Saone in 813 decreed that ordinations by Scottish bish
ops should be regarded as null ; and at the Synod of
Calcuith in 816 the English prelates forbade that any of
the nation of the Scots should be allowed to celebrate
the sacraments, or minister otherwise in the rites of the
Church. As the bonds were strengthened with Rome,
there was of course an approximation to the Roman
model. At the Synod of Rathbreasail in 1110, diocesan
1 Book iii. chap. 4.

110 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
episcopacy was established in Ireland, and in other re
spects the Irish polity was conformed to that of the
Church at large.1
On the Continent, if abbots were in no cases made
the superiors of bishops, they were sometimes placed
substantially on a parity with them. By favor of the
Pope, cloisters were sometimes exempted, in important
respects, from episcopal jurisdiction. This was of quite
frequent occurrence in the eleventh century.
In the previous centuries the bishops had been wont
to make the archdeacon a special assistant, — a kind of
vicar-general. In the present period a plan was intro
duced which provided for several archdeacons within a
single diocese. Heddo, Bishop of Strasburg, seems to
have been the originator of this plan. We find him in
774 asking Pope Adrian I. to confirm the division of his
diocese into seven archdiaconates.2
The circumstances of the age, on the whole, were not
favorable to the growth of the metropolitan system.
While the efforts of the missionary Boniface gave it an
advantageous introduction, there were adverse influences
in the way of its complete establishment. Wealth and
patronage sometimes made a simple bishop quite a match
for his metropolitan. Moreover, the disposition of the
bishops to prefer a distant master to one near at hand,
and their consequent habit of appealing to the Pope,
ministered to the exaltation of the papal, at the expense
of the metropolitan dignity.
1 Killen, Eccl. Hist, of Ireland; Grub, Eccl. Hist, of Scotland; Todd,
St. Patrick.
2 Alzog, § 163.

CONSTITUTION AND DISCIPLINE. Ill

III. — THE PAPACY.
While the drift of events was toward the establish
ment of the papal theocracy, conspicuous obstacles had
to be encountered on the way to this goal. There were
temporal rulers of independent spirit, who cherished no
thought of subordination to an ecclesiastic. As the
case of Martin I. shows, the Eastern Emperor, while
his power extended over the Western capital, some
times made bold to treat a disagreeing Pope simply as
a refractory subject ; and some of the Western rulers
made it evident that even in ecclesiastical affairs they
were ready to assert their own will as opposed to that
of the Popes. Charlemagne, for example, in opposition
to the known and long-standing position of the Popes,
openly declared against the worship of images.
There were also prelates who had the boldness to
openly antagonize the Popes. As Gregory IV. came
into France to throw the weight of his authority into
the struggle between Louis the Pious and his rebellious
sons, the bishops who sided with the Emperor plainly
intimated that he might just as well dispense with his
unrighteous interference, that they stood in no awe of
his prerogatives, and that, if he should undertake to
excommunicate them, he should himself go away ex
communicated. Toward the close of the next century,
Arnulf, Bishop of Orleans, in opposition to the dictum
that the Pope alone was the judge of bishops, declared
that papal authority has its conditions ; that one who
is destitute of charity and is puffed up with the pride
of learning sits in the temple of God as an Antichrist,

112 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
while one who has neither charity nor learning is only
a statue or an idol in the temple, to seek a response from
whom is like taking counsel of the marble. Referring
to one of the most flagitious of the Popes, he exclaimed,
" Is it then established, that to such shameful monsters,
who are lacking in all knowledge of things divine and
human, numberless priests in the whole world who are
distinguished by learning and nobility of living must
be subject?"1 Gerbert, the contemporary of Arnulf,
used equally plain terms; maintaining that a Roman
bishop who has sinned against his brethren, and refused
to listen to the repeated admonitions of the Church, is
to be treated as a heathen and a publican.2 Evidently
such powerful voices as these only needed the proper
allies to be able to throw a very serious obstacle in the
way of papal supremacy.
The greatest hindrance, however, to the achievement
of the papal ideal, was the base lives of some of the
Popes, and the degradation of the office under the ma
nipulation of Italian factions. A large part of the tenth
century and the earlier portion of the eleventh were, in
particular, a season of disgrace with the papacy. In
the former century the chair of Peter passed under the
control of the Marquises of Tuscany, the Counts of Tus-
culum, and, above all, the trio of infamous women, The
odora and her two daughters, Marozia and Theodora.
For half a century the papal dignity was the spoil of
the ambitions and intrigues of these women.3 The para-
1 Concil. Remense, anno 991, cap. xxviii. Mansi, xix. 131-133.
2 Epist. ad Segwinum, Migne, torn, cxxxix. col. 267.
8 We find here perhaps the nearest approach to a female representa
tive of the papal dignity. The story that a woman, who had success
fully disguised her sex, was elected as the successor of Leo. IV (855),

CONSTITUTION AND DISCIPLINE. 113
mours and the progeny of harlots wore the crown which
had graced the brow of Gregory the Great. Among
these the palm of infamy was won by Octavian, who
styled himself John XII., and thus supplied the prece
dent for assuming a new name which his successors
have followed. According to the impeachment of a
Roman synod convened under Otho the Great in 963,
there is hardly a gross crime in the catalogue of which
John XII. was not guilty. It was charged against him,
that he had committed arson, homicide, adultery, and
incest ; that he had drunk to the health of the devil,
and implored the help of Jupiter and Venus at the
gambling-table.1 Alzog remarks of this Pope, that " he
heaped an excess of disgrace and shame upon the apos
tolic dignity." 2
The interference of the German Emperors lifted the
burden of infamy from the papacy for only a short
interval. In the eleventh century the chair of Peter
again became the spoil of local factions. A rival in
wickedness of John XII. appeared in Benedict IX.
Placed by patronage and power upon the papal throne
at the age of twelve, he made his crimes to correspond
to his extraordinary advancement. Even the debauched
Romans grew weary of his excesses, and drove him from
the city, installing Sylvester III. in his place. But
Benedict managed to reinstate himself. He then sold
out the papal office, for a thousand pounds or more of
silver, to Gregory VI. Repenting, however, of his bar-
though very largely credited from the thirteenth to the seventeenth cen
tury, is now regarded as an exploded fable. (See Dollinger, Die Papst-
fabeln des Mittelalters.)
1 Liutprandus, Liber de Rebus Gestis 0 ttonis Magni Imperatoris, § 10.
2 § 188. 8

114 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
gain, he again set up as Pope. There were now three
claimants of the papal chair. Again the Empire, in the
person of Henry III., interfered. All three claimants
were put aside. A far more respectable order of Popes
was introduced, preparing the way for the powerful and
far-reaching sovereignty of Gregory VII.
It is quite evident, that, in order to surmount these
hindrances, the papacy must have been favored with
special means for strengthening its position and advan
cing its power. Among these we note the following.
1. Popes of Extraordinary Ability and Force of Char
acter. — The administration of a great pontiff was mani
festly such a blessing, under the existing conditions,
that, in spite of many unworthy incumbents, it gave a
value to the office in the estimate of the nations of
Europe. In the present period, there were at least two
men who were qualified to give majesty to the papal
prerogatives, and to make a deep impression as to the
benefits of pontifical sovereignty. These two were
Gregory the Great and Nicolas I.
Gregory (590-604) came to the papal throne at a
time of disruption and gloomy prospects. Italy was
trembling before the encroaching Lombards. It seemed
as though the last days had come, and the world had
reached the eve of dissolution. Gregory himself shared
the conviction that the end was near, if we may judge
from his graphic description. "The cities," he says,
" are depopulated, the castles overturned, the churches
burned, the monasteries and nunneries destroyed, the
farms despoiled of men and destitute of a cultivator ;
the land lies in empty solitude, no possessor inhabits it ;
the beasts have entered into occupancy of the places

CONSTITUTION AND DISCIPLINE. 115
that formerly were held by a great multitude of men.
What indeed is transpiring in other parts of the world,
I know not; but in this land in which we live, the
end of the world is not merely announced, but made
manifest." 1
In this crisis Gregory took the helm. By reason of
his commanding influence he was virtually temporal as
well as spiritual ruler in Rome. According to his own
testimony, it was a source of profound grief to him that
he was obliged to deal so largely with the affairs of
the world. In numerous epistles he complains that
his office had snatched him away from the sphere of
heavenly contemplations, and plunged him into such a
tumult of earthly tasks and complications as to leave
scarce any room for divine communion.2 And in truth,
though he may have been better pleased with the papal
dignity than his words indicate, there can be no doubt
as to his laborious engrossment ; for he extended his
oversight over matters far and near. In general he ad
ministered with breadth of spirit, with discretion, with
justice, and with paternal kindness to the weak, the
oppressed, and the unfortunate. He was capable of
preferring the spirit to the letter, the advantage of souls
to the honor of traditional forms. He wrote to a Span
ish bishop, in reply to his question on the mode of bap
tism, that within the one faith there might be diversity
of custom without prejudice to the Church.3 He an
swered the missionary Augustine in a like spirit, and
told him that he should feel free to adopt good institu-
1 Dialogi, lib. iii. cap. 28.
2 Migne's collection, lib. i. epist. 5, 6, 26, 30, 31.
8 Epist. i. 43.

116 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
fions wherever he might find them, whether in the
Roman Church or elsewhere.1 In many instances he
reprobated the disposition of the people to violent and
arbitrary conduct toward the Jews.2 He esteemed him
self in particular the patron of widows and orphans,
and charged his agents to see to it that no unjust exac
tions were practised against the peasants who cultivated
the papal farms.3
The record of Gregory, it is true, has its revelation
of weakness, not to say of moral obliquity. He gave a
ready assent to the superstitions of his age. His Dia
logues are a mass of marvellous tales, such as the utmost
credulity alone could take pleasure in. The way in
which he answers the request of the Empress for relics
of the Apostle Paul is truly astonishing.4 His proposal
to exempt such Jews as should embrace Christianity
from a part of the payments ordinarily required, does
not show a very delicate regard for the supremacy of
purely spiritual considerations.5 In one instance he
departs from the maxim of tolerance which he usually
urged, and advises one of his bishops of the propriety
of using corporal punishments, to a certain extent,
against persistent worshippers of idols.6 Especially ex
posed to criticism were Gregory's joyful and flattering
congratulations to Phocas, the bloody usurper who over
threw the Eastern Emperor Maurice. Unless Gregory
was strangely ignorant of the character and the doings
of Phocas, this certainly was a sad blot upon his record ;
since it reveals him as indulging a. grudge which he had
entertained against Maurice, in a spirit and manner
i Epist. xi. 64. 2 i. 10, 35, 47, ix. 6, xiii. 12. » i. 44, 64.
4 iv 30. * v. 8. e ix. 65

CONSTITUTION AND DISCIPLINE. 117
alike unseemly and unchristian.1 But while censure
has its place, Gregory, taken all in all, was, for his age,
an eminent and commanding example of the Christian
bishop. Though his tone was less lofty than that of some of
his successors, Gregory's view of his office did not fall
much short of the full papal theory. He disclaimed,
it is true, high-sounding titles, such as " universal pope "
and " universal bishop." But he had a special incentive
to this. To disclaim such titles gave greater force to
his criticism of the Patriarch of Constantinople for
styling himself universal bishop. Gregory complained
bitterly of the assumption of the Eastern prelate, and
declared it a fitting introduction to the proud and god
less reign of Antichrist. Nevertheless, in the very let
ters in which he voices his complaints, he claims for the
Roman see that general oversight of the Church which
one might naturally connect ' with the rejected name.2
Boniface III., therefore, was adding little or nothing to
the actual claims of the papacy, when, a few years after
Gregory's death, he accepted from Phocas the title
which had been so obnoxious to his illustrious prede
cessor. Nicolas I. (858-867) adopted a very lofty tone in
dealing with princes and prelates. Indeed, he fell little
short of the dictatorial manner of the most powerful
autocrats who ruled from the chair of Peter in the
crowning era of the papal theocracy. Like Gregory
the Great, he gave dignity to his assumptions by the
moral animus which in general distinguished his admin
istration. 1 Epist. xiii. 31, 38. 2 See Epist. v. 18, 20, 21, ix. 68.

118 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
Nicolas I. had three noteworthy encounters : (1) with
Photius as the candidate of the Eastern Emperor for
the episcopal throne of Constantinople ; (2) with King
Lothaire II. ; (3) with Archbishop Hincmar and the
bishops associated with him. In the first instance the
occasion for interference was given by the arbitrary
and unjust action of the government at Constantinople
in deposing Ignatius and installing Photius as patriarch.
Since the rival parties sued for the support of Nicolas,
he had a very plausible ground for asserting his au
thority. From the first he spoke as a man conscious of
his headship over the whole of Christendom. Having
satisfied himself that the right was with Ignatius, he
boldly espoused his cause, repudiated the action of his
own legates, who had been seduced into an approval of
his deposition, and declared him restored to his high
office. The edict of restitution is a good example of
the commanding tone of Nicolas. An abridged version
by Milman is as follows : " We, by the power committed
to us by our Lord through St. Peter, restore our brother
Ignatius to his former station, to his see, to his dignity
as patriarch, and to all the honors of his office. Who
ever, after the promulgation of this decree, shall presume
to disturb him in the exercise of his office, separate from
his communion, or dare to judge him anew without the
consent of the apostolic see, if a clerk, shall share the
eternal punishment of the traitor Judas ; if a layman,
he has incurred the malediction of Canaan, — he is ex
communicate, and will suffer the same fearful sentence
from the Eternal Judge." 1 The effect of this edict, it
must be allowed, was not proportionate to its authori-
1 See Mlgne, Nicolai Epist. et Decret. xlvi.

CONSTITUTION AND DISCIPLINE. 119
tative tone. Photius was a very able opponent, and
the success of his claim to the episcopal throne of Con
stantinople depended rather upon the fluctuations of
the imperial government than upon the decrees of the
Roman pontiff.
The attempt of Nicolas to discipline King Lothaire
was occasioned by the scandalous conduct of that prince
in repudiating his lawful wife, Teutberga, and marrying
his mistress, Waldrada. For all this, it is true, he had
the sanction of the local church authorities. But the
flimsiness of the pretexts by which he and his clergy
had justified the cruel treatment of the repudiated
queen could not stand any searching scrutiny. Nicolas
was not to be deceived. He ordered the case to be re
opened before a new council, in the presence of his
legates. Bribery and royal influence again secured a
verdict in favor of Lothaire. This, however, had no
effect upon Nicolas, except to stir him to increased
energy. He declared that a council which had stooped
to the patronage of an adulterer was no council at all,
deposed the leading prelates who had so demeaned1 their
office, and proclaimed them incompetent for any priestly
function. He menaced the King with the anathema,
and pressed the case against every shift and intrigue.
Both the King and the prelates were humbled, and
the Pope looked toward complete victory, when death
snatched him from the scene.
The controversy with Hincmar was provoked by the
action of this able and high-spirited prelate in deposing
Rothad, the Bishop of Soissons. Nicolas championed
the cause of the deposed bishop, and restored him to his
diocese. It was an early instance in which the Galli-

120 THE MEDIJEVAL CHURCH.
can principle gave way to the Ultramontane. Nicolas
took pains to assert the latter in the most unmistakable
terms. The central authority of the papacy, as he
maintained, is not to be regarded as limited by the local
authority of metropolitans. The Pope has the right to
draw the case of any bishop before his tribunal, whether
it may have been previously committed to a local tribu
nal or not. He alone is armed with plenary authority
to judge bishops.
The impression made by the reign of Nicolas I. is
well indicated by the following description from a con
temporary chronicler : " Since the days of the blessed
Gregory, no bishop has been raised to the pontifical
throne in the city of Rome who can be compared to
him. He reigned over kings and tyrants, and subdued
them to his authority, as if he were the master of the
world. He was humble, mild, and benevolent to pious
bishops and priests, who obeyed the precepts of the
Lord, terrible and extreme in his rigor towards the im
pious, and those who forsook the way of right ; so that
one might say that another Elias had been raised up in
our times at the voice of God, if not in body, at least
in spirit and power." 1
The benefits of such powerful administrations as
those just described were too marked to escape ap
preciative attention. Very properly, therefore, they
have been given a place among the aids to papal su
premacy. 2. The Absence of any other Centre of Government,
and the Anarchical State of Society. — The fall of the
Western Empire left the Bishop of Rome the most con-
1 Chron. de Reginon, quoted by Guizot.

CONSTITUTION AND DISCIPLINE. 121
spicuous representative, in the West, of a central au
thority. For a short time, it is true, the towering form
of Charlemagne attracted the attention of men, and the
civil power overshadowed the ecclesiastical. But the
empire of Charlemagne soon went to pieces. Society
was separated into fragments. What wonder, then, that
a feeling of reverence and appreciation was drawn to
ward that abiding throne which through all vicissitudes
held its place at the seat of ancient empire ?
3. Patronage of Missionary Enterprise by the Roman
Bishops. — Missionaries who went forth from Rome
naturally laid a foundation for Roman supremacy in
the churches which they instituted. The Anglo-Saxon
Church under Augustine and his successors, and the
German Church under Boniface, furnish ample illus
tration. 4. Appeals of Contending Parties. — Mindful only of
the ends immediately before them, and careless of the
ultimate result in the centralization of power, those
who were engaged in a quarrel would flatter the pre
rogatives of the Pope by appealing to him in the hope
of securing his patronage. In fact, the overgrown
practice of appealing to the Popes virtually invited
them to assume the full stretch of prerogatives which
they finally arrogated to themselves.
5. Acquisition of Temporal Sovereignty. — This, no
doubt, was not an unmixed gain. The poor spectacle
which some of the Popes made as temporal rulers served
to lessen the prestige which they might have won from
their ecclesiastical headship. Still, a measure of impor
tance accrued to the papacy from its temporal power.
The foundation of this was the grant made by Pepin in

122 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
755, and renewed by Charlemagne. The grant included
the territory of the exarchate, with some additions.
According to a fiction long since exploded, this terri
tory was primarily conferred on the Roman see by Con
stantine. Adrian I. in a letter to Charlemagne made
mention of donations by the first Christian Emperor,
and in the ninth century a document purporting to
give the actual form of the transfer was brought for
ward. The real donatioii of Constantine, it is under
stood, did not extend beyond the limits of the Lateran
palace. The grant of Pepin and Charlemagne no doubt
assigned to the Pope a certain sovereignty over the
territory in question. But it was not a complete and
independent sovereignty. The papal estates were not
regarded as beyond the reach of the imperial sceptre.1
Charlemagne and later Emperors claimed and exercised
within them a certain ill-defined jurisdiction. It was
only by gradual advances that the Popes added to their
spiritual dignity the full status of temporal rulers.
6. False Decretals. — At the middle of the ninth cen
tury a collection of documents appeared under the name
of Isidore, referring perhaps to the Spanish bishop of
the seventh century. The collection now passes un
der the name of the Pseudo-Isidore Decretals.2 The
1 A public act of Leo III. clearly acknowledged the obligation of
Rome to Charlemagne as respects civil allegiance. Says Einhard :
" Romae, Adriano defuncto, Leo pontificatum suscepit, et mox per legatos
suos claves confessionis Sancti Petri ac vexillum Romanae urbis cum aliis
muneribus regi misit, rogavitque ut aliquem de suis optimatibus Romam
mitteret, qui populum Romanum ad suam fidem atque subjectionem per
sacramenta firmaret. Missus est ad hoc Angilbertus, abbas monasterii
sancti Richarii." ( Annales Francorum, sub anno 796.)
2 Among the earliest references to these decretals is that of Hincmar

CONSTITUTION AND DISCIPLINE. 123
forgery is apparent to scholarship at a glance, especially
on account of the glaring anachronisms indulged. Nev
ertheless, the collection was quoted by Nicolas I. a few
years after its appearance, and was honored through
the Middle Ages as a genuine authority. It includes
about one hundred forged decretals of the Roman
bishops, sixty of these being referred to a period ante
rior to the death of Melchiades in 314, some genuine
decretals of later bishops corrupted by interpolations,
the spurious account of the donation of Constantine,
and canons belonging to different centuries. The stand
point assumed is that of the extreme hierarchical claims.
Strong emphasis is placed upon the high position and
the immunities of the clergy. The bishops in particu
lar are exempted from any lower jurisdiction than that
of the sovereign pontiff. The immediate aim may not
have been to enlarge the papal prerogatives. There are
indications that the ruling purpose was to support the
clergy in general against the domination of the secular
power, and the bishops in particular against the author
ity of the metropolitans. The Pope is called in as the
patron of the bishops. But the effect is the same as if
the chief design were the strengthening of the papacy.
The Popes, above all others, derived advantage from
the fraud. It was a broad stone in the foundation of
spiritual absolutism, and has been not inaptly described
as " the boldest, most stupendous, and most successful
forgery that the world has seen." 1
of Rheims, who objected not so much to their genuineness as to the use
which was made of them by Hincmar of Laon. (Capitula adv. Hincma-
rum Laudunensem, xxiv.)
1 Henry C. Lea, Studies in Church History.

124 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
7. The Provision for a. Mode of Electing the Popes
which gave the Matter into the Hands of the Higher
Clergy of Rome. — The Second Lateran Council, con
vened in 1059 under Nicolas II., ordained that the
cardinal bishops, or heads of the suburban churches of
Rome, should have the initiative. Then the concur
rence of the cardinal priests and deacons was to be
asked, and finally that of the laity. For the Pope thus
elected, the confirmation of the Emperor was to be so
licited. But this part of the decree was worded rather
ambiguously, and the council very likely cherished the
expectation that in time the form of asking the Em
peror's confirmation might be dispensed with. Thus
was laid the foundation of the modern method of elect
ing a Pope. The new measure was evidently favorable
to the independence of the papacy.
8. The Asserted Right of the Pope to confirm all Elec
tions of Bishops. — This development belongs to the
closing part of the period. " By a constitution of
Alexander II.," says Hallam, "no bishop in the Cath
olic Church was to be permitted to exercise his func
tions until he had received the confirmation of the Holy
See, a provision of vast importance, through which,
beyond perhaps any other means, Rome has sustained,
and still sustains, her temporal influence, as well as her
ecclesiastical supremacy." The hand of Hildebrand
may be discerned in this constitution. A few years
later, he was to demonstrate how amply the factors
which we have enumerated had prepared the ground
for papal absolutism.

CONSTITUTION AND DISCIPLINE. 125

IV. — DISCIPLINE.
Stated confession to a priest was not prescribed by
any ecumenical decree, but was extensively practised.
The rule of Chrodegang required those in his insti
tutes to confess twice a year, and it may be supposed
that it was counted appropriate for the laity to con
fess about as often.1 For open sins a public penance
was imposed. Those who confessed secret sins were
privately absolved, though under condition of a cer
tain penance. The performance of the penance was
often subsequent to absolution. After the latter part of
the seventh century, penitential books, or manuals giving
instructions for the proper management of the confes
sional, began to be much used.
The view entertained as to the ground of confession,
or the penitent's relation to the priest, was at least in
part the same as in the previous period. For example,
Theodulfus, Bishop of Orleans, near the end of the
eighth century, emphasized the function of the priest as
an adviser respecting the appropriate satisfactions, and
not his prerogative judicially to absolve.2 Throughout
the period absolution seems to have been expressed in
the form of a supplication to God, rather than in that
1 It was first in 1215 that the minimum was fixed at once a year for
all Christians having reached the age of discretion.
2 " Confessio quam sacerdotibus facimus, hoc etiam nobis adminicu-
lum affert, quia accepto ab eis salutari consilio, saluberrimis poenitentiae
observationibus, sive mutuis orationibus, peccatorum maculas diluimus.
Confessio vero, quam soli Deo facimus in hoc juvat quia quanto nos me-
mores sumus peccatorum nostrorum, tanto horum Dominus obliviscitur."
(Capit. ad Presbyt. Paroch. suae, xxx.)

126 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
of a judicial sentence.1 This fact has been acknowl
edged by manj' Roman Catholic writers. Amort speaks
of it as generally recognized by the learned in his day.2
Special points regarding the practice of confession in
the Celtic Church have been given as follows : " (1) It
was public rather than private. An old Irish canon
speaks of confession of sins in the presence of priest
and people. (2) It was optional rather than compul
sory. . . . Alcuin, writing to certain brethren in Ireland,
urged the practice of confession, and complained that
it was reported that none of the laity were willing to
make their confession to the priests. (3) It was not
the custom to pronounce absolution until after the
penance assigned had been fulfilled." 3 In all of these
points the customs of the Celtic Church differed from
the later, not from the earlier, practice of the Church
at large.
1 The following are some of the forms used in the latter part of the
period : —
¦• Ab omnibus judiciis quae tibi pro peccatis tuis debentur, secundum
misericordiam suam, omnipotens Deus te absolvat, et parcat, et remittat,
ac deleat omnia peccata tua, et perducat atque introducat te in vitam
seternam. Amen." (H. J. Schmitz, die Bussbiicher und die Bussdis-
ciplin der Kirche, p. 757.)
" Per istam veram et puram conf essionem, quam modo mihi quamvis
peccatori sacerdoti Christi fecisti, absolvat te omnipotens Deus ab omni
bus judiciis, quae tibi pro peccatis tuis debentur, secundum multitudinem
miserationum suarum antiquarum, et parcat ac remittat et deleat omnia
peccata tua et perducat te ad vitam aeternam. Amen.'' (Ibid., p. 778.)
2 " Ab omnibus enim aut certe plerisque viris eruditis nunc admittitur,
ante saeculum duodecimum aut undecimum, formam absolvendi fuisse
deprecatoriam." (De Origine, Progressu, Valore, ac Fructu Iudulgen-
tiarum, Pars I. § 2, p. 3.)
8 F. E. Warren, The Liturgy and Ritual of the Celtic Church, pp.
148-150.

CONSTITUTION AND DISCIPLINE. 127
A peculiar mixture of severity and laxity character
ized the administration of discipline. As an example of
the former, we have the long periods of penance that
were occasionally imposed. Thus, a monk who struck
a brother of his order was condemned to do penance for
twelve years, during five of which he was excluded from
the communion. In the penitential books from seven
to ten years of penance are found charged against no
inconsiderable list of offences. But these prolonged
punishments became less and less frequent. Indul
gences began to be multiplied. It was discovered that
penance could be made materially profitable to the
Church, as well as spiritually fruitful to the subject of
discipline. So instead of lengthened fasts, and exclu
sion from the privileges of Christian communion, pay
ments of money and the accomplishing of a pilgrimage
were accepted.1 Protests against this practice were not
wanting, as by the Council of Cloveshoe in 747, and of
Mentz in 847 ; but by the tenth century it was largely
current, and was attended with the evil results which
combined laxity and legalism always produce. One of
the crudest manifestations of a shallow legalism was
the practice of calling in others who should expedite
matters by sharing the penance. Lingard, in describ
ing this practice among the Anglo-Saxons, says : " Men
were willing to persuade themselves that they might
atone for their crimes by substituting, in place of their
1 In the Pcenitentiale Romanum, which Schmitz places at the middle
of the eighth century, we read : —
" Si quis forte non potuerit jejunare, et habuerit, unde dare possit ad
redimendum, si dives fuerit, pro septem hebdomadibus det solidos xx ;
si autem non habuerit tantum unde dare possit, det solidos x ; si autem
multum pauper fuerit, det solidos iii." (p. 473.)

128 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
own, the austerities of mercenary penitents. It was
in vain that the Council of Cloveshoe thundered its
anathemas against their disobedience : the new doctrine
was supported by the wishes and the practice of the
opulent ; and its toleration was at length extorted on
the condition that the sinner should undergo in person
a part at least of his penance. The thane who sub
mitted to embrace this expedient was commanded to
lay aside his arms, to clothe himself in woollen or sack
cloth, to walk barefoot, to carry in his hand the staff
of a pilgrim, to maintain a certain number of poor, to
watch during the night in the church, and when he
slept to repose on the ground. At his summons, his
friends and dependents assembled at his castle; thej'
also assumed the garb of penitence ; their food was
confined to bread, herbs, and water ; and these austeri
ties were continued till the aggregate amount of their
fasts equalled the number specified by the canons.
Thus, with the assistance of one hundred and twenty
associates, an opulent sinner might, in. the short space
of three days, discharge the penance of a whole year.
But he was admonished that it was a doubtful and
dangerous experiment ; and that, if he hoped to ap
pease the anger of the Almighty, he must sanctify his
repentance by true contrition of heart, by frequent
donations to the poor, and by fervent prayer." x
The principal engines of discipline in dealing with
the refractory were the excommunication and the inter
dict. The former was distinguished as the lesser and the
greater ; the one suspending from participation in the
sacraments, the other excluding from the Church under
1 Hist and Antiq., chap. vii.

CONSTITUTION AND DISCIPLINE. 129
anathema. The interdict commonly applied not merely
to the person of the offender, but to a greater or less
portion of his country.1 It might be imposed upon a
whole county for a noble, or upon an entire realm for a
prince. While an interdict was in force, the rites of
religion were for the most part suspended. No services
were held in the churches, at least none which were not
back of closed doors. No marriage could be solemnized,
no flesh eaten, no religious burial granted, except to
priests, beggars, and children not above the age of two
years. In fine, the whole land was regarded as resting
under a penal shadow. Interdicts were not often im
posed till the next period. Some assign the first in
stance to the year 1031, when the county of Limoges
was placed under interdict on account of the refusal of
the nobles in that quarter to keep the peace ; but there
appear to have been a few minor cases at an earlier
date. The excommunication, as a spiritual penalty, is the
common prerogative of religious society, a legitimate
weapon against those who profane the Christian bond.
In the Middle Ages, however, excommunication was
something more than a means of spiritual censure. It
had very serious temporal consequences. Intercourse
with the excommunicate, except on the part of depend
ents, was itself made punishable with excommunication.
So, for example, the Council of Metz in 888 ordained.
In some cases, also, the civil power bound itself to a kind
1 In the ultimate definition of the subject, the interdict was distin
guished, (1) as personal, local, or mixed, according as it immediately
affects ¦- person, a place, or both together ; (2) as general or particular,
according as it extends to a whole region, or is restricted to a particular
church, to a chapel, or to specified individuals.

130 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
of persecution of those who had been thus unchurched,
and proclaimed their disabilities before the law.1 As for
the interdict, in the form which it frequently assumed,
it was an attempt at high-handed terrorism, which did
not scruple to trample on the rights of innocent thou
sands in order to humble a single object of a righteous
or unrighteous indignation.
i According to English law the excommunicate person could enter into
no legal contracts, and could have no place in court. No one was author
ized to eat with him, or even to speak to him. If he remained under ex
communication forty days, the bishop could apply to the king for his
arrest and imprisonment until he should give satisfaction to the Church.
In Germany the government was equally pledged to sustain spiritual
censures. Sweden had perhaps the severest requisition. Laws in force
till the Reformation provided that, if a man remained under excom
munication for a year without seeking absolution, the king should put
him to death. (Lea, Studies in Church History.)
The extent to which such laws were executed depended, of course, in
no small degree, upon the temper of the sovereign and his existing rela
tions with the spiritual power.

CHAPTER VII.
WOBSHTP AND UFE.
ON this subject, the closing part of the preceding
period drew very distinctly the diagram for the
present. As there, so also here, we find high concep
tions of divine service and religious living mixed with
great crudities in theory and practice. The Christian
ideal was obscured by incongruous additions, rather than
denied. At one point or another it received recogni
tion from multitudes of devout men and women.
1. Sunday. — In the observance of Sunday, the legis
lation took the standard from the stricter of the views
and regulations which had place in the preceding cen
turies. An English synod near the close of the seventh
century ordained that, if a master should set a slave to
work on Sunday, the slave should be free, and the mas
ter be required to pay a fine. If the slave went to work
of his own motion, he was to be scourged, or pay a fine.
The freeman who should work on Sunday was to for
feit his freedom, or pay a considerable sum of money.
For a priest the sum was to be doubled.1 Other synods,
as those of Rheims and Aries in 813, Rome in 826, and
Paris in 829, prohibited trade and servile labor on
Sunday. i Hefele, § 329.

132 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
2. Preaching. — The importance of preaching, as a
factor in the Sunday service, was not overlooked by the
more enlightened minds of the age. Chrodegang of
Metz, and Alcuin, strongly emphasized the indispensa
ble need of preaching for the religious education of the
people. Various synods, as that of Rheims in 813, and
of Pavia in 876, instructed the bishops to give heed to
the subject. Still, there was wide-spread and persistent
neglect. A large proportion of the priests were incom
petent to prepare a sermon. If they were to preach,
the sermon must of necessity be put into their posses
sion. This was acknowledged ; and to meet the case,
it was ordained that a collection of homilies from the
writings of the fathers, which were to be translated
into the vernacular, should be in the hands of bishops
and priests.1
3. Baptism. — The correspondence of Gregory the
Great with the Spanish bishop — to which reference has
already been made — indicates that the Latin Church,
as well as the Greek, customarily administered baptism
by the threefold immersion. Gregory decided, however,
that a single immersion was equally valid. In the ad
ministration of baptism, various supplementary rites
were added to the application of water. Lingard, de
scribing Anglo-Saxon customs, says of the candidate,
" He was now anointed on the crown with the chrism
in the form of the cross, and a white linen cap called a
chrismal was fastened over his head. If the bishop
were present, he was first confirmed ; if not, he pro
ceeded immediately to the church, and attended at the
1 So Charlemagne, the Synods of Rheims and Tours in 813, and the
Synod of Mentz in 847.

WORSHIP AND LIFE. 133
mass. The rites of the day were concluded by his par
taking of a mixture of milk and honey, which was given
to him to taste, as a token that he was now introduced
into the congregation of Christ, the true land of prom
ise, of which the land of Canaan had been only the
figure." x Clinic baptism, though in ill repute, seems,
as in the earlier centuries, to have been regarded as
valid baptism.2 Indeed, the Latin Church never re
garded immersion as of the essence of baptism. The
preferred time for baptism was Easter. The Synod of
Tribur in 895 decreed that only in case of necessity
should baptism occur at any other times than Easter
and Whitsuntide.
4. The Eucharist. — If in the previous period the
Church had been disposed to attribute a mystical signif
icance to the eucharist, and to emphasize the sacrificial
element therein, in the present centuries a loose rein
was given to both tendencies. The consecrated bread
and wine were regarded as such only in appearance, —
a veil to conceal the glorified body of the Redeemer,
which had taken the place of their substance. It was
not, however, till the latter part of the period that the
dogma of transubstantiation won a thorough ascendency.
With this dogma came the complete theoretical basis
for the eucharist as a sacrifice. Unbounded stress was
placed upon this aspect. The table of communion was
superseded by the altar of sacrifice. The main idea be
came the presentation of an efficacious offering for the
living, and for the dead in purgatory. In some cases,
so far was the idea of fellowship lost sight of, that the
priest conducted the eucharistic service entirely by
1 Chap. vii. 2 Synod of Paris, 829 ; Hefele, § 428,

134 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
himself. This was not an illogical outcome of the sac
rificial theory, but it was too plainly at variance with
Christian tradition not to be challenged. The Synod of
Mentz in 813 forbade the practice, as discordant with
the language of the liturgy. One of the results of the
awful sanctity attached to the elements was the with
drawal of the cup from the laity. This result, however,
was not reached till a later date. The laity still re
ceived, though not generally at frequent intervals, an
unmutilated feast. " During the whole of the Anglo-
Saxon period," says Lingard, " it was administered
under both kinds, first to the clergy of the Church,
and then to the people." 1 Following primitive custom,
there were prescriptions for mixing water with the wine.
The Synod of Tribur, in 895, specified that there should
be two parts of wine to one of water. We note also
that synodal action was taken on the manner of receiv
ing the eucharistic bread, providing that it should be
placed in the mouth rather than in the hand of a lay
person.2 5. Worship of Saints and Relics. — The worship of
saints and their relics formed one of the most character
istic features of the age. That this was carried to a
gross extreme is allowed by those who might be sup
posed to be most charitable toward the mediaeval model.
" The frequent neglect of popular instruction," says
Alzog, " necessarily engendered with the people a su
perficial, materialistic tendency, which made alliance
with manifold superstitions, especially a wellnigh hea
thenish reverence for saints and relics." 3 Saints were
really accorded the place of patron deities by the un-
1 Chap. vii. 2 Hefele, § 290. » § 200.

WORSHIP AND LIFE. 135
thinking multitude. Martin of Tours received as many
prayers from admiring devotees in Gaul as ever the
heathen population of the region offered up to one of
their gods. In some instances the form of the petition
vied in crudeness with any heathen address to a deity.
The petitioner, it is said, sometimes made bold to de
clare to the saint, that, if he did not grant the request,
no more lights should be burned before his shrine, or
other honors rendered.
Relics were assigned all the virtue which the heathen
associated with their amulets. They were employed to
solemnize covenants, and instances are on record in
which the transfer of a relic was formally entered
among the stipulations of a treaty. The Second Coun
cil of Nicaea decreed that no churches should be conse
crated without relics. The value of the merchandise
naturally acted upon the supply. The chroniclers of
the time give us to understand that bogus relics were
paraded, and penurious and worthless men suborned to
give them credit by sudden recovery from an apparent
lameness or sickness. Sometimes the stealing of relics
was condoned in virtue of the benevolent intent of the
thief to benefit the region to which the treasure was
conveyed. A love of the marvellous gathered about both the
saint and his relics an innumerable group of legends,
tales of marvellous doings and workings. The Lives
of the Saints became an enormous literature. To the
modern investigator they are largely a wilderness, an
interminable mass of fiction, from which it is difficult
to detach any trustworthy materials for real biographies.
But to the mediaeval mind nothing was of more interest.

136 THE MEDIJEVAL CHURCH.
" As these Lives were circulated freely in the language
of the people, they would constitute important items in
the fireside readings of the age ; and so warm was the
response which they found in men of every grade, that
notwithstanding feeble efforts to reform them, or at
least to eliminate a few of the more monstrous and
absurd, they kept their hold on Christendom at large,
and are subsisting even now in the creations of the
mediaeval artist." 1
The evident lack of discrimination which appeared in
the distribution of the honors of saintship gave occasion
to the introduction of a more regular mode of canoniza
tion. At first the voice of the people, or the authority
of bishops or national councils, enrolled the candidate
among the saints. Not till the tenth century did the
Popes begin to bring the matter under their jurisdiction.
" The first instance," says Lingard, " of a solemn canon
ization occurs in the year 993, when John XV., after a
diligent inquiry into the life and virtues of Ulric, Bishop
of Augsburg, enrolled him among the saints. It was
not, however, till the beginning of the twelfth century
that the privilege of canonization was reserved to the
Roman see by Alexander III. From that period to
the accession of Clement XIII., in 1758, one hundred
and fifteen persons had been solemnly canonized." 2
While a larger share of honors was awarded to some
saints than to others, provision was made in the festival
of All Saints that none should be neglected. This
festival was introduced into the West by Boniface IV.
(608-615) on the occasion of the transformation of the
1 Hardwicke, Christian Church in the Middle Age.
2 Vol. ii. chap. x.

WORSHIP AND LIFE. 137
Pantheon into a Christian church. " Baronius tells us
that at the time of dedication, on May 13, the bones of
martyrs from the various cemeteries were in solemn
procession transferred to the church in twenty-eight
carriages. From Rome the festival spread during the
ninth century over the West, and Gregory IV. induced
Louis the Pious in 835 to make it general in the Empire.
The celebration was fixed on the 1st of November for
the convenience of the people, who after harvest had a
time of leisure, and were disposed to give thanks to God
for all his mercies." 1
As previously indicated, among the very few who had
the boldness in this period to speak against saint- wor
ship, a foremost place belongs to Agobard of Lyons and
Claudius of Turin. Both were opposed to all forms of
creature worship, and to all trust in externals. Clau
dius went so far as even to reprobate the veneration of
the cross symbol.
6. Pilgrimages. — The preference of the age for phys
ical expedients in atoning for sins and manifesting devo
tion gave continued support to the custom of making
pilgrimages. In the early part of the period, Rome
was the favored resort in the West. About the year
1030 the stream began to flow toward the Holy Sepul
chre.2 The practice did not escape criticism; but it
i Schaff, Church Hist., vol. iv. § 99.
2 A contemporary historian thus describes the movement : " A multi
tude, such as no one could have anticipated, began to flow from all quar
ters toward the Saviour's tomb : first the lower class of people ; then
those of middle rank ; afterwards a number of the foremost kings and
counts. Finally, what had never happened before, many noble women
together with those of the poorer class, proceeded thither. Some cher
ished the desire that they might die before returning to their homes."
(Rudulfus Glaber, Hist. Sui Temporis, iv. 6.)

138 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
was too agreeable to popular thought and feeling to be
held in check, notwithstanding the glaring evils to
which it gave occasion. " Even when pilgrimages were
most fashionable," writes Lingard, " there were many
who, though they dared not condemn a devotion con
secrated by the practice of ages, justly contended that
their countrymen carried it to excess. They complained
that by the absence of bishops the interests of the
Church were abandoned ; by that of princes, the tran
quillity of the State was endangered ; that journeys of
devotion were undertaken to elude the penitential can
ons ; and that the morality of the travellers was often
impaired, instead of being improved. This last charge
is forcibly corroborated by the conduct of several among
the female pilgrims. Their beauty proved fatal to their
chastity ; amid strangers, without a friend, perhaps
without the means of subsistence, they sometimes fell
victims to the arts of seduction ; and the apostle of
Germany confesses, in the anguish of his zeal, that there
were few cities in Lombardy or Gaul which had not
witnessed the shame of some of his itinerant country
women. But his remonstrances were not more success
ful than those of St. Jerome and St. Gregory had been
in preceding ages." x As another testimony from the
times to the evils of the custom, we may quote the
complaint of the Synod of Soissons, in 813, that many
priests and laymen entered upon pilgrimages to Tours
and Rome from superstitious and impure motives.2
7. Flagellations. — A physical expedient less com
monly practised, but having its enthusiastic devotees,
was that of voluntary scourgings. According to the
i Vol. ii. chap. x. 2 Hefele, § 414.

WORSHIP AND LIFE. 139
representations of Peter Damiani, who commended this
mode of self-torture with all the power of his impas
sioned rhetoric, the scourge would appear to have been
laid upon the bare flesh ; for he takes special pains to
teach that the contemplation of Christ despoiled of his
vesture, and suspended upon the cross in the sight of
men, should overcome the feeling of shame for naked
ness, as well as inspire to a cheerful endurance of pain.1
In thus executing the penalty of sin against himself,
the penitent, says Damiani, announces to the Supreme
Judge that there is no longer any occasion for Him to
enter into strict judgment against His servant.
8. Monasticism. — The age which extolled the virtue
of the scourge cherished of course a high appreciation
for the monastic system in general. And, indeed, the
system was not without very conspicuous grounds for
a favorable estimate. Who equalled the monks as con
servators of learning ? Who rivalled them in mission
ary zeal, in heroic self-sacrifice throughout the great
enterprise of converting the barbarian tribes ? By no
part of her membership was the Church more effectually
served, in the era of transition, than by this class. But
offsetting facts must not be overlooked. The monas
teries in many cases suffered fearful demoralization.
We have the testimony of a council, that of Aachen in
836, that some of the cloisters of the women had been
transformed wellnigh into brothels.2 Worldly-minded
abbots, put into office by secular patronage, naturally
had little care to enforce a discipline upon others which
they had no disposition to accept for themselves. So,
1 Opuscula, xliii., De Laude Flagellorutn.
2 Hefele, § 435.

140 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
in place of being a severe training-school, the monastery
became often the abode of ease and luxury. The ideal,
nevertheless, was not lost sight of; and now and then
the voice of a reformer, like Benedict of Aniane and
Dunstan, called the monks back to the strictness of the
Benedictine rule. The cloister of Cluny, founded in
910, became a special centre of the reform in monas
ticism. Numerous affiliated cloisters arose. As these
were all under the rule of the chief abbot, they present
an example of the compact organization which appears
in the great orders of later times.
Some beautiful characters were nurtured under the
monastic regime. Where in the annals of the time can
be found a more engaging figure than the head of the
monastic school at Yarrow, — Beda, or the Venerable
Bede, as he is usually called? What Alfred was in the
early history of English kingship, that was Beda in the
history of English monasticism. Gentleness, practical
sagacity, unwearied industry, and warm devotion were
traits which have left an indelible impress upon his life
work. His energies were mainly given to the tasks of
the scholar. In this field, if he was not distinguished
by the highest critical acumen, he was painstaking, and
sincerely desirous to subserve the interests of the exact
truth. Forty-five works, covering the whole domain of
theological and scientific knowledge which at that time
was accessible to the West, attest his scholarly dili
gence. Among these, posterity has prized most of all
his invaluable history of the Anglo-Saxon Church. As
to the spirit of religious devotion with which he plied his
pen, we have an apt index in this prayer uttered at the
close of his literary labors : " O good Jesus, who hast

WORSHIP AND LIFE. 141
deigned to refresh my soul with the sweet streams of
knowledge, grant that one day I may mount to Thee,
who art the source of all wisdom, and remain forever
in thy divine presence." A still more touching index, if
possible, of the mingled piety and scholarship of Beda,
is seen in the account of his closing hours. As he felt
the end approaching, he was much concerned to finish
his translation of the Gospel of John. Being told on
the day of his death that one chapter still remained to
be written, he said to his scribe, " Take thy pen, and
write quickly." Again at eventide he repeated the
command, as the scribe informed him that one sentence
yet remained to be recorded. Then, the welcome an
nouncement being made that all was finished, he replied,
" You speak truth ; all is finished now." Placed by
his request upon the floor of his cell, and supported in
his scholar's arms, he breathed out his soul in the chant,
" Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the
Holy Ghost."
Monasticism seems to have found a congenial soil in
the territory of the Anglo-Saxons. Among the inmates
of the cloister were many who had known the associa
tions of royal or aristocratic life. A peculiar feature
was the prominence attained at one time by the heads of
cloisters for women. " The abbesses," says Montalem-
bert, " as we have seen by the example of Hilda, Ebba,
and Elfleda, had soon an influence and authority which
rivalled that of the most venerated bishops and abbots.
They had often the retinue and state of princesses, espe
cially when they came of royal blood. They treated
with kings, bishops, and the greatest lords, on terms of
perfect equality; and as the rule of the cloister does

142 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
not seem to have existed for them, they are to be seen
going where they please, present at all great religious
and national solemnities, at the dedication of churches,
and even, like the queens, taking part in the delibera
tions of the national assemblies, and affixing their
signatures to the charters therein granted."1 The
wide-reaching influence of Hilda, who died in 680, as
abbess of the monastery of Streaneshalch, is thus de
scribed by Beda : " Her prudence was so great, that not
only indifferent persons, but even kings and princes, as
occasion offered, asked and received her advice. She
obliged those who were under her direction to attend so
much to the reading of the Holy Scriptures, and to ex
ercise themselves so much in works of justice, that many
might be there found fit for ecclesiastical duties, and to
serve at the altar." 2 As the language of Beda indicates,
Hilda had supervision over monks, as well as over nuns.
Lingard remarks, that it was not unusual among the
northern nations for a society of religious men to be
placed under the government of a woman.3
Distinguished representatives of the monastic life upon
the Continent might be considered, if our space per
mitted. In the tenth century and the early part of the
eleventh, great admiration was commanded by Nilus
and Romuald in Italy, — men who, like Anthony, united
with their austerities much of practical sagacity and
spiritual wisdom.
9. Ordeals. — The mediaeval readiness to believe in
supernatural interventions on all occasions supplied a
congenial soil for the barbaric custom of deciding by
1 Monks of the West, vol. v. book xv. 2 iv. 23.
8 Hist, and Antiq., chap. v.

WORSHIP AND LIFE. 143
ordeals. One form of this test was the duel, or judicial
combat. This claimed a legal recognition in the Bur-
gundian code, but was rigorously condemned by the
Council of Valence in 855. The duel was unknown in
England till after the Norman Conquest. There was
also an ordeal by cold water. In this the accused was
lowered by a cord into a pool. If he was able to sink
so as to draw a knot at a certain distance from the end
beneath the surface, he was regarded as innocent. The
theory was that the pure element would accept the inno
cent and reject the guilty.1 In the ordeal by hot water
the accused, or his champion, plunged his naked arm
into a boiling caldron, and drew out a stone which had
been placed therein. The arm was then wrapped in a
cloth. If it appeared healed at the end of three days,
the accused was pronounced guiltless. In the ordeal
by hot iron, the prisoner was expected to take the heated
metal, and to walk three steps before throwing it down.
The hand was then treated as in the trial by hot water.
In a less usual form of this test the accused was required
to walk upon or among burning ploughshares. In the
ordeal of the eucharist, the Divine judgment was in
voked before the consecrated bread was partaken, and
it was expected that a punishment from heaven would
fall upon the guilty party.2
The use of ordeals was favored by the legislation of
Charlemagne. The attitude of the Church toward
them was not uniform. They were opposed in one
1 So argued a man as eminent as Hincmar of Rheims, De Divortio
Lothar. et Tetberg., Responsio ad Interrogat. vi.
2 See the ample discussion by Henry C. Lea, in " Superstition and
Force."

144 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
form or another by various councils. Agobard of
Lyons denounced them in toto, as a product of super
stition.1 Several of the Popes also, as Nicolas I., Ste
phen VI., and Alexander II., were opposed to them.
Alexander III. (1159-1181) uttered against them a dis
tinct prohibition. But the custom was too deeply rooted
to be easily extirpated.
10. The Truce of God. — Like the ordeal, this testi
fies to the power of inherited customs. It shows a
consciousness of the evils of private warfare which the
barbarian doctrine of revenge had sanctioned, and to
which the feudal system gave ample scope ; but, at the
same time, it shows a feeling of the impossibility of
any total abolition of the practice. An endeavor was,
therefore, made to limit what could not be entirely pro
hibited. By the Truce of God, it was ordained that dur
ing four days of each week, namely, from Wednesday
evening to Monday morning, forcible attempts to settle
quarrels must be suspended. The regulation had its
rise in France, about the year 1033.2 Attempts were
made to put it in force in other quarters ; and the
1 Liber adv. Legem Gundobadi ; Liber de Divinis Sententiis. Ago
bard is especially pronounced in his strictures upon the judicial combat.
" If in this life," he says, " the innocent were always victors, and the
guilty were overcome, Pharaoh would not have slain Josiah, but
Josiah Pharaoh ; Herod would not have killed John, but John Herod.
These things we say, not as denying that the providence of God some
times secures the acquittal of the innocent and the condemnation of the
guilty ; but because it has never been decreed by God that this should
take place in all cases prior to the last judgment." (Adv. Leg.
Gund., § 9.)
2 A graphic account of the circumstances leading to its introduction
is given by Rudulfus Glaber, Hist. Sui Temporis, iv. 4, 5.

WORSHIP AND LIFE. 145
season of truce was finally extended so as to cover,
not only a section of each week, but certain sacred
periods of the year ; namely, from the first of Advent
to Epiphany, the whole of Lent together with Eas
ter, and from Ascension to the close of the week of
Pentecost.

10

SECOND PERIOD.
1073-1294.

INTRODUCTION.

THE mediaeval stage of Christian history came to its
climax between Gregory VII. and Boniface VIII.
The pontificate of the former urged toward this result
with powerful agency. As we pass from the pontificate
of the latter, we are still, it is true, within the mediaeval
horizon. But the prophecy of a new order of things
meets our gaze. The horizon begins to be tinged with
the dawning of that great revolution which two centu
ries later was to accomplish the transition to the modern
world. The period, therefore, appears remarkably well de
fined. A number of great and relatively complete de
velopments meet our attention. We see the causes
which for centuries had been working toward papal
supremacy at length bearing their perfect fruit. A
theocracy is set over the nations. The most far-reach
ing sovereignty ever known in Europe rules from the
chair of Peter. Mediaevalism culminates on its hie
rarchical side. No less also it culminates on its intel
lectual side. Learning and logic show what they can
do from a preconceived standpoint. As the servants
of the Church, as the handmaids of the hierarchy, they

150 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
elaborate the gigantic system known as Scholasticism.
Still further, mediaevalism culminates on the side of
monastic eccentricity and enthusiasm. Great apostles
of poverty, of beggary, make their appearance, and
orders of mendicants take their place as favored sons
of the Church, and carry their influence into every
corner of Latin Christendom. Once more, mediaeval
ism culminates on the side of romantic feeling and
enterprise. The fire of devotion and the love of ad
venture find equal satisfaction in the Crusades. All
those great movements for the recovery of the Holy
Land, which so enlisted the heart and commanded the
resources of Europe, fell within the present period.
The preceding paragraph will serve to indicate our
principal topics. With respect to Scholasticism, how
ever, it should be noticed that its consideration belongs
more especially to the History of Doctrine. We can
award it only a passing glance as a feature in the civil
ization of the times. Among subsidiary themes a place
is properly given to a view of the chief political de
velopments of the era.

CHAPTER I.
POLITICAL STATUS OF THE PRINCIPAL COUNTRIES OF EUROPE.
IN a brief glance at the political condition of Italy we
shall find it of advantage to divide the country into
three different sections, the Northern, the Central, and
the Southern. In the Northern or Lombard region an
important development was in progress at the opening
of the period. Everywhere the cities were successfully
contending for their liberties, and gaining for them
selves a republican type of government. " Before the
death of Henry V., in 1125, almost all the cities of
Lombardy, and many of those of Tuscany, were accus
tomed to elect their own magistrates, and to act as in
dependent communities in waging war and in domestic
government." x But this republican constitution was
not of long continuance. Before the end of the thir
teenth century the sovereignty in many of the Lombard
republics had been concentrated in the hands of some
leading citizen, and by the middle of the next century
scarcely a trace of self-government remained. The
flourishing condition of these cities would have made
them a formidable power, had they been disposed to
act the part of faithful allies and confederates. But
this was prevented by their mutual jealousies and rival-
1 Hallam, Europe in the Middle Ages.

152 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
Ties. So the German Emperors kept up the claim to
sovereignty over this region which had been asserted
by Otho the Great, and found a general acquiescence
in their pretensions. Not till Frederic Barbarossa had
shown a disposition to destroy their liberties were the
cities driven to concerted action. The issue showed
their strength when united in a common cause. The
defeated Emperor was constrained to accept a truce in
1177, and six years later, at the peace of Constance,
he guaranteed to the cities the full measure of self-
government which they had previously claimed for
themselves. In the next century three of the Italian
republics, Pisa, Genoa, and Venice, began to win a
high distinction for naval enterprise and commercial
prosperity. The struggle between the Empire and the Papacy
naturally wrought divisions within the Lombard com
munities. Choice between the cause of the Popes and
that of the Emperors gave rise to the celebrated party
names of Guelfs and Ghibellines. These names were
imported from Germany, where the rivalry of the Bava
rian and the Swabian houses (the former of which was
an ally of the Saxon house) had given them an associa
tion with zealous partisanship. The Guelfs favored
the Popes, and the Ghibellines the Emperors. But
while this general antagonism lay back of the names,
they seem often to have been used merely to give
direction to an aimless and senseless love of faction.
In Rome and Central Italy the Popes claimed the
sovereignty in virtue of the donations of Pepin and
Charlemagne, not to mention the appeal often made
to the fictitious bestowments of the first Christian Em-

POLITICAL STATUS OF EUROPE. 153
peror. But it was frequently a poor shadow of sover
eignty that they were able to command. Popes who
were powerful enough to uncrown distant rulers were
unable to exercise a temporal sway over territory that
lay under their feet. On the one hand, the Emperors
stood in the way of their rule. Up to the time of In
nocent III., the Prefect of Rome swore allegiance to
the Emperor rather than to the Pope, and it was not
till 1278 that the claim to supremacy over the domin
ions of the Holy See was formally renounced by the
German Emperor. On the other hand, a reluctant peo
ple made it impossible for the Popes to exercise any
settled control over civil affairs in their neighborhood.
Rome was subject to much the same fluctuations as
other Italian cities. Among the more distinguished
episodes of her local government was the inauguration
in the twelfth century of a republican regime, after the
pattern of that bold agitator, Arnold of Brescia.
The political complexion of Southern Italy in this
era was, if possible, still more variegated than that of
the other sections. At the beginning of the eleventh
century the larger part of the southern provinces was
governed by the lieutenant of the Greek Empire. The
republics of Naples, Gaeta, and Amalfi acknowledged
the nominal sovereignty of that empire. There were,
besides, the Lombard principalities of Benevento, Sa
lerno, and Capua. Internal disorders were frequent,
and the unsettled state of the country was aggravated
by the spoliations of the Saracens who held Sicily.
But in the course of the century the map of the region
was destined to be radically changed. The chief agents
of the revolution were introduced by a seemingly

154 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
chance incident. In the early part of the eleventh
century a band of Saracens landed under the walls of
Salerno. The Prince of Salerno, intimidated by their
threats, was about to yield to their demand for a con
tribution, when a company of about forty pilgrims
asked the privilege of chastising the marauders. Sally
ing bravely forth, they drove them from the vicinity.
These chivalrous pilgrims were Normans. The grate
ful prince loaded them with presents, and the glowing
accounts which they gave to their countrymen, as they
returned to Normandy, incited many of them to visit
the field of their adventure. Here they found service
under the patronage of various parties. A considerable
company of them were employed by the Greek Em
peror against the Saracens. Being poorly requited, as
they deemed, for their brilliant achievements in this
war, they turned their arms against the Greek domin
ion in Southern Italy. The Pope, Leo IX., attempted
to check their success, but was himself defeated and
made prisoner, and concluded in the end to be rather
the ally than the opponent of their enterprise. By
1057 Norman rule had taken the place of Greek. The
conquest of Sicily followed, as also of the republics of
Southern Italy. Roger II., who became ruler over this
entire domain, was acknowledged by the Papacy, and
received from Innocent II. the designation of King of
Sicily. By the marriage of his daughter to Henry VI.
the title of the kingdom passed into the Hohenstaufen
family. Conradin, the last heir of this family, was put
to death in 1268 by Charles of Anjou, who sought
thus a secure possession of the throne which he had
usurped. Favored by the Papacy, Charles gained a

POLITICAL STATUS OF EUROPE. 155
wide influence in Italy. But his tyranny was at length
rewarded with a great reverse. The oppressed Sicil
ians entered into a conspiracy and cut off the French
in their midst in the massacre of the Sicilian Vespers
(1282). Improving the opportunity which this act of
bloody vengeance had supplied, Peter of Aragon took
possession of the island.
II. Charlemagne's brilliant project of a restored Ro
man Empire was not forgotten. As we have seen, the
first Otho revived the project, and pursued it with
energy. Likewise the more ambitious and enterprising
of his successors in Germany kept the same ideal in
mind. But enormous difficulties stood in the way of
its realization. The Papacy was not content to hold
the co-ordinate, or rather subordinate, position which
it occupied during the personal rule of Charlemagne.
It strove with exhaustless ambition and diligence after
supremacy. It refused to be the mere ally of the Em
pire, and used every spiritual and political expedient to
keep the Emperor's power within bounds agreeable to
its own safety and superiority. There were also great
hindrances to the imperial sovereignty from within.
The rivalry of princely houses, and the jealousies and
ambitions of individual princes, furnished abundant fuel
for rebellion. The strength and the resources of the
Emperor were often severely taxed in quelling intestine
disorders. In theory the imperial dignity was elective, though
it was natural that a powerful ruler should be able to
direct the choice to a member of his own family. The
composition of the electoral college is not very exactly
determined. The tendency seems to have been toward

156 THE MEDIMVAL CHURCH.
a limitation of suffrage. The scheme of seven electors,
so long in vogue in later times, was first made a fixed
part of the constitution by the Golden Bull of Charles IV.
in 1355.
Toward the latter part of the period, a political fac
tor which was asserting itself in other parts of Europe
also came to prominence in Germany. A large number
of the cities gained release from inferior jurisdiction,
came into direct relation to the Empire, elected their
own magistrates, and began to claim a place for their
deputies in the diets. The better to conserve their
privileges against the aggressions of the nobles and the
bishops, the cities entered into leagues with one another.
The need of protection against local usurpation natu
rally inclined them to a friendly attitude toward the
Emperors. For the major part of the period the imperial office
was held by men of vigorous personality. This was
conspicuously the case with the Hohenstaufen line.
As previously mentioned, the Franconian line of Em
perors ended with Henry V., in 1125. Lothaire III.
followed as a single representative of the Saxon house.
On his death, in 1138, the Swabian or Hohenstaufen
succession commenced, the representatives of which
were Conrad III., Frederic I., called Barbarossa or Red
Beard, Henry VI., and Frederic II. After the death
of Frederic II. in 1250, the imperial power was at
such a low ebb that the ensuing twenty-two years have
been styled an interregnum. Rudolf of Hapsburg, who
received the imperial dignity in 1272, ruled with credit
able vigor and discretion. The Empire, however, failed
to gain its former footing, and continued to bear the

POLITICAL STATUS OF EUROPE. 157
tokens of the defeat which had been incurred in the
war with the Papacy.
III. The dynasty founded by Hugh Capet in 987
continued through the whole of the period. Not till
1328 did a new house, that of Valois, succeed the long
line of the Capetians. Hugh Capet, however, and a
number of his successors, can hardly be called sover
eigns of France. The royal domain was of limited ex
tent, and the powerful vassals who possessed the greater
part of the territory held wellnigh the position of in
dependent rulers. But in the course of the period a
radical change was effected in the distribution of sover
eignty. The growth of the communes or municipali
ties, with their chartered liberties, presented a counter
poise to the feudal nobility. The Crusades also were
a greater drain upon the nobility than upon the lower
class of people. The study of the civil law began in
the thirteenth century to assume a prominent place,
and this study was favorable to centralized authority.
As a result of these developments, increased power and
prerogatives came to the crown. Under Louis VI.
(1108-1137) the claims of royalty began to be asserted
with aggressive energy. A check, it is true, was
suffered under his feeble and unfortunate successor,
Louis VII., during the latter part of whose reign the
rule of the English King covered quite as much of the
soil of France as did his own. But the active and
politic Philip Augustus (1180-1223) turned the tide,
and secured a large increase of prestige and governing
power, as well as of territory, to the French crown.
The rule of Louis IX. (1226-1270) was, on the whole,
favorable to the royal supremacy, and Philip the Fair

158 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
(1285-1314), who closes the period, carried the vigor
ous and successful assertion of his will quite up to the
verge of despotism.
With both Philip Augustus and Philip the Fair a
policy of encroachment in the interests of royalty was
a thing of set purpose. Louis IX., on the other hand,
while disposed to make a manful assertion of the pre
rogatives of the throne, was as careful of others' rights
as of his own. He ruled as he understood that the
good of the people and the principles of Christianity
required. The annals of royalty present no instance
of a more complete enthronement of conscience. What
Marcus Aurelius was in the history of Roman imperial
ism, that was Louis IX. in the history of French king
ship. He appears as an illustrious example of a ruler
who in no wise sacrificed the requirements of manhood
to the privileges of sovereignty. " If he had been
poor, obscure, a priest, a monk, he could not have been
more constantly and passionately preoccupied to live
as Christ's faithful servant, and to insure by pious
obedience upon earth his eternal salvation hereafter." 1
His domestic life was of unblemished purity. He
entered into sympathetic relations with his people, and
gave a ready ear to the requests of the poorest. He
sought to compose the disputes of his vassals and to
settle the quarrels of sovereigns, ranking the blessings
of peace far above any opportunities of personal ad
vantage which might accrue from the contentions of
others. Great errors may indeed be charged against
him. His crusading mania, at a time when the heart
of Europe was no longer genuinely enlisted in the
1 Guizot, St. Louis and Calvin.

POLITICAL STATUS OF EUROPE. 159
enterprise of recovering the Holy Land, indicates that
he was not beyond the reach of a miscalculating enthu
siasm. The penalties which he affixed to heresy, and
his patronage of the Inquisition, show that he was as
far as other leading representatives of the thirteenth
century from understanding the law of Christian toler
ance. But these were with him errors of the head.
They may demonstrate that he lacked a keen and
broad insight into his age, and still more the prophetic
gift to transcend his age -, they do not indicate that
he was wanting in purity of intention or in loyalty to
duty. The mature verdict of history corresponds with
the impression of contemporaries, and pronounces that
Rome, relatively speaking, was not making a bad use
of her assumed prerogative of canonization, when, in
1297, she proclaimed the saintship of Louis IX.
IV. While the Norman Duke William was diligent
in parading the title to the English throne, which, as
he assumed, had come to him through the promise of
his cousin, Edward the Confessor, his real title was
that of conquest. The rout of Harold and the English
forces in the battle of Hastings (1066) was the actual
basis of his claim. William ruled too as a conqueror.
He made, it is true, a certain show of respect toward
the institutions of the country. He was careful to give
a color of law to his proceedings. " The laws of Eng
land were not formally and systematically abolished;
the rights of Englishmen were not formally and syste
matically disregarded." 1 The result, nevertheless, was
oppression and spoliation. William had to reward his
soldiers. The means of the reward were naturally
1 B. A. Freeman, History of the Norman Conquest.

160 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
found in the fruits of conquest. The lands of the
English were transferred to the Norman soldiers. The
confiscation did not occur all at once, and was not at
any time universal. But sooner or later Norman
strangers came into possession of the larger part of
the land. A people thus despoiled and made the un
willing subjects of a heavy yoke could not of course
be trusted with official responsibilities. Hence the
positions of authority were given to the conquerors.
Not only were Englishmen driven out from the civil
dignities ; they were expelled from the ecclesiastical
as well. The abbot of a cloister in Normandy was
called across the Channel to fill the archbishopric of
Canterbury. This foreign dignitary, the energetic and
politic Lanfranc, used his authority in full harmony
with the policy of William. Vacant bishoprics and
abbeys were awarded to foreigners, and the transfer
was hastened by a diligent improvement of all plausible
occasions of deprivation. In short, England came com
pletely under Norman dominion. The very thorough
ness of this possession, however, tended ultimately not
only to guarantee the national independence of Eng
land, but also to conserve to a conspicuous degree the
national traits, the heritage of the old Anglo-Saxon
civilization. In proportion to the firmness of their
tenure, the Normans felt at home in England. Their
interests became centred there. They were ready at
all hazards to defend the land against future invasions.
In a word, they soon became Anglicized. As the con
quest overcame divisions which previously existed, the
final result was an English people more united, more
truly national, than ever before.

POLITICAL STATUS OF EUROPE. 161
Under the Conqueror the feudal system was inaugu
rated in England. The lands of the realm were given
under feudal tenure. But William was careful to
modify the feudal regime in the interest of the royal
supremacy. One innovation which he introduced was
especially important. " By the leading principle of
feuds," says Hallam, " an oath of fealty was due from
the vassal to the lord of whom he immediately held
his land, and to no other. The King of France, long
after this period, had no feudal and scarcely any royal
authority over the tenants of his vassals. But William
received at Salisbury, in 1085, the fealty of all land
holders in England, both those who held in chief and
their tenants, thus breaking in upon the feudal compact
in its most essential attribute, the exclusive depend
ence of a vassal upon his lord. And this may be reck
oned among the several causes which prevented the
Continental notions of independence upon the crown
from ever taking root among the English aristocracy." 1
Most of the kings who followed William were not
so competent as he to maintain an arbitrary author
ity. But the vantage ground which he had sup
plied made itself manifest, and the royal prerogative
was often pressed to the border of arbitrary and tyran
nical rule.
Happily the nation was not destitute of material
for a reaction against royal oppression. Under the
galling despotism of John, such a united movement
was made for constitutional limitations, that the King
was constrained by the apparent necessity of the case
1 Europe during the Middle Ages, chap. viii.
11

162 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
to affix his signature to the Great Charter (1215).
This instrument was of broad scope, and well fitted to
serve as a corner stone of constitutional liberty. The
privileges of the clergy were confirmed. The barons
were secured against certain special grievances. The
rights and immunities of the lower vassals were as
serted. The King was restricted in the levying of taxes.
A safeguard to the person and property of the indi
vidual was furnished in this celebrated provision : " No
freeman shall be taken or imprisoned, or be disseised
of his freehold, or liberties, or free customs, or be out
lawed, or exiled, or any otherwise destroyed ; nor will
we pass upon him, nor send upon him, but by lawful
judgment of his peers, or by the law of the land ; we
will not deny or delay to any man justice or right."
Referring to this great event in the constitutional
history of England, a distinguished French writer has
remarked : " For the first time there appeared to the
Middle Ages the imposing spectacle of a nation uniting
its different classes and laboring in a body to substitute
the reign of law for arbitrary rule." 1
As respects the ecclesiastical relations of England,
the Norman Conquest favored the scheme of centraliza
tion which began in that era to be so vigorous! y cham
pioned. The strong personality of William, it is true,
stood in the way of papal rule in England. Greg
ory VII. treated him with an exceptional deference,
allowing him to practise an interference in the affairs
of the Church which he was ready to punish with
the anathema in other sovereigns. But the Conquest
brought into the chief positions a clergy which had
1 Martin, Histoire de France, tome iv.

POLITICAL STATUS OF EUROPE. 163
been trained under the more direct influence of the
papal regime. The Pope was also fortunate in having
a very effective ally in the second of the Archbishops
of Canterbury under the Norman rule. The fact that
it was the saintly Anselm who withstood the King's
prerogative in the ecclesiastical domain, and appealed
to the Pope as the higher authority, was specially
adapted to support the claims of the latter. The ulti
mate result, therefore, was in the direction of the papal
supremacy over England.
V. The conquest of Spain by the Mohammedans
had not long been effected before its reconquest by the
Christians commenced. Lapse into relative indolence
and luxury on the part of the conquerors, and the
springing up of party divisions among them, gave the
conquered opportunities of successful attack. The Mo
hammedans, it is true, manifested an aggressive spirit
and power of recovery under the able leadership of
Almanzor at the end of the tenth century; but this
revival of their fortunes proved to be only temporary.
During the eleventh century the victory was almost
always with the Christians , and such Christian states
as Leon, Castile, and Aragon attained a good measure
of prosperity. A long time, however, was still to
elapse before the complete overthrow of the Arabic
dominion in Spain. The work of reconquest was re
laxed, and it was not till after the consolidation of the
kingdoms of Aragon and Castile under Ferdinand and
Isabella that the final victory was achieved. The sur
render of Grenada in 1492 proclaimed for the first time
the complete restoration of Spain to Christian sover
eignty.

164 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
A closer consideration of the political developments
of the Spanish kingdoms hardly comes within the scope
of our inquiry. We notice simply that a commendable
effort was made to place the power of the sovereign
under constitutional checks. Both in Castile and Ara
gon the principle of limited monarchy was very clearly
and emphatically asserted.

CHAPTER II.
THE PAPAL THEOCRACY AND OTHER FEATURES OF CHURCH
CONSTITUTION.
I. — GREGORY VH. AND HIS MORE IMMEDIATE
SUCCESSORS.
THE establishment of a theocracy over the restless
nations of the Occident was no easy task. How
ever numerous and great the other helps may have been,
there was still the need of the personality of extra
ordinary men. Only an ecclesiastical Caesar, a man
of imperial energy and will, was competent to establish
the new empire of Rome. And even such an agent
stood always dangerously near to the borders of failure.
Events occurred during the reigns of the mightiest of
the ecclesiastical monarchs which plainly prophesied
that the descent must erelong be made from enormous
power to discredited pretension. The papal ideal was
a dream of the imagination, a thing outside the sphere
of possible realization ; and such approach to it as
was made was accomplished only at the expense of an
extreme tension which could not be lasting.
Among those who attempted to build up the papal
theocracy, none were better qualified for the herculean
task than Gregory VII. As a youth, he had used the

166 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
monastic discipline to establish a habit of self-control
and hardihood. So the cloister in his case, as in that
of many others, was not so much the gateway to se
clusion from the world as a place of training for un
usual activity in the world. He went forth to grapple
with affairs. For the twenty-five years preceding his
election to the papacy, he stood, so to speak, upon the
threshold of the office. He was the influential associate,
counsellor, and legate of the Popes. The important
administrations of Leo IX., Nicolas II., and Alexan
der II. were largely shaped by his hand. He had
already been trained to rule when he took the sceptre,
and he understood his domain, no man of the age hav
ing a clearer outlook upon both the political and the
ecclesiastical condition of Europe.
Gregory derived no small measure of support from
the moral respect which he commanded. In physical
qualities he was without special advantage, unless the
courage which preserves an appearance of perfect com
posure in the midst of tumult and danger be numbered
among such qualities. With this sort of courage he
was no doubt highly endowed, as was illustrated in the
early part of his pontificate, when the outlaw Censius
and his band broke in upon the evening solemnities in
the church of Santa Maria Maggiore, dragged the Pope
from his ministrations at the altar, and hurried him off
to a tower. In an emergency like this Gregory was
able to preserve the majesty of his position by a fit
ting exhibition of calmness. But he was not a man of
imposing physique, and in his habitual relations with
men commanded reverence mainly on the basis of the
moral impression which he was able to make. His life

THE PAPAL THEOCRACY. 167
was undoubtedly pure and austere. The enmity which
his reform policy called forth gave occasion indeed to
accusations of gross immoralities. But these have too
little show of foundation to require any serious refuta
tion. By numerous acts of his administration he de
clared himself above the ordinary vices of the Roman
court. He was inaccessible to bribes. A count whose
unlawful connections had brought him under spiritual
censures hoped by gifts to gain indulgence from the
Pope. But he found himself utterly mistaken. Greg
ory sent back the presents, and informed him that he
could accept nothing from him till he had renounced
his sin, and meanwhile could only pray for the divine
compassion upon him. In answer to the generous re
quest of the English Queen, Matilda, to name the gift
which he most desired of her, Gregory wrote : " What
gold, what gems, what treasures of this world should
I desire from you more than a chaste life, distribution
of your goods to the poor, love of God and your neigh
bor ? These and gifts like unto these are what I de
sire at your hands." 1 A German bishop, Hermann of
Bamberg, who had been deposed on account of simony,
sought to recover himself by going to Rome furnished
with gold and advocates. He found the Pope deaf
to all such appeals, and determined to exact the full
penalty for his misdeeds.
Along with this general probity of life Gregory gave
some indications of a more than average breadth and
liberality of spirit. The history of his dealing with
Berengar indicates that for his own part he was disin
clined to persecute him for his denial of transubstantia-
1 Lib. vii. epist. 26.

168 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
tion, and was rather disturbed than pleased by the
crusade which was gotten up against the keen contro
versialist. Again he showed himself able to surmount
his prejudice and the prejudice of his age in favor of
monasticism, and rebuked the Abbot of Cluny for open
ing the doors of the cloister to a man who was needed
in the world. The terms of the rebuke were very em
phatic, as will appear from the following : " Behold,
those who seem to fear or to love God flee from the
warfare of Christ, make secondary the salvation of
their brethren, and, loving only themselves, seek a quiet
retreat. The shepherds flee ; flee also the dogs and
the defenders of the flocks. Wolves and robbers un
opposed attack the sheep of Christ. You have taken
or received a pious duke into the quiet of Cluny, and
you have deprived a hundred thousand Christians of
their protector." 1 It is furthermore recorded in favor
of Gregory's enlightenment and liberality that he com
manded the King of Denmark to put a stop to his cruel
and foolish persecution of innocent women accused of
magic, forbidding him to harbor the notion that the
judgments of God were to be escaped, and not rather
increased, by such means.2
We see then that Gregory brought to his pontificate
such personal traits as would naturally command re
spect, and lessen umbrage at the usurpation of un
bounded authority. His election came as a spontaneous
tribute to his fitness for the high office. Moreover,
there was a consciousness that his relation to the bold
est measures of the preceding administration marked
1 Lib. vi. epist. 17.
2 Lib. vii. epist. 21.

THE PAPAL THEOCRACY. 169
him out as the only man for the exigency. " The re
cent decrees of Alexander II.," says Villemain, " sum
moning King Henry to the bar of the Council of Rome,
made it impossible to choose any other Pope than Hilde
brand, the intrepid adviser of this bold step." 1 Accord
ingly, the acclamations of priests and people summoned
him to this office. While he was yet celebrating the
obsequies of his predecessor they thronged around the
archdeacon and exclaimed, " Hildebrand is Pope ; bles
sed Peter has elected Hildebrand." The cardinals, as
it appeared, were equally ready and decided in their
choice. So the Archdeacon Hildebrand stepped from
virtual into acknowledged rule, and began to administer
the affairs of Christendom as Gregory VII.
Gregory professed to be utterly unwilling to accept
the honor that was thrust upon him. According to
one account he carried his reluctance so far as to re
quest the German Emperor to withhold the confirma
tion which he was expected to ask (in conformity with
a custom that expired with his pontificate), at the same
time warning him that, if he were confirmed in the
papal office, he must inflict punishment for imperial
misdeeds. This account has been challenged by vari
ous historians. Alzog, however, accepts it, and says
that it is supported by the testimony of Hildebrand's
friend Bonizo of Turin, by the Acta Vaticana, and by
the Abbot William of Metz.2 Very likely it was with
some inward shrinkings that Gregory contemplated the
position of supreme pontiff. While we are not obliged
to take his professions in all their breadth, we may
1 Life of Gregory VII., book iii.
a Kirchengeschichte, § 214.

170 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
readily believe that the eager thirst for power, natural
to a strong and aggressive personality, was in a measure
neutralized by a sense of its weighty responsibilities.
Gregory was too well informed respecting the state of
Europe not to foresee the burdens involved in a faith
ful discharge of ecclesiastical headship. Letters to his
friends in the early years of his pontificate indicate
how deeply he felt the miseries and responsibilities of
authority over a corrupt Church in the midst of dis
ordered states. In 1074 he wrote to the Countess
Beatrice and her daughter Matilda in the following
strain : " Know for the rest, that, contrary to the ex
pectation of all who were with us, we have escaped
infirmity of body and have recovered good health, —
a cause rather for grief to us than of rejoicing, as we
think. For our soul was tending toward, and with full
desire was panting after, that country in which He who
has regard to our labor and grief affords rest and refuge
to the weary. But reserved still to our customary la
bors and boundless anxieties, we suffer each hour as it
were the sorrows and pangs of one giving birth, while
we are unable by any means of guidance to rescue the
Church going to wreck almost under our eyes." 1 The
next year, writing to Hugo, Abbot of Cluny, he be
sought him to pour out his heart in tears and supplica
tions to Christ, that He might deign to deliver His
wretched servant. " For," he continues, " I have often
besought Him either to take me from the present life,
or to make me useful to our common mother [the
Church] ; but nevertheless He has not yet rescued me
from great tribulation, nor made my life useful as I had
1 Lib. ii. epist. 9.

THE PAPAL THEOCRACY. 171
hoped to that mother with whose cords He has bound
me. Exceeding grief compasses me, and sorrow with
out bounds, because the Oriental Church by the insti
gation of the devil has fallen away from the Catholic
faith. If I look with the glance of the mind toward
the parts of the West, or of the South, or of the North,
I find scarcely anywhere bishops who are such by law
ful election and mode of life, who rule the Christian
people in the love of Christ and not through worldly
ambition ; and among all secular princes I do not find
any who prefer the honor of God to their own, and
righteousness to gain. As for those among whom I
dwell, Romans, Lombards, and Normans, as I often tell
them, I pronounce them to be in a manner worse than
Jews and Pagans. When I return to myself, I find my
self so borne down by the weight of my own conduct
that there remains no hope of salvation save through
the compassion of Christ alone. If I did not hope to
attain unto a better life, and to become of profit to the
holy Church, I would on no account remain at Rome,
where, as I call God to witness, I have dwelt by com
pulsion these twenty years. Whence it results, that
between sorrow daily renewed and a hope which, alas,
is delayed too long, shaken by a thousand tempests,
I am so to speak dying while I live." l
It is quite evident from these testimonies, that in the
experience of Gregory the burden was fully equal to
the elation of power. Nevertheless, he had no disposi
tion to relinquish aught of the prerogatives of his
office ; and his interpretation of those prerogatives was
of the boldest kind. As the head of the Church, the
1 Lib. ii. epist. 49.

172 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
vicegerent of Christ, he claimed to be without peer or
rival upon earth, having the oversight not only of ec
clesiastical affairs, but also of the secular so far as con
nected with moral and religious interests, possessing a
sovereignty which is related to that of earthly princes
as the sun to the moon, engaged, it may be, to leave
the temporal throne standing, but competent to expel
an incumbent and to install another in his place. In
short, Gregory conceived of Christendom as a theoc
racy in which the Pope as the visible representative
of God held the supreme authority. Leading Roman
Catholic historians freely allow that this was his con
ception. Says Alzog : " We believe with Hefele that
Gregory's idea was as follows : Since he saw the world
of that time under the power of evil, and clearly dis
cerned that the Pope alone could rescue from the cor
ruption, there hovered before him the majestic plan of a
universal theocracy. This was to embrace all the king
doms of the Christian name, especially of the West, in
one great community, whose supreme code was to
be the commands of God. The administrator of the
same was to be the Pope, as the visible representa
tive of God, having a spiritual sovereignty which is
related to the earthly sovereignty of kings as the sun
to the moon, the one being the source of the light
and warmth of the other ; in virtue of which relation,
however, the Papacy is never to destroy the power of
the civil lords, or rob them of their sovereignty [that
is, as a class] . On the other hand, the sovereignty of
the civil lord must bow to the higher sovereignty of
God ; and if the civil lord disallows this, he should be
expelled from the theocratic union and thereby rendered

THE PAPAL THEOCRACY. 173
incapable of being longer the representative of God as
the ruler of an individual realm." l As the same
writer remarks, this idea was not new, but was asserted
by Gregory more definitely and emphatically than by
his predecessors. In truth, Gregory left no shadow of
doubt about his opinion of the complete subordination
of kings to papal authority. He argued that the power
of absolution which belongs to the priesthood, upon
which all kings and princes are dependent, and of
which they are especially desirous to avail themselves
when confronted by death, gives to the priesthood a
vast superiority over the secular order ; that the Pope
is the head of the priesthood and the supreme exponent
of its absolving power ; that he to whom the spiritual
order is subject must be, with still larger right, judge
over the inferior secular order.2 At a council in Rome
in 1080, giving the most sweeping application to the
inference from the power of binding and loosing, he
said : " So act, I beseech you, most holy fathers and
princes, that all the world may know and understand
that, if you are able to bind and loose in heaven, you
are able upon earth to take away, and to give to whom
ever you please, empires, kingdoms, princedoms, duchies,
margravates, countships, and the possessions of all men
according to their deserts." Here, to be sure, the Pope
speaks of the prerogatives of the assembled prelates;
but in this he was only taking an indirect way to assert
the authority which he claimed for himself.
In a number of instances Gregory borrowed from
feudal terms a representation of the subordinate posi-
1 Kirchengeschichte, § 214.
2 Lib. iv. epist. 2 ; lib. viii. epist. 21.

174 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
tion of sovereigns, and claimed from them an acknowl
edgment of vassalage. He looked upon Spain as a fief
of the papacy, and in the first year of his pontificate
announced his claim to the Spanish princes in these
terms : " You are not unaware, as we think, that the
kingdom of Spain belonged anciently by a proper right
to St. Peter, and that, although it has been occupied a
long time by pagans, the law of justice not having been
annulled, it belongs still in equity to no mortal but to
the apostolic seat alone." 1 He preferred a bike claim
to the kingdom of Hungary.2 He asked a pledge of
fealty from William I. of England, — an unfortunate
demand in this case, for the Conqueror replied that he
had no notion of rendering this token of vassalage :
" Fidelitatem facere nolui, nee volo : quia nee promisi,
nee antecessores meos antecessoribus tuis id fecisse
comperio." A purpose to signify the vassal relation of
the German realm may be discerned in the inscription,
Petra dedit Petro, Petrus diadema Rudolfo, which is
said to have been graven upon the crown which Greg
ory sent to Rudolph, the competitor of Henry IV. for
the rule of Germany.
In the practical maintenance of theocratic sovereignty
over Christendom Gregory made much use of the legate
system. Through his ambassadors, whom he held to a
strict accountability, he made himself virtually present
in all quarters. The outlying countries attracted his
attention. He wrote to the King of Sweden to send
representatives of the priesthood of his country to Rome
that they might give information respecting their own
1 Lib. i. epist. 7 ; compare lib. iv. epist. 28.
2 Lib. ii. epist. 14.

THE PAPAL THEOCRACY. 175
land, and become better acquainted with the Roman
system. He made a similar request of the King of
Norway, directing him to select youths of promise
and rank, who after being placed under Roman tuition
might be qualified to teach their countrymen. Nor did
he confine his attention to the West. He broached the
great project of the Crusades, which was to fill the at
tention of Europe for the next two centuries, and
assigned as a leading motive for such a project the
probability that it would result in reuniting the Eastern
and Western branches of the Church.1 That the re
united Church would be under the supreme authority
of the Roman pontiff was, of course, taken for granted.
Among the preliminaries to the proper enthronement
of the ecclesiastical over the civil power, Gregory saw
clearly that the abolition of the practice of lay investi
ture must be included. It was perfectly evident that
independence must be secured before a proper pre-emi
nence could be asserted. So long as bishops elect could
not enter upon their sees until they had received the
ring and the staff from the civil lord, they must be de
pendent upon him. In the view of the civil lord, such
dependence was indeed no more than ought to be ac
knowledged. The temporalities of the bishoprics had
been given, at least in many cases, under feudal tenure.
It was claimed, therefore, by the civil lord, that the
bishop ought to give him a token of his obligation,
ought to receive at his hands the ring and the staff;
not as though he obtained from this source his spiritual
functions, but only the permit to enter upon temporali
ties for which he was indebted to the temporal power.
1 Lib. ii. epist. 31.

176 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
The plea was not without a good measure of plausi
bility, and it is not strange that sovereigns were unwill
ing to relinquish the prerogative of investiture. They
could not be expected to receive with complacency the
demand to abandon so important an item of control
over estates and men. But Gregory from his stand
point was bound to insist upon this demand. He could
not tolerate the notion that the Church should be thus
dependent upon the State. Moreover, the practice of
lay investiture was obnoxious to the Pope, as being
accessory to a crying abuse of the times which he was
determined to uproot, — the pestilential sin of simony.
In the view of Gregory there was another great abuse,
the marriage of the clergy, — an abuse which, as he
conceived, might well draw down the anathemas of
heaven and earth, a thing in glaring contravention of
the legislation of the Church and subversive of the
sanctity and distinctive character of the priestly office.
The three principal items then in the reform scheme of
Gregory were, (1) the enforced celibacy of the clergy,
(2) the uprooting of the practice of simony, (3) the
achievement of the independence of the Church by the
abolition of lay investiture, or, more broadly speaking,
the expulsion of the temporal power from its interfer
ence with ecclesiastical offices.
In prosecuting these measures of reform, Gregory
might have come about equally into collision with Eng
land, France, and Germany, so far as the practices of
those countries were concerned. But as a matter of
fact, there was no conflict with England ; and, while
Gregory early made his complaints against the King of
France, and called upon the French bishops to tame

THE PAPAL THEOCRACY. 177
their tyrant, declaring that unless he mended his ways
resort should be had to interdict and deposition,1 his
dealing with the French monarch appears only as a
passing episode. The great conflict which fills the
whole horizon of Gregory's pontificate was that waged
with Henry IV. of Germany and his allies.
In the year 1074 the reforming pontiff sent forth the
first blast of the trumpet, and it was no uncertain
sound which fell upon the ears of the nations. Through
a council convened at Rome, it was decreed that all
priests living in relations of marriage or concubinage
must put away their partners at once on pain of sus
pension, and that all candidates for the priesthood must
engage to live in perpetual celibacy. The crime of
simony seems also to have been denounced at the same
time, and suspension from the service of the altar de
clared against those implicated therein. But the point
commanding most attention in the decree of 1074 was
the absolute prohibition of marriage to the clergy.
Though this was only the reassertion of a law which
had long been on the statute-book of the Church, so
widely had the practice diverged from the law, that its
emphatic restatement by Gregory was received in large
part as though a revolutionary edict had suddenly, been
launched forth. In Germany, in particular, there was
a great ferment. As Lambert of Aschaffenburg reports,
a large proportion of the clergy vehemently denounced
the decree of the Pope, as worthy only of a heretic, a
man of insane beliefs, who had overlooked the declara
tion of the Lord that not all can receive the law of
virginity,2 and the explicit permit of the apostle that
i Lib. ii. epist. 5. " Matt. xix. 11, 12.
12

178 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
those convinced of their inability to live in continence
should marry.1 They insisted that the imposition of
such a violent check upon the course of nature would
eventuate in fornication and uncleanness, and expressed
an intention, if the matter should be pressed, to for
sake the priesthood rather than their wives ; and then
the Pope, who was not content with the service of men,
might make shift as he could to secure the ministrations
oi angels in the churches. Instances are reported in
which prelates and papal legates who attempted to en^
force the decree found it necessary to forbear in order
to save their lives, so great was the fury with which
they were assailed. In a number of countries there
were outbreaks of violence. But Gregory was unflinch
ing, and in answer to requests for some amelioration of
the decree refused to abate an iota of his requirement.
He had expected fierce opposition, and from the first
prepared for it by appealing to the laity. He exhorted
the people to have nothing to do with the married
priests, and sent instructions to prominent laymen to
prevent such priests by force, if need be, from exercis
ing their functions, — expedients not very well in har
mony with the maxims which the Church had been
striving to inculcate respecting the immunity of the
clergy from accusation and judgment at the hands of
hvymen. Gregory found allies. The monks, among others,
were generally faithful supporters of the decree of
celibacy. But the immediate success was far from
complete. In England the authorities made no at
tempt to separate the parish clergy from their wives,
i 1 Cor. vii. 5, 9, 10.

THE PAPAL THEOCRACY. 179
and acquiesced in the scheme of Gregory only to the
extent of forbidding marriages to be contracted in the
future. In the practice of many countries, as will be
noticed subsequently, the rule of celibacy continued to
be very poorly observed. Nevertheless, the bold and
vigorous action of Gregory was not a failure. The
scheme of clerical celibacy received from him an im
pulse which assured its triumph in the papal com
munion. In 1075 Gregory proceeded to a decisive attack upon
simony and lay investiture. At the council which he
convened in Rome, besides passing censures upon in
dividuals, he issued the following decree : " If any one
henceforth shall receive a bishopric or abbey from the
hand of any lay person, he shall not be regarded as
bishop or abbot, nor shall any audience be given him
as bishop or abbot; moreover, we interdict him the
grace of St. Peter and entrance into the Church, so
long as he shall not penitently forsake the position
which he has taken through the crime of ambition
as well as of disobedience, which is the impious sin
of idolatry. We make a similar ordinance also respect
ing the inferior ecclesiastical dignities. Likewise, if
any emperor, king, duke, margrave, count, or any secu
lar power or persons, shall presume to give investiture
of a bishopric, or any ecclesiastical dignity, let him
know that he is bound with the fetters of the same
sentence." 1
However unwelcome such a measure was to the
young sovereign of Germany, he found it convenient to
temporize for the time being. The better capabilities
1 Quoted by Gieseler, Kirchengeschichte, § 47.

180 THE MEDIJEVAL CHURCH.
of Henry IV. had been kept in abeyance by the misera
ble and corrupting influence of his educators. Through
his own misrule and that of his principal advisers he
had alienated a large part of his subjects. A stubborn
revolt had broken out among the Saxons. Being thus
hampered by the disturbed condition of his realm,
Henry thought it best to make a show of submission
to the requirements of Gregory. The Pope very likely
did not feel secure of the continued fidelity of Henry ;
but he addressed him in friendly terms, and commended
him for the support which he gave to his reformatory
degrees.1 This style of intercourse, however, came
speedily to a close. The whole party in Germany which
was touched by the new edicts naturally sought to en
list the Emperor on its side. For his own part, too,
he vehemently disliked the Pope's interference. No
sooner, then, had he won freedom of action by victory
over the Saxons, than he made a radical change of
bearing. Gregory learned that he was associating with
the excommunicated, and was filling bishoprics at his
pleasure. He therefore sent him an admonitory letter,
giving instructions at the same time to the bearer to
tell him that he deserved to lose his crown, and would
certainly be excommunicated unless he should forth
with mend his ways. If the report of a contemporary
writer may be trusted, Henry was even cited to answer
for his misdeeds before a Roman synod.2
A monarch with any sense of self-respect could not
1 Lib. iii. epist. 3.
2 Giesebrecht is of the opinion that this item, which rests on the
authority of Lambert, is not to be accepted. (Geschichte der deutschen
Kaiserzeit, iii. 384.)

THE PAPAL THEOCRACY. 181
easily endure to be corrected in such a dictatorial fash
ion. A respectful defiance was certainly in order. But
Henry gave way to an unseemly and impolitic burst
of passion. At a synod convened at Worms in Janu
ary, 1076, the most scandalous charges were preferred
against the Pope, and he was declared deposed. A
letter which accompanied the sentence of deposition
began with this address : " Henry, not by usurpation,
but by God's ordinance King, to Hildebrand, no longer
Pope, but the false monk."
Here surely was a sufficient invitation to the thun
derbolts of the haughty vicegerent. As it happened,
Henry's messenger reached Rome when a council, which
doubtless was designed to pay special attention to his
case, had been convened by the Pope. Coming into
the presence of the assembly, the messenger delivered
the sentence of deposition. A loud outcry arose, and
it seemed probable that the daring ambassador would
pay for his audacity with his life. But Gregory inter
posed, and prepared a response more agreeable to the
majesty of his office. In language impregnated with
the loftiest assumptions of pontifical sovereignty, he
issued his sentence. Having appealed to St. Peter,
as the successor of whom he had received the power
of binding and loosing, he continued : " Armed with
this confidence, for the honor and defence of thy Church,
in the name of the omnipotent God, Father, Son, and
Holy Spirit, through thy power and authority, I inter
dict Henry the King, son of Henry the Emperor, who
with unexampled pride has risen up against thy Church,
from the government of the whole realm of Germany
and Italy, and I absolve all Christians from the obliga-

182 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
tion of the oaths which they have sworn or shall swear
to him, and I forbid that any one should serve him as
King. For it is fitting that he who assails the honor
of thy Church should himself lose the honor which he
seems to have. And because he has contemned the
obedience which befits a Christian, and refused to re
turn to the Lord he renounced, by associating with the
excommunicate, by spurning my counsels, which, as
thou knowest, I have given him for his salvation, and
by separating himself from thy Church as a patron of
schism, I bind him in thy name and in the bonds of thy
anathema, that the nations may know and acknowledge
that thou art Peter, that upon thy rock the Son of the
living God has built His Church, and that the gates
of hell shall not prevail against it."
Had Henry IV. been supported by a united realm,
he might have discarded this high-sounding sentence
and prepared for a history of the relations of the Em
pire and the Papacy far different from that which has
been recorded. But a part of his subjects were rather
eager than otherwise for a pretext to dethrone him.
His cause too was lacking in moral prestige. A large
proportion of the bishops who had acted as his sup
porters were men of doubtful conduct, who deserved
to be scourged for their misdeeds. The popular mind
was largely open to a superstitious dread of the papal
thunder. So Henry found himself deserted by one
ally after another, and smitten as it were with leprosy
in the sight of the people. In his forsaken condition
he could do no better than to accept the terms imposed
by the Diet of Tribur (October, 1076), which required
him to live as a private person till a council, which was

THE PAPAL THEOCRACY. 183
to be convened the next year at Augsburg under the
presidency of the Pope, should have decided his case,
and also to renounce the hope of reinstatement if he
were not released from the ban within a year from its
imposition. To be tried by the Pope before the dignitaries of Ger
many, especially as one under anathema, was a thing
most abhorrent to the thought of the humbled mon
arch. He determined to forestall this ordeal, at once so
crucifying to his feelings and so perilous to his crown,
by presenting himself in person before the Pope. He
started, therefore, for Italy. Through the rigors of
one of the severest winters ever known in Europe he
crossed the Alps and sought the presence of the Pope.
He found the successor of Peter by no means ready to
embrace the prodigal. Gregory was then stopping at
Canossa, a fortress of the Countess Matilda. Three
walls surrounded this fortress. The discrowned sover
eign found admission within two of these, but there his
progress was stayed. For three days in the cold of
January he stood in penitential garb, beseeching au
dience of the Pope. At length the intercessions of
Matilda and others prevailed upon Gregory to receive
the penitent. Conditions of absolution were proposed,
and accepted. Henry engaged to answer the charges
of his subjects in the presence of the Pope, and to ac
cept the decision which might be rendered. Meanwhile
he was to assume neither the ensigns nor the authority
of a sovereign, and in case he should be restored he
was to rule in harmony with the interests and the laws
of the Church.
The details of this triumph of papal assumption over

184 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
prostrate kingship were published abroad by Gregory
himself. Some have thought that his motive in this
was an unseemly desire to triumph over his adversary,
and to weaken his cause by a display of his abasement.
But more probably Gregory wished to show the Sax
ons, who were highly displeased to have the absolution
granted at all, how reluctantly he had proceeded to the
measure, and with what expense to the suppliant.
The oppressive weight of the ban was now lifted.
It followed in the nature of things that a reaction should
ensue. To the inward promptings of shame there was
added the stimulus of voices from without. Many of
the Lombards were no friends of the Pope, and were
much aggrieved that Henry should have come into
Italy to abase himself, instead of to humble Gregory.
They were a thousand times more ready to assist in
bringing the latter to pass, than to witness the former.
Their ill-suppressed murmurings by no means increased
Henry's satisfaction with the part which he had played
at Canossa. He saw, moreover, as the edge of their
resentment wore off, that he could count very largely
upon their support. So he entered into friendly rela
tions with the Lombards, and awaited the progress of
events. The presence and growing power of Henry in Italy
stood in the way of Gregory's departure for Germany.
The projected council at Augsburg failed to meet ; but
the nobles of Germany assembled at Forchheim and
proceeded to elect Rudolph of Swabia to the German
throne (March, 1077). This transpired without the
special sanction of the Pope, or any confirmation from
him further than the presence of his legates at the cere-

THE PAPAL THEOCRACY. 185
mony of consecration. As Henry was no longer under
the ban, the setting up of a rival had much of the ap
pearance of an unwarrantable rebellion. Enough of
sympathy was therefore shown for his cause to em
bolden him to contend with Rudolph for the possession
of Germany, and the unhappy country was desolated
with the horrors of a civil war. With surprising inde
cision Gregory delayed to decide between the contest
ants till the year 1080. He then pronounced in favor
of Rudolph, placed Henry under anathema, and de
clared all Christians released from any oaths which
they had sworn or should swear to him. But no such
results followed from this as came from the previous
sentence. The party of the excommunicated monarch
stood firm, and, as Rudolph soon fell in battle, Henry's
time to exact vengeance from the Pope, who had abased
him to the earth arrived. He marched into Italy in
1081. After assailing Rome for three successive sea
sons, he gained possession of the larger portion of the
city, and confined Gregory to the castle of St. Angelo.
Meanwhile he had set up an anti-pope, installing Gui-
bert of Ravenna, who took the name of Clement III.
The Normans under Robert Guiscard released Gregory
from his imprisonment, at the same time avenging a
popular assault, which their insolent bearing had insti
gated, with dreadful carnage and destruction. With
these fierce warriors Gregory retired to Salerno, where
he died soon after, in 1085. Through all hi6 misfor
tunes he had preserved the same unbending mien, and
refused to listen to any terms of compromise.- The last
words of the dying pontiff were in keeping with the
lofty bearing which he had maintained in his- official

186 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
station : " I have loved righteousness," he said, " and
hated iniquity, and therefore I die in exile."
Viewed in its general outline, the pontificate of Greg
ory VII. makes a certain impression of majesty. The
boldness and breadth of his scheme, the lofty assump
tions which he put forth, and the courage and stead
fastness which he manifested at crucial epochs, make
together an image that is striking to the imagination.
But, on the other hand, there were phases seriously de
tracting from the grandeur of his rule. An element of
calculation which lies far below the plane of moral sub
limity is painfully apparent. When we behold him
sparing William the Conqueror, and leaving him to em
ploy the prerogative of investiture with unchallenged
independence while he treated the same offence as a
capital crime in Henry IV., — when we see him again
delaying for years to decide between the claims of
Henry and Rudolph, the blood of the German people
being meanwhile poured out like water in the civil
strife, — what have we but a spectacle of weakness and
irresolution, in place of moral intrepidity and straight
forwardness ? It may be said, indeed, that Gregory
had to act as his limited resources allowed, that one
powerful sovereign was enough to deal with at a time,
and that in dealing even with this one it was necessary
to have a prudent regard to favoring opportunities and
means of success. All this may be true. But let it
be granted, and what is the conclusion ? The conclu
sion is that the papacy, even in the persons of its no
blest and most powerful exponents, by meddling with
the affairs of nations, by aspiring to a temporal sway,
has endangered the moral grandeur of its rule, has been

THE PAPAL THEOCRACY. 187
driven aside from the path of a straightforward and im
partial application of principles, and has tended with a
gravitation not easily resisted toward the vulgarity of
conmon political finesse.
The death of Gregory did not end the struggle.
Henry continued to support the claims of an anti-pope,
and for a time quite effectively. The successors of
Gregor3r were not able to hold their ground against
the nominee of the Emperor. But during the pontif
icate of Urban II., the tide began to turn. The part
of this Pope in instituting the first crusade gained him
such a prestige as sustained his own authority and pre
pared a favorable ground for his successor, Paschal II.
At the same time a defection occurred which abridged
the Emperor's power and overwhelmed him with a grief
far more bitter than the cup of death. First, his son
Conrad, instigated by the papal party, revolted and
seized the government of Italy. Some years later, his
son Henry endeavored to rob him of the government
of Germany, took possession of his person, and treated
him with most unfilial hardness. A popular reaction
gained the freedom of the Emperor and secured him a
fair prospect of holding his own against his adversaries.
But before the ordeal of battle had rendered a decision
the occasion for conflict was over. The sorrow-stricken
monarch, who was pierced by the infidelity of his sons
as David by the rebellion of Absalom, had found release
in death (1106). He died under the shadow of the
papal excommunication. Five years passed before his
body was allowed to repose in a consecrated place.
The rebellion of young Henry, if not directly insti
gated by Paschal II., had been blessed by him. With

188 THE MEDIJEVAL CHURCH.
great promptness, it might be said with great eagerness,
he had released the prince from his oath of allegiance
to his father. As it happened, or as Providence ruled,
this trespass against the law of nature was speedily
requited. The Pope was setting up the instrument of
his own humiliation. For never was Pope more plagued
or put to deeper disgrace by an Emperor than was Pas
chal by Henry V. As soon as his policy was developed,
it became perfectly evident that Henry had no inclina
tion to resign the right of investiture. In 1110 he de
scended into Italy with a powerful army, one purpose
of his coming being the reception of the imperial
crown. The Pope of course would not be willing to
crown a disobedient son of the Church. But he had no
means of resisting Henry. In this exigency he made
terms which were a surprise to his contemporaries, and
which have continued to be somewhat of an historical
riddle. That a Pope should so nearly have anticipated
a leading principle of Arnold of Brescia was truly re
markable. Paschal agreed that the Church should
resign the possessions and royalties which it had re
ceived from the Empire, on condition that the Empire
should resign the right of investiture. Henry, of course,
could not object to these terms. The vast possessions
in question being once surrendered, it would be a small
thing to resign the ceremony of investiture. He there
fore expressed his assent, though he probably discerned
the impracticable nature of the compact, and well un
derstood that the prelates of Germany would make a
desperate resistance to its fulfilment. Before the coro
nation, which Paschal had engaged to bestow, had taken
place, the feelings of the German prelates became mani-

THE PAPAL THEOCRACY. 189
fest. As they would not follow out the proposal which
the Pope had made for them, Henry felt released from
his part of the engagement. Still he insisted upon the
coronation, and since Paschal would not bestow this
unless the claim to investiture were given up, he took
Pope and cardinals prisoners, and exacted as the price
of freedom a treaty in which the Pope conceded to
him the right of investiture. The coronation then took
place, and the victorious Emperor returned to Germany.
Paschal now found the reproaches of his friends as hard
to bear as had been the persecutions of his ruthless
antagonist. Some of them berated him without mercy
for the indignity which he had brought upon the
Church by his unmanly surrender. The Pope him
self repented of his weakness in dust and ashes. He
would gladly have anathematized the Emperor, but
was restrained by sense of shame, if not of honor, from
breaking the solemn pledge which he had given. He
contented himself therefore with seeing the treaty con
demned as invalid by a Roman synod, and the Emperor
anathematized through the agency of his legates.
Before the close of his reign Henry's supremacy in
Germany became so far endangered that he was willing
to make some concession for the sake of reconciliation
with the papacy. The result of the negotiations that
were opened was the Concordat of Worms, which was
ratified in 1122. The Emperor on his side gave up all
claim to investiture by ring and staff, guaranteed canon
ical election and free consecration in all churches, and
promised restoration of possessions and feudal sover
eignties which had been taken from the Church during
the time of discord. The Pope on his part conceded

190 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
that the bishops and abbots belonging to the German
realm should be elected in the presence of the Em
peror, only without simony and violence, and should
receive from him authority to enter upon the tem
poralities of their positions through the touch of the
sceptre.1 This may be regarded as not an unfair settlement of
questions in dispute. The old form of investiture was
objectionable, inasmuch as the ring and the staff were
the proper ensigns of the spiritual functions of the
bishop. Their delivery by the temporal prince might
seem to imply a dependence of the bishop upon the
State for his spiritual prerogatives. This inference was
indeed denied. Still a ceremony whose natural signifi
cance needed to be explained away were better dis
pensed with. The Concordat provided a more suitable
form of investiture. By guaranteeing free election,
it secured the rights of the Church. By retaining in
vestiture in any form it left to the sovereign a means
of asserting lordship over vast estates, which were not
designed, as they were given to the Church, to pass
into the rank of independent property.
The result fell short of that complete independence
which Gregory VII. wished to secure for the Church.
At the same time, inasmuch as the State conceded a
portion of the prerogative which it had freely used for
a long period, the Church appears as the gaining party
in the settlement.
It should be noticed that the compromise which was
effected at Worms in 1122 had. been anticipated in
1 " Electus regalia per sceptrum a te [imperatore] recipiat, et quae
ex his jure tibi debet, faciat."

THE PAPAL THEOCRACY. 191
England by a similar settlement. Henry I. at his rec
onciliation with Anselm, agreed to give up the cere
mony of investiture, requiring only that bishops should
do homage to him for their temporalities.
II. — ALEXANDER III. AND THOMAS BECKET.
The peace which was consummated through the Con
cordat of Worms was not seriously threatened till after
the middle of the century. The most prominent figure
in Europe during this interval was neither Pope nor
Emperor, but that marvellous combination of lofty de
votion and practical force, that unequalled union of
monk and man of affairs, Bernard of Clairvaux. The
contemporary Popes did not possess the eminent talents
which might qualify them for new conquests. More
over, they were confronted by such difficulties at home
as naturally restrained them from going abroad for oc
casions of quarrel. Among these difficulties was a
schism. This had its origin, not in interference from
without, but in the partisanship of the electors. By
hasty action a section of the cardinals in 1130 suc
ceeded in installing Innocent II. Not to be foiled in
this way, the opposing party declared the election in
valid, and proceeded to choose Anacletus II. By alli
ance with Roger of Sicily, Anacletus commanded the
ascendency in Italy. Innocent was forced to take refuge
in France ; but, supported by the eloquent champion
ship of Bernard, he retrieved his fortunes, and in 1136
reinstated himself at Rome.
Before the close of Innocent's administration another
serious difficulty assailed the papacy. By the year

192 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
1139 the protests of Arnold of Brescia against the
worldliness and wealth of the clergy, and his vigorous
emphasis upon the need of renouncing secular affairs
and returning to apostolic simplicity, had made no small
stir in his native city. At the Lateran Council which
was convened in that year, it was thought necessary to
check the agitator. Innocent accordingly ordered Ar
nold to leave the soil of Italy and not to return without
the papal permit. Arnold retired to France and then
to Switzerland, but after a few years made bold to ally
himself with the republican movement which had been
started at Rome. For a time he held the field. The
republican scheme had a complete ascendency. The
Popes were relegated to a purely spiritual jurisdiction,
their temporal authority was denied, and the govern
ment of Rome was intrusted to a Senate. Innocent
was unable to quell the uprising of popular enthu
siasm, and died in the midst of his unavailing efforts.
One of his successors, Lucius II., fared still worse, be
ing killed while attempting to storm the Capitol at
the head of his troops. Eugenius III., who followed,
was an exile from Rome for a large part of his pon
tificate. First under Adrian IV., who became Pope in 1154,
was an effective movement made for dislodging Ar
nold and overthrowing his institutions. Soon after
Adrian's inauguration, a fatal assault upon one of the
cardinals gave him an occasion for a decisive fulmi-
nation. Rome was placed under interdict, and as a
condition of its removal the city was required to ex
pel Arnold. Shortly afterwards the champion of the
Roman republic fell into the hands of the German

THE PAPAL THEOCRACY. 193
Emperor, Frederic Barbarossa. As Frederic neither
sympathized with his enthusiasms nor appreciated the
instrumentality that might have been found in him for
antagonizing the ambitions of the papacy, he delivered
him over to his enemies in Rome, who executed him in
all haste, and cast his ashes into the Tiber.
The Emperor and the Pope, between whom a kind
of bond might appear to have been established by the
sacrifice of Arnold, were both eminently fitted to ini
tiate a quarrel over prerogatives. Frederic held lofty
views of imperial rights. He claimed an unrivalled
supremacy in things temporal. He spurned the notion
that his authority was one which needed any papal
sanction. His crown was from God ; to say that it
came from the successor of St. Peter was to indulge
a lying assertion, contradictory to the divine arrange
ment and to the doctrine of St. Peter himself. These
ideas were backed up by a strong will and a command
ing force of character which powerfully impressed men.
Frederic Barbarossa, therefore, was well qualified to
inaugurate the first stage of the hundred years' war
between the Hohenstaufen family and the papacy.
Adrian IV., who left his home as Nicolas Break-
speare to find preferment in a French monastery, to fill
the position of cardinal and legate, and lastly to present
the solitary instance of an Englishman upon the papal
throne, was a man of aspiring temper and ready cour
age, holding high notions of his office, and not inclined
to tolerate any encroachment. We have a specimen of
his idea of pontifical sovereignty in his grant of Ireland
to Henry II. of England. Holding that the Roman
see has a special claim upon all islands which have re-
13

194 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
ceived the Christian oracles, he proceeded formally to
sacrifice the independence of the Irish people. In the
bull which fulfilled the request of Henry, and author
ized him to conquer the island, is the following : " We
therefore, with the grace and acceptance suited to your
pious and laudable design, and favorably assenting to
your petition, hold it good and acceptable that, for ex
tending the borders of the Church, restraining the pro
gress of vice, for the correction of manners, the plant
ing of virtue, and the increase of the Christian religion,
you enter that island, and execute therein whatever
shall pertain to the honor of God and welfare of the
land ; and that the people of the land receive you hon
orably, and reverence you as their lord, — the rights
of their churches still remaining sacred and inviolate,
and saving to St. Peter the annual pension of one
penny from every house." 1 No wonder that Irish
patriots of the Roman Catholic persuasion find here an
occasion of much perplexity ! " Adrian's bull," says
Lanigan, " is of so unwarrantable and unjustifiable a
nature, that some writers could not bring themselves
to believe that he issued it, and have endeavored to
prove it a forgery ; but their efforts were of no avail,
and never did there exist a more real or authentic docu
ment." 2
Such a Pope was not likely to remain on terms of
amity with the ambitious Frederic. The Emperor took
umbrage at language of Adrian and of his legates which
was thought to imply that he held his crown by the
grace of the Pope. He was angered, moreover, by the
» Quoted by W. D. Killen, Eccl. Hist, of Ireland.
* Eccl. Hist, of Ireland, vol. iv. chap. 28.

THE PAPAL THEOCRACY. 195
alliance of the Pope with the King of Sicily, as being
a menace to his own rule in Italy. Adrian on his part
complained that the Emperor exacted the oath of vas
salage from the bishops, hindered appeals, and restricted
the action of the papal legates in Germany. Especially
was he vexed by Frederic's manifest and even avowed
determination to assert the imperial sovereignty over
Rome. A rupture seemed inevitable. Indeed, Adrian
was about to launch forth sentence of excommunication,
when the hand of death passed over the conflict to his
successor (1159).
That successor was Alexander III. He was the
choice of the party which favored the bold policy of
Adrian IV. The cardinals, however, were not all
friendly to such a policy. Some of them favored peace
with the Emperor. The result was another schism.
Alexander III. was confronted by a rival, who bore the
name of Victor IV. The Emperor, with commendable
moderation, made no choice between the contestants,
but convened a council at Pavia to pass upon their
claims. This council, whose authority Alexander from
the first refused to acknowledge, gave its verdict in
favor of Victor. For a time the imperial patronage
gave Victor the ascendency in Italy. Alexander III.
in 1162 was obliged to take refuge in France. But
erelong he found means for a successful struggle. Espe
cially was a powerful instrument prepared to his hand
in the cities of Northern Italy, which the arbitrary
rule of Frederic had alienated. As previously stated,
the arms of the cities gained a signal victory upon
the field of Legnano in 1176. The following year the
defeated Emperor humbled himself at Venice before

196 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
the victorious Pope and received from him the kiss of
peace.1 But Frederic's prostration upon the pavement
of Venice was no token of his settled disposition. He
had still courage and energy for recovering lost ground,
and had made progress toward reinstating the imperial
rule in Italy, when he embarked upon the crusade from
which he never returned. He was drowned while at
tempting to cross a river in Asia Minor (1190).
Contemporary with the conflict between Alexander
III. and Frederic I. occurred one of the most stirring
crises in the ecclesiastical history of England. It was
during the Pope's exile in France that the famous
quarrel between Thomas Becket and Henry II. broke
out. The quarrel was an exhibition of the same an
tagonism which had been displayed on the Continent
upon a larger scale. Becket was an English Hildebrand,
entertaining the loftiest notions respecting the preroga
tives of his order, and concerned for nothing so much
as to resist every encroachment upon his rights as pri
mate of England. " Who doubts," he wrote in the
midst of the strife, " that the priests of Christ are to
be considered the fathers and masters of kings and
princes, and of all the faithful? Is it not seen to be
a miserable insanity, when the son attempts to subju-
1 The Pope, according to the representation of an old chronicle, tri
umphed over the Emperor in good earnest : " Imperator Alexandrinum
in sede Romana collocavit, ubi Imperator coronam deposuit, et proster-
nens se super terram, Papa super guttur Imperatoris pedem sinistrum
fixit, et elevato altero pede ad alteram partem prosiliit dicens : Super
aspidum et basiliscum ambulabis, et conculcabis leonem et draconem. Cui
Imperator : Non tibi, sed Petro. Et Papa : Non dignitati, sed Frederico.
Tunc Papa coronam Imperii eidem restituit cum pede." (Gualvaneus
Flamma, Historia Mediolanensis, cap. ccvi., apud Muratori, xi. 651 )

THE PAPAL THEOCRACY. 197
gate the father, the disciple the master, and to bring
under the unholy bonds of his own power the one by
whom he believes he can be bound and loosed, not only
upon earth, but also in heaven ? " 1 Again he remarks :
" It is certain that kings receive their power from the
Church, whereas the Church receives its power not from
them, but from Christ." 2 Henry II., on the other hand,
entertained high notions of his rights as king, and drew
his standard rather from the practice of his royal pre
decessors than from the teachings with which Rome

had been endeavoring to enlighten princes for some
generations. However, it was not in virtue of any
such general declaration of principles that the quarrel
was begun. The subject of dispute was primarily much
more concrete and specific, as will be seen from the nar
rative of Becket's relations with Henry.
The first noteworthy advancement of Becket, who
was the son of a London citizen of respectable stand
ing, was due to the favorable impression which his
talents made upon Theobald, the Archbishop of Can
terbury. Through the kindness of the primate, he was
enabled to perfect his education upon the Continent
by the study of law at Bologna and Auxerre. His ca
pacity for business having been proved by the success
ful execution of some matters of diplomacy, he was
brought into prominence, and in 1154 was rewarded with
the lucrative and influential position of Archdeacon of
Canterbury. Not long thereafter, on the recommenda
tion of Theobald, who wished to have near the King a
competent guardian of the interests of the Church, he
was raised to the position of Chancellor. But in this
1 Epist. Ixxiii. 2 Epist. clxxix.

198 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
office Becket, so far as is discoverable, was not at all
conspicuous for carrying out the intent of Theobald. He
appeared rather as the faithful coadjutor of the King
than as the champion of the Church. As is evident
from the references of John of Salisbury and others, he
was so far a co-agent or instrument in the King's exac
tions as to gain somewhat of a reputation as a spoiler
of the Church and the clergy.1 On the testimony of
all the contemporary biographers, it is perfectly plain
that the tone of his life was pre-eminently secular.
The appearance which he presented to the world was
that of a magnificent courtier, who wellnigh outshone
the King in the splendor of his retinue and the sump-
tuousness of his banquets.
Henry very naturally supposed that the Chancellor
who had shown so little disposition to give an undue
prominence to ecclesiastical interests would be a safe
man to put over the Church. Accordingly, in 1162,
Becket was made Archbishop of Canterbury. But
the mistake of the King very soon became apparent.
Becket was no sooner archbishop than he ceased at
once to be the courtier, and became exclusively the
ecclesiastic. While he retained much of his outward
state, and was quite as prodigal of display as was ex
pected of an archbishop, he subjected himself to monas
tic severities, and exhibited a zeal for his order whose
fanatical intensity could not have been excelled if it had
been diligently nurtured for a score of years.
Among the tokens of the new temper in Becket was
the resignation of the chancellorship. This was to the
King a source of surprise, if not of alienation. Another
1 J. C. Robertson, Biography of Becket, chap. v.

THE PAPAL THEOCRACY. 199
thing which he was not able to regard with complacency
was the grasping way in which the Archbishop went
to work to recover whatever was deemed to belong to
his see. He seemed to entertain the principle that
church property could not be alienated. " Everything
that had ever been given to the Church was to be
claimed, while nothing that had been parted with was
to be abandoned ; and documents were to be reck
oned valid or worthless, according as they made for or
against the ecclesiastical claims."1 It was also dis
pleasing to the King that Becket should excommunicate
one of his tenants without asking leave. Furthermore,
his resentment was stirred when the prelate thwarted
his plan of appropriating certain sheriff's fees, though
in this particular instance it is quite evident that he
was only standing in the way of an aggression.
The great subject of dispute, however, was the im
munities of the clergy. Becket held that the clergy
were amenable only to the ecclesiastical tribunal ; that
a heinous crime was to be punished with degradation
from the clerical standing ; that in accordance with law
and reason a single crime could not receive a double
punishment ; and that consequently only a crime com
mitted after degradation could come under the cogni
zance of the civil power, and be punished by the same.2
This theory was not without support in English law.
A basis for it at least was supplied in the legislation of
William the Conqueror, though Becket seems not to
have appealed to this fact. " In Saxon times," says
Robertson, " both clergy and laity had been subject to
mixed tribunals, — the archdeacon sitting with the secu-
1 Robertson, Biography, chap. v. 2 Edward Grim, S. Thomse Vita.

200 THE MEDIJEVAL CHURCH.
lar judge in the court of the hundred, and the bishop
with the earl in the county court. This arrangement
had, indeed, been abolished by William the Conqueror,
who ordered that the jurisdictions should be separated.
But it would seem that, notwithstanding the new law,
the separation of the courts was not generally carried
out before the latter part of Henry the First's reign.
And in whatever degree the law of William may have
contributed towards that exemption from secular judg
ment which the clergy had at length all but completely
established for themselves during the troubled reign
of Stephen, Becket is never found to have appealed to
it. If, indeed, he had relied on the Conqueror's law,
he might have been told that experience had abundantly
proved the necessity of its repeal. But he would have
scorned such a foundation for his pretensions ; he claimed
the immunities as an inherent right of the clergy."1
Becket's position was no doubt that which was nat
urally dictated by the hierarchical standpoint of the
time. It was part and parcel of the high-churchism of
the age. The position none the less was a mischievous
one. For the clerical immunities, while they may have
sheltered from unjust violence in many instances, by
affording a comparative freedom from punishment, of
fered a scandalous encouragement to the indulgence of
all the evil passions of human nature. The King had
just cause for complaint and indignation. He saw that
exemption from the proper penalties of the law was
causing the law to be defied, to the injury and scandal
of his government. He determined therefore to lift the
shield from clerical offenders, and to bring them within
1 Biography, chap. v.

THE PAPAL THEOCRACY. 201
the reach of the civil arm. With this intent he sum
moned the bishops and abbots to meet him at West
minster in October, 1163. He told them that he was
prevented by the immunities of the clergy from fulfil
ling the oath which he had taken at his coronation, and
asked their concurrence in the remedial measures which
he proposed. " I am bent," he said, " on having peace
and tranquillity through all my dominions, and I am
much annoyed at the disturbances which the crimes
of the clergy have occasioned ; they do not hesitate
to commit robbery of all kinds, and very often murder
also. I therefore demand your consent, my lord of
Canterbury, and the consent of all the other bishops
also, that when clerks are detected in crimes, and con
victed either by the judgment of the court or by their
own eonfes&ion, they shall be stripped of their orders,
and given over to the officers of my court, to receive cor
poral punishment, without protection from the Church.
I also demand that whilst the ceremony of stripping
them of their orders is performed, some of my officials
shall be present to seize the culprit immediately, lest
he should find an opportunity of escaping." J The
bishops at first demurred at this demand. The King
then asked them individually if they would obey the
customs of the realm. Following the lead of Becket,
they replied that they would, "saving their order."
This reservation greatly enraged the King, and he in
sisted upon an unqualified assent. At length, the
bishops generally gave way, and even Becket was pre
vailed upon, in a private interview, to give a verbal
promise of submission. According to one account, he
1 Quoted by J. A. Giles, Life and Letters of Becket.

202 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
was constrained to this step by the representations of
the envoy of Alexander III., who wished to keep on
good terms with the English King, as he had need of his
aid in the struggle with Frederic and the anti-pope.
Henry used Becket's concession in a way indicating
either that he doubted his good faith, or was bent upon
punishing him for his vexatious opposition. In January,
1164, he called a council at Clarendon in order that the
promise of the Archbishop to observe the customs might
be ratified in a public and formal manner. Becket
signified that he was not sufficiently aware of what the
customs were. The King therefore caused that they
should be reduced to writing. So originated the Consti
tutions of Clarendon. Those who were intrusted with
their compilation omitted no important item which
usage had in any wise sanctioned as a part of the royal
prerogative. That they included none which were
wholly destitute of historical warrant seems to be im
plied by the fact that they were not attacked from this
side by Becket or his party.1 The more important pro
visions were as follows: (1) Ecclesiastics accused of
any crime, having been cited by the King's justiciary,
shall come before his court, where shall be determined
what pertains to the King's court and what to the ec
clesiastical court. To the latter court an officer shall
be sent to watch the trial. If the ecclesiastic shall be
1 A competent investigator has thus characterized the Constitutions :
" They are no mere engine of tyranny or secular spite against a church
man ; they are really a part of a great scheme of administrative reform,
by which the debatable ground between the spiritual and temporal
powers can be brought within the reach of common justice, and the
lawlessness arising from professional jealousies abolished." (Slubbs,
Constitutional History of England, i. 466.)

THE PAPAL THEOCRACY. 203
convicted, or shall confess, he is to receive no further
protection from the Church. (2) No archbishop or
other person shall leave the kingdom without the King's
license, and those receiving this shall give security that
neither in going nor in returning, nor during their stay,
will they work any harm to the King or the realm.
(3) Archbishops, bishops, and all persons of the realm
who are tenants in chief of the King, have their pos
sessions of the King as barons, and hence they shall
be amenable to the King's justiciaries and ministers,
and shall fulfil all the customary feudal obligations, and
shall sit with the barons in the King's trials, except in
cases affecting life and limb. (4) Appeals shall pass
from the archdeacon to the bishop, from the bishop to
the archbishop, and, if the archbishop shall fail to do
justice, resort shall be had to the King. Beyond the
King the case cannot be carried without his consent, —
a provision aimed against appeals to the Pope. (5) No
tenant in chief of the King, or officer of his household,
shall be excommunicated, or have his lands placed under
interdict, until the King has been consulted, or, in his
absence, his justiciary, and what is pertinent in the case
to the civil and ecclesiastical tribunal respectively has
been referred to each. (6) The revenues of vacant
sees and abbeys shall be at the King's disposal. Those
who are qualified to act as electors shall give their votes
in the King's chapel, with the assent of the King him
self, and of the council which he has convened for the
purpose. And there before his consecration the person
elected shall render homage and pledge of fidelity to
the King as his liege lord, for life, limb, and worldly
honor, saving his order.

204 THE MEDIJEVAL CHURCH.
These Constitutions were plainly at war with the
principles which had been championed at Rome from
the time of Gregory VII., and with the ecclesiasticism
to which Becket was devoted heart and soul. But so
great was the clamor raised by the King's partisans,
that the primate concluded that for the time being he
must appear to yield. So in the presence of the assem
bly he promised to observe the customs. He was then
asked to set his seal to the Constitutions. Whether
he overcame his repugnance to this demand, so far as
to assent, is somewhat uncertain. Fitzstephen, in his
Life of Becket, gives us to understand that he yielded
on this point also. He says : " Timore mortis, et ut
regem mitigaret, acquievit ad tempus, assensu et in
verbo veritatis stipulatione, et sigillorum suorum im-
pressione." But other accounts leave the point more
in the mist.
Once away from Clarendon, Becket immediately took
pains to express his abhorrence of his own act in sur
rendering to the King's demand. He suspended him
self from serving at the altar, and sent across the Chan
nel to obtain absolution from the Pope. Soon, in direct
violation of the Constitutions, he attempted to make
his escape to the Pope. Such an attempt revealed of
course to the King that Becket's pledges meant noth
ing. He determined therefore to crush the rebellious
prelate. At a Parliament convened at Northampton in
1164, as the most available device for his overthrow,
he was called to account for revenues which had passed
into his hands when he was chancellor, and was charged
with responsibility for an enormous sum of money.
Becket observed the plain intent to grant him no

THE PAPAL THEOCRACY. 205
quarter, and in the absence of other resource fled to
France, to make his appeal to the Pope. Henry caused
the Archbishop's property to be confiscated, and with
unseemly tyranny banished his kindred, his servants,
and all who had harbored him in his flight.
The narrative of Becket's six years' exile need not
be given in detail. It was a time of diplomacy. Alex
ander III., beset at once by Becket and by the envoys
of Henry, accommodated his course to his judgment of
his prospects in his own struggle against formidable
antagonists. While he undoubted^ abhorred the Con
stitutions of Clarendon he could not afford to make an
enemy of the English King, and drive him into alliance
with the German Emperor. So he temporized, some
times encouraging one party and sometimes another.
The best satisfaction which Becket was able to obtain
was the privilege in 1166, in virtue of a legatine power
over the greater part of England, to anathematize the
Constitutions of Clarendon, to absolve the bishops from
their pledge to keep them, to excommunicate or sus
pend some offending ecclesiastics, and to threaten the
King with excommunication if he should not repent and
change his course. Other excommunications followed
in the ensuing years, the Bishop of London being
among the victims. But Becket had to pay for these
onslaughts by seeing the curb put upon himself and
some of his censures annulled by the Pope. His vexa
tion at times knew no bounds, and he exclaimed against
the conduct of the Pope in terms which might help out
the bitterest adversary of the papacy with a vocabulary
of invective. " I know not how it is," he wrote, " that
in the court of Rome the Lord's side is always sacri-

206 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
ficed, — that Barabbas escapes and Christ is put to
death." 1 At length, after endless negotiations, a for
mal reconciliation was accomplished between the King
and the Archbishop at the conference of Freteval in
1170. Becket returned in the spirit in which Saul of Tar
sus journeyed to Damascus. Instead of a message of
peace, he sent before himself the anathema. His feel
ings had been exasperated by the recent coronation
of the King's son, — ¦ a ceremony which he regarded as
peculiarly the prerogative of the see of Canterbury.
The Archbishop of York, who officiated at the corona
tion, was suspended, and sentence of excommunication
was renewed against the Bishops of London and Salis
bury. A report of Becket's unrelenting spirit and harsh
measures, a report which very likely grew in the pro
cess of transmission, drove Henry into a frenzy of rage.
In the midst of his invectives he uttered the passionate
words, " Spiritless and miserable men have I nurtured
and raised up in my kingdom, who refuse to keep faith
with their lord, and suffer him to be so ignominiously
mocked by a low-born priest."2 Four of the King's
knights took this exclamation as a commission to exe
cute vengeance upon the Archbishop. As note was
taken of their absence, messengers were sent to fore
stall the deed which, it was feared, they might be con
templating. But the messengers were outstripped, and
Becket was murdered in the cathedral of Canterbury,
the 29th of December, 1170.
A power emanated from the blood which stained the
1 Quoted by Robertson. 2 So given by Grim.

THE PAPAL THEOCRACY. 207
pavement of the cathedral, before which all opposition
went down. Criticism of the victim was cast into the
background by the horror of his tragic fate. The King
himself was overwhelmed with grief and terror. Becket
was now sanctified in popular thought as a martyr.
Questionings as to whether he had not forfeited that
holy name by his obstinacy and passion, and lack of
humility, had little chance of holding their ground
against reports of supernatural attestations of his sanc
tity. The rumor of repeated miracles carried every
thing before it. The tomb of Becket became the
unrivalled shrine. Before three years had passed, Rome
ventured to enroll him among the saints ; and scarcely
another year had passed before his royal antagonist had
approached his tomb with bare and bleeding feet, and
spent a night and a day there with abject tokens of
penitence. The King had lost his cause. A single deed of
bloody violence cancelled all opportunity to limit the
overgrown prerogatives of the ecclesiastical power. It
was with extreme difficulty that Henry saved himself
from the papal anathema. As it was, he escaped only
at the cost of abandoning the Constitutions of Clar
endon, and promising certain costly services to the
Church. Very different measures of sympathy have been
awarded to the principal actors in this great quarrel.
Each has been the subject of lavish commendation and
unstinted reproach. But it is evident that neither
praise nor blame should be undivided. The King was
undoubtedly perfectly right in his desire to reform the
abuse of clerical immunities. The reform was some-

208 THE MEDIJEVAL CHURCH.
thing which simple justice and good government de
manded. A resolute attempt to break down the shield
of crime, conducted in the right spirit, would have
been something worthy of his kingship. But he failed
of the right spirit. He gave way to resentment. He
answered priestly assumption with an overstraining of
royal prerogative, and was impelled into acts of tyran
nical violence in his attempts to humble and to distress
his opponent. As for Becket, he may be credited with
a good measure of conscientious conviction. He prob
ably believed that he was called upon to defend the
sacred rights of the Church. But he conducted the de
fence as a partisan, — yea, as a bigot. He was without
largeness of heart or clearness of vision. The rights
of his order and the prerogatives of his see claimed his
whole ardor. In his view, usurpation against these was
the one crime. He had no prophet's voice to denounce
other sins and iniquities in high places. Only encroach
ments against the ecclesiastical domain, and especially
against the archiepiscopal throne of Canterbury, called
forth his censures. His whole struggle, in short, was
a struggle for mere power. Granting that it was not
a display of selfishness, it was at least a display of
narrowness. To seek mere power for the Church in a
spirit which ignores the ethical and spiritual basis of
the Church, even though one sacrifice himself in the
seeking, is justly to incur the charge of narrowness and
fanaticism. We will not impeach the honest intention
of Becket. We will not refuse a certain admiration for
the steadfastness with which he fought out his cause.
But we blush for the moral judgment of one who, with
anything like an adequate knowledge of his history,

THE PAPAL THEOCRACY. 209
can pronounce him a saint. The canonization of Becket
may be placed along with other instances of libel upon
the New Testament ideal.

III. — INNOCENT TH.
Reference has been made to the fact that the tempo
rary humiliation of Frederic Barbarossa had been fol
lowed by a vigorous and successful assertion of imperial
claims. Great advantage accrued to the Empire in
particular from the marriage of Frederic's son Henry
to Constance, the heiress of the Norman dominion in
Sicily and Southern Italy. The transfer of sovereignty
over this territory to the Hohenstaufen family took
away a valuable support from the papacy, and exposed
it on all sides to the power of an ambitious rival. The
inconvenience of the situation became at once apparent.
For Henry VI., who received the imperial office on the
death of Frederic, was not a man from whom an oppo
nent could expect any leniency or concession. As ag
gressive in spirit as his father, he was far less restrained
by the dictates of honor. Treating the papal censures
as unworthy of notice, crushing opposition with equal
vigor, cruelty, and unscrupulousness, he advanced to a
controlling power in Italy. The gains, however, which
he made were of very uncertain tenure. His tyranny
strengthened and embittered the opposition to the Em
pire which was always cherished by a part of the Italian
people, while his early death, in 1197, left no one from
his house to take up the sceptre. His son Frederic was
then but an infant. The Empire had no competent
champion against the papacy. On the contrary, the
14

210 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
struggle of rival claimants for the imperial honor in
vited the Roman pontiff to interfere, to the magnifying
of his own superiority. At this juncture, too, a man
came to the papal throne who was qualified to make
the most of the opportunity, — a man whose capacity
for rule has never been excelled by any one who has
called himself a successor of Peter.
Historians very commonly agree in the verdict that
Innocent III. marks the culmination of the papal theoc
racy. Other pontiffs may have put forth equal preten
sions , but in the actual exercise of governing power,
in the successful maintenance of sovereignty, Innocent
stands at the point of highest elevation in the whole
line. His achievements were on a truly magnificent
scale. As respects their moral quality, they will not
indeed appear unstained. The vice of autocratic power
is too plainly revealed to escape detection. Still the
administration of Innocent III. bears in general the ap
pearance of moral respectability. Like Gregory VII.,
he knew how to despise a bribe, and sought to drive out
the plague of venality from his neighborhood. If his
censorship over the nations was not carried out with
full impartiality, it was often used to scourge a mani
fest injustice. No open turpitude cancelled the respect
of his contemporaries. He had the prestige of superior
learning. His study at the universities of Paris and Bo
logna had given him a good understanding of theology
and an almost unequalled mastery of law. Unlike a
majority of the Popes, he came to his pontificate in the
undiminished vigor of his years, being installed at the
early age of thirty-seven. The long term of eighteen
years (1198-1216) gave him full scope for the execution

THE PAPAL THEOCRACY. 211
of arduous enterprises. To one, therefore, who is not
revolted by his boundless assumption and dictatorial
exercise of authority, Innocent III. will not appear
otherwise than as an imposing figure in history. A
Roman Catholic at all tinged with Ultramontanism will
take no exception to the following words of Alzog:
" If Innocent had found occasion to show his steadfast
ness against outward misfortune, as did Gregory VII.
and Alexander III., whom he far surpassed in theologi
cal and juristic learning, as well as in executive ability,
so would one be obliged to pronounce him the greatest
successor of Peter ; in any case, he exalted the chair
of Peter to the highest honor." 1
The conception of theocratic rule had been so fully
outlined by Gregory VII. that there was little occasion
to add thereto. Accordingly, we find Innocent's defi
nitions of papal prerogatives substantially the same as
those of his powerful predecessor of the eleventh cen
tury. He regarded the Pope as the central luminary,
the sun of the ecclesiastical system. His jurisdiction
in things spiritual — so he wrote to the French King —
has no limits ; by the divine ordinance, it is so full that
it admits of no addition.2 Other dignitaries of the
Church stand in servant relations. Among the apostolic
seats the Roman is as the throne which the Revelator
saw, while the relative position of the four patriarch
ates, Alexandria, Antioch, Jerusalem, and Constanti
nople, is symbolized by the four living creatures which
rendered their homage before the throne.3 The Pope
indeed bears the name of a servant, that he may not
i Kirchengeschichte, § 221. 2 Lib. vi. epist. 163.
8 Lib. xv. epist. 156.

212 THE MEDIMVAL CHURCH.
forget the demands of humility. But still, as the vice
gerent of Christ, he occupies a kind of superhuman
station. "He stands in the midst between God and
man ; below God, above man ; less than God, more
than man. He judges all, is judged by none." 1 In the
spiritual organism he is the head, and just as the head,
which is the principal seat of the senses, bears rule
among the members of the body, so the successors of
Peter have a commanding primacy, over all the prelates
of the Church.2 As for temporal rulers, they belong
to a quite different sphere. Their jurisdiction extends
simply over bodies, not over souls. They have each
but a single realm, whereas the successor of Peter rules
with unbounded sway, as the vicar of Him to whom
the whole earth belongs. Their glory is a borrowed
glory. " As the moon derives its light from the sun,
and is inferior to it at once in quantity and quality, in
position as well as in effect, so the regal power derives
the splendor of its dignity from pontifical authority." 3
In a word, kings are the servants of the Pope. He is
their instructor as to their duties, the censor of their
conduct, the arbiter of their disputes, the disposer, in
case of stubborn disobedience, of their crowns.
The practice of Innocent corresponded to his theory.
1 " Videtis quis iste servus, qui super familiam constituitur, profecto
vicarius Jesu Christi, successor Petri, Christus Domini, Deus Pliaraonis :
inter Deum et hominem medius constitutus, citra Deum, sed ultra homi-
nem : minor Deo, sed major homine : qui de omnibus judicat, et a ne-
mine judicatur; apostoli voce pronuntians 'qui me judicat, Dominus,
est.' " (Serm. ii. in Consecrat. Pontif. Max., Opera Innocent., iv. 658.)
2 Lib. i. epist. 117, 320 ; ii. 209.
3 See messages to Philip of Swahia, Otho, and the nobles of Tus
cany.

THE PAPAL THEOCRACY. 213
The words which he addressed to John of England,
ecce tensus est arcus,1 are a good symbol of his attitude
toward kings and emperors. He might appropriately
be pictured as standing with bended bow upon the ram
parts of Rome, glancing around the horizon of Chris
tendom in search of the recreant prince who should
next be made to feel the envenomed arrow of his spir
itual censures. As the narrative of his pontificate will
reveal, he often aimed his arrows to good effect. Still,
it would be a mistake to suppose that Innocent III.
was uniformly victorious. No aggressive pontiff ever
sat in the chair of Peter, who was not met with more
or less of successful defiance. Even under the power
ful rule of Innocent III. there were enough instances in
which the papal will was discarded, and the papal de
crees brought to naught, to show the uncertain tenure
of the papal autocracy. At more than one point we
gain the suggestion that a moderate change of popular
sentiment, a little decrease of superstitious awe and a
little increase of manly independence, was all that was
needed to turn the balance against the Pope, and enable
princes to contemn his fulminations. Fidelity to his
tory requires a record not only of the great victories of
Innocent III., but also of their offsets.
Like other Popes, Innocent found the people in his
immediate neighborhood the most difficult to rule.
While he gained so important a tribute to his authority
as the oath of allegiance from the Prefect of Rome,2
1 Lib. xi. epist. 211. Another figure which he brought out for the
benefit of John was that of the rod alongside the manna in the ark.
(Rymer, Fcedera, i. 58.)
2 Gesta, § 8 ; Epistolae, i. 23.

214 THE MEDIJEVAL CHURCH.
he was not able to maintain a steady control over the
factious populace. In one instance opposition reached
such a pitch that he was in a manner forced to take
refuge elsewhere. But in Italy at large he obtained a
considerable advantage. By availing himself of the
reaction against the imperial rule, and allying himself
with the republican leagues of the cities, he was able
to hold in check the ambitious leaders of the German
forces whom the death of the Emperor had left to
strive for their own promotion. In Southern Italy and
Sicily he gained in terms, if not in full reality, a very
decided recognition of papal right and pre-eminence.
This came through the widow of Henry VI. As the
price of securing protection and acknowledgment for
her infant son Frederic, in the succession to the king
dom of Naples and Sicily, Constance stipulated that
this realm should be held as a fief of the papacy, its
sovereign swearing allegiance to the Pope and paying
tribute to him.
In Germany the contest for the vacant throne gave
Innocent a fine opportunity, at the opening of his pon
tificate, to figure as supreme arbiter over princes and
nations. The choice of a majority of the electors fell
upon Philip, of the house of Hohenstaufen, and uncle
of the infant Frederic. But the opponents of this
house refused to acknowledge Philip, and, proceeding
to elect Otho, son of Henry the Lion and nephew of
the English King Richard Cceur de Lion, gave over
Germany to the horrors of civil war. The superior
claim of Philip, so far as legitimacy of election was
concerned, was sufficiently clear. But in the eyes of
Innocent this was a circumstance of small account.

THE PAPAL THEOCRACY. 215
The fact that Philip belonged to the hated Hohenstau
fen family, and was less likely to feel under obligation
than was his rival, outweighed all other considerations.
Accordingly, in 1201 he pronounced in favor of Otho.
In the document which set forth the grounds of this
decision, no attempt was made to conceal its arbitrary
nature. On the contrary, the Pope confessed that be
fore the standard of German law and custom Philip had
the better right. But he did not consider himself
bound by national customs. Philip, he said, belonged
to a race of persecutors, and had himself given evi
dence of a disposition to injure the papal interests.
Having cited in this connection a long list of offences
committed by the Hohenstaufen Emperors, and quoted
Old Testament precedents for visiting the iniquities of
the fathers upon the children, Innocent proceeded as
follows : " As for Otho, it seems not lawful to espouse
his cause, since he was elected by a minority ; not be
coming, lest we appear to extend the apostolic favor to
him not so much out of good will to him as from hatred
to another ; not expedient, because he is the weaker
party of the two. But since, among those who are
wont to have most weight in the election of an Em
peror, as many are known to have voted for Otho as
for Philip, or even more ; since Otho is better fitted
to rule the Empire than Philip ; since also the Lord
punishes the sins of the fathers in the children to the
third and fourth generation of them that hate Him, that
is in those who imitate the sins of their fathers ; since
Philip imitates the sins of his ancestors in persecuting
the Church ; since the Lord is recorded to have chosen
the weak things to confound the mighty, as He raised

216 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
David to the throne, it appears lawful, befitting, and
expedient to bestow upon Otho the favor of the apos
tolic see." 1
In the sequel, Innocent paid rather dearly for the
pleasure which he may have experienced in issuing this
dictatorial sentence. By supporting the weaker, as
well as the less rightful claimant, he gave occasion to a
prolonged conflict in Germany. Philip was found to be
abundantly able to sustain himself in the face of papal
censures. After ten years of civil war his cause was
so far in the ascendant that the Pope began to show a
disposition to yield to the inevitable, and to acknowl
edge the claim of Philip before it should be too late to
make favorable terms. Negotiations had been opened
and the ban had been removed when the hand of an
assassin released Innocent from the necessity of ren
dering further concessions to an adversary. Philip fell
a victim to private vengeance in 1208. This gave the
field to Otho, and in 1209 he received the imperial
crown at Rome. Now came the reward of his papal
patron ; for no sooner had Otho gained his crown than
he discarded the hand which had placed it upon his
head. His fair promises were thrown to the winds, and
with all the grasping energy of a Henry VI. he pro.-
ceeded to assert the imperial rule over Italy. It was
a bitter cup for the lofty vicegerent ; and Innocent
showed well how deeply he felt its bitterness. In most
instances of dealing with refractory monarchs he put
on a show of restraint, and called them beloved sons
even in the act of passing sentence against them. But
no such honeyed terms were bestowed upon the Otho
1 Migne, Patrologia, Innocentii Opera, torn. iv. pp. 1025-1031.

THE PAPAL THEOCRACY. 217
who had responded to support and promotion with in
jury and ingratitude. Impelled by a wrath too great
to be held in check, the Pope spoke of him in his offi
cial addresses as an " impious persecutor," an " excom
municated and accursed tyrant." a Otho cared little
for the opprobrious epithets or for the anathemas of
the Pope. But more formidable means were to be
encountered. A scion of the illustrious Hohenstaufen
family was still at hand, whom the enthusiasm of the
people could easily raise into a victorious rival. Bent
on the overthrow of Otho, the Pope did not hesitate to
support the cause of the young Frederic, who appeared
in Germany in 1212, and three years later had gained
settled possession of the German crown. Thus circum
stances compelled Innocent to undo his own work. He
ended by confirming the sovereignty to the house from
which he had attempted to take it by his arbitrary
decree. One of the most notable victories of Innocent was
gained in France. For here he triumphed over a sov
ereign of uncommon boldness and vigor, Philip Au
gustus, the strongest of the Capetians up to that time.
A domestic offence supplied the first occasion for inter
ference and censure. In 1193 Philip, who was then a
widower, stipulated for the hand of the Danish Princess
Ingeburga. But the princess had scarcely been received
and the nuptial bond acknowledged, before Philip con
ceived for her an unconquerable repugnance. As a
narrator of the times reports, he was observed, during
the coronation service for the new queen, to grow pale,
and to tremble with such violent emotion as made it
i Lib. xiv. epist. 78; xv. 20; xv. 31; xv. 138.

218 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
difficult for him to await the end of the ceremonial.1
Forthwith, whispers about a divorce began to be heard.
On the plea of a distant relationship, the subservient
prelates of France acceded to the wish of the King, and
declared the marriage with Ingeburga annulled. As
the discarded princess refused to return to her own
country, she was sent into a convent. Philip then pro
ceeded to consummate a marriage with Agnes of Meran,
who bore him children and for whom he came to enter
tain a passionate attachment. Meanwhile, in pursuance
of the appeal of the injured party, the case had passed
under the judgment of the Pope. The measures of
Celestine, Innocent's predecessor, failed to bring any
redress. So the matter stood, when the resolute pon
tiff turned his attention toward France. After intro
ducing the subject in the way of expostulation and
warning, he gave peremptory instructions to his legates,
authorizing and requiring them, in case the King did
not yield before a certain date, to impose an interdict
upon the whole French realm. Appeal from the action
of the legates was excluded, and so long as the inter
dict was in force no other sacred rite than the baptism
of infants and the absolution of the dying was to be
allowed. The threatened sentence was imposed. A
silence like that of death settled upon the churches.
The venerated relics were removed from sight. The
crucifix was veiled. Rites of burial which affection and
piety so earnestly coveted were refused. An entire na
tion was punished in order to humble its chief.
For a time Philip put on as stubborn a front as in
jured royalty could well assume. Doing his utmost to
1 Gesta Innocentii III., § 48.

THE PAPAL THEOCRACY. 219
nullify the interdict, he drove out priest and prelate
who attempted to observe it, and vented his displeasure
also upon laymen who countenanced such attempts.
But the tide of popular feeling was too strong to be
held in check by physical violence. Disquiet over the
combined hardships of the interdict and the royal fury
reached a dangerous pitch. Philip saw that he was
running too great a hazard. Accordingly, he sent his
messengers to the Pope to seek accommodation. The
answer was a stern injunction to dismiss Agnes, and
to receive back without delay the outraged Ingeburga.
Philip then called a parliament of nobles and bishops
at Paris. Their verdict was an echo of the papal de
cision. Even the Archbishop of Rheims, who had pro
nounced the divorce, had not a word to offer in defence
of his former act. Being asked by the King if the
Pope had written truly when he styled the sentence
of divorce no true sentence, but a mere mockery, he
replied in the affirmative. " Then," said the King,
" you are a fool and a simpleton to have pronounced the
sentence." 1 Thus bereft of support on all sides, Philip
bowed to the bitter requirement that was laid upon
him, and, having dismissed Agnes, acknowledged Inge
burga as his wife and queen (1201). But the restora
tion was only a passing ceremony. Philip could never
overcome his aversion, and the hapless princess had
occasion to complain that she was rather imprisoned
than restored. As for Agnes, she soon died of a broken
heart. Before passing from France, we should notice a partial
offset to this great victory of Innocent. We give it in
1 Gesta Innocentii, § 53.

220 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
the words of Henri Martin : " During the campaign of
1203, the Pope Innocent III., perhaps at the solicita
tion of John, sent two legates to summon the two
kings to suspend hostilities, to submit their differences
to the Church, and to unite for the deliverance of the
Holy Land. The kingdom of France was menaced
with interdict, and the King with excommunication, in
case of disobedience. But the triumph of the papacy
in the matter of the divorce had induced Innocent to
presume too much upon his power. The war against
King John was popular ; the hatred against the assassin
of Arthur was interwoven with the old hatred of the
French and the Bretons against the Normans, and eleven
great barons, impelled bjr their feelings counter to their
true interests, declared by letters patent that they would
sustain the King against the Pope or any other who
should undertake the defence of John of England." l
It is customary to disparage the victory which Inno
cent gained over John of England, on the ground that
John was a weak and pusillanimous prince. No doubt,
the English monarch was a poor specimen of royalty.
The history of his reign is a record of tyranny and
moral turpitude of all kinds. But so far as his relations
with the papacy are concerned, the suggestion of weak
ness and cowardice comes only from the completeness
of his final collapse before his antagonist. He met the
papal censures with long and stubborn defiance, and
yielded only when it seemed to be certain ruin not to
yield. Had Innocent been anxious in the early years of his
pontificate to find an occasion of quarrel with John, he
1 Histoire de France, torn. iii. liv. xxii.

THE PAPAL THEOCRACY. 221
had not far to search. He who appeared as the avenger
of domestic infidelity in France might have seen equal
cause to act the same part in England ; for John
sinned against the nuptial tie even more scandalously
than Philip. Having divorced his lawful wife, he con
tracted for the daughter of the King of Portugal ; but
meanwhile he became enamored of the betrothed of
one of his vassals, and in defiance of decency as well
as the obligations of the feudal relation took her to be
his wife. Here surely was a ground for the judge over
kings and princes to interfere. No censure, however,
came from Rome. Perhaps the fact that England at
this time was one of the main supports of Otho in his
struggle for the Empire ^nterposed a sort of mist be-
tween the Pope and the sins of the English monarcn.
The real occasion for quarrel was quite a different mat
ter, namely, the manner in which a contested election
was adjudicated by the Pope.
In 1205 the see of Canterbury became vacant. The
monks of Christ Church in the metropolitan seat, in
order to make sure that their privilege to choose a suc
cessor should not be infringed upon, hastily consum
mated an election. This action was very obnoxious to
the suffragan bishops, who claimed that a share in the
election belonged of right to them. Under the King's
license, a new choice was made and a rival archbishop
set forward. Both parties appealed to Rome. The
Pope, while agreeing with the monks as to their gen
eral claim, declared that the manner of their choice
made it no less invalid than that of their opponents.
He therefore set aside both candidates, and ordered
the electors to choose his own nominee, Stephen Lang-

222 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
ton. This was a very excellent choice on the part of
the Pope, — better than he was himself aware of at the
time. But the merits of Langton were no recommen
dation to John. The fact that his own nominee had
been set aside drove him into a frenzy of rage. Expos
tulations had no effect to bring him to a better mind.
Innocent accordingly proceeded to the use of more
potent means. In 1208 an interdict, like that which
had cast its horrifying shadow upon France, was im
posed upon England. So far from subduing the King,
this only drove him to greater atrocities. The clergy
who presumed to obey the Pope were deprived of their
revenues and denied the protection of the law. It is
reported that a robber, who had slain a priest, was
ordered at the royal tribunal to be dismissed. " He
has rid me," said the King, " of one enemy." J In
nocent, after allowing the interdict a proper time to
manifest its virtue, reinforced it by sentence of excom
munication. As this too proved ineffectual, he brought
out finally his most decisive weapon. The obdurate
monarch was declared deposed, his subjects were re
leased from their allegiance, and Philip of France was
commanded to lead the crusade by which he was to be
driven from his throne (1213). Philip began to gather
his forces. John on his side assembled an immense
force to withstand the attack ; but his heart misgave
him ; he could not trust his own adherents. He deter
mined therefore to forestall the ambitious project of
Philip, and to make such a submission to the Pope as
would turn him from an enemy into an ally. Regardless
of his own honor and the honor of the realm, he surren-
1 Milman, Lat. Christ., book ix. chap. 5.

THE PAPAL THEOCRACY. 223
dered crown and kingdom to the Pope, stipulating that
henceforth he should hold them, and his successors for
all time should hold them, in the relation of vassalage
to the sovereign pontiff. The surrender was made in
such terms as these : " We wish it known to all men,
that through this charter bearing our seal, acting freely
and without the constraint of violence or fear, with
the advice of our barons, we offer and freely concede to
God and his holy apostles Peter and Paul, and to the
holy Roman Church, our mother, and to our lord Pope
Innocent and his Catholic successors, the whole king
dom of England and the whole kingdom of Ireland,
with all their rights and belongings, for the remission
of our sins and of our entire people, as well the living
as the dead. And now, as a feudatory receiving and
holding them from God and the Roman Church, we
swear fealty to the aforesaid Pope Innocent and his
Catholic successors, according to the subscribed form,
obligating our successors and heirs by natural descent
perpetually to show fealty and to render homage to the
existing pontiff and to the Roman Church. In evidence
of this our perpetual offering and grant, we ordain that
from the special revenues of the aforesaid kingdoms, as
a discharge of the service which is due for them, the
customary Peter's pence being at the same time guar
anteed, the Roman Church shall receive annually one
thousand marks. The royal prerogatives and liberties
are to be preserved to ourselves and our heirs. Wishing
these stipulations to be perpetually established, we bind
ourselves and our successors not to transgress them.
And if any one of our successors shall dare to at
tempt this, whoever he may be, unless he repents after

224 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
suitable admonition, he shall lose his right to the king
dom." 1
Such was the price with which John purchased the
friendship of the Pope. A price greater than he could
afford! For while the sale of his country's indepen
dence may not have been met with much of popular
resentment at the time, it was a deed which the awak
ening spirit of the nation was sure erelong to brand
with deepest infamy. However, it gained him his im
mediate end. The Pope declared himself well pleased,
affirmed that the Holy Spirit alone could have inspired
such gracious conduct, and promised that his legate
should come as an angel of peace.2
Innocent proved to be a faithful ally of the recon
ciled King. In his forwardness to defend his vassal,
he did not shun the ignominy of patronizing his des
potism and hurling his thunderbolts against those who
sought to restrain his irresponsible rule by constitu
tional limitations. He characterized the Great Charter,
which the barons, with Stephen Langton at their head,
had constrained the King to sign, as " not only a vile
and base agreement, but also unlawful and iniquitous
in its excessive derogation from the King's right and
honor."3 He forbade its observance under pain of
anathema, declared it utterly null and void, and caused
bulls of excommunication to be published against the
barons.4 He also punished Stephen Langton for his
1 Lib. xvi. epist. 77.
2 Lib. xvi. epist. 79, 137.
3 " Compositionem non solum vilem et turpem, verum etiam illi-
citam et iniquam, in nimiam derogationem ac diminutionem sui juris
pariter ac honoris."
4 Rymer, Foedera, i. 68-71.

THE PAPAL THEOCRACY. 225
noble and patriotic course by suspending him from his
high office. But neither the tyrant nor his supporter
gained any substantial fruit from these measures. In
nocent had scored his last victory in England. The
barons were too deeply conscious of the justice of their
cause to pay any heed to the papal fuiminations, and
determined to fight out the conflict to the bitter end.
They had shown no disposition to yield when, in 1216,
the whole aspect of the case was changed by the death
of both Pope and King.
In dealing with the kingdoms of the Spanish Penin
sula, Innocent made a free use of his characteristic ex
pedients. Interdicts or threats of interdicts were of
frequent occurrence. Sometimes the interference was
for the purpose of making a prince keep the peace with
a neighboring state ; sometimes it was designed to pre
vent or to annul a marriage within the prohibited de
grees. On the latter ground, the Kings of Leon and
Castile were unmercifully harried, the one that he
might be prevailed upon to send away a wife who had
borne him children, and the other that he might claim
back a daughter from the husband to whom he had
given her. On the former ground, the ban was threat
ened against the realm and the person of the King of
Navarre. The ruler of Portugal was also menaced as
delaying to pay the stipulated tribute, and being sus
pected of hostile designs against Castile. If the King
of Aragon enjoyed comparative immunity, it was
probably due to the fact that he gratified the Pope
immensely by surrendering his realm to him, and
agreeing to pay yearly a sum of money in token of vas
salage. Certainly, if Innocent had been so disposed,
IS

226 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
he might have found occasion for censure in a mar
riage of this King, — a marriage far more obnoxious
to all moral sense than some of those which evoked his
anathemas. Innocent's relation to the Crusade undertaken in his
pontificate was not specially flattering to his authority,
and illustrates more largely his enterprise than his su
premacy. He spared no pains to inaugurate the great
expedition, thundering against the quarrels of princes
which stood in the way of his preparations, taking the
goods of those who enlisted under the special protection
of the Church, and holding out the promise of plenary
indulgence of sins to those who in person, or through
one supported by their contributions, should add a
soldier to the ranks of the crusading army. The latter
inducement was set forth in terms like these : " Through
the compassion of God, and trusting in the authority
of the blessed apostles Peter and Paul, in virtue of
that power of binding and loosing which God has con
ferred upon us, though we be unworthy of its exercise,
we grant to all who shall undertake the labor of this
expedition in their own persons and at their own ex
pense full indulgence of the sins for which they shall
offer confession of mouth and contrition of heart, and
in the reward of the just we promise them an increase
of eternal salvation. To those who shall not proceed
in person to the place of destination, but shall send ,
thither at their own expense, in correspondence with
their means and rank, suitable men, who shall abide for
at least the space of two years, and likewise to those
who indeed at another's expense, but in their own
persons, shall accomplish the journey, we grant full

THE PAPAL THEOCRACY. 227
indulgence for their sins, — plenam suorum concedimus
veniam peccatorum."1
After overcoming many hindrances, the Pope at length
succeeded in gathering the forces which were expected
to overthrow the Mohammedan dominion in the East,
and give the Holy Land into the secure possession of
the Christians. But here his control of the movement
practically ceased. The shrewd and grasping Vene
tians proved more than a match for papal authority.
As the ships of the Republic were needed to transport
so large a host, Venice was made the point of depart
ure. A price exceeding the means of the crusaders
was charged by the subtle Venetians for their convey
ance. To make good the deficit, they were required
to serve the Republic in the capture of Zara, a city
claimed by the King of Hungary. Thus the army
destined for a common enterprise of Christendom was
made subservient to private greed. The fleet sailed to
Zara in face of the papal prohibition, and delayed there
in winter quarters. Equally unavailing were the Pope's
denunciations of intervention in the affairs of Constan
tinople. The crusaders listened to the appeals of a de
throned Emperor and his son, drove out the usurper,
set up the claimants whom they had taken under their
patronage, and, as these were displaced in the swift
movement of revolution, seized the government for
themselves, placing the sceptre in the hand of Bald
win, Count of Flanders, and nominating for the patri
archal dignity a representative of the Venetians. This
result was not without an element of satisfaction to the
Pope, however chagrined he may have been at the suc-
1 Lib. i. epist. 336.

228 THE MED1JEVAL CHURCH.
cessful defiance of his commands. He could now act
as papal superior over the proud metropolis of the
East. He therefore swallowed his wrath, revoked the
excommunication of the Venetians, and gave his pro
tection to the new kingdom. A gain had been made
for the papal jurisdiction ; but it was only temporary.
The Latin dominion at Constantinople lasted only about
half a century, and served rather to alienate the Greeks
than to establish a bond of union between East and
West. A brief mention may fitly be made of Innocent's
relations with the King of Bulgaria. This prince had
placed himself and his realm under the spiritual juris
diction of Rome. But the Pope had occasion to dis
cover that it was no obsequious subject that he had
won. Heedless of the remonstrances of Innocent, the
Bulgarian King pursued his own advantage, and con
tinued to oppose the Latin rule at Constantinople.
Thus almost every region felt the powerful sway of
the great dictator at Rome. But at the same time in
almost every region there was a measure of open in
difference to papal admonitions and of successful resist
ance to papal mandates. We see the verification of a
previous remark. — the proof that the power of the
papacy even at its culmination was unequal to its pre
tensions. The administration of Innocent III. marked an im
portant era in dealing with heresy. This pontiff un
doubtedly had a keen understanding of the power of
free thought to undermine the existing fabric of the
Church. He discovered that an encroaching heresy

THE PAPAL THEOCRACY. 229
had already infected considerable districts. To him it
appeared as the deadliest of foes, a heinous crime, a
menace of anarchy and dissolution. The only way to
deal with it, in his view, was to secure its speedy re
moval either by converting the heretic or by destroy
ing him. He opposed, therefore, an adamantine front
to every species of pronounced heterodoxy. In very
few portions of the whole field of history will one meet
with the image of a more unsparing and inexorable
despotism than that which will rise up before him as
he peruses the decrees of Innocent III. against heretics.
Scarcely another message to ecclesiastics and princes
was more frequently repeated than the instruction to
coerce the heretic. In the first year of his pontificate we
find Innocent enjoining upon the Archbishop of Auch to
visit the censures of the Church upon those in his juris
diction who were guilty of heresy or of association with
the guilty, debarring such from appeals, and if neces
sary summoning princes and people to coerce them by
the power of the temporal sword.1 In the same year
he instructed the Bishop of Syracuse to excommuni
cate heretics, and to cause the magistrates to confiscate
their goods.2 The following year, in a communication
addressed to the clergy, the consuls, and the people of
Viterbo, he declared that the abetting of heresy ren
dered one infamous and robbed him of all the preroga
tives of citizenship ; that in lands under the temporal
jurisdiction of the Roman see the goods of those found
guilty of this fault should be confiscated ; that in other
lands the secular powers should impose the same pen
alty, under pain of being themselves visited with spir-
1 Lib. i. epist. 81. 2 Lib. i. epist. 509.

230 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
itual censures. In the same connection he justified the
prescribed severity by the famous a fortiori argument,
so often used by persecutors, contending that if treason
against the state deserves a bitter punishment, much
more does defection from the faith, which is treason
against the Son of God.1 In the year 1200 he wrote
to the King of Hungary that a heretic after one or two
admonitions was to be treated as devoid of civil rights.2
In 1204 he authorized the King of France, if he found
any of his knights or barons affording shelter to here
tics, to confiscate their goods and to add their terri
tories to the royal domain.3 In 1206 he gave orders
to the authorities at Faenza to expel the Poor Men
of Lyons and the Paterines, confiscating the goods of
those who did not have Catholic heirs, and either de
stroying their houses or assigning them to the Church.4
The same year he encouraged the orthodox zeal of the
King of Aragon by allowing him to possess himself of
the property of heretics and their patrons.5 In 1207
he delivered a message to all the faithful in the papal
dominions providing for the division of the property
of heretics among the different parties engaged in their
arrest and punishment, and ordering that the houses of
the condemned should be destroyed to their foundations
and left in perpetual ruin.6 Near the close of the same
year, as a suitable initiation of the great tragedy which
was to be enacted in Southern France, he summoned
the faithful to arms against the heretics of that region,
1 Lib. ii. epist. 1. 2 Lib. iii. epist. 3. s Lib. vii. epist. 212.
4 Lib. ix. epist. 18. The parties referred to here are otherwise known
as Waldenses and Cathari.
6 Lib. ix. epist. 102. 6 Lib x. epist. 130.

THE PAPAL THEOCRACY. 231
and stimulated their ardor with the promise of the same
rewards which the crusader was wont to seek in the
long and dangerous march to the East. In a communi
cation addressed to the King of France, he stated the
reward in these terms : " We wish all the goods of the
heretics to be confiscated, and both to yourself, either
laboring in person or affording necessary aid, and to the
men of your land who shall take arms against the per
fidious,1 the same remission of sins shall be vouchsafed
as we have deemed it proper to bestow upon those who
assist in the rescue of the Holy Land." 2 As if bent
upon supplying an ample prey to those whose bigotry
and lust of plunder had been inflamed by his appeals,
Innocent dealt with Raymond, the powerful Count of
Toulouse, as if he had forfeited all claim by his indul
gence of heresy. He was not allowed any reasonable
terms of reconciliation, and his territories were ad
judged to the leader of the crusade, the brave and able,
but fierce and fanatical Simon de Montfort. The war
was such as the rapacity and fanaticism of the assail
ants might have been expected to entail. In truth,
the horrors of the St. Bartholomew massacre were an
ticipated. At the sacking of Bdziers, in 1209, an in
discriminate fury sacrificed alike Catholic and heretic.
" Slay them all, God will know His own," was the com
mand of the Abbot Arnold, the ecclesiastical leader of
the crusade, as Simon de Montfort was the secular.
1 The heretics of Languedoc, called Albigenses from the town of
Alby, which was one of their centres.
2 Lib. x. epist. 149. Indulgences had also been offered in connection
with the ineffectual crusade which was undertaken against the same
heretics in the time of Alexander in., but in less generous terms.

232 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
" Never," says Milman, " was war waged in which am
bition, the consciousness of strength, rapacity, impla
cable hatred, and pitiless cruelty played a greater part.
And throughout the war it cannot be disguised that it
was not merely the army of the Church, but the Church
itself in arms. Papal legates and the greatest prelates
headed the host, and mingled in all the horrors of the
battle and the siege. In no instance did they interfere
to arrest the massacre, in some cases urged it on." 1
As respects the beliefs of the Albigenses who were
subjected to this exterminating onslaught, there has
been some variety of opinion. Individual writers, in
fluenced more or less by the desire to find a continuous
chain of witnesses against the Romish apostasy, have
been inclined to give a favorable estimate of their teach
ing. In doing this they are compelled to challenge the
reports of contemporary authorities, and to rule them
out as the misshapen products of prejudice or malice.
No doubt, some of these reports did receive a false
coloring from the channel of ill-will and hatred through
which they were delivered. An insufficient regard was
sometimes paid to gradations of belief among the sec
taries. In particular they were exposed to calumny
as respects their moral conduct. While it is not neces
sary to assume that their practice was uniformly on so
high a level as their austere maxims, and some room
may be given to the supposition that the attempt to
maintain a strained and unhealthy crucifixion of the
flesh reacted disastrously upon individuals, there is no
reason to think that they fell below the average stan
dard of morals in that age. On the contrary, an ap-
1 Lat. Christ, book ix. chap. 8.

THE PAPAL THEOCRACY. 233
pearance of superior strictness and simplicity of life
served them as an effective means of influence and
propagandism. But, although it is the dictate of sim
ple justice and sobriety to qualify some ultra phases
of the contemporary testimony, it is a great perversion
of history to represent the Albigenses as true expo
nents of New Testament Christianity. While they re
jected a large proportion of Romish corruptions, they
introduced the evil virus of Gnostic and Manichaean
tenets. For the more fanciful speculations of the Gnos
tic schools and of the disciples of Mani they showed
indeed little concern ; nevertheless, they were in close
affinity with their fundamental views of the world and
of man. This is proved by a sufficient mass of docu
ments. Grant that the documents have been received
from the hands of opponents; they came from such a
variety of conditions, and exhibit so large a measure of
agreement, that there is no valid ground to reject the
main points in their testimony.1
The Albigenses were a branch of the Cathari. As
was noticed in the preceding period, the creed of the
Cathari was borrowed very largely from the Paulicians
and the Bogomiles, Eastern sects which mixed their
Christianity with various Gnostic and Manichaean ele
ments. Some have supposed that a ground of accept
ance had been prepared for the Eastern importations
by the secret persistence of some of the teachings
which had been propagated in the fourth century by
the Priscillianists. However this may have been, the
imported doctrines found a wide door of entrance. The
1 See documents collected by Dollinger, Beitrage zur Sektenge-
scbichte des Mittelalters, Theil ii.

234 THE MEDIJEVAL CHURCH.
Cathari became no inconsiderable sect. The attack
made upon them in the early part of the eleventh cen
tury did not arrest their progress. They continued to
win converts in Italy, France, Germany, and some of
the Scandinavian countries. In Bosnia their strength
was not broken till the fourteenth century. In all
these countries the circumstances of their growth are
very obscure. No leaders appeared whose personal
prominence might serve to illuminate their history.
Some writers, indeed, suppose that Pierre de Bruys
and Henry of Lausanne — who obtained in the twelfth
century a considerable following in France known as
Petrobrusians and Henricians — were genuine repre
sentatives of the Catharist sect.1 But others doubt the
warrant for this conclusion. In any case, only a mod
erate amount of definite historical materials is afforded
in the record of these two men. Most of our informa
tion respecting the Cathari comes from the era of extir
pation which began in the pontificate of Innocent III.,
1 Dollinger reaches this conclusion. ( Sektengeschichte, i. 75-97.)
The most weighty item in the evidence is perhaps the allegation, ad
duced by Peter the Venerable, that the Petrobrusians rejected large por
tions of the Biblical Canon. (Epist. adv. Petrobrusianos. ) But, as his
words indicate, this allegation was based on rumor, — an insecure ground
for deciding respecting the doctrine of the sect, and still less decisive
respecting that of its founder. The followers of Pierre de Bruys may
have been ied by their antipathy against the hierarchy to more or
less of association with the Cathari, and to an ultimate appropriation
of Catharist beliefs which were no part of their original creed. Ber
nard, it is true, in speaking of some sectaries of his time, distinctly
imputes to them certain Manichaean tenets (Sermones in Cantica, lxv.,
lxvi.) ; but so far is he from associating these sectaries with Pierre de
Bruys or with Henry, that he places them in contrast with other hereti
cal sects on the express ground of their having no leaders or prominent
teachers from whom they might take their name.

THE PAPAL THEOCRACY. 235
and was continued through the agency of the Inquisi
tion into the next century.
Among the Cathari distinctions of belief existed cor
responding very much to those between the Paulicians
and Bogomiles.1 As respects their general creed, Rei-
nerus, who says that he was a member of the sect for
seventeen years, gives the following account : " The
Cathari hold in common that the devil made this world
and all things which are therein. Likewise, that all the
sacraments of the Church — namely, the sacrament of
baptism by material water, and the other sacraments —
avail in no degree for salvation, and are no true sacra
ments of Christ and His Church, but deceptive and
diabolical, and pertaining to a church of malignants.
Likewise it is the common opinion of all the Cathari
that physical marriage is always mortal sin, and that
one does not earn a severer punishment in the future
by the crime of incest or adultery than by legitimate
marriage. Likewise all the Cathari deny the future
resurrection of the flesh. They also believe that to
eat flesh, eggs, or cheese, even in a case of urgent
necessity, is a mortal sin ; that secular authorities com
mit mortal sin in punishing malefactors or heretics ;
that no one can be saved except through themselves.
1 Reinerus mentions three sections, the Albanenses, the Concore-
zenses, and the Bagnolenses. (Contra Waldenses, cap. vi.) The first
of these affiliated with the absolute dualism of the Paulicians, tlie
second with the modified dualism of the Bogomiles; the third also
adopted the modified dualism, but preferred on some other points the
special tenets of the Albanenses to those of the Concorezenses. Dol
linger associates the Albigenses with the strict dualists, who, while they
were a minority of the Cathari in Italy, were the more numerous in
other regions.

236 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
They all deny purgatory. It is also a common opinion
of the Cathari, that he seriously transgresses who kills
any bird from the least to the greatest, or any quad
ruped from a weasel to an elephant. But respecting
other animals they do not hold the like view."1 To
this list of opinions should be added a decided repro
bation of the worship of images and saints.
In connection with the rejection of the Romish idea
of purgatory, it may be observed that the Cathari pro
vided a substitute in their theory that souls which
have not been purged from sin before the death of the
body undergo the ordeal of transmigration. The strict
dualists believed that all souls which have been created
by the good Deity will finally be saved. They also
taught the pre-existence of souls. On these points the
moderate dualists were of a different opinion. The
former class rejected the entire Old Testament ; many
in the latter class reserved some portions of it. Some
apocryphal additions to the New Testament had place
among them, such as a so called " Gospel of John,"
in which a series of questions propounded by the
Apostle to Christ are resolved in a sense agreeable to
the Cathari.
Like the Manichaeans, the Catharist sect consisted
of two broadly distinguished divisions, the "perfect,"
and the " simple believers " or " hearers." The latter
were expected to be received into the company of
the former before death. Meanwhile they were not
subjected to the full measure of unsparing asceticism
which was incumbent upon the perfect.
1 Contra Waldenses, cap. vi., Maxima Bibliotheca Veterum Patrum,
torn xxv. pp. 267, 268.

THE PAPAL THEOCRACY. 237
The rite which had most significance among the
Cathari was the consolamentum. This was the solemn
laying on of hands, and was regarded as the true spir
itual baptism which Christ placed in contrast with that
of water. The one who had received it was obligated
to the strict life of the perfect. Great emphasis was
laid upon the necessity of this rite. As a substitute for
the eucharist the Cathari practised a religious breaking
of bread in connection with their ordinary meals, when
ever any one of the perfect was present.
While the Romish hierarchy was an object of their
special detestation, they recognized different ranks of
ecclesiastics among themselves. They had their bishops,
with each of whom were connected two assistants called
respectively the " elder son " and the " younger son."
They had also their deacons. Some distinct references
are found, moreover, to a supreme head, a Catharist
pope, though it may be presumed that his authority
was acknowledged only by those who held in common
the stricter dualism.
In view of the false ingredients which they mingled
with their protest against Romish corruptions, the over
throw of the Albigenses, or, more broadly speaking,
of the Cathari, cannot be regretted. In saying this,
however, we are not to be regarded as qualifying the
infamy of the method by which their extirpation was
accomplished. The Waldenses, who were also touched by the storm
of persecuting rage, resembled the Albigenses in their
advocacy of apostolic simplicity and poverty, but were
not, like them, infected with the leaven of Oriental
dualism, and in general kept within more moderate

238 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
limits in their protests against the Romish system. A
more specific account of this reforming party will be
given in the next period.
The support which Innocent III. gave to the war
against the Albigenses was not his last stroke against
heresy. As if resolved to lay a sure foundation against
heretical innovation in the future, he published near the
close of his pontificate a definite plan for its prosecu
tion. At the Fourth Lateran Council, in 1215, he gave
an ecumenical sanction to a thorough scheme of repres
sion. In the article De Hwretieis it was ordained that
every archbishop or bishop, either in person or through
suitable agents, should visit once or twice a year any
locality in his jurisdiction where there was rumor of
heresy, and compel three men, or the whole community
if it should seem expedient, to take oath that, if they
had knowledge of any heretics in the vicinity, or of
secret conventicles, or of persons who in their life and
manners held themselves aloof from the communion
of the faithful, they would point them out. The ac
cused were to be summoned, and if found guilty to be
punished. Here was the germ of the Inquisition. It
was only necessary that the functions assigned to the
resident bishops should be confided to a special tri
bunal, as they were by the second among Innocent's
successors, to inaugurate the institution which was to
be the most fearful engine of spiritual despotism known
to the history of the Church. In the same article
careful provision was made to insure the co-operation
of the temporal ruler in the extermination of heresy.
He must rule out the heretic or be himself ruled out.
"If a temporal lord," says the decree, "after being

THE PAPAL THEOCRACY. 239
summoned and admonished by the Church, shall neglect
to purge his land of heretical defilement, the metro
politan and the bishops of the province shall bind him
with the excommunication. If he refuses to give satis
faction within a year, his case shall be brought before
the supreme pontiff, and he shall declare his vassals
released from their allegiance, and shall give over his
land to the occupation of Catholics, who, having exter
minated the heretics, shall possess it without challenge
and preserve it in purity of faith." 1
Such was the reign of him who sat in the chair
of Peter at the noonday of papal power. One can
scarcely refrain from admiration as he contemplates
the wonderful scope of his oversight and activity.
The record of his correspondence is of itself adequate
proof of his extraordinary executive talent. He may
be credited also with a sincere regard for the interests
of Christendom. Nevertheless there was in his rule
an element which must ever be revolting to a clear
moral sense. His eager ambition to magnify on all
occasions his own prerogatives, and his warped and
arbitrary decisions in several of the great causes of the
nations, give an aspect to his sovereignty which asso
ciates it rather with the prince of this world than with
Him who said, " My kingdom is not of this world."
IV. — THE PAPACY FROM INNOCENT III. TO
BONIFACE VIII.
The successors of Innocent III. were by no means
his equals in capacity for rule. Still the transition from
1 Mansi, torn. xxii.

240 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
his pontificate does not mark any abrupt descent in the
fortunes of the papacy. There was no abatement in
its claims. As respects actual power, also, a high level
was maintained till the latter part of the century.
This result was due in no small degree to the agency
of the mendicant orders. In the first decades after
their formation these orders were stanch allies of the
papacy. Rapidly pressing into every quarter, and gain
ing immense influence with the people, they were able
to make an ample return for the benefits which were
lavished upon them by their patron at Rome.
Among the first of the tasks devolved upon the pa
pacy in this era was the completion of the extermi
nating assault upon heresy which had been inaugurated
by Innocent III. Notwithstanding the victorious cru
sade which had been made against the Albigenses and
the formal assignment of the land to Simon de Montfort,
the work of extirpation and subjugation still awaited
a final stage. The expelled Count of Toulouse and
his son, known afterwards as Raymond VII., reappear
upon the scene. The strong attachment of the people
secures them ready assistance. De Montfort falls in
the conflict, and the house of Raymond comes again
into the ascendant. But the hard-earned victory is not
long enjoyed. The French throne supported by the
papacy compels Raymond VII. to the sacrifice of much
territory, reduces him from the comparative indepen
dence asserted by his ancestors to a position of strict
vassalage, and binds him to the uprooting of heresy in
his domains. To insure the fulfilment of this requisi
tion, the Council of Toulouse in 1229 published an elab
orate plan of inquisition. Among the demands imposed

THE PAPAL THEOCRACY. 241
were the following. Archbishops and bishops must ap
point in every parish a priest and two or more laymen,
and require them under oath to make a minute search
for heretics, penetrating into every suspected quarter
and possible lurking place, and bringing both the viola
tors of the orthodox faith and their patrons to judg
ment. If any one tolerates heresy upon his domain, he
is to lose his land forever, and his body shall be in
the power of his lord, to be dealt with as may be fit
ting. A house which shelters a heretic is to be de
stroyed and its site confiscated. A bailiff who neglects
to make a vigorous prosecution of heretics in the region
where he resides is to lose his goods, and no more to
exercise his office, either there or elsewhere. Heretics
who return to the Church of their own free will are to
be located in a Catholic community, and to wear a cross
upon each shoulder as a penance for their former un
faithfulness, while those who seek reconciliation with
the Church under constraint, moved by fear of death
or similar cause, shall be so incarcerated that they shall
not have opportunity to corrupt others. The names
of all males above fourteen years of age and of all
females above twelve shall be put on record, and every
two years they must take oath to keep the Catholic faith
and to oppose heretics to the extent of their ability.
By the same council the laity were forbidden to have
the Scriptures, with the exception of the Psalter and
such passages as were contained in the authorized ritual;
and this much they must on no account possess in the
vernacular. The language of the decree is as follows :
" Prohibemus etiam, ne libros veteris testamenti aut
novi, laici permittantur habere: nisi forte psalterium,
16

242 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH
vel breviarium pro Divinis officiis, aut horas beatae
Mariae aliquis ex devotione habere velit. Sed ne prae-
missos libros habeant in vulgari translatos, arctissime
inhibemus." 1
Before the meeting of the Council of Toulouse and
the settlement of affairs in Southern France the papacy
had embarked upon one of its most noteworthy con
flicts, — the last great struggle with the Empire as rep
resented by the Hohenstaufen family. This struggle,
while it had its special occasions, was the natural pro
duct of the essential rivalry between Pope and Em
peror. By virtue of their position they were rivals.
Theocratic rule as it was conceived by the Pope, and
imperial rule as it was conceived by an Emperor of
high spirit and ambition, could not well be reconciled.
Frederic II. was not a sovereign who coveted a quar
rel with the spiritual power. He was not recklessly
bent upon a policy of aggression. In disposition he
was probably more placable than Frederic Barbarossa,
certainly more placable than Henry VI. But at the
same time he was ready to maintain all the rights which
he regarded as belonging to the Empire, and in doing so
he was trammelled by no superstitious awe. A patron
of literature, having much of the spirit of the humanist,
he was disposed to a freedom of thought which indeed
stopped short of positive infidelity, but was also remote
from blind reverence. He was able to estimate the
papacy at its worth, and, finding it to be a grasping
earthly power, to deal with its censures as simply the
arts of an unscrupulous rival.
1 Mansi, torn, xxiii. Compare Synod of Tarragona in 1233, and of
Ueziers in 1246.

THE PAPAL THEOCRACY. 243
The first occasion of rupture was the delay of Fred
eric to embark upon a crusade. Yielding to the urgent
solicitations of Honorius III., he had not only agreed to
lead such a project, but bound himself to depart by a
certain date, namely, August, 1227. He kept his word
so far as to embark about the appointed time. But
the extreme heat of the season engendered sickness,
and, on the plea that a due regard to his health re
quired it, Frederic returned again to land. Very likely
his excuse would have been entertained, and a time
of grace allowed him, if his case had been in the
hands of Honorius. But this moderate pontiff had
been succeeded by one as captious and assertatory as
he was energetic, the indomitable old man who took
the name of Gregory IX. As if it were a thing too
certain to be inquired into, he pronounced Frederic's
excuses mere pretences, and launched against him the
excommunication. The next year, as the Emperor
again embarked, he inhibited his departure, and sent
messengers before him into the Holy Land, who should
there publish his excommunication and forbid all Chris
tians to render him any service or recognition. When,
in spite of such an introduction, Frederic had concluded
an advantageous treaty, by which it was stipulated that
Jerusalem should be given into Christian possession, he
denounced the treaty as a monstrous attempt to recon
cile Christ and Belial. Meanwhile he attempted to stir
up the adversaries of Frederic at home, and zealously
forwarded a movement to seize upon his territories in
Italy. The Emperor on his side gave no further heed
to papal censures and accusations than to make his ap
peal to the judgment of Europe. He contemned alike

244 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
the anathemas and the prohibitions of Gregory. Hav
ing satisfied his ambition in the East by placing the
crown of Jerusalem upon his head, he suddenly re
turned to Italy. An easy victory over the papal forces
followed, and, after all his outpouring of fury, Gregory
was constrained to a reconciliation (1230).
Nine years of peace ensued, when a conflict more
envenomed than ever was begun. The victories of
Frederic over the Guelfic cities of Lombardy, which
he undertook to chastise for their complicity in a re
bellion against him in Germany, were regarded as im
perilling the papal interests. Gregory therefore flew to
his customary weapons, pronounced Frederic excom
municated, released his subjects from their allegiance,
declared any place in which he might reside under in
terdict and any ecclesiastic who should dare to minister
to him the rites of the Church degraded from his office,
and sought for a prince who might have the courage
to strive for his crown. Forgetting the claims of dig
nity in the excess of passion, he launched out into un
measured charges, berating Frederic as an infidel and
blasphemer, a man who had not shunned to declare
that Christ, Moses, and Mahomet were three impostors
by whom the world had been deceived, and that only
simpletons could believe that it was possible for God to
be born of a virgin.1 As Frederic answered philippic
with philippic, a war on paper proceeded alongside the
sterner conflict of armies.
The death of Gregory in 1241 rather interrupted
than ended the struggle. Innocent IV. after a brief
truce, renewed the quarrel with an ardor scarcely in-
1 Matthew Paris, sub anno 1239.

THE PAPAL THEOCRACY. 245
ferior to the unscrupulous zeal of his predecessor. Eu
rope was ransacked for money to fill the papal treasury,
and for a prince to stand as claimant for Frederic's
crown. To the honor of the European powers the
claimants were not easy to discover and when discov
ered were feebly sustained.1 But in the Italian cities
the Pope had strong allies. During the war against
these the Emperor was overtaken by heavy calamities,
such as the capture of a favorite son and a defeat at
Parma. Under the shadow of these reverses he died,
in 1250.2 As already stated, no successor was left
equal to sustaining the claims of his house. His de
scendants were soon cut off. The Papacy triumphed
over the Empire.
The triumph of the papacy, however, was more ap
parent than real, at least as respects its position in
Christendom at large. The victory was purchased at
a cost which gave it very much the character of a
defeat. In the first place, the unchristian hardness and
ferocity of Gregory IX. and Innocent IV. caused a
revulsion of feeling in many breasts. Faithful sons of
the Church, like Louis IX. of France, openly declared
their horror of the papal violence and implacability.
As Gregory IX. sent word to France that he had
awarded Frederic's crown to Robert, the brother of the
King, the reply came back in these words of stinging
rebuke : " What presumptuous daring is this, that the
1 Henry of Thuringia, who early suffered defeat and death, was fol
lowed by William of Holland.
2 The Pope thought it fitting to announce the death of his great an
tagonist in such words of exultation as these : "Laetantur coeli, et exultet
terra ! " (Raynaldus, sub anno 1251, n. 3.)

246 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
Pope should presume to disinherit and to cast down
from the height of the imperial dignity a prince who
has no superior, or even equal, among Christians, and
that too before he has been convicted of the crimes
charged against him or made confession thereof. Even
if he deserved to be deposed, the sentence should not
be passed without the approbation of a general council.
As respects the transgressions with which he is charged,
faith ought not to be reposed in the word of his enemies,
of whom the Pope is the most deadly. To us he has
given no grounds of accusation, yea, has been a good
neighbor, nor have we seen any reason for challenging
his fidelity in worldly relations or his Catholic faith.
This we know, that he has fought loyally for our Lord
Jesus Christ, exposing himself resolutely to the perils
of the sea and the hazards of battle. So much religion
we have not yet found in the Pope." 1
Again people, princes, and ecclesiastics were alienated
by the enormous exactions of the Popes. Nothing is
more prominent in the narratives of Matthew Paris
for this era than the sense of torture which was caused
by the unbounded demands of Rome. A significant in
dex of this feeling is seen in the way in which the peo
ple discussed the Pope's charges against Frederic II.,
particularly the accusation of heresy and blasphemy.
They were inclined to doubt the charges, and declared
it an item in favor of the Emperor that he had not let
loose upon them a band of usurers and extortioners.2
England in particular had reason to complain of the
papal exactions. The Popes dealt with the country as
the avarice of ancient Rome claimed the right to deal
1 Matthew Paris, sub anno 1239. 2 Ibid.

THE PAPAL THEOCRACY. 247
with a conquered province. It has been estimated that
during a few years the agents of Gregory IX. at Lon
don plundered the realm of a sum equivalent to fifteen
millions sterling at the present rate.1 No wonder that
there were bitter comments, and instances in which the
exactors were exposed to personal violence.
In another respect, also, the papacy was injured by its
own representatives. To shut out the heirs of Fred
eric II. from the kingdom of Naples and Sicily, the
crown of this realm was awarded to Charles of Anjou,
a man of grasping and unprincipled ambition. Thus
a foothold was given to that ascendency of French poli
tics which speedily brought the papacy into abject sub-
servienc}' to the French throne. In 1281 the arts of
Charles of Anjou secured the election of a French
Pope. "From this time forward," says Alzog, "French
patronage, politics, and tyranny inflicted deeper wounds
upon the papal dignity than had ever been inflicted by
the spiteful enmity of the Hohenstaufen Emperors."2
At an earlier date, if the record may be trusted, a
prince of entirely different spirit from Charles of Anjou,
the sainted Louis IX., had laid a foundation for the
rights of the national Church in the contest with Roman
centralization. In the so called Pragmatic Sanction the
privilege of the Pope to make levies upon property in
the realm was declared dependent upon the consent
of the King and Church of France, and the rights of
local parties in filling vacant offices, as opposed to papal
interference, were guaranteed. The genuineness of
this document has been denied, but it is quoted by
1 Hallam, Europe in the Middle Ages.
2 Kirchengeschichte, § 225.

248 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
very eminent historians as a part of the national legis
lation under Louis IX.
Still another cause of decline, which assailed the pa
pacy through the indiscretion and greed of its repre
sentatives, may be adduced. We refer to the nepotism
which turned the attention of Popes from wider pro
jects to the task of advancing their relatives in worldly
power, honors, and riches. Nicolas III. (1277—1280)
gave a conspicuous example of this practice, whose
overgrown excess in subsequent times was to be one
of the most repellent features of the papacy.
V. — VARIOUS FEATURES OF CHURCH CONSTITUTION.
As the preceding history has indicated, it continued
to be a wavering line which ran between the provinces
of Church and State. While there was a general ad
vantage on the side of the Church, the State still found
means to gratify in a measure its appetite for control
over ecclesiastical offices and revenues. Notwithstand
ing the powerful efforts of the Popes, secular interfer
ence in episcopal elections was but slowly relinquished.
During the twelfth century it was no uncommon thing
in Sicily, Hungary, Denmark, and Sweden for kings
to nominate bishops. In the thirteenth century, as a
partial compensation for the surrender of their share
in the appointment of bishops, sovereigns acquired the
" right of first prayers," jus primarum precum, which
gave them a claim to one piece of patronage from every
new bishop or abbot. As ways of getting their hands
into the ecclesiastical treasury, they applied the jus rega
lia and the jus spolii or jus exuviarum. Both of these

THE PAPAL THEOCRACY. 249
were well established on the Continent in the twelfth
century, and at the close of the preceding century
were greatly abused in England by William Rufus.
The former was based upon the feudal principle that a
vacant fief reverts to its lord. In the application of this
principle, sovereigns were able to enjoy the revenues
of vacant sees and of monasteries waiting for the elec
tion of an abbot. The jus exuviarum concerned the fur
niture and other property of deceased bishops. This
claim seems primarily to have been based on services
rendered in the way of protection. Having defended
the goods of the dead officials against the greed of
lawless nobles, sovereigns began to think themselves
entitled to a share in such property. Besides asserting
claims of this character, temporal rulers sometimes im
posed heavy taxes upon the clergy.1
The exclusion of the secular power from the appoint
ment of bishops was not wholly in the interest of free
elections. What the Popes took away from the sover
eign they were disposed to arrogate to themselves. Not
only did they exercise the right to confirm bishops, but
also in many instances to nominate. Thus, in the course
of the thirteenth century, they filled with their own
nominees five out of seven vacancies in the see of Can
terbury. A class of bishops still more distinctly the clients of
the Pope than these appointees came into existence by
reason of the downfall of Christian rule in the East.
Expelled from their sees by the Mohammedans, various
bishops received hospitality in the West. As they died,
1 Gieseler, Kirchengeschichte, § 63; Robertson, Church History,
books vi., vii.

250 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
the Pope, in order to keep up the semblance of a Chris
tian claim to the conquered territory, passed over their
titles to others, who were appointed as their successors.
Thus was conserved a class of titular bishops, known
as episcopi in partibus infidelium.
The Popes were also disposed to extend their patron
age to other offices. Bishops in the outlying coun
tries were expected to provide places for a crowd of
hungry Italians. Three hundred was the modest con
tingent which Gregory IX. in 1240 asked some English
bishops to supply with benefices. Closely linked with
this zeal for patronage, as has been observed, was the
zeal for revenue. A conspicuous exhibition of the lat
ter was the request of Honorius III. and Innocent IV.
that the income of certain prebends in each cathedral
or monastic church (in France and England) should be
set apart for the Roman curia. As the papal exactions
had already become an enormous scandal, such a re
quest naturally was not met in any spirit of amiable
compliance. Endeavors were made to limit the prerogative of the
secular power to tax the clergy. Alexander III. set
forth the principle, that payments for civil purposes,
other than those founded upon the feudal relation,
should depend upon the free will of the clergy. The
Lateran Council under Innocent III. (can. 46) added
as a further condition of such payments the permit of
the Pope.
The principle of clerical immunities, so emphatically
asserted by Becket, continued to be maintained by the
Church with a good degree of tenacitj', and sometimes
was guaranteed by sovereigns, as by Frederic II. at the

THE PAPAL THEOCRACY. 251
time of his coronation at Rome.1 In practice, however,
the principle was not always observed by sovereigns,
and their just complaints moved the ecclesiastical au
thorities, if not to modify the immunities, at least to
sharpen the penalties against clerical offenders. Thus
Innocent III. instructed the prelates to hold in strict
custody such .of their clergy as were proved guilty of
crimes. He also forbade them to secure from the grasp
of the secular authorities such as had been degraded
from their orders. At a council held under the Eng
lish primate in 1261 it was ordained that a crime which
would make a layman liable to a capital sentence should
entail life-long imprisonment upon a member of the
clergy. Fourteen years later the first Statute of West
minster provided that, while the person of a clerk ac
cused of felony should be given over at the demand
of the spiritual authority, the secular judge should in
vestigate the case, and, if guilt were proved, the King
should confiscate the property of the culprit.
At the same time that the Church claimed judgment
over its own servants, it was disposed to extend its
jurisdiction over outside parties. Various matters which
belonged properly to the civil tribunal were drawn into
the ecclesiastical courts. An opportunity for encroach
ment in this direction was supplied by the Crusades, it
being established that a crusader accused of crime was
not to be held by the temporal magistrate, but to answer
at the bar of the spiritual authority.2
The legislation indicates the prevalence in the cler
ical body of the same order of abuses that had place
i Hefele, § 649.
2 So ordained the Synod of Tours, 1236, can. 1.

252 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
in the preceding period. Canons were issued from time
to time against the practice of arms,1 against luxurious
and frivolous habits,2 against pluralities, against simony,
against the appointment of boys to benefices connected
with the cure of souls, against ordinations at large,
against exacting payment for the administration of the
sacraments. But the most notorious irregularity was the
wide-spread and persistent violation of the rule enjoin
ing celibacy. The policy of Gregory VII. was in gen
eral pursued by the Popes, and some severe enactments
were directed against the offending clergy. Thus Ur
ban II., through the Council of Amalfi, in 1089, decreed
that liberty should be given the secular power to seize
the wives of the clergy and to reduce them to slavery.
But it was found to be much easier to pass decrees on
this subject than to execute them. So the authorities
themselves apprehended, and it was with varying energy
that they pressed their demands in different quarters.
In the border countries there was no earnest attempt to
enforce celibacy till the latter part of the period. Down
to the thirteenth century marriage of the clergy was
the prevailing custom in Hungary, Bohemia, Poland,
Denmark, and Sweden. In Wales the like custom was
scarcely eradicated before the Reformation of the six
teenth century gained for it the sanction of law. In
1 The warlike propensities of the bishops gave signal occasion for
such legislation. " The chroniclers describe with a mixture of admira
tion and reprobation the exploits of such prelates as Christian of Mentz,
who appeared in full armor at the head of armies, and, after having in
one battle slain nine men with his spiked club, arrayed himself on the
following day in pontificals, and solemnly celebrated a mass of thanks
giving for the victory " (Robertson, book vi.)
2 See, as an example, canon 17 of the Fourth Lateran Council.

THE PAPAL THEOCRACY. 253
England marriage of the clergy was of frequent occur
rence till the middle of the thirteenth century. An
equal or greater departure from the rule of celibacy had
place in Spain to a still later date ; indeed, in no land
equally accessible to Roman authority was the crusade
against clerical marriage carried on more feebly than in
Spain. In various countries it was necessary to give
attention to the fact that the sons of the clergy were
being obtruded into benefices, and that sacred positions
were being made hereditary.1 Where the efforts of the
hierarchy were successful in checking the practice of
marriage, they were far from abolishing that of concu
binage ; in truth, limitation in one direction was apt to
be avenged by license in the other. In some instances
bishops condoned for a price the unhallowed substitute
for nuptials, — a shameless traffic in fornication which
was not fully abrogated before the sixteenth century.2
The infection of this license reinforced, of course, the
ordinary tendencies to corruption within the monastic
institute. A sufficient illustration has been given in the preced
ing sections of the way in which spiritual censures were
employed by the Popes to exact obedience. Indica
tions are not wanting that the excommunication was
sometimes ineffectual against lesser culprits, as well as
against sovereigns. We find synods ordaining that
those who had been excommunicated a year should be
compelled by the secular power to seek reconciliation
with the Church.3
1 See Councils of Gerundum in 1078, Amalfi in 1089, Clermont in
1095, Epist. (v. 66, 67) of Innocent in. in 1202.
2 See Lea, Sacerdotal Celibacy, chaps, xvi., xvii.
8 So the Synod of Tarragona in 1233, and that of Paris in 1248.

254 THE MEDIJEVAL CHURCH.
One of the most important regulations in the sphere
of discipline which the period witnessed was that im
posed by the twenty-first canon of the Fourth Lateran
Council (1215), by which auricular confession to a
priest once a year was made obligatory upon all mem
bers of the Church having reached years of discretion.
Before the end of the century the full scholastic theory
was installed, according to which the absolution pro
nounced upon the penitent by the priest is a judicial
act, a means of setting free from sins, and not merely
declaratory of the divine forgiveness. Thomas Aquinas
took this position, and taught, in conformity therewith,
that the proper formula of absolution is, "I absolve
thee." Thus finally priestly pretence reached its cli
max, reconciliation with the Church was confounded
with reconciliation with God, and a sinful mortal un
dertook the solemn farce of exercising the prerogatives
of Omniscient Deity. It only remained for the Coun
cil of Trent to stamp as dogma what scholasticism had
enthroned. In connection with the preceding periods, adequate
evidence has been given that it was only very gradually
that the absolving declaration of the priest came to be
distinctly regarded as a judicial sentence, that is, for
anything more than the penitent's ecclesiastical rela
tion. Additional evidence of the same fact may be
found in the present period. Writers of the twelfth
century as prominent as Peter Lombard and Robert
Pullus took the ground that the absolution by the
priest is merely declaratory, — a showing forth, in the
sphere of the Church, of what God has accomplished
or may be presumed to have accomplished. Speaking

THE PAPAL THEOCRACY. 255
of God's agency, the former says : " He Himself alone
through Himself remits sin, who also purifies the soul
from interior stain, and releases from the debt of eter
nal death. But He has not conceded this to the priests,
to whom, nevertheless, He has assigned the power of
loosing and binding, that is, of showing men bound or
loosed." 1 The same limitation appears in the words
of Pullus : " The priest absolves from sins, not in the
sense that he remits them, but that he discloses their
remission through the sacrament. And what is this
work of disclosing except a means of affording con
solation to the penitent ? " 2 A like view appears at
the beginning of the thirteenth century with William,
Bishop of Paris. He says : " The confessor does not,
like the judges of the civil courts, pronounce the words,
' We absolve thee, we do not condemn,' but rather
makes a prayer over the penitent that God may grant
him absolution." 3 Some of the contemporaries of these
writers, however, had already approached the theory
of absolution which is found with Aquinas.
At the same time that the doctrine of sacramental
absolution was completed, a theoretical basis was sup
plied to the current practice of abridging or cancelling
satisfaction for sins by virtue of indulgences. This
was obtained in the notion that the supererogatory
merits of the saints, as well as those of Christ, make a
great treasure, which is at the disposition of the Church,
or, more specifically, of the Pope as the head of the
1 Sent. iv. 18. 5, 6. 2 Sent. vi. 61.
a " Neque more judicum forensium pronunciat confessor: 'Absolve-
mus te, non condemnamus '; sed magis orationem facit super eum ut
Deus absolutionem . . . tribuat." (Quoted by Etienne Chastel, His-
toire du Christianisme, iii. 354.)

256 THE MEDIJEVAL CHURCH.
Church. This treasure, it was conceived, could be
used to cancel, in whole or in part, the temporal penalty
or satisfaction which was regarded as still due for sins
after the eternal penalty had been removed by penitence,
confession, and absolution. Such an application of the
supposed treasure was called an indulgence. In the
view of the better informed, therefore, an indulgence
was not in the full sense a remission of sin. At the
same time, it was accounted something more than the
remission of a mere ecclesiastical penance imposed sim
ply for discipline ; it was regarded as a remission of
the penalty or satisfaction still due in divine justice,
after the guilt of sin and the larger, or eternal, penalty
have been cancelled.1 At the best, therefore, the
theory of indulgences had this obnoxious element, that
it enthroned human discretion, the discretion or caprice,
perchance, of one of the vilest of men, over the claims
of Divine justice.2 But this was only a part of the evil
which came into the Church at this door. The limita
tions which had place in the scholastic theory were very
imperfectly apprehended. Many of the people looked
upon indulgences as practically a means of escaping
all the consequences of their sins, and their superi
ors did not use adequate caution to guard against the
misconception. The result was, of course, the serious
demoralization of great numbers.
1 This was plainly the opinion of Thomas Aquinas (Sum. Theol., iii.,
Sup. 25. 1), as it is the implication of the decrees of the Council of
Trent. 2 In the approved theory, an indulgence for the living was reckoned
a judicial act. As respects indulgences for the dead, many eminent
theologians have not ventured to assign them so unconditional an
efficacy.

THE PAPAL THEOCRACY. 257
The character of the legislation against heresy has
already been indicated in quotations from the epistles
of Innocent III. and the canons of the Council of Tou
louse. Decrees equally severe were issued by other
popes and councils. For example, the Council of
Aries, in 1234, decreed that all convicted of heresy,
whatever show of repentance they might make, should
be imprisoned for life. That there was a plenty of
victims under this policy is adequately indicated by
the fact that the Synod of Narbonne, in 1243, found it
necessary to suspend for the time being the sentence
to life-long imprisonment, since the number of con
victed heretics was greater than the prisons could hold.
The same synod, however, made a bid for increased
convictions, ordaining that, where heresy was in ques
tion, the worthless and discredited character of the
witness should be no bar against allowing him to give
in his testimony.
The attempt of the Church to rule men in all rela
tions naturally resulted in a great mass of legislation.
In the twelfth century, as the distinguished Irnerius
revived the study of Roman law at Bologna, it was
felt that the canon law, in order to hold its own,
needed to be collected and systematized. A monk by
the name of Gratian undertook this great task. His
collection is known as the Decretum Gratiani. After
several supplements had been added to Gratian's work,
a new collection in five books was made by Raymond
of Pennaforte, at the instance of Gregory IX. In this
the papal decretals formed the principal matter. A
sixth book was added by Boniface VIII. Shortly after
wards, another collection was prepared by Clement V.
17

258 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
This, which is known as the Clementines was pub
lished in 1317 by John XXII. Papal constitutions
viewed as detached from the general collections, or
as additional to them, were frequently designated as
extravagantes, an abbreviation of the phrase extra decre
tum vagantes.

CHAPTER III.
THE CRUSADES.
THE Crusades were the first great enterprise which
unlisted the common zeal of the Christian na
tions of Europe. History records scarcely another in
stance in which an equal enthusiasm has wrought in
men of so many different countries and ranks. All
classes of society, from the king down to the peasant,
sent forth the armed pilgrims who were to reclaim the
holy places of the East. Hundreds of thousands, pos
sibly several millions, of men were sacrificed in these
expeditions. At first glance we are astonished at the enormous
expenditure of treasure and men upon a project seem
ingly so Utopian. But further scrutiny speedily reveals
that substantial causes lay back of the crusades. They
were, in fact, a genuine expression of mediaeval insti
tutions, thought, and feeling. The principal factors of
mediaeval civilization are clearly visible in their origi
nation. In the first place, .papal ambition urged on the cru
sades. They were distinctly a means for extending
papal dominion. The vanquishing of the infidel and
the establishing of a Latin power in the East were to
be utilized for the union of East and West. The Ro-

260 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
man pontiff hoped to find therein means for bringing
an undivided Church beneath his sceptre. Gregory
VII., who was the first to plan a crusade upon a large
scale, gave prominence, as we have seen, to this design.
Moreover the zeal of the Popes in these movements
was stimulated by their bearing upon the papal suprem
acy in the West. To engage powerful sovereigns in
a crusade was an easy way to be relieved from danger
ous rivals. Of course it is not to be supposed that the
Popes from first to last were influenced solely by such
motives as these. If is but just to credit them with a
share in the religious sentiment by which the heart
of Europe was so deeply touched.1 At the same time,
it lies on the face of the history that their zeal was
sustained by the desire and the expectation of official
advantage. In the second place, military policy urged on the cru
sades. Mohammedanism was still a threatening power.
The access of a new host of converts, the hardy and
sanguinary Turks, had infused into it a new energy.
The degenerate Greeks were ill prepared to withstand
their onsets. Conscious of their own weakness, they
appealed to the Latins for aid, representing that Con
stantinople with all its heirlooms of Christian antiquity
1 It may be noticed that Gerbert (known afterwards as Pope Syl
vester II. ), three quarters of a century before the time of Gregory VII.,
spoke in a vein of deep feeling about the obligations of Christendom to
despoiled and mourning Jerusalem. The following words, which he rep
resents her as addressing to the Church Universal, seem very much
like a call to a crusade : " Cum propheta dixerit : erit sepulchrum ejus
gloriosum, paganis loca sancta subvertentibus, tentat diabolus reddere
inglorium. Enitere ergo, miles Christi, esto signifer et compugnator, et
quod armis nequis, consilii et opum auxilio subveni." (Epist. xxviii.)

THE CRUSADES. 261
was likely to pass under the profaning hands of the
infidels. To be sure, they soon learned to dread the
Latins as much as the Turks, and made them the vic
tims in more than one instance of their treacherous
arts. But at the outset they were urgent enough in
calling them to the rescue. It seemed, therefore, to
be the dictate of a wise military discretion to take the
offensive, and to beat back the foe before he had cap
tured any more of the strongholds Of Christendom.
Again, the crusading enthusiasm was sustained by
the prevalent love of romantic adventure and warlike
exploits. It was the period of "'youth' In '"the history of
Europe. The age of manly reflection had not yet ar
rived. Fantasy usurped largely the place of reason.
Impelled by its elating and disquieting visions, multi
tudes from all classes were ready to rush eagerly to^
ward a field of strange adventure. As for the knights,
the continual feuds of the age had taught them to
regard the practice of arms as their profession. The
code of chivalry which was coming into vogue made
daring exploits the price of honor. Naturally, there
fore, the knight welcomed the crusade as at once grati
fying his love of adventure and affording a theatre for
the display of his valor.
Once more, the value assigned to pilgrimages as a
means of penance and religious edification powerfully
assisted in swellingthe expeditions to the Holy Land.
The crusades might aptly be described as armed pil
grimages. They carried out on a larger scale the cus
tom which long had been fostered by the materialistic
piety of the times, — a piety which depended largely
for its inspiration upon material objects and associa-

262 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
tions. To such a type of religion nothing could seem
more desirable, nothing more fruitful to the soul, than
to stand amid the scenes which had been sanctified by
the Savior's life and sufferings. Heaven, it was fondly
pictured, stooped low above the Holy Sepulchre. Je
rusalem, accordingly, from the days when the true cross
was believed to have been discovered, was a favorite
resort. The subjection of the city to Mohammedan
rule did not stop the influx except in a season of un
usual persecution. A continuous stream of pilgrims
sought her gates, to satisfy their religious sentiment, or
to gain a respite from the tortures of an accusing con
science. We read of a French count who three times
made the journey to Jerusalem, in his penitence for his
crimes, and his endeavor to escape the pursuing spectres
of those whom his cruelty had destroyed. Many sim
ilar examples are on record. Often no greater boon was
desired than the privilege of dying on the consecrated
soil. When the pilgrims presented themselves before
the Holy Sepulchre, they were accustomed, it is said, to
offer up this prayer : " Thou who didst die for us and
wast buried in this holy spot, take pity of our misery,
and withdraw us at once from this valley of tears." 1
In some instances quite a large number of pilgrims un
dertook the journey together. Thus, in the year 1054
the Bishop of Cambray set out with a company of three
thousand, and ten years later seven thousand started
under the Archbishop of Mayence and the neighboring
prelates. This was carrying pilgrimage far toward the
proportions of a crusade. Now, as the crusade an
swered the same ends as a pilgrimage, and was regarded
1 J. F. Michaud, History of the Crusades, book i.

THE CRUSADES. 263
as a work of even greater merit, it was but natural that
any cause of special excitement should inflame a nu
merous host with the ambition to march to Jerusalem
and to drive out the infidel.
Such a cause was supplied by the contagious zeal of
Peter the Hermit. This man, who was a Frenchman
by birth, made a pilgrimage to the. Holy Land in atone
ment for the sins of his early fife. Both on his journey
and after his arrival he had experienced the barbarities
of the Turks, and witnessed the indignities which oth
ers suffered at the hands of these rude Mohammedans,
who had not the self-restraint to treat Christians with
respect and kindness, though they allowed them to visit
the Holy City for the sake of the revenue which they
brought. At Jerusalem he met the Patriarch Simeon.
As he listened to his plaints over the sad condition of
affairs and the hopelessness of relief through the East
ern Emperors, he was prompted to reply that Western
Europe, if once thoroughly aroused, could be relied
upon to bring effectual aid. The Patriarch caught at
this suggestion, and, entering readily into the plan of
his visitor, gave under his seal such a statement of the
facts as might enlist the sympathies of Western Chris
tians. Armed with this document, Peter the Hermit
returned to Europe. Abundant success at once at
tended his efforts. Pope Urban II. entered zealously
into the project of a crusade, and the people made a
generous response. At the Council of Placentia, in
March, 1095, interest in the enterprise was manifested
by an attendance of upwards of thirty thousand, and
at the Council of Clermont in the ensuing November
the enthusiasm of the vast throng broke through all

264 THE MEDIMVAL CHURCH.
restraint, and interrupted the eloquent address of the
Pope with the mighty and confident cry, " God wills
it t " — « God wills it ! " The Pope took up the words,
declared that they should be the battle cry of Christ's
soldiers in the holy war, and commanded that all re
cruits should attach to their garments the form of the
cross. The time fixed upon for the departure of the crusad
ing army was August, 1096. But the impatience of the
people led them to anticipate this date. Before the
military leaders had accomplished their preparations
there were already on the march no less than four
detachments, namely, some 20,000 under Walter the
Penniless, 40,000 under Peter the Hermit, 15,000 un
der a German priest by the name of Gottschalk, and
an ill-assorted rabble of the baser elements of society
estimated by some as high as 200,000. A large propor
tion of these undisciplined and ungovernable troops
fell by the hands of the Hungarians and Bulgarians,
whose fear or wrath they excited by their lawless con
duct. Walter the Penniless and Peter the Hermit
succeeded in bringing a remnant of their forces to Con
stantinople. These had an opportunity to fight with
the infidels, but only to be wellnigh exterminated in a
rash venture, which they made in the neighborhood of
Nicaea. While thus an unguided enthusiasm was vainly sacri
ficing the lives of tens of thousands, a well officered and
well equipped army was being gathered. This came
to Constantinople in different divisions, under such
leaders as Godfrey of Bouillon, Hugh, Count of Ver-
mandois, Raymond of Toulouse, and Bohemond of Ta-

THE CRUSADES. 265
rentum, with his nephew Tancred. " According to the
lowest computation the army must have numbered more
than six hundred thousand soldiers and pilgrims. There
were upwards of one hundred thousand mailed horse
men, the flower of the chivalry of Europe. They were
clothed for the most part in scale armor ; their heads
were covered with glittering helmets."1 A truly for
midable array! The Mohammedans now found that
they had to deal with foemen worthy of their steel. In
hard contested battles the Christian soldiers proved
their superiority. Having taken Nicaea, Edessa, and
Antioch on their way, they came at length with de
pleted ranks to the Holy City. A brief siege and a
desperate assault gave them possession, and their swords
were dyed with the blood of the infidel inhabitants
(1099). Godfrey of Bouillon was chosen King of Je
rusalem ; and a worthier choice could not have been
made. While he accepted the office, he declined the
insignia and the title, refusing to wear a crown of gold
in the city in which the Savior had worn a crown of
thorns, and styling himself simply the " Defender of
the Holy Sepulchre." Thus ended the first and most
successful of the crusades. After defeating an army
sent by the Egyptian Sultan to recapture Jerusalem
most of the leaders returned to Europe.
The second crusade (1147-1149) was commanded by
Conrad III. of Germany and Louis VII. of France. It
was a sad failure. Only a remnant of the great armies
which took the march ever passed the limits of Asia
Minor, where they were made the prey of treachery,
famine, and the sword.
1 W. E. Dutton, History of the Crusades.

266 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
Before the inauguration of the third crusade (1189-
1193) the Mohammedans had found a competent leader
in the celebrated Saladin, and Europe had been shocked
by the news that Jerusalem had again fallen under the
rule of the infidel (1187). In response to the cry of
grief and dismay the greatest sovereigns took the cross,
Frederic I. of Germany, Philip Augustus of France, and
Richard of England. Frederic perished on the march.
A remnant of his army, together with the forces of
Philip and Richard, assisted in the capture of Acre.
Further success was hindered by the jealousies of the
two kings. Richard, it is true, achieved some remark
able exploits. His valor won him the admiration of
the foe, as well as of his Christian adherents. So great,
it is said, became the terror of his name, that Saracen
mothers were wont to use it sixty years later as a means
of frightening their children. But his deeds of bravery
and personal force brought little gain to the Christian
cause. An introduction to the fourth crusade (1202-1204)
has already been given in the account of the pontifi
cate of Innocent III. Its history shows how the baser
motives of worldly ambition had usurped the place of
the religious enthusiasm which first started the hosts
of Europe toward the coasts of Asia. Instead of re
gaining Jerusalem from the infidel, it gave the seat
of Christian empire in the East into the possession of
the Latins.
The fifth crusade (1217-1221), under the King of
Hungary, Hugh of Lusignan, and John de Brienne,1
1 Hugh was King of Cyprus, John de Brienne nominal King of Je
rusalem.

THE CRUSADES. 267
gained a temporary success in Egypt. Several years
before this expedition, one of the wildest pieces of folly
known to European history had been perpetrated, — the
Children's Crusade (1212). In this senseless move
ment, some thirty or forty thousand children either met
their death through exposure and hunger, or, falling
into the hands of pitiless and designing men, were sold
into slavery.
The sixth crusade (1228-1229) was led by Frederic II.
As already observed, he acted under the weight of the
papal ban, but was able, nevertheless, to effect a treaty
for the surrender of Jerusalem, certain privileges being
guaranteed to the Mohammedan residents. It has been
supposed that still more favorable terms might have
been obtained had it not been for the virulent opposi
tion of the Pope.
In the seventh and eighth crusades, undertaken in
1248 and 1270, the leading figure was St. Louis of
France. Both were fruitless. The first came to dis
aster in Egypt, after a brief season of success, during
which Damietta was taken. The second was arrested
by the ravages of a plague upon the coast of Africa,
where Louis himself was among the victims. Prior
to these expeditions, whose best result seems to have
been the illustration which they gave of the piety and
fortitude of the French King, Jerusalem had been
finally lost to the Christians. Other strongholds in
Palestine and Syria erelong shared the same fate.
With the fall of Acre, in 1291, the last remnant of
Christian dominion in the East which had been won
by the crusades was relinquished. No serious effort
was again put forth to wrest the Holy Land from Mo-

268 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
hammedan rule. The voice of a Pope was indeed occa
sionally raised in favor of a crusade. But zeal for the
enterprise had perished, and could not be revived.
Europe had not the requisite ambition to guard her
own borders against the Turk, to say nothing about
routing him from more distant fields.
Among the memorials which survived the crusades
the military orders were one of the most interesting.
There were three, — the Hospitallers or Knights of St.
John, the Templars, and the Teutonic Knights. The
germ of the first was a hospital, which was founded in
the eleventh century for the care of sick and wounded
pilgrims. The brothers of the hospital lived under mo
nastic rule. In the first half of the twelfth century the
association took on a military cast. As now organized,
the order consisted of serving brothers, who were occu
pied with the care of the sick, priests, who discharged
the rites of religion, and knights, whose duty it was to
fight against the infidel and to guard the pilgrim. On
the evacuation of Palestine, the Hospitallers retired to
the island of Rhodes. In the time of Charles V. the
island of Malta was assigned to them. The organiza
tion of the Templars was like that of the Hospitallers.
By the end of the crusades the order was extended
over a large part of Europe, and was extensively en
dowed. An object at once of jealousy and avarice, they
were assailed by the most damaging reports as respects
their morals and their faith, and, at the instigation of
the despotic Philip the Fair, the order was dissolved in
1312, after having been subjected to a tragic ordeal.
The Teutonic Knights were instituted, after the model
of the other orders, in connection with the third cru-

THE CRUSADES. 269
sade, and were specially devoted to the care and pro
tection of German pilgrims. Service was also rendered
by this order in the protection of Christianity in the
district bordering on the Prussians, who still in the
thirteenth century were stubbornly attached to their
paganism. However fruitless the crusades may have been as
respects their immediate object, they were far from
being destitute of substantial results. If they did not
transform Asia according to their intent, they trans
formed Europe far beyond their design. They brought
isolated sections into contact with each other, and led
the nations to a wider outlook. They gave a new
stimulus to thought and enterprise. The mind of Eu
rope was made by their means more active, more in
quisitive, and more confident. Hence, while they
enlarged the power of the papacy in the beginning,
they abridged it in the end. The Popes came to
find in the people a less passive instrument to deal
with, so that the assertion of their more extreme
pretensions was likely to incur the ignominy of
defeat. At the same time, the crusades effected a great trans
formation in the constitution of society. They hastened
the disintegration of the feudal system. Union in a
common enterprise tended to lessen somewhat the dis
tance between lord and vassal, between noble and
peasant. Moreover, many a noble found himself em
barrassed by the pecuniary demands of these great
expeditions. To gain the necessary funds, he might
be obliged to release a city from feudal obligations,
or to make over a part of his domain to the king or

270 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
other purchaser. Thus it came to pass that the feu
dal nobility were depressed, and a relative ascendency
was given to the king and the commercial classes.
A centralizing movement, a movement toward the
modern type of states, dates from the era of the
crusades.

CHAPTER IV.
MONASTICISM.
I. — THE CISTERCIANS AND THEIR GREAT REPRE
SENTATIVE.
AMONG the monastic fraternities which originated
in the eleventh century, a distinguished place was
occupied by the Carthusians and the Cistercians. The
founder of the former was Bruno, the cultured prin
cipal of the cathedral school at Rheims. His fervent
piety gave him a predilection for the monastic life. At
the same time, the conduct of his ecclesiastical supe
riors stimulated his desire to escape the world. His
archbishop was a man who could indulge the declara
tion that the episcopal charge at Rheims would be a
fine thing, if only one could enjoy the income with
out being obliged to say mass. Disgusted by this
heartless dealing with sacred things, Bruno retired to
the lonely vale of Chartreuse in the neighborhood
of Grenoble. Here, in 1084, with twelve companions,
he initiated an order which bore an honored name by
reason of unusual perseverance in a simple and austere
piety. A kindred spirit gave rise to the Cistercians. The
founder, Robert of Molesme, being dissatisfied with the
lax fashion in which the Benedictine discipline was ad-

272 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
ministered in the existing societies, retired to Citeaux
in the bishopric of Chalons, in 1098. Little addition
was made under the first three abbots to the. twenty
monks who began the foundation. The severity of the
Cistercian rule was too far above the level of monastic
enthusiasm to be generally attractive. Only the per
sonal force of a great leader could enkindle the zeal
which would welcome the rigorous scheme of the new
order. In Bernard of Clairvaux such a leader was
found. His name by itself established the reputation
of the order, and secured its rapid spread. Its monas
teries are said to have amounted to two thousand, and
its nunneries to nearly six thousand, in the thirteenth
century.1 Bernard was born in 1091. His life, accordingly, fell
at a marked epoch in the history of Europe. It was
the youthful, romantic, crusading era. Within the first
eight years of his life came the stirring summons to the
earliest of the crusades from the lips of Peter the Her
mit, the sacrifice of scores of thousands of lives in the
project, and the recovery of Jerusalem from the in
fidel. In the inauguration of the second crusade Ber
nard was himself the most conspicuous agent, and gave
the full energies of his manhood to stir up princes and
people to the holy emprise. It was a time when feeling
was dominant over reflection ; a time when men were
dissatisfied with the ordinary, and piety sought for it
self extraordinary expression, urging its devotees to the
cloister, the pilgrimage, or the adventurous undertak
ing. Such an age Bernard was fitted at once to repre
sent and to command. Possessing himself a heart deeply
1 Kurtz, Kirchengeschichte, § 99.

MONASTICISM. 273
imbued with poetic sentiment and mystical ardor, he
knew how to touch the emotive nature of the people
with a master hand. At the same time he gave so large
an exhibition of practical sagacity as naturally won re
liance upou his leadership. Thus swaying at once
the hearts of his contemporaries and commanding their
judgment, he gained such an ascendency over his age
as finds few parallels in history.
Like other great lights of the Church, Bernard owed
much to maternal tuition. His mother lived a life of
ardent piety, and died with a psalm upon her lips.
Each of her six sons was consecrated by her to the
Lord from the hour of birth. Bernard, though not the
oldest, was the first earnestly to espouse a life of re
ligious devotion. About the time that he reached his
majority he formed an inflexible purpose to enter the
monastic life. His friends attempted to dissuade him
from his design ; but Bernard was stronger than they,
and at once gave evidence of that powerful personality
which so often brought him the victory. Instead of
yielding to their opposition, he turned his persuasions
upon his friends, and actually induced all his brothers
who were of sufficient age, as well as some other rela
tives, to join him. As they left the feudal castle in the
neighborhood of Dijon in France, which had been the
home of their childhood, an incident occurred which
showed how lightly their sacrifice might have been
esteemed by the more earnest believers of that age.
The youngest — a boy who still was accustomed to play
with his companions on the street — being left behind,
the eldest remarked to him in his farewell, " Behold,
our entire estate now belongs to you." But the boy
18

274 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
answered, " Thus heaven to you, and to me the earth ;
that is no equal division." 1
In 1113 Bernard and his companions applied for ad
mission to the cloister of Citeaux. Severe as was the
rule of the Cistercians, it fell below Bernard's ambitions
for self-discipline, and of his own accord he exceeded
the requirements. His asceticism was carried to an ex
treme which threatened the ruin of his health. He was
not content with the Christian ideal of a sanctified
manhood, but in the genuine spirit of monastic ex
aggeration sought something above human nature.
Ashamed of earthly needs and uses, he seemed anxious
to give no place whatever to the body in his considera
tion. Later he himself repented of the extreme to
which he was led by youthful zeal. The injury done
to his health, however, was not without its compensa
tion. The contrast between his vigor of soul and the
feebleness of his attenuated body greatly added to the
impression which his presence made upon the men of
his time.
Bernard had not been long in the cloister before his
superior sanctity and ability attracted attention. The
monastic community at Citeaux became too numerous
for the accommodations; a colony was therefore sent
out ; a new cloister was founded at Clairvaux, and
Bernard was chosen abbot, though but twenty-four
years of age.
As a superior over monks, Bernard exercised a real
kingship of personal influence. He understood well
the art of grappling with a refractory nature. The
story is told of how he rescued a notorious criminal
1 Neander, Der heilige Bernhard und sein Zeitalter.

MONASTICISM. 275
from those who were hurrying him to execution, took
the blood-stained robber under his tuition, and con
verted him into a humble and pious monk. If thus
able to bend refractory material, it may be concluded
that his supremacy was easily asserted over those who
of their own accord elected him as their spiritual master,
and from the outset were his admirers and almost wor
shippers. Bernard showed, too, no little discretion as
a Christian guide. If he was bound by the ascetic
maxims of his age, he still knew how to mingle much
of practical wisdom with their application. He was
well aware of the danger of dwelling too exclusively
upon one phase of truth or practice. Let labor and
meditation, said he, succeed each other at proper inter
vals. Like the sisters Martha and Mary, they should
dwell together. "When one falls from the light of
meditation, he guards against sinking into the darkness
of sin and the torpor of idleness by abiding in the
light of good works."1 As respects the ordering of
meditations, he advised against the continuous pursuit
of one line of reflection. " I exhort you," said he in
one of his sermons, " to leave for a season the painful
and anxious remembrance of your ways, to strike
away into the softer parts of memory, and dwell upon
the loving kindness of God, that you who are con
founded in yourselves may recover by gazing on Him.
I wish you to experience that which the holy prophet
advised, saying, 'Delight thou in the Lord, and He
shall give thee thy heart's desire.' Now grief over sin
is necessary if it be not constant ; it must be broken by
the more joyful remembrance of the Divine goodness,
1 Sermones in Cantica, li. 2.

276 THE MEDIJEVAL CHURCH.
lest the heart grow hardened through sadness, and
from despair perish more exceedingly." 1
Bernard, however zealously he may have been devoted
to the monastic regime, did not lose the man in the
monk. The strong native currents of feeling were not
repressed by self-discipline. His inborn love of nature,
for example, lost nothing of its enthusiasm in the clois
tral life. " Trust to one," says he, " who has had ex
perience. You will find something greater in the woods
than in books. Trees and stones will teach you what
3Tou cannot learn from masters. Think you not that
you can suck honey from the rock and oil from the
flinty rock? Do not the mountains drop sweetness,
the hills flow with milk and honey, and the valleys
stand thick with corn? "2 In various relations the im
pulses of an intense and affectionate heart gained full
vent. Witness the strain which he indulged on the
death of his brother Gerard : " He was my brother by
blood, but more than brother by religion. I was weak
in body, and he sustained me ; downcast in spirit, and
he comforted me ; slow and negligent, and he stimu
lated me. My soul clave to his, and identity of mind,
not of blood, made us one. When we, therefore, were
of one mind, one heart, the sword which pierced through
his soul pierced mine also, and, separating us, placed one
part in heaven and left the other in the mire of earth." 3
A similar glimpse into the heart of Bernard is furnished
by various of his epistles to his friends. Thus he wrote
to a young disciple who had been promoted to the posi
tion of abbot : "As a mother loves her only son, even
1 Sermones in Cantica, xi. 2.
2 Epist. cvi. 8 Serm. in Cant., xxvi.

MONASTICISM. 277
so did I love you, when you clave to my side, and re
joiced my heart. And now I will love you when far
from me, lest I should appear to have loved my own
comfort in you, and not yourself." 1 To parents anx
ious lest the monastic discipline should proise too se
vere for their son he wrote : " I will be to him a father,
a mother, a brother, and a sister. I will make the
crooked straight for him, and the rough smooth. I will
so temper and order all things for him, that he shall at
once gain in spirit and not fail in body."2 To the
members of his cloister he wrote : " Judge for your
selves what my sufferings are. If my absence is pain
ful to you, let no one doubt that it is more painful to
me. For the loss you experience in my single absence
is not to be compared with mine, when I am deprived
of all of you. As many as there are of you, so many
cares do I feel ; from each one I grieve to be separated ;
for each do I fear dangers." 3
The Abbot of Clairveaux by no means confined him
self to the narrow precincts of the cloister. The fame
of his sanctity and the power of his address made
him too efficient in great emergencies to allow of his
remaining in seclusion. If bishops, nobles, princes,
or popes had any arduous work to perform, Bernard
was the necessary ally. Even those who were jealous
of his fame were too deeply conscious of the utility of
his aid to withhold long their summons. He responded
according to his view of the cause, and with but little
regard for the persons of men. At one time his friend,
Count Theobald, had hastily and unjustly taken away
1 Morison, Life and Times of Saint Bernard.
2 Epist. ex. 3 Epist. cxliii.

278 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
the property of a vassal by the name of Humbert. Ber
nard told the Count, that with what measure he had
measured, he might expect that it would be measured
to him again, and warned him that it would be far
easier for God to disinherit him than it had been for
him to rob Humbert of his estate.1 At another time,
the territories of the same Count were being ravaged by
the French King, Louis VII., because of the support
which had been given by Theobald to certain obnoxious
measures of the Pope. Bernard did not scruple to ren
der a scathing rebuke to the monarch, as he broke truce
and drew the sword. " Too quickly and rashly," said
he, " you forsake the good and healthful counsel which
you had received, and hasten, I know not by what
devilish instigation, to renew the evils which you de
servedly deplored in the presence of the freshly wrought
misery and ruin. For from whom else than the devil
should I say such a purpose proceeds as adds conflagra
tion to conflagration, slaughter to slaughter, and makes
the cry of the poor, the groans of the fettered, and the
blood of the slain, to appeal unto Him who is the Father
of orphans and a Judge for the widows." 2
Another conspicuous occasion for public activity was
given by the schism in the papacy which occurred
after the death of Honorius II. (1130). Two rival
claimants — Innocent II. and Anacletus II. — appealed
each to the obedience of Christendom. Bernard sided
with the former. Largely through his influence the
French and English governments decided to recognize
Innocent as the lawful Pope. But the Count of Aqui-
taine asserted the claim of Anacletus, and banished the
1 Epist. xxxvii. 2 Epist. ccxxi.

MONASTICISM. 279
bishops opposing his decision. Bernard sought a per
sonal interview with the Count, and soon prevailed
upon him to acknowledge Innocent. At the same time
he swore that he would not receive back the bishops, —
the men who had so deeply offended him. Here was a
challenge that called for a decisive answer. Bernard
turned suddenly away, entered into the sanctuary, per
formed the rite of consecration, and bearing forth the
host, which the common faith of the age esteemed the
very body of Christ, exclaimed to the Count with a
voice of thunder: "We have beseeched you, and us
you have despised ; an assembled multitude of God's
servants have implored you, and them have you de
spised. Behold the Virgin's Son, the Head and Lord
of that Church which you persecute, comes toward
you. Your Judge is here, at whose name every knee
shall bow, whether in heaven, on earth, or in hell.
Your Judge is here, into whose hand your soul will
fall. Will you spurn Him also ? Will you despise
Him as you have His servants ? " The appeal was
overpowering. Trembling lest the instant judgment
of Heaven should descend upon him, the Count fell to
the earth. On recovering his senses, he agreed at once
to receive back the banished bishops.1 A cause with
such an advocate could hardly fail of success. In Italy
as well as in France Bernard was a victorious cham
pion, and finally had the satisfaction of seeing Innocent
in the undisturbed possession of the chair of Peter.2
1 Morison.
2 Bernard's zeal in this controversy seems to have outrun his charity.
The following are the terms in which he referred to the death of Ana
cletus : "Ille, ille, iniquus qui peccare fecit Israel, morte absorptus est,

280 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
It could hardly be expected that so powerful a ser
vant of the Popes would stand in timid subservience to
their will. In fact, the Abbot of Clairvaux appears
quite as much an adviser and instructor of the Popes
as a servant. His style of address is not without rev
erence ; but great plainness is mixed with the rever
ence. Observe his language to Innocent II. : " There
is but one voice among those who exercise a faithful
superintendence of the people ; and that declares that
justice is perishing in the Church, that the power of the
keys is annulled, that episcopal authority is brought
low, since a bishop can no longer appear as an avenger
of crimes, and no one is allowed to chastise iniquity
even in his Own parish. What they ordain aright, you,
as they say, abolish ; what they justly abolish, you es
tablish. The flagitious and contentious among the peo
ple, the clergy, or even the renegade monks, run to
you, and on returning boast that they have obtained
protectors, when they ought rather to have obtained an
agent of vengeance on themselves. . . . Your friends
are confounded, the faithful are insulted, the bishops
everywhere are coming into shame and contempt ; and
while their righteous judgments are despised, your own
authority also suffers great injury." x Toward Pope
Eugenius also Bernard assumed an attitude of great
boldness and frankness. He declared that the Pope
was demeaning his office when he gave so much atten
tion to worldly business, and that he ought rather to
et traductus in ventrem inferni. Fecerat quippe, secundum prophe-
tam, pactum cum morte, et cum inferno foedus inierat (Isa. xxviii. 15 ) ;
ideoque, juxta Ezechielem, factus est perditio, et non subsistit in
seternum." 1 Epist. clxxviii.

MONASTICISM. 281
count himself a shepherd of souls than a manipulator
of the common earthly affairs which the impure ambi
tions of men urged upon his attention.1 Looking back
to the era of primitive simplicity, he exclaimed: "O
that it were granted me, ere I die, to see the Church
as it was in the ancient days, when the apostles let out
their nets to enclose, not silver and gold, but souls.
How do I desire that you may be heir to the voice of
him whose seat you have obtained. ' Thy money,' he
said, ' perish with thee.' O voice of thunder ! O voice
of magnificence and might ! at the terror of which all
who hate Sion are confounded and turned back." 2
The practical rather than the speculative was the
supreme interest with Bernard. His talent fitted him
for edifying the heart more than for quickening the
intellect. He was one of the most eminent examples
in mediaeval times of an ardent, subjective type of
piety. He ranks with those mystics in whom a native
good sense curbed the imagination, and turned the
mind into the channel of devotion, instead of allowing
the inward ardor to expend itself in the vagaries of
theosophic dogmatism. He was not, indeed, opposed
to speculation as such ; but his predominant interest
in the practical made him jealous of its course. It
must be strictly subordinated, as he contended, to the
established faith. He looked upon the incoming of
heresy as the preying of a wolf upon the flock of Christ.
His principles, accordingly, as well as the summons of
urgent voices, impelled him to an unsparing warfare
against those charged with teaching error.
Bernard enters here upon a field where we follow
1 De Consideratione. 2 Epist. ccxxxviii.

282 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
him with a measure of reluctance. He was indeed in
no way behind his age in point of tolerance. In his
endeavor to protect the Jews from the bigoted and
fanatical violence of the people, he showed a more
than average humanity.1 But he had little charity for
those who brought forward novelties of opinion, and
considered it entirely proper to put them to silence.
Hence his part, not to mention other instances, in
securing the condemnation of Abelard, the most at
tractive teacher and the most independent thinker of
the twelfth century.
Abelard's views had already been challenged, and
he had suffered enough to break a spirit less elastic
than his, when Bernard entered the lists against him.
What now was the guilt of the great teacher and dia
lectician, in the view of the devout monk ? His expo
sition of certain individual doctrines was looked upon
as erroneous ; still it was his spirit and method that
were specially obnoxious. Bernard regarded Abelard
as the representative of a daring, rationalistic specu
lation, which, following its own bent, would inevitably
lead far away from the simplicity of the faith and give
over its most sacred mysteries to reckless and vulgar
manipulation. " The faith of the simple," he writes in
his complaint, " is brought to scorn, the secrets of God
are torn open, questions respecting the highest subjects
are discussed with reckless freedom, the fathers are
insulted because they deemed that such things should
be rather guarded from inspection than solved. So the
human mind usurps dominion over everything, reserv
ing nothing to faith. Attempting things too high and
1 Epist. ccclxiii., ccclxv.

MONASTICISM. 283
too profound for its faculties, and rushing into the
divine, it profanes sacred things, instead of disclosing
them, and does not so much open the closed and the
sealed as tear it asunder. Whatever it does not find
penetrable to its understanding, it thinks of no account,
and disdains to believe." x A spirit is begotten which
refuses to see anything through a glass darkly, and
presumptuously claims the prerogative to look upon all
things face to face.
Abelard had asserted the rights of free inquiry, had
maintained that the faith which too readily accepts a
tenet is superficial, that doubt, in so far as it leads to
investigation, is the needful antecedent of genuine faith.
He advocated the claims of criticism. To Bernard
criticism of the sacred things of religion seemed akin
to sacrilege. " The faith of the pious," says he, " be
lieves, and dissects not. But this man, to whom God
Himself is a suspicious witness, will believe nothing
unless he has previously dissected the subject with the
reason. And while the prophet says, ' Unless ye believe
ye shall not understand,' he on the other hand scouts a
voluntary faith as levity." 2 Charging his opponent with
robbing faith of all certitude, Bernard exclaims : " B ut
God forbid that we should think as he does, that there
is anything in our faith or hope which hangs on a
doubtful opinion. Rather let us hold that the whole
of it is grounded on certain, solid truth, inculcated
divinely by oracles and miracles, established and conse
crated by the child-birth of the Virgin, by the blood of
1 Epist. clxxxviii. Compare Epist. cxci., cxcii., cxciii., cccxxxii.,
cccxxxvi. 2 Epist. cccxxxviii.

284 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
the Redeemer, by the glory of the resurrection. These
testimonies have been made too credible to allow of
doubt. And if they fail in any measure, the Spirit it
self bears witness with our spirit that we are the sons
of God. How then shall one dare to call faith opinion,
except he who has not yet received that Spirit, who
knows not the Gospel or counts it a fable ? * I know
whom I have believed, and am certain,' exclaims the
apostle; and you whisper to me, 'Faith is opinion.'
You prate to me about the ambiguity of that than which
nothing can be more certain." ]
Bernard in this does injustice; for Abelard never
meant to identify faith in its maturity with mere opin
ion. The champion of orthodoxy was quite too head
long in his polemic. Still his language may serve to
indicate an important difference in the standpoint of the
two men. Abelard was inclined to say, Investigate
first, and believe afterwards. Bernard said, ' Believe
at once, and the power of this faith will bring the
truth within the certain grasp of the soul. Each had
truth on his side ; neither had the whole truth. If
Abelard allowed too little to that humble, trustful spirit
which becomes a medium of divine enlightenment, Ber
nard conceded too little to that critical temper which
puts the mind on guard against the passive acceptance
of error. But whatever the merits of the controversy,
Bernard was too influential with the authorities not to
gain his cause ; and the highest grace awaiting his
humbled and heart-broken rival was the privilege of
spending his last days in the quiet of the renowned
cloister of Cluny.
1 Tractatus de Erroribus Abaelardi, cap. iv.

MONASTICISM. 285
One of the last of the great enterprises in which
Bernard engaged was the preaching of the second cru
sade. Here he found a theatre of activity pre-eminently
suited to his talents. Thousands took the cross in an
swer to his appeals in France and Germany. Many, it
is stated, who could not understand one word of what
he said, were moved to tears by his tone and appear
ance. The German Emperor, Conrad, though stub
bornly opposed to the crusade at first, could not resist
the words of its eloquent advocate. In the popular
belief, miracles also came in to sanction the cause, and
a multitude of instances are reported in which the
saintly monk is said to have cured the sick and the
infirm. Bernard himself, while he cautions against
the overvaluation of miracles or of their agent, allows
that such were wrought by his hands, or in answer to
his prayers. His sincerity in this matter ought in
no wise to be called in question. At the same time,
it is but right to judge of the facts in the light of
mediaeval credulity, and with due reference to the
marvellous power which an enthusiastic faith natu
rally commands over certain forms of bodily distem
per. The preaching of the crusade was an eminent
success ; but the crusade itself was a miserable fail
ure. Some were disposed to severe criticism of the
preacher who had talked with such assurance of vic
tory. Bernard bore the opprobrium with great calm
ness. While, on the one hand, he called attention to
the fact that God's judgments are apt to be inscru
table, he suggested, on the other, that an explanation
of failure might be found in the sins and follies of
the crusaders. Their conduct, like that of the Israel-

286 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
ites who started for Canaan, had nullified the words
of promise.1
Death came to Bernard, in 1153, as a most welcome
guest. Only twenty years elapsed before the authority
of the Church enrolled him in the list of saints. The
canonizing sentence but gave expression to the sponta
neous verdict of the age ; and later times can sympa
thize in a measure with that verdict. No doubt, faults
can be found in the life of Saint Bernard. His strong
nature occasionally inclined him to an over-positive and
arbitrary course. But he had great and lustrous vir
tues. The humility with which he prostrated self be
fore God rests like a halo upon a man of such strength
and popularity. As has been testified by his familiar
friends, he walked amid the plaudits and praises of
men as one in a dream. No false elation came from
earthly successes. His most ardent desires reached
toward higher things. With strong aspirings his heart
went out after God, and delighted above all things in
fellowship with Him. " The soul," says he, " which
once has received from the Lord the art and the dispo
sition to retire into itself, and in its inmost depths to
sigh after the presence of God, and to seek ever His
face, — I know not whether such a soul would consider
it a greater punishment to endure for a season the pains
of hell, than to turn back after it has tasted the blessed
ness of such a spiritual life to the pleasures, or rather
the pains, of the flesh." 2
Morison, in his interesting biography of Bernard,
speaks thus of a resemblance between him and Luther :
1 De Consideratione.
2 Neander, Der heilige Bernhard, p. 59.

MONASTICISM. 287
" To any one who can look below the surface, to any
one who can see through the varying costume which
each successive age throws over the deeper character
istics of human nature, there will appear much in the
Abbot of Clairvaux to remind of the Saxon Reformer :
the same vehemence, not to say hastiness of temper ;
the same fearless disregard of consequences in de
nouncing falsehood and sin ; the same dauntless cour
age ; the same humility and gentleness, under all their
divine wrath." II. — THE MENDICANT ORDERS.
By this title our attention is turned to two great
fraternities which became powerful factors in the me
diaeval Church. There were indeed more than two
mendicant orders. The Carmelites, founded on Mount
Carmel by Berthold of Calabria, near the middle of the
twelfth century, took the mendicant constitution after
their transference to the West in the next century.
The Augustines and the Servites, organized in the
middle portion of the thirteenth century, were also
mendicant orders. But the relative prominence of the
Franciscans1 and Dominicans2 was so great, that the
term became pre-eminently a designation of these two
fraternities. Like other great movements, the rise of the mendi
cant orders was due to something more than individual
eccentricities. They met certain urgent demands of
the age, — the call on the part of a large class of peo
ple for teachers of an unworldly mien, and the need of
1 Called originally Fratres Minores. 2 Fratres Pradicatores.

288 THE MEDIMVAL CHURCH.
more earnest and frequent preaching. At the same
time, individual eccentricity or genius had not a little
to do with the rise of these orders. The founders were
men of marked individuality, well fitted to draw oth
ers to themselves, and to leave upon them their own
impress. Francis of Assisi, from whom the Franciscans took
their name, was born in 1182. The indulged son of a
well to do merchant, he gave himself freely to the in
toxication of worldly pleasures till he had reached the
age of early manhood. No promise of his future career
had as yet appeared, unless it might be found in the
imaginative temper and generous impulses of the gay
reveller. But sickness induced thoughtfulness, and by
the radical transition agreeable to such ardent natures
he passed to an extreme renunciation of the world.
What came into his hand speedily passed out in alms.
On one occasion his love of giving so mastered his sense
of legal right, that he offered in benefactions all the
proceeds which he had collected from selling a roll of
his father's goods. The enraged father complained
of the prodigality of his son, and brought him before
the bishop to enforce the demand for reimbursement.
Francis not only agreed to the demand, but, stripping
himself naked, gave back the very clothes which he
was wearing. Henceforth poverty was his beloved
bride, the most wretched and degraded of men the
objects of his peculiar sympathy and care. Lepers and
beggars received his choicest attentions. Assailed with
revilings, he reviled not again. Taunts and insinua
tions of insanity left no bitterness in his humble and
gentle mind. With imperturbable good nature he bore

MONASTICISM. 289
every affront, conquering opposition with such effective
weapons as patience, sympathy, and self-abnegation.
His peculiar dower might be described as a loving sym
pathy. The full tide of his good will poured itself
forth upon alloDjects. .turds, beasts, ana even inani
mate things, were reckoned by his sensitive heart within
the circle of fellowship, and betimes were honored with
the name of brothers and sisters. " That which irre
sistibly attracts us to this man," says Hagenbach, " in
spite of his extravagance and his mistake in the choice
of means, is the loving compassion which lay at the
basis of all his doing and striving. It is the same com
passion which meets us later in a Wesley, a Francke, a
Pestalozzi, an Oberlin, a Miss Fry, an Amalie Sieve-
king, a Florence Nightingale, and in all the men and
women who in different times and ways have taken up
the cause of perishing, indigent, neglected humanity." x
Total renunciation of the world — all its display,
riches, and diversions — and active benevolence were
the watchwords of Francis. In his estimate, practical
usefulness took precedence of contemplation. Theo
logical learning was relegated to a subordinate place.
Mystical devotion going hand in hand with incessant
activity, was his ideal of Christian service. His piety
was of the heart, rather than of the head, and the
plowing visions of the imagination were more to him
than logical discrimination.
Among all the themes of religion, Francis dwelt with
most passionate ardor upon that of Christ crucified. A
pious man, it is said, once found him sighing and weep
ing. Supposing him to be suffering from some grievous
1 Kirchengeschichte, Band ii. Vorlesung xxi.
19

290 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
bodily affliction, he asked him why he wept. " I weep,"
replied Francis, " for the suffering of my Lord Jesus
Christ ; in consideration of which I am not ashamed to
go weeping aloud through the whole world." 1
From such a spirit a contagious influence naturally
went forth. Disciples began to gather. In 1209 Inno
cent III. was asked to approve the new order. The
answer, if not a positive sanction, gave Francis at least
a negative permission to go forward in his project. In
1223 the rule of the order was elaborated, and Honorius
III. gave it his approbation. Several years before this,
Francis had instituted an order of nuns, called from
the first abbess the order of Saint Clara.2
Ridicule had now given place to admiration. The
apostle of poverty was greeted with a veneration which
was in no wise careful to stop short of worship. His
biographer, Thomas of Celano, says : " So great was
the confidence of men and women, so great their de
votion toward the saint of God, that he counted himself
happy who was but able to touch his garment. As he
approached a city, the clergy, the townsmen and the
women gave vent to their joy, the youth shouted their
plaudits, and often went forth to meet him playing
upon instruments of music and bearing branches of
trees." 3
Francis died in 1226. Two years later came the
decree of canonization. As an object of popular
idolatry, he could not well escape a reputation for
miracles. In fact, he had not been long in his grave
1 Karl Hase, Franz von Assisi.
2 Primarily, Ordo Dominarum Pauperum.
8 Quoted by Gieseler, Kirchengeschichte, § 68.

MONASTICISM. 291
when the industry of the legend-monger had enriched,
or rather deformed, the story of his life with a multi
tude of marvels. In the " Liber Conformitatum," writ
ten by Bartholomew of Pisa in the fourteenth century,
forty points of comparison between Francis and Christ
are enumerated, and such items of superior glory in the
record of the former are noted as that he was trans
figured twenty times instead of once, and, in place of
suffering for a short interval, bore the wounds of cru
cifixion for two years. Bartholomew's book was ap
proved by the General Chapter of the order, though,
if they had wished to challenge its enormous fictions,
they had only to refer to the three biographies written
within forty years of the death of Francis.1 As these
were composed in the spirit of an ardent hero-worship,
they may be presumed to have neglected no authentic
materials of glorification. Hase renders the following
verdict on the subject : " Where miracles are narrated
of Francis which unmistakably contradict the divinely
appointed laws of nature, trustworthy historical tradi
tion is wanting, as is the case with all the miracles
in the Liber Conformitatum, which are made to bear
away the palm from the marvellous doings of Christ.
To be sure, we read in the account of Bonaventura,
that a blind person at Assisi, whose eyes had been put
out in punishment for theft, had eyes restored to him,
only somewhat smaller than the original, within three
days of the time that he approached the altar of the
saint and invoked his help ; and that this had been
sworn to by a knight and a monk. However, the
1 Those by Thomas of Celano, the Tres Socii, and Bonaventura.

292 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
whole story was first smuggled into the work of Bona
ventura after his death."
The miracle which above all others was claimed to
' establish the peculiar glory of Francis was the miracle
of the stigmata, — the marks upon hands, feet, and
side, analogous to those on the person of the Redeemer.
The wounds, it was said, were impressed upon his body
immediately after he had seen a vision of a seraph, be
tween whose wings was discerned the form of a cruci
fied man. This occurred two years before the death
of the saint, but his carefulness to conceal the singular
honor prevented it from being very largely observed
till after his decease. That the wounds were found at
least upon the dead body of Francis, seems to be quite
strongly attested. How they came there, whether as
the result of the mind's reaction upon a peculiarly
sensitive organism, of self-mutilation in a species of
ecstasy or mental aberration, or of pious fraud, is a
question that is still open to speculation.1
Dominic, the founder of the rival order, was born of
Spanish parents in Old Castile, in 1170. At the age
of fifteen he commenced to study at the University of
Palencia in Leon. A memorial of his student life is
preserved in the story of the humane zeal which
prompted him to sell his books that he might con
tribute the more to those suffering from famine. " How
can I study," said he, " from dry parchments, when
there are human beings dying of hunger ? " 2 After
spending ten years at the university, in response to the
1 See Hase's discussion of the subject.
2 Lacordaire, Life of Saint Dominic ; translation by Mrs. Edward
Hazeland.

MONASTICISM. 293
wish of the Bishop of Osma, he joined his chapter of
canons-regular. In 1203 a new field of activity was
opened to him, as, journeying on an embassy with the
Bishop of Osma, he had occasion to observe the serious
spread of heresy in the southern part of France. The
devout and sagaeious bishop saw that heretics who
made so much of evangelical poverty were not likely to
be converted by the methods of the papal legates, who
travelled in state through the country. The appeal to
such men, as he maintained, must be commended by
the humble and self-denying appearance of the agent.
At his earliest opportunity, he put his ideas into prac
tice, journeying together with Dominic through the
land, and endeavoring by earnest preaching, disputa
tion, and conversation to win the people back to the
Catholic faith.
The death of the Bishop of Osma soon left Dominic
with the chief responsibility in the work which had
been inaugurated. Meanwhile other weapons than the
persuasions of the preacher were summoned against the
heretics. The swords of Simon de Montfort and the
fierce crusaders who followed his standard commenced
the work of extermination. Dominic remained upon
the field, but in what relation to the severities prac
tised is not clearly revealed. Some have concluded
that he was a pattern of mercy. Others have blamed
or applauded him as bearing in his bosom the spirit of
a grand-inquisitor, and as anticipating the cruel meth
ods of the dread tribunal. The more probable verdict
is, that he neither opposed severe measures nor took a
conspicuous part in their execution. No example of
extraordinary rigor in their founder was needed to

294 THE MEDIJEVAL CHURCH.
prepare the Dominicans for their mission of unsparing
warfare against heresy. The fact that the defence and
propagation of the orthodox faith were made from the
outset a special feature in their vocation naturally
tended toward that proficiency in heresy-hunting, and
that zest for repressive measures, which made them the
fittest agents of the Inquisition. Still, the inflexible
zeal of a Dominic lay much nearer to the arts of a per
secutor than the irrepressible sympathy of a Francis.
There is a measure of truth in the following contrast,
which is drawn by Hagenbach : " Both belong to South
ern Europe, to the Romanic world ; but in the veins of
the one courses the blood of the earnest methodical
Spaniard, in the other that of the emotional Italian.
Both are strict devotees, and capable of the greatest
sacrifice ; but out of the features of Dominic speaks
the imposing rigor of an inquisitor, out of those of
Francis the heart-subduing passion of one who makes
a pastime of self-renunciation. Dominic was of a hie
rarchical, Francis of a poetical nature ; the one dispo
sition could degenerate into a destroying tyranny over
men's faith, the other into sectarianism and cynic rude
ness and eccentricity. The fire which burned in Dom
inic, although at the beginning a fire of love, reminds
in its farther spread all too much of the pyres which
the Church prepared for the heretics ; in connection
with Francis, from beginning to end we think of a
flaming heart, which consumes itself in an enthusi
astic, never-satisfied love, which, even if it is pushed
beyond the point of nature, does not deny its noble
origin." * 1 Band ii. Vorlesung xx.

MONASTICISM. 295
The humble style and the devout zeal with which
Dominic conducted his ministry are thus pictured by
Lacordaire: "He travelled on foot, a staff in his hand,
and a bundle of clothes upon his shoulder. On ap
proaching a town or village he would put on his shoes,
keeping them on until he had passed through. He
carried no money with him, leaving himself to the
mercy of his fellow-creatures and of Providence.
Sometimes he begged his bread from door to door,
always humbly thanking the donors, occasionally even
on his knees. He slept on straw or on a plank, and
without undressing. He never entered any house as
guest without first praying in a church, if one was to
be found in that locality. After finishing his repast,
he withdrew to a room in order to read St. Matthew's
Gospel and Saint Paul's Epistles, which he always car
ried with him. After sitting down, he opened his book,
made the sign of the cross, and began to read atten- 1
tively. So enraptured was he by the Divine Word that
he appeared beside himself ; gesticulated as if holding
converse with some one ; then appeared to be listen
ing, arguing, and contending ; alternately laughed and
wept ; then after gazing intently would cast down his
eyes, soliloquize, and strike his breast. From reading
he passed to prayer, from meditation to contemplation,
at times lovingly kissing the book, as if grateful to it
for the happiness it conferred. . . . He preached to all
whom he met in the roads, towns, villages, chateaux,
and monasteries."
Dominic's first institute was a cloister for women at
Prouille. In 1215 the Pope gave his assent to the
proposition to found an order of preaching friars, only

296 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
requiring Dominic to choose some established rule.1
The rule chosen was that of St. Augustine, as being
very general in its nature, and allowing of much option
in details. Honorius confirmed the order in 1216, and
granted some special privileges. The mendicant con
stitution was not formally adopted at the start. First
in 1220 the General Chapter voted the renunciation of
all property. The death of Dominic occurred in the
following year, and in 1233 sentence of canonization
was passed.
The two mendicant orders were much the same in
constitution and methods. Each had its general, as
supreme executive, its assembly of delegates meeting
at stated intervals, its provincials or superintendents
of provinces, and its priors or guardians, who presided
over single congregations of the fraternity. Each had
also its lay branch, or Tertiaries, as they were called.
The men and women who were enrolled in this con
tinued to live in relations of marriage and ordinary
business, only engaging to dress with becoming plain
ness, to avoid distracting and questionable amusements,
to employ themselves in devotions, and to practise
fasting as their condition might allow. As a means
of extending the influence of the mendicant orders,
the lay branch was of great importance. Speaking of
the Franciscan Tertiaries, Hase remarks : " This third
order, for which every chamber might become a cell
and every house a cloister, had an immeasurable exten-
1 It is said that Innocent was moved to grant the request for the new
order by a vision, in which he saw Dominic supporting with outstretched
hands the falling Lateran church. (Ptolemaeus Lucensis, Hist. Eccl.,
xxi. 17.)

MONASTICISM. 297
sion, from the royal pair down to the masses. But it
was especially the middle rank of citizens that supplied
recruits by the thousand and the hundred thousand ;
and with good reason, since the order gave to it security
against the powerful of this world, as well as promise
of the heavenly riches."
In their design, the Franciscans and Dominicans both
exhibited a noteworthy departure from the primitive
idea of monasticism. Their leading aim was not private
edification, the salvation of the individual monk by iso
lation from a corrupt and tempting world. It was
rather activity in the world, — constant activity in the
midst of the very world which was renounced, even to
the point of beggary. They were to overrun the
world with a preaching fraternity. In the first instance,
the Dominicans contemplated especially preaching to
heretics ; the Franciscans, preaching to the Moham
medans. But so great was the need of Catholic Chris
tendom itself in this regard, that they at once broke
through the limits of their special fields. Every region
was traversed by their itinerant ministry. Earnest
bishops welcomed them as far more competent than the
parish priests to edify and stimulate the people. The
Popes saw in them effective agents for sustaining their
own supremacy, and accordingly gave them ample free
dom of action, releasing them in large measure from
episcopal authority, and guaranteeing them the right
to preach and to hear confessions wherever they might
come. This excess of influence and prerogative naturally
had a double effect. On the one hand, it provoked
the jealousy of the secular priests, and also of other

298 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
classes of monks, who were compelled to see themselves
so largely supplanted by these intruders. On the other
hand, it tended to arrogance and corruption in the
orders themselves. As an example of the complaints
which began to be urged against them, we may take
the severe language of Matthew Paris. He charges
them with having degenerated more in forty years than
orders previously established had in three or four hun
dred years. " These are they," he says, " who in their
sumptuous edifices, which they daily enlarge, and within
their high walls, lay up incalculable treasures, impu
dently transgressing the injunction of poverty and the
fundamental rule of their own profession, even as was
prophesied by the German Hildegard. To the injury
and loss of the ordinary pastors, they thrust themselves
upon the great and the wealthy in the hour of death,
greedy for a share of their abundant riches, extorting
confessions and secret testaments, commending only
themselves and their order, and claiming superiority to
all others. Hence no one of the faithful now believes
that he can be saved, unless he is under the guidance
of the Preachers and the Minorites. In their anxiety
to acquire privileges, they serve in the courts of kings
and nobles as counsellors, chamberlains, treasurers,
bridesmen, notaries of marriages, and agents of papal
extortions. In their sermons they indulge at one time
in flattery, at another in biting censure ; they reveal
the secrets of the confessional, and run into reckless
accusation." x
In another connection the same writer speaks of
the elation of the Dominicans over privileges recently
i Sub anno 1243.

MONASTICISM. 299
granted by the Pope, and pictures the arts by which
they sought a monopoly in the hearing of confessions.
" They proceeded," he says, " to ask any one they met,
' Hast thou confessed ? ' A reply being given in the
affirmative, the inquiry was, ' To whom ? ' The person
answering, ' To my own priest,' it was rejoined, ' And
who is that ignorant fellow ? He has never heard lec
tures on theology, never studied the decrees, never
learned to solve a question. They are blind, and leaders
of the blind. Come to us, who know how to distinguish
one phase of the soul's sickness from another, to whom
things arduous and difficult, to whom the secrets of
God, are made manifest.' " Many, it is added, were
eaught by such artifices, and confessed to the Domin
ican friars, to the neglect of their own priests, and
the injury of the general order and discipline of the
Church.1 Umbrage was taken, in particular, at the attempt of
the Mendicants to gain a controlling position in the
universities. At Paris a determined resistance was
maintained, under the leadership of William of St.
Amour. But the aggression of the Mendicants was
backed by a cause not easy to resist. To say nothing
of the support afforded by various of the Popes, they
had the power and prestige of superior learning. The
unrivalled theologians and scholastic philosophers came
from their ranks, the Dominicans boasting of such
masters as Albertus Magnus and Thomas Aquinas, and
the Franciscans glorying in an Alexander Hales, a
Bonaventura, and a Duns Scotus.
While becoming thus objects of jealousy to many
1 Sub anno 1246.

300 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
outsiders, the two orders were at the same time envious
rivals of each other. One source of the fictitious mira
cles which found place in their annals was undoubtedly
the desire of each to prove its title to a superior glory.
The temper of the Franciscans naturally gave them a
certain advantage in the race for popularity. Their
tone was freer, their piety more emotional and mystical,
than that of the Dominicans, who were the champions
of the rigid orthodoxy of the Church. But this advan
tage had its offsets. The freer spirit and the mystical
vein in the Franciscans gave a wider scope to vagaries
in opinion and conduct, and so increased the liabilities
of division.
Both orders soon found it extremely difficult to adhere
strictly to mendicancy. An impracticable standard had,
in truth, been adopted. The Dominicans virtually con
fessed as much, and explained their vow of poverty as
denoting only that the individual could have no pos
sessions. The fraternity, it was agreed, could hold
property for the common use of its members. The
Franciscans found greater difficulty in uniting upon a
mitigation of their rule. One party, dating back even
to the time of Francis, favored a measure of relaxation.
Another party insisted upon keeping the vow of poverty
in all strictness. The uncompromising opposition of
the latter against tendencies to laxity led to various
schisms, and the history is made complicated by such
names as Caesarins, Celestines, Spirituals, and Frati-
celli. In some cases the schism did not stop with the
mere separation from the order. The Fraticelli, for
example, were denounced as heretics, and regarded as
outside of the Catholic fellowship. They seem to have

MONASTICISM. 301
borrowed from Joachim of Floris, and held such enthu
siastic notions respecting the age of the Holy Spirit as
came to expression in the " Introduction to the Ever
lasting Gospel," a book condemned by the Pope in
1254. As it seemed to be impossible to compose the
differences among the Franciscans, the authorities finally
concluded to recognize different branches of the fra
ternity. The more rigid party was recognized by the
Council of Constance as brethren of the stricter ob
servance. They were called accordingly Observants.
Those representing the laxer scheme were designated
Conventuals. Since the early part of the sixteenth
century, the Franciscan fraternity has appeared in three
divisions, the Observants, the Conventuals, and the
Capuchins. In the thirteenth century, the semi-monastic socie
ties of the Beguines and Beghards — the former being
composed of women and the latter of men — appeared
in close association with the Franciscan sectaries. In
some instances they entered into the relation of Ter
tiaries to the latter. They are supposed to have origi
nated in the preceding centurj'. The fact that they
became a refuge for those adjudged heretics brought
the hand of persecution against them, and many of
their houses were suppressed.1
1 At one time the church authorities made but moderate distinction
between these associations and such decided heretics as the Sect of the
Free Spirit (see next chapter). But it is concluded that this was an
injustice ; that, while there was an outcropping of enthusiasm among the
Beghards and Beguines, they did not share largely in the peculiar tenets
of the Sect of the Free Spirit. (Hermann Haupt, Beitrage zur Geschichte
der Sekte von freien Geiste und des Beghardentums, Zeitschrift fur
Kirchengeschichte, 1884-85.)

CHAPTER V.
SCHOLASTICISM AND MYSTICISM.
THE same era which witnessed the culmination of
bhe papal theocracy witnessed also the culmina
tion of scholasticism. The thirteenth century was for
popes and schoolmen alike the golden age. Alongside
the imposing edifice of ecclesiastical sovereignty stood
an equally massive and imposing edifice of ecclesiastical
learning. As mutually supporting fortresses they held
the field for the established polity and faith. Ecclesi
astical authority may, indeed, have exhibited some
jealousy toward its neighbor. For example, it looked
with a measure of distrust, in the first instance, upon
the alliance between theological thinking and Aristote-
lianism, as this became prominent in the early part of
the thirteenth century. But in general mutual friend
liness was maintained. Scholasticism purchased for
itself tolerance and patronage by sustaining the hie
rarchical system in its full length and breadth. Its
most renowned representatives defined papal preroga
tives in terms which a Gregory VII. could hardly have
wished to amend ; and left as little territory to the
heretic as was conceded by the decrees of an Inno
cent III.
Scholasticism is but another name for the mediaeval
system of dogmatics. It was the product of zeal for

SCHOLASTICISM AND MYSTICISM. 303
the Catholic faith, combined with that species of mania
for logical studies which seized upon the mind of
Europe, and dominated her principal schools, in the
twelfth, thirteenth, and fourteenth centuries. The
scholastic doctors had a great ambition to formulate
the doctrines of the Church, to arrange them into an
elaborate system, to discuss and to defend them at
every point. They were not original investigators in
the more positive sense of the term. Very little was
done by them in the way either of Biblical or historical
criticism. Their task was not to test the established
faith, but rather to state it and to bring forward argu
ments in its behalf. This task they executed with
marvellous industry. Not content to treat simply the
more salient points of a theme, they taxed their in
genuity to deal with all the questions which could in
any way be brought into relation to the subject in
hand. The result was such ponderous tomes that the
modern investigator finds his courage severely tried by
the requirement to look into their contents. As to the
merit of these elaborate works, it must be allowed that
they contain not a little of profound and acute disqui
sition, and that in general they are very creditable to
the intellectual vigor of their authors. At the same
time, their worth is seriously abridged by the easy as
sumption of premises which lay at the foundation of
scholasticism. In default of a critical examination at
the starting point, an extended process of reasoning is
often made to contribute no more substantial result
than a simple display of mental gymnastics.
John Scotus Erigena, in the ninth century, anticipated
in a measure the methods of scholasticism. His daring

304 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
speculation, however, paid less tribute to traditional
dogmas than was rendered by the system in general.
The succession in the stricter sense was begun by
Anselm, who won the veneration of his age both as
scholar and saint. The happier part of his life was
spent in the cloister of Bee, where as prior, and then
as abbot, he exercised a gentle but most effective sway
over the minds and hearts of his monastic brethren.
As the successor of Lanfranc on the archiepiscopal
throne of Canterbury, he experienced much crucifixion
by reason of his conscientious opposition to royal de
mands. In his thinking he was bold and subtle within
the limits of the traditional faith. On two subjects in
particular — the proof of the Divine existence and the
atonement — his speculations have had a marked in
fluence. Anselm closed his career in the early part of the
twelfth century. By the middle of this centurj^ scho
lasticism had obtained one of its chief models in Peter
Lombard's " Four Books of Sentences." In the next
century, and the first years of the following, it reached
its culmination in the massive works of Alexander
Hales, Albertus Magnus, Thomas Aquinas, Bonaven
tura, and Duns Scotus. Among the later representa
tives, a conspicuous place was held by Durandus and
Occam. The universities which served as the citadels of scho
lasticism date from the end of the twelfth and the early
part of the thirteenth century.1
1 See Heinrich Denifle, Die Entstehung der Universitaten des Mittel-
alters ; S. S. Laurie, Lectures on the Rise and Early Constitutions of
Universities.

SCHOLASTICISM AND MYSTICISM. 305
While an intellectual formalism was being developed
in scholasticism, there were those who looked to other
means for laying hold upon truth, who believed that
the highest point of vision is to be gained, not by dis
cursive reasoning, but on the wings of faith and love.
The upward flight of the soul in the rapture of devo
tion brings, as they conceived, a better knowledge of
divine things than any mere intellectual industry or
acumen is able to reach. The deepest truths are open
only to intuition, and intuition is the function of a puri
fied heart, in which selfhood has been consumed by the
flame of a boundless love. Such in its better aspect
was mediaeval mysticism. It asserted the claims of the
heart over against those of the head. While scho
lasticism was engrossed with the task of giving due
proportion and solidity to the walls of the temple, mys
ticism deemed the altar fires and the irradiating pres
ence of the responsive Deity the matters of principal
concern. In quite a large proportion of instances mysticism
stood in friendly relations with scholasticism. Some of
the more distinguished exponents of the former were
at the same time representatives of the latter ; in other
words, they wrote scholastic treatises after the model
of the current dogmatics, as well as those designed to
commend the mystical theology. But there were others
who stepped aside from the current theology and ran
into both speculative and practical aberrations. We
have accordingly to deal with mysticism in two main
types, a heterodox and an orthodox.
A pantheistic conception lay at the basis of much of
the heterodox mysticism. The ardor with which it
20

306 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
pressed the thought of the union of the human and the
divine urged beyond the notion of simple union into
that of substantial identity. This appears to have been
the case with Amalrich of Bena, a master of theology
at Paris about the year 1200. Three sentences of his
indicate his standpoint: (1) "God is all things," —
Deus est omnia. (2) " Every one is bound to believe
that he is a member of Christ, nor can one be saved
who does not believe this, any more than one who does
not believe the birth and suffering of Christ and the
other articles of faith." (3) "To those who have
entered into the state of love, no sin is imputed."1
Amalrich was probably much influenced by the writings
of Erigena. Indeed, the condemnation of Erigena's
principal work in 1225 may be imputed to the con
nection which was supposed to subsist between it and
the new heresy. An evidence that Amalrich was cau
tious about giving public expression to his more radical
views is seen in the fact that we read only of his second
proposition being made during his life an occasion of
open complaint. He died in the communion of the-
Church, having been previously subjected, however, to
the humiliation of a recantation, in answer to the de
cision of Innocent III.
The views of Amalrich served as the basis for an
association or sect. A few years after his death, it was
found that several of the French bishoprics had been
invaded by his disciples. The authorities were aroused,
a search was made, and by means of the disclosures of
a pretended adherent a number were identified as mem
bers of the sect. The Synod of Paris in 1209 or 1210
1 Quoted by Wilhelm Preger, Geschichte der deutschen Mystik.

SCHOLASTICISM AND MYSTICISM. 307
condemned nine of them to the flames, and gave or
ders that the bones of Amalrich should be cast out of
consecrated ground.
The teachings of this sect, judging from the repre
sentations made, were characterized by an undisguised
pantheism and an ultra spiritualism. In place of the
Catholic doctrine of the Trinity and the incarnation,
they taught a succession of divine manifestations and
incarnations, God being revealed as Father through
His incarnation in Abraham, as Son through His incar
nation in Mary, as Holy Spirit through His incarna
tion in themselves. As having the Spirit, they thought
themselves above the need of external rites and the
obligation of written laws. Spiritual birth was regarded
as a substitute for baptism, and spiritual resurrection as
a substitute for the raising of the body from the dead.
Views substantially identical with those described
were taught later in the century, as also in the following
century, by those who were denominated the Sect of
the New Spirit, or the Sect of the Free Spirit. Very
likely these names indicate, not an entirely distinct
company of sectaries, but rather that which sprang
from Amalrich, and which may be supposed to have
survived the onslaught of the persecutor, and to have
spread into various quarters.
Contemporary with Amalrich there were other rep
resentatives of a heterodox mysticism. The same synod
of 1209, which passed sentence against him, condemned
also a writing of David of Dinanto. The pantheistic
standpoint of David is seen in his proposition that God
is the material principle of existence, the common sub
stratum of all things, or that which is reached when

308 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
subtraction is made of the distinguishing features of
individuals. From this point of view, he drew a pe
culiar inference respecting the conditions of knowing
God. Knowledge, as he taught, implies an assimilation
between the knowing and the known. The soul, as
having form, knows that which has form by virtue of
community with it; it knows things by abstracting
their form and appropriating it to itself. But God is
without form. There is accordingly no opportunity to
abstract from Him. The soul can come into community
with Him, and so know Him, only by renouncing its
particular form, and sinking back into the formless
essence which is identical with God.1 Here we have a
view which entered not a little into the speculative
mysticism of later times.
A species of mysticism less remote from orthodoxy
had its starting point in another teacher of this era, the
Abbot Joachim, who died in 1201 or 1202. Joachim
was evidently a man of fervid piety, who saw with open
eyes the corruptions of the Church, and was filled with
intense longings for its reformation. As a burning
desire easily becomes the parent of expectation, so was
it in his case. He apprehended that the Church had
come to the verge of a new era ; that having witnessed
the age of the Father in the old dispensation, and that
of the Son in the establishment of the Christian dis
pensation, it was now to enter upon the final age, the
golden era of the Holy Spirit's reign. In the ushering in
of this better time, a conspicuous part was to be taken
by a purified monasticism, a monasticism in which the
outward crucifixion was to be only an index of the self-
1 Preger's exposition.

SCHOLASTICISM AND MYSTICISM. 309
renunciation abiding within. The teachings of Joachim
were transmitted in particular by three writings, the
" Commentary on the Apocalypse," the " Concordance
of the Old and the New Testament," and the " Psaltery
of Ten Strings." These writings are to be understood
as constituting the "Eternal Gospel" which came to
be associated with the name of Joachim.1 From this
source, as previously noticed, the zealots for the vow of
absolute poverty among the Franciscans drew largely.
Among mystics of unchallenged orthodoxy were
numbered such celebrated men as Bernard of Clair
vaux, Hugo of St. Victor, Richard of St. Victor, and
Bonaventura. Bernard describes in different ways the steps which
lead up to God. In one instance he specifies three
species of consideration {consideration , or modes in
which the mind may apply itself: the dispensative, in
pursuance of which the senses and the things of sense
are employed in the orderly and useful manner that is
esteemed well pleasing to God ; the estimative, in which
one carefully scrutinizes and ponders the various objects
that are presented, in order by their means to arrive at
a knowledge of God ; the speculative, in which the
mind gathers up its powers, leaves earthly things
behind, and rises by the help of divine grace to the
contemplation of God.2 In another instance he speaks
of opinion, faith, and knowledge as three ways of
1 So by Gerhard, the Franciscan monk, who wrote, in 1254, the
"Introduction to the Eternal Gospel." Joachim himself, who borrowed
the term from Rev. xiv. 6, probably used it to denote the spiritual sense
of Christ's gospel, and not any specific writing.
2 De Consideratione, v. 2.

310 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
approaching divine things. The first rests on sem
blance, the second on authority, and the third on rea
son. The first gives no certainty. The second gives
a sure grasp of truth, but not definiteness of insight.
The third possesses the truth unveiled and clearly man
ifest.1 Here, as in the previous instance, the goal is the
intuitive vision of God, but the preceding stages are
not to be understood as being parallel. What Bernard
describes as the dispensative and the estimative consid
eration he did not regard as competent, apart from the
aid of faith, to lead farther than the stage of varying
opinion. Finally, Bernard specifies four different stages
of love, the last and highest of which he esteemed the in
dispensable and direct antecedent of the beatific vision.
Beginning with a simple love of self, man is taught by
sense of need to turn erelong to God, and to love
Him for the help and blessing which He bestows. By
communion with God he learns, in a third stage of
advancement, to love Him for His own sake. In the
fourth stage he is so swallowed up in God that he
loves himself only for the sake of God. Concerning
this stage Bernard exclaims : " To be thus affected is
to be deified. As a drop of water mixed with a quan
tity of wine seems to lose itself, while it takes the
taste and color of the wine, as the ignited and glowing
iron becomes most like to fire, as air pervaded by the
light of the sun is transformed into a luminous ex
panse, and made to seem not merely to be illuminated,
but to be light itself, so then all human affection in the
saints will melt away in a certain ineffable mode, and
be wholly transfused into the will of God. Otherwise,
1 De Consideratione, v. 3.

SCHOLASTICISM AND MYSTICISM. 311
how shall God be all in all, if in man there remains
aught of human affection ? The substance indeed will
remain, but in another form, another glory, another
power." x This supreme altitude, according to Bernard,
can never be gained by human industry. It is reached
only as the spirit is transported by the gracious power
of God, and belongs rather to the life to come than to
earthly experience, though some claim to have realized
it in this world.
Hugo was a contemporary of Bernard. Born in
1097, he entered the cloister of St. Victor, near Paris, in
1115, where he continued the life of study and contem
plation till his death in 1141. He was at once scho
lastic and mystic, and in both relations exercised no
inconsiderable influence upon his successors.
As distinguished by Hugo, there are three different
modes in which the mind may occupy itself with ob
jects, namely, cogitatio, meditatio, and contemplatio. The
first denotes a passing attention to a thing as it is pre
sented to the senses or called up by the memory ; the
second denotes a careful scrutiny and examination,
with the design of ascertaining the hidden nature of a
thing ; the third denotes the intuitive insight, which
penetrates to the very depths of things, and discovers
their meaning without any labored investigation. To
the last alone does perfect clearness belong. It is the
faculty of open vision. " What meditation seeks, con
templation possesses." The latter, however, may be
distinguished into two kinds: an earlier and less per
fect, which is directed to creatures ; a final and perfect,
which is directed to the Creator. At the initiation of
1 Liber de Diligendo Deo, viii.-x. Compare Epist. xi.

312 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
meditation, knowledge is obscured by mixture with
ignorance. The effect is like the mingled smoke and
flame which break forth at the starting of a fire. In
the next stage — the inferior form of contemplation,
which may be termed speculation — the obscurity has
ceased ; there is now only fire and flame. In the final
stage the clarified vision rests with a perfectly settled
and satisfied glance upon the one Divine object; the
quivering flame has disappeared, and the fire alone
remains. " The whole heart, being then converted into
the fire of love, truly feels that God is all in all." 1
In another connection Hugo brings out an idea much
favored by mystics, namely, that contemplation must
take a subjective course in order to reach its goal.
One must first enter into self, as he teaches, in order
to transcend self. " In spiritual and invisible things
the highest is identical with the most interior. To
ascend to God, therefore, is to enter into one's self,
and not only to enter into one's self, but in a certain
ineffable mode in the inner depths of the being to pass
beyond one's self." 2
Richard, a disciple of Hugo, and his successor in the
office of teacher and prior at St. Victor, likewise com
bined the characteristics of both the scholastic and
the mystic. Starting upon the foundation of his pre
decessor, he attempted to build up a more complete
superstructure of mystical theology.
Like Hugo, Richard distinguishes three cardinal func
tions or activities of man as a rational being, cogitatio,
meditatio, and contemplatio. These correspond to the
1 Horn, in Salomonis Ecclesiasten, i.
2 De Vanitate Mundi.

SCHOLASTICISM AND MYSTICISM. 313
three faculties, imagination, reason, and intelligence,
the last differing from the second as the faculty of in
tuition differs from that of discursive thinking. The
proper goal of contemplation is the immediate vision
of God. However, on the way to this goal several
stages may be passed through. Indeed, no less than
six stages of contemplation may be specified. The
first is directed to nature, as a field from which one
may derive a spontaneous impression of divine power,
wisdom, and goodness. In the second, the mind passes
beyond this spontaneous impression, and inquires after
the order, cause, and use of visible things. In the
third, the similitude between the visible and the in
visible is made an occasion of the thought being up
lifted to the latter. In the fourth, the images of visible
things are wholly transcended, and incorporeal entities,
such as one's own soul, or such as spirits and angels,
are apprehended. In the fifth stage there is a vision
of the divine, which may be described as above reason,
but not contrary to reason. In the sixth stage contem
plation is apparently counter to reason (prceter ra
tionem), as well as above reason. Here the soul is
confronted with mysteries transcending all its powers
of rational insight. Such is the mystery of the Holy
Trinity.1 In the first four of these stages human in
dustry has a part to perform along with divine agency.
1 The technical scheme for these different stages is thus given :
" Primum est in imaginatione et secundum solam imaginationem. Se
cundum est in imaginatione secundum rationem. Tertium est in ratione
secundum imaginationem. Quartum est in ratione et secundum ratio
nem. Quintum est supra, sed non prater rationem. Sextnm est supra
rationem, et videtur esse praeter rationem." (Benjamin Major, i. 6.)

314 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
But in the last two all depends upon the grace of God.
One may prepare himself for them by the exercises of
self-discipline and of piety; he attains to them only
as he is transported by the might of that same Spirit
which caught up Paul to the third heaven. In such
an experience, the mind is lost both to the world and
to itself in ecstasy. " When we are caught up into
the contemplation of divine things, forthwith we are
made oblivious, not only of all things without, but also
of all within us. And likewise, when we return to our
selves from that lofty height, we are in no wise able to
recall what we saw in that distinctness in which it was
presented to us. And although we may retain some
veiled and indistinct image of what we beheld, we are
able neither to comprehend nor to remember the mode
and the character of the vision." 1
Bonaventura followed the example of the Victorines
in representing at once the scholastic and the mystic
theology. He was born in Italy in 1221. At the age
of twenty-one he entered the Franciscan order. He
studied at Paris under the renowned Alexander Hales.
This teacher, it is said, was so impressed by the sanctity
of his life, that he was wont to remark that Bonaven
tura seemed to have been born without original sin.
In 1256 he was elected General of his order. His death
occurred in 1274, a few months after that of his dis
tinguished contemporary, Thomas Aquinas.
The mystical teaching of Bonaventura, while char
acterized by some peculiarities in the choice of terms,
was essentially the same as that of the Victorines.
Like Richard, he distinguishes six stages of contem-
1 Benjamin Major, i. 12, iv. 23.

SCHOLASTICISM AND MYSTICISM. 315
plation. In the first two, the attention is directed to
outward nature, as bearing the traces of a divine hand.
In the next two, the attention is turned inward to the
soul as the image of Deity, a mirror in which some
what of His perfections is reflected. In the last two
stages there is an ecstatic vision of God in His absolute
being and trinitarian life.1
The name of another great theologian of the period
might also be cited under the subject of orthodox mys
ticism. While mainly exhibiting the bent of the scho
lastic, Albertus Magnus devoted some attention to the
mystical theology. Indeed, in the view of Preger, he
may be regarded as quite an important contributor.
For, although he added nothing essentially new, he
gave to previous teachings a clearer and more complete
statement. Moreover, his great reputation for learning
and metaphysical ability naturally drew the attention
of later mystics to that which he had written upon their
favorite themes.
It is to be noticed of all of these writers, from Ber
nard to Albertus Magnus, that they strongly emphasize
the ethical conditions of divine union ; that they repre
sent the higher stages of that union as being always
a supernatural gift ; and that they in fact distinguish
the ultimate stage from a pantheistic absorption into
Deity, however near some of their fervid statements
may seem to come to this result.2
1 Itinerarium Mentis ad Deum, etc.
2 See Stockl, Geschichte der Philosophic des Mittelalters, Band ii.
§241.

THIRD PERIOD.
1294-1517.

INTRODUCTION.

THIS closing period of the Mediaeval Church is
throughout an illustration of the way in which,
under Divine Providence, the conditions are made ready
for a great crisis. The revolution of the sixteenth cen
tury came as a surprise to men only because they had
not the insight to discover the inevitable goal of the
preceding events. Through the space of two centuries
Europe had been preparing for that season of upheaval
and readjustment. Designedly or undesignedly, all
parties — the State, the Church, the critic within the
Church, and the agitator who was cast out of its fel
lowship — had been making their contribution toward
the final result. Even those who were most concerned
to preserve the old order of things intact became,
through their blind and selfish policy, the instigators
and servants of revolution. Nearly the whole list of
topics, therefore, upon which we now enter, might be
classed as antecedents of the Protestant Reformation.
The reason why humanism is not treated among
these topics is not the lack of a title to the same classi
fication. It was truly a forerunner of Protestantism.
By proclaiming the permanent worth of the classic

320 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
systems it gained recognition for the interests of civil
ization in general, and provided an offset to the domi
nance of the purely ecclesiastical. It thus assisted to
a departure from the mediaeval basis. But it was an
accompaniment of the first stages of Protestantism, as
well as a preparation. It will be of practical advan
tage, therefore, to defer its treatment till we reach the
Reformation era.
Some of the topics which have engaged our attention
in previous periods scarcely require a detailed consider
ation in this. Aside from features connected with the
papacy, church constitution does not exhibit many
noteworthy developments. A phase of some impor
tance in the relations of ecclesiastics to the State was
that which grew out of the increase of monarchical
power and independence, such as we find in England
and France toward the close of the period. This
tended to limit in a measure the immunities which had
been claimed by the clergy.
In the sphere of discipline, a principal fact to be
noticed is the enormous extent to which the sale of
jnf^lgences_y7as carried. The closing of the crusades
was far from involving a sealing up of the treasury of
merits. It was kept open to the hand of the Pope,
and any undertaking which he was pleased to call a
holy war, whether directed against a prince, a papal
rival, or a company of heretics, was made an occasion
for a generous offer of indulgences. Thus John XXII.
endeavored to sustain his unrighteous attack against
Louis of Bavaria by promise of the same indulgences
which were customarily obtained by joining the Eastern
crusade. Urban VI. offered like favors to those who

INTRODUCTION. 321
would assist in overthrowing the antipope. John
XXIII. sought, through an extensive sale of indul
gences, the means of humbling Ladislaus, King of
Naples. Martin V. promised plenary indulgences to
all who would take up arms against the Hussites ; and
Innocent VIII. urged on the Christians of Savoy and
France against the Waldenses in Piedmont, by the ex
pectation of an equal reward. Aside from these more
prominent occasions of distribution, there was a great
throng of local interests to which response was given.
The work of the Inquisition involved continual drafts
upon the unfailing treasury ; in fact, so far as a pro
fusion of indulgences could cheer the officials of the
Holy Office along their hard path, they were not desti
tute of comfort. Among subordinate agents engaged
in trafficking with these spiritual goods, not a few, no
doubt, were genuine prototypes of Tetzel, and practised
in a shameless way upon the ignorance of the people.1
While the abuse was not effectually dealt with, it did
not escape censure. The Council of Constance left on
record both its recognition of scandalous malpractice
and its desire to place it under restraint.2
1 We read of some who went so far in disregarding all limitations
upon the value of indulgences, that they proclaimed their efficacy to
deliver the damned from hell. (Raynaldus, anno 1453, n. 19 ; Amort,
De Origine, Progressu, Valore ac Fructu Indulgentiarum, pars ii. sect. i.
cap. xvi.) This, of course, was going further than the authorities could
allow. 2 The Council annulled all grants of indulgences made since the time
of Clement V., and gave the following as the reason for its action : " Quia
tempore schismatis, quo singula quasi spiritualia publice exponebantur
venditioni, multae quaestuationes ac petitiones cum quamplurium indul
gentiarum et concession um privilegio, ut verosimiliter prsesumitur, pro
21

322 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
In the department of worship there was a tendency,
along with increased acceptance of the immaculate
conception, to render increased homage to the Virgin.
Two new festivals, those of the Presentation and the
Visitation, were instituted in her honor. The credulous
found new occasion for Mariolatry in the fable respect
ing the miraculous transfer of the house of the Virgin
from Palestine to Loretto. There were, no doubt, some
offsets to these crudities ; but in the extensive lack of
edifying preaching, the means for disabusing the pop
ular mind of shallow and superstitious notions were
sadly inadequate.
pecunia plus, quam pro animarum salute sunt concessa? in gravamen
pauperum, et ecclesiastici status ridiculum, et quibus velut ex facilitate
veniae incentivum prabetur delinquendi." (Amort, pars ii. sect. ii.
cap. x.)

CHAPTER I.
CHIEF POLITICAL DEVELOPMENTS.
ITALY was still, in a pre-eminent sense, the country
of transitions. The conflicting claims and mutual
encroachments of Church and Empire, of free cities and
kingdoms, involved continual agitation and frequent
changes in the status of different members in the com
plex aggregate of political powers. This breaking up
of the sovereignty into many fragments was not with
out its benefits. Government was made thereby a
matter of personal concern to a relatively large pro
portion of the people. Responsibility and struggle im
parted a certain confidence, and stimulated to achieve
ment. At any rate, in point of intellectual activity,
Italy occupied a conspicuous place in Europe in the
fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. But, on the other
hand, lack of national unity involved great misery and
waste, and invited in the devastating hand of foreign
dominion. The emancipation from the French yoke which Sicily
achieved by the terrible expedient of the " Sicilian Ves
pers " (1282) proved to be a permanent acquisition.
Charles II., who succeeded his father upon the throne
of Naples, though seconded in his efforts by the Pope,
was not able to recover the island. Frederic, brother

324 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
of the King of Aragon, remained in possession. During
the whole time that the Angevin dynasty ruled at Na
ples, Sicily was independent of the Neapolitan realm.
First under Alfonso, who established the Aragonese
dynasty at Naples in 1442, the island kingdom was
reunited to its neighbor upon the peninsula.
At Rome the civil authority claimed by the pontiff,
while receiving a general acknowledgment, was still
subject to serious obstructions at the hands of the tur
bulent nobility and the unstable populace. The long
absence of the Popes from the city in the fourteenth
century gave enlarged scope to these unruly factors.
At this time occurred the most noted outbreak of re
publican enthusiasm witnessed in Rome since the days
of Arnold of Brescia. The leader in the movement
was Cola di Rienzi. His motive was not so much a
genuine zeal for democratic or republican rule as a
poetic antiquarianism. Being a man of ardent fancy,
he revelled in the glory of the old republican Rome.'
To bring back that glory seemed to his impetuous
mind a possible achievement. He hoped to unite all
the Italian cities in a confederacy centring in Rome,
and then to lift the eternal city to a still grander head
ship. Gifted with an eloquent tongue, and assisted by
that enthusiasm for the antique which then numbered
not a few votaries, among them the illustrious Petrarch,
Rienzi came speedily to a complete ascendency (1347).
The tribune became the dictator. In his earliest essays
he had been somewhat favored by the Pope, who was
willing to patronize democracy to a certain extent, as
a counterpoise to the Roman nobility. But when the
daring sweep of Rienzi's undertaking became manifest,

CHIEF POLITICAL DEVELOPMENTS. 325
the Pope joined hands with his adversaries to compass
his overthrow. This was the less difficult, as the pos
session of power brought to light Rienzi's lack of bal
ance and statesmanlike wisdom. Failing of the needed
support, he left the city. A subsequent reinstatement
sufficed only for a brief season of pompous rule. He
fell a victim in a popular insurrection in 1354.
The schism which covered the last quarter of the
fourteenth and the first part of the fifteenth century
was not favorable to the temporal interest of the
papacy. Not long afterwards, however, the Pope held
a more stable place than ever in Rome,1 and advanced
also in a conspicuous measure his rule over the sur
rounding territory.
The gravitation of the cities of Northern Italy toward
the estate of oligarchies or principalities was noticed in
the preceding period. Florence was one of the most
tenacious in holding on to her republican liberty, but
at length, in the course of the fifteenth century, allowed
it to be sacrificed before the powerful ascendency of
the Medici family.
A position of high importance was attained by Milan
in this era. Here the Visconti family usurped the con
trol. A princely rank had already been maintained by
them for some time, when it was virtually sanctioned
(1395), in that Milan was erected into a duchy by
letters patent of the Emperor. On the extinction of
this family in the male line (1447), the rule of Milan
fell into the hands of the able general, Francesco Sforza.
Meanwhile the intermarriage of the Visconti with the
1 More especially after the abortive attempt at a popular rising by
Stephen Porcaro, in the time of Nicolas V.

326 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
royal house of France had given rise in that quarter
to a claim upon Milan. A door was thus opened to
French ambition to gain a secure foothold in Italy.
Francis I., in the early part of the sixteenth century,
attempted to enter this door. He found himself, how
ever, effectually confronted by the Spanish power.
At the close of the thirteenth century the Ghibelline
party was in a repressed state in most of the Italian
cities. But it rose at various points in the next century,
and maintained itself with no little vigor. Some re
markable exhibitions were given, at this time, of the
hold which the Empire had upon the thought and feel
ing of men. As some of the early Christians had taught
that when the Roman Empire should be dissolved the
world would come to an end, so mediaeval Christians
thought of the Empire as coextensive with the tem
poral order of things. It seemed to them to be a neces
sary counterpart of the Church, a universal dominion
over the bodies of men alongside that spiritual dominion
which extends over all souls upon earth. The unex
tinguished force of this sentiment appeared in the warm
enthusiasm with which Henry VII. was welcomed as he
came into Italy in 1310. Though the issue proved that
very few, if any, desired to be really governed by the
Emperor, many hailed him in the first instance as
though he were the embodiment of beneficent sov
ereignty, the pillar of civil order. It was thus that he
was regarded by the greatest Ghibelline of the age, the
poet Dante. In his De Monarchia, which gave full
expression to his views, he argued that the Empire has
its own foundation, no less than the Church; that it
arose in the ordering of Divine Providence, is essential

CHIEF POLITICAL DEVELOPMENTS. 327
to human welfare, was acknowledged by Christ, who
was born and fulfilled His ministry under its sway, has
an inalienable right which cannot be surrendered even
by the free act of any particular Emperor, and is de
pendent upon no earthly sanction for its authority.
The Emperor should indeed cultivate relations of amity
with the Pope, and give ear to his spiritual counsels.
But in his own sphere he is independent. "It is
clear," says Dante, "that the authority of temporal
monarchy comes down, with no intermediate will, from
the fountain of universal authority."1 Thus Dante
opposed ideal to ideal, placing over against the arro
gant sovereignty of the Pope, which claimed to dis
pose of the Empire at pleasure, the divine right and
independent basis of imperial rule.2
1 Book III., translation by F. J. Church.
2 Bryce thus gives the genesis of the papal claim : " It was not diffi
cult to find grounds on which to base such a doctrine. Gregory VII.
deduced it with characteristic boldness from the power of the keys, and
the superiority over all other dignities which must needs appertain to
the Pope as arbiter of eternal weal or woe. Others took their stand in
the analogy of clerical ordination, and urged that since the Pope in con
secrating the Emperor gave him a title to the obedience of all Christian
men, he must have himself the right of approving or rejecting the can
didate according to his merits. Others again, appealing to the Old Tes
tament, showed how Samuel discarded Saul and anointed David in his
room, and argued that the Pope now must have powers at least equal to
those of the Hebrew prophets. But the ascendency of the doctrine
dates from the time of Pope Innocent ITI., whose ingenuity discovered
for it an historical basis. It was by the favor of the Pope, he declared,
that the Empire was taken away from the Greeks and given to the
Germans in the person of Charles ; and the authority which Leo then
exercised as God's representative must abide thenceforth and forever in
his successors, who can therefore at any time recall the gift, and bestow
it on a person or a nation more worthy than its present holders. This
is the famous theory of the Translation of the Empire, which plays so

328 THE MEDIMVAL CHURCH.
The dream of Dante was far from being fulfilled. No
Augustus arose to bring in a golden age of universal
peace. Inside the Germanic States the Emperor found
but limited means of asserting his will. While his au
thority was regarded in general as a necessary bond of
union, the princes were disposed to evade any particular
applications of it that were not agreeable to their minds.
Outside of Germany, after the days of Henry VII., the
Emperor possessed only a shadow of power. As the
modern era was approached, those romantic sentiments
which had given support to imperialism greatly waned.
The notion of universal rule lost its hold. Even the
ceremony of investiture with the Roman imperium —
the coronation by the Pope — was dispensed with,
Frederic III. (1452) being the last to receive this hon
ored token at Rome.1 In the sixteenth century the
head of the Holy Roman Empire had become very gen
erally in men's thoughts, as well as in reality, simply the
Emperor of Germany.
In France, the sovereigns who followed Philip the
Fair showed less ability for advancing royal and na
tional interests than had characterized his vigorous rule.
Moreover, they began to be embarrassed, within the
space of a generation, by enormous difficulties in the
external relations of the realm. The claim which Ed-
large a part in controversy down till the seventeenth century." (The
Holy Roman Empire, chap, xiii.)
"Dante's arguments are not stranger than his omissions. No sus
picion is breathed against Constantine's donation ; no proof is adduced,
for no doubt is felt, that the empire of Henry VII. is the legitimate con
tinuation of that which had been swayed by Augustus and Justinian."
(Bryce, chap, xv.)
1 Charles V. was crowned at Bologna.

CHIEF POLITICAL DEVELOPMENTS. 329
ward III. of England put forth to the crown of France,
and in pursuance of which he invaded the country in
1339, seemed at times, in the ensuing struggle of nearly
one hundred and twenty years, on the point of being
realized. Great defeats were suffered by the French
forces, as in the battles of Cre"cy, Poitiers, and Agin-
court. Perhaps the acme of distress was reached in
1429, when the English soldiers were pressing the siege
of Orleans with every prospect of success. The French
troops were dispirited, the King in despair. Then it
was that the weak was enabled to confound the mighty.
A humble peasant girl, Joan of Arc, became the in
spired heroine who retrieved the national fortunes. By
1453, the ambitious project which had been started by
Edward III. was a thing of the past. English domin
ion in France comprised thereafter only the town of
Calais and a narrow tract of adjacent territory. With
this emancipation from foreign pressure, the power of
the crown was increased. As early as 1439 a note
worthy blow was dealt to the remains of the feudal
system in the realm by the ordinance of Charles VII.
providing for a permanent military force. This was to
be officered by the nominees of the King, and was ex
pected to supersede very largely such private equip
ments as the nobles were accustomed to make. Under
the crafty policy of Louis XL (1461-1483) still further
advance was made toward the extinction of feudalism
and the concentration of sovereignty in the King.
English political history records two noteworthy de
velopments in this period. The first of these was an
advance toward parliamentary privilege, and constitu
tional limitations upon the monarchy. The wars with

330 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
Scotland, which began in the reign of the first Edward,
and those with France from the time of Edward III.
involved a financial drain which made it prudent for
sovereigns to consult the national representatives, and
to enlist their friendly co-operation. Hence Parlia
ments were called, and were conceded powers which
came to be deemed of constitutional virtue. " During
the long reign of Edward III.," says Hallam, "the ef
forts of Parliament in behalf of their country were re
warded with success in establishing upon a firm footing
three essential principles of our government : the ille
gality of raising money without consent ; the necessity
that the two houses should concur for any alterations in
the law ; and, lastly, the right of the commons to inquire
into public abuses, and to impeach public counsellors."
The second development was in an opposite direction
from the foregoing. This became manifest during the
wars between the houses of York and Lancaster, which
covered the space of a generation in the last half of the
fifteenth century. In the course of the struggle many
great nobles were attainted, and their confiscated es
tates added to the wealth and the consequent inde
pendence of the sovereign.1 With the accession of
the Tudors (1485) the counter development went still
further, and constitutional limitations upon the crown
were thrown very largely into abeyance.
1 " If the Wars of the Roses," says Green, " failed in utterly destroy
ing English freedom, they succeeded in arresting its progress for more
than a hundred years. With them we enter upon an epoch of consti
tutional retrogression, in which the slow work of the age that went before
it was rapidly undone." (Vol. ii. chap, i.)

CHAPTER II.
POPES AND COUNCILS.
A GLANCE over the period reveals several eras in
the fortunes of the papacy. First we have the
spectacle of lofty pretension ending in signal failure, —
a pontiff who would tread on the necks of kings cast
down himself into the dust. Then follows a long inter
val, in which the power that wrought this humiliation
holds the papacy in a subservient relation to itself, —
the interval of seventy years (1305-1376) during which
the Popes scarcely enter Rome, and are the subjects, or
at best the allies, of the French monarchy. Close upon
this follows a time of still deeper abasement of the
papal dignity. A schism of nearly forty years' duration
(1378-1417) gives occasion to the intervention of a su
perior tribunal, and important councils deal with Popes
as with a subordinate factor in church government.
The energy and shrewdness of the pontiffs who follow
the schism serve in a measure to recover lost ground,
but the gain is soon offset by the worldly ambition of
the Popes, which leads them to absorb their energies
in building up a principality in Italy, to the neglect of
wider interests, and to a total disregard of the gather
ing storm which is about to shake the fabric of their
power to its foundations. It will be our task now to
consider these developments in order.

332 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
I. Boniface VIII. entered upon his pontificate with
an ambition and a self-confidence in excess of his re
sources. He thought to rule as Innocent III. had
ruled. But a century had wrought no inconsiderable
change in the temper of princes and peoples. Europe
after the crusades was not the same as Europe in the
midst of the crusades. There was more alertness, more
independence, a stronger current of purely secular en
terprise. In pursuing any policy which looked toward
national advantage, a prince could be more firm against
papal demands, as being better assured of support
within his realm. It happened, too, as Boniface be
came Pope, that strong hands were in possession of
the sceptre. The German Emperor, it is true, was not
formidable ; but Edward I. of England was a prince of
strong will and resolute courage, thoroughly indisposed
to submit to any exterior authority ; and the same was
true of the French King, Philip the Fair, a man of
peculiar inflexibility, in whom feeling and conscience
were, to all appearance, absolutely dormant before self-
interest. The circumstances under which Boniface attained
the papal dignity were not such as to command for him
the most hearty and unanimous welcome. His prede
cessor, Celestine V., after a pontificate of a few months,
had taken the extraordinary step of a voluntary abdica
tion. With this act, which some regarded as in any
case of questionable validity, Boniface was more promi
nently associated than suited his reputation. Early
testimony reinforces the inference which is suggested
by the known character of Boniface, and informs us
that he took a leading part in persuading his weak pre-

POPES AND COUNCILS. 333
decessor to lay down his office.1 This was nothing else
than an expedient of the proud and officious cardinal
for hastening his own advancement, and is made to
appear all the more odious by his subsequent treatment
of Celestine. The humble man was not allowed to
choose his own place of seclusion, but was put under
strict custody, for fear that he might be instigated to
claim back his lost crown. According to Peter d'Ally,
Boniface afflicted his prisoner with needless severity,
contrary to the wish of the cardinals.2 However this
may have been, the discrowned pontiff was shabbily
treated in being robbed of his liberty. Surely Boniface
must have had an inadequate apprehension of the saint-
ship of Celestine, which was formally proclaimed by a
near successor, or he would have seen that the plea
of necessary prudence, used to cover his act of vio
lence, might very properly be challenged. A saint so
dangerous to the successor of Peter that he must be
treated like a criminal is a spectacle that calls for ex
planation. As respects Italian affairs, Boniface scored some vic-
1 Ptolemaeus Lucensis says that Boniface by his aptness for business
gained an eminent place in the College of Cardinals, " sed propter hanc
causam factus est fastuosus, et arrogans, ac omnium contemtivus." (Mu-
ratori, Rerum Italicarum Scriptores, xi. 1203.) The same writer states
that he was the foremost agent in persuading Celestine to abdicate.
(Raynaldus, Annal. Eccl., sub anno 1294.) Walsingham speaks of Boni
face as having craftily induced Celestine to resign the papal office, —
"subdole induxisset." (Hist. Anglicana, anno 1294.) The formula of
abdication which was read by Celestine is declared to have been written
by another. (Raynaldus.) The conclusion that this other was Boniface
lies near at hand.
2 Raynaldus, anno 1295, where some testimony of a different tenor is
given.

334 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
tones and suffered some defeats. In the latter must
be reckoned his attempt to extend the sovereignty of
Charles II., King of Naples, over Sicily. James of Ara
gon was indeed persuaded to abandon the claim of his
house to that island. But the Sicilians were not at all
disposed to fall again under the hated rule of the line
of Anjou, and heartily sustained Frederic, the brother
of James of Aragon, in his effort to establish himself
as their king. Boniface, who is supposed to have been
indebted to Charles II. for aid in securing his election,
entered vigorously upon the task of sustaining his ally.
He declared Frederic's assumption of the crown of
Sicily an abominable usurpation ; denounced his claim
as a complete nullity; forbade Frederic to adopt any
royal title whatever, and the Sicilians to yield him any
obedience, on pain of forfeiting all privileges which had
been granted by the Holy See.1 Aside from gratifying
the feelings of Boniface this peremptory mandate did
little good. The valiant Frederic fought successfully
for his crown. Boniface in the end allowed his claim.2
It was stipulated, to be sure, that the crown of Sicily
should revert to the King of Naples on the death of
Frederic. But such a provision looks very much like
an expedient to save appearances ; there could hardly
have been a serious expectation that it would be ful
filled. In another project Boniface was far more successful.
He gained indeed a complete triumph for the time being,
though ultimately compelled to pay dearly for his vic
tory. We refer to his onslaught against the Colonnas,
' Raynaldus, anno 1296.
2 Ibid., anno 1303.

POPES AND COUNCILS. 335
i
one of the most powerful families in the Romagna.
There was naturally a jealousy between the Pope and
this house. Having placed himself at the head of the
Guelfs, Boniface could hardly fail to hold the house
of Colonna, with its Ghibelline affinities, under sus
picion. On their part the Colonnas were probably not
very careful to conceal their ill will, and one of them
was so rash as to plunder some property of the Pope
which was being conveyed to his native town, Anagni.
Nothing more was needed to provoke jealousy into an
unappeasable rage. No distinction was made between
the guilty and the innocent. The two Colonna car
dinals were deposed and excommunicated, and their
nephews, as also their posterity down to the fourth
generation, were declared incapable of any spiritual
office. The condemned house was called upon to de
liver up its castles. As it refused to do this, appealed
against the Pope, and questioned his title, (since, as they
alleged, Celestine's abdication was unauthorized,) Boni
face proclaimed the whole family outlawed, — incapable
of transmitting any estates or dignities, — called the
faithful to a crusade against it, and stimulated the zeal
of any who would listen to his summons by promise of
the same indulgences as were wont to be granted to
those engaged in warfare for the Holy Land.1 The
Pope's war-cry found a response, especially in the rival
family, the Orsini. The Colonnas were obliged to
bend to the storm. Their castles were dismantled, and
no refuge was open to them save in flight from their
country. In Germany, Boniface met with indifferent success.
1 Raynaldus, annis 1297, 1298.

336 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
He was not able to control the alliances of the Em
peror Adolphus ; and after this prince was overthrown
by the tyrannical Albert, the stress of the conflict in
which the Pope was engaged elsewhere drove him at
length to recall his excommunications, and to make
terms with the usurper.
Hostilities between Edward of England and Philip
the Fair of France gave the Pope his first conspicuous
occasion to meddle with the affairs of these realms.
Early in his pontificate he commanded the belligerent
sovereigns to make peace. As they gave no heed to
his mandate, he resorted to more practical measures.
Near the beginning of 1296, he issued a strict injunction
against ecclesiastics making contributions to laymen,
under any name or pretext whatever, without the papal
authorization. Whoever should offend by contributing
or by exacting contribution was to be excommunicated,
and to have no privilege of absolution till the dy
ing hour, unless by special grant of the Pope. This
injunction, embodied in the bull Clericis Laicos, was
expected to arrest the warlike operations of the two
Kings, since both of them depended largely upon the
taxes which they had imposed upon ecclesiastical prop
erty. However, it failed of its purpose. The English
King brought most of his clergy to terms by threaten
ing, in case of non-compliance, to withhold from them
the protection of the laws.1 The French King re
sponded to the papal interference with an expedient
suited to his haughty temper, and calculated also to
touch the Pope to the quick ; he issued an order pro
hibiting the exportation of gold and other valuables
1 Walsingham, annis 1296, 1297.

POPES AND COUNCILS. 337
without the royal license. As Boniface was on the eve
of his conflict with the Colonna family, he found it
prudent to modify his demands upon Philip. Though
indulging to some extent in the lofty language which
he was so fond of employing, he really retreated from
the requirement which had been proclaimed in the bull
Clericis Laicos, and consented that the French clergy
might render financial aid to their sovereign. A rup
ture was thus avoided for the time being with the
French monarch. The English King also found it for
his convenience to make peace. Boniface was allowed
to arbitrate the case between the two sovereigns (1298),
it being distinctly understood that he was to fulfil this
function by the consent of the parties, rather than in
virtue of any official prerogatives.
In the further relations between the English King
and the Pope, the principal occasion of controversy
was the jurisdiction which Edward sought to assert
over Scotland. In answer to the appeal of the Scots
for his intervention, the Pope declared that the kingdom
of Scotland was a fief of the Holy See, commanded the
release of Scottish prisoners and the surrender of cas
tles and monasteries, and ordered Edward to despatch
his ambassadors to Rome that they might there receive
a final disposition of matters in dispute between the
two kingdoms. The response to the Pope's manifesto
was prudently made through the national Parliament,
rather than by the King in person. It was a bold
refusal of the Pope's settlement, the assembled barons
declaring that they would not permit the King to
surrender England's right over Scotland. In the
course of the negotiations, the Pope and the King ex-
22

338 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
changed elaborate documents in support of their re
spective claims.1
Meanwhile Philip the Fair took no special pains to in
sure peaceful relations with Boniface. He encroached
upon certain ecclesiastical benefices and jurisdictions ;
he gave asylum to the exiled Colonnas ; he entered
into a treaty with the excommunicated Albert of Ger
many. No open rupture occurred, however, till after
the jubilee year 1300. Perhaps the events of that year
had some influence in bringing about the collision that
followed. Certain is it that they ministered greatly
to the pride of the haughty pontiff. All Christendom
seemed to be streaming to his footstool. It has been
supposed that a million persons journeyed to Rome in
the course of the year, to claim the benefit of the ample
indulgences promised to all who should visit for fifteen
days the basilicas of Peter and Paul.2 The altars of
these churches overflowed with the offerings of the
multitudes which day after day, in ceaseless proces
sion, moved toward the sacred shrines of the apostles.3
1 Walsingham, anno 1301; Rymer, Foedera inter Reges Angliae et
alios quosvis.
2 For Romans, as not having to endure the labor of pilgrimage, fifteen
days extra were added. The proclamation of indulgence was couched
in the most emphatic terms. Of those making the required visitation it
said : " Omnibus vere poenitentibus et confessis, non solum plenam et
largiorem, immo plenissimam omnium suorum concedimus veniam pec
catorum." (Raynaldus, anno 1300.)
3 According to an eyewitness, money was thrown down in such pro
fusion by the swarming crowds that it was collected with rakes : " Pluries
ego vidi ibi tarn viros, quam mulieres conculcatos sub pedibus aliorum ;
et etiam egomet in eodem periculo plures vices evasi. Papa innumera-
bilem pecuniam ab eisdem recepit, quia die ac nocte duo clerici stabant
ad altare sancti Pauli tenentes in eorum manibus rastellos rastellantea

POPES AND COUNCILS. 339
What wonder if the proud old man in the chair of
Peter, in the midst of such flattering tributes to his
spiritual sovereignty, imagined himself not only lifted
high above the kings of the earth, but competent to
rule them according to his pleasure ! At any rate, the
next year he proceeded as if very ready to undertake
the task of humbling the French King.
Not content to bring various grievances to the King's
attention, the Pope chose as the bearer of his remon
strances an agent peculiarly odious, Bernard Saisset,
Bishop of Pamiers. The way in which the turbulent
legate fulfilled his charge angered the monarch beyond
measure. Matter of accusation was sought for, and
Bernard Saisset, as guilty of treasonable conduct, was
put under arrest. The wrath of Boniface now flamed
forth. In a series of bulls he commanded the release
of his legate, summoned the French clergy to Rome to
take measures for settling the disorders in the French
realm, and excommunicated the King.1 In some of
these manifestoes the papal prerogatives were asserted
in terms which had scarcely been paralleled up to
that time. This was especially true of the bull Unam
Sanctam, issued in November, 1302. What words could
more strongly assert the solitary eminence of the Roman
pontiff than the following : " We learn from the words
of the gospel that in his power are the two swords, the
spiritual and the temporal. For when the apostles said,
' Here are two swords,' that is, in the Church, the Lord
pecuniam infinitam.*' (Chronica Astensia, cap. xxvi., apud Muratori,
torn, xi.)
1 No one, however, had the courage to publish this excommunication
in France.

340 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
replied, not that it was too many, but that it was enough.
Certainly he who denies that the temporal sword is
in the power of Peter attends but poorly to this say
ing of Christ, ' Put up thy sword in its sheath.' Both
therefore are in the power of the Church, the spiritual
sword and the material ; the latter to be used for the
Church, the former by the Church ; the one in the hand
of the priest, the other in the hands of kings and sol
diers, but wielded according to the will and sufferance
of the priest. Now it is fitting that sword should be
subordinate to sword, and that the temporal authority
should be subject to the spiritual power : for the apostle
says, ' There is no power save that which comes from
God ; but all things coming from God are in orderly
arrangement'; and they would not be thus arranged,
unless sword were subordinate to sword, and the higher
were reached from the lower through intermediate
grades, according to the divine law which the blessed
Dionysius has expounded. Therefore, if the earthly
power transgresses, it is to be judged by the spiritual ;
if a lower rank of the spiritual transgresses, it is to be
judged by its superior ; if the highest spiritual rank is
at fault, it is to be judged by God alone, not by man,
as the apostle testifies, ' The spiritual man judges all
things, but he himself is judged by none.' This au
thority, even if it has been given to man, and is ex
ercised through man, is not a human, but rather a divine
power, given by divine sentence to Peter, and, both to
himself and his successors in the same Christ whom
he had confessed, a firm rock ; the Lord saying to the
same Peter, ' Whatsoever thou shalt bind,' etc. Who
ever therefore resists this power thus ordained of God

POPES AND COUNCILS. 341
resists the ordination of God, unless, as Manichaeus im
agines, there are two principles, which we judge to be
false and heretical, since Moses testifies that God made
heaven and earth not in principiis but in principio.
Moreover, we declare, say, and define that to be subject
to the Roman pontiff is for every human being alto
gether necessary to salvation." ]
Such language evidently implies a supremacy in the
Pope before which kings hold only the place of instru
ments, having no real autonomy or self-motion, except
so far as the papal will may choose to allow. To sus
tain these high claims against the refractory monarch
of France, Boniface was willing to relax his rule for
the time being in other quarters. So he made peace,
as we have seen, with Frederic of Sicily and Albert of
Germany. Furthermore, he ceased to press his claim
to suzerainty over Scotland, and left the English King
to pursue his ambitions in that quarter.
Philip on his part spared no expedient. His remorse
less egoism was a sufficient pledge that he would take
no step toward conciliation, save under the stress of
seeming interest. And in fact very little time was spent
in temporizing. The King, however, did not allow
his resentment to overcloud his discretion. Sharing
in the temper of the astute lawyers whom he had gath
ered about himself, he took his measures with keenness
and adroitness. The prosecution against the Bishop
of Pamiers was dropped, as being likely to alienate the
1 Raynaldus, anno 1302. The Fifth Lateran Council, held under
Leo X., which passes for an Ecumenical Council, distinctly approved
the Unam Sanctam. (Hergenrother, Conciliengeschichte, Fortsetzung,
§ 905; Liberatore, La Chiesa e lo Stato, p. 23.)

342 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
clergy ; the sentiment of patriotism was enlisted against
Boniface by the representation that his measures were
an attack upon the national independence ; the good
will of the people was solicited by promise of various
ameliorations in the administration ; and diligent effort
was made to thoroughly identify the cause of the King
with the cause of the nation. To this end the three
estates were assembled, • — the first instance in the his
tory of the French monarchy in which the commons sat
with nobles and clergy.1 The King found himself well
supported. The clergy, indeed, wished to preserve a
respectful attitude toward the Pope, but on the whole
they acquiesced in the policy of the King. As for the
nobles and the commons, they heartily seconded the
royal will, and sent to the cardinals a vigorous protest
against the papal assumptions and usurpations. At a
second meeting of the estates, the severest charges were
made against Boniface, and the necessity of a general
council to release Christendom from his oppressions
was asserted. This brought the struggle to a crisis.
Boniface prepared to hurl his most effective bolt against
the King. Excommunication, deposition, release of
subjects from all allegiance, prohibition of all recogni
tion of the deposed monarch either by service or ac
ceptance of any office or position at his hands, — such
1 Martin remarks on the contrast between the occasions which as
sembled the commons in England and France respectively : " The first
appeal to the commons in England had been made by the barons against
royalty, in the name of public liberties. The first appeal to the third
estate of France was made by royalty against the Pope, in the name of
national independence, and it was, strange to say, the most despotic of
the kings of the middle ages who assembled our first States General.
(ILstoire de France, livre xxvii.)

POPES AND COUNCILS. 343
were the specifications which Boniface prepared and
designed to publish by affixing to the porch of the ca
thedral in Anagni on the 8th of September, 1303.
When that day arrived, Boniface was in the custody
of deadly enemies, who hardly stopped short of per
sonal violence in their contumelious treatment of the
pontiff. These enemies were Philip's councillor, Wil
liam of Nogaret, and Sciarra Colonna. Supplied with
ample funds, they had hired a band of lawless soldiers,
and by a sudden sally into the town of Anagni, Sep
tember, 7th, had captured Boniface and forestalled his
thunderbolt against the French King. The Pope's cap
tivity was of brief duration. The people of Anagni who
had been enticed to a share in the assault, soon experi
enced a revulsion of feeling and drove out the captors.
But the rescue availed not for the humiliated pontiff.
The stroke which levelled his pride at the same time
pierced his life. He died shortly after the ordeal of his
shameful arrest.1 In his downfall, according to a re
port which became current among his opponents, this
prophecy reached its fulfilment : " He came in like a
fox, he will rule like a lion, he will die like a dog." 2
A loss of prestige naturally followed from the close
conjunction of such lofty pretension and such deep
humiliation. Even in the absence of further adversity,
the papacy must have put forth vigorous efforts in order
to recover lost ground. But ill fortune did not stop
1 Ptolemseus Lucensis states that his death was preceded by a con
dition of insanity. (Hist. Eccl., xxii. 36, apud Muratori.)
2 "Ascendisti ut vulpes, regnabis ut leo, morieris ut cano.'' The
words are ascribed in Walsingham (annis 1294, 1303) to Celestine, the
predecessor of Boniface.

344 THE MEDIMVAL CHURCH.
with the assault at Anagni. The grasping monarch of
France took pains to follow up his advantage. From
the immediate successor of Boniface, Benedict XL, he
obtained a repeal of most of the censures which had
been passed upon himself and his allies. Only William
of Nogaret, Sciarra Colonna, and others who were im
plicated in the capture of Boniface, were excluded from
grace. Further than this Benedict was not willing to
go in the way of conciliation. As Philip pressed for a
formal condemnation of the deceased pontiff, he called
forth resentment and opposition. A renewal of strife
seemed probable. But the speedy death of the Pope
brought matters to a halt ; and the character of the new
incumbent encouraged the King to expect a slackened
resistance to his designs.
II. Philip the Fair did not misjudge his own in
terests when he gave the weight of his influence in
favor of Bernard de Goth, Bishop of Bordeaux, and
thus directed to him the choice which for many months
the divided college of cardinals had been unable to ef
fect. For although he had adhered to Boniface in the
recent quarrel, it was well surmised that he might be
made subservient to royal designs, since he was not
a man of great personal force or elevation of character.
As report has it, the Bishop of Bordeaux paid a good
round price for the coveted preferment. He engaged, it
is said, to fulfil these six conditions: (1) To grant the
King complete reconciliation to the Church. (2) To
remove from him and his followers all censures which
had been imposed. (3) To concede to him the tenths
from the clergy, for five years. (4) To condemn and

POPES AND COUNCILS. 345
bring to naught the memory of Pope Boniface. (5) To
restore to the Colonna cardinals the goods and dig
nities taken from them. (6) To perform a great and
arduous undertaking, to be named at some future
time.1 A definite bargain, couched in these terms, may
not indeed have been made. But it is certain that the
papacy at this point passed into a subservient relation
to the French crown. As if to give visible expression
to this fact, the newly elected Pope, who bore the
name of Clement V., took up his residence on French
soil. He was crowned at Lyons in 1305. In 1309 he
made Avignon the seat of the papal court. This town,
it is true, was not a part of the French kingdom. It
belonged then to the King of Naples ; later, it came by
purchase into the possession of the Popes themselves.
However, it was not sufficiently remote from French
jurisdiction to escape being dominated by French in
fluence. The whole line of Avignon Popes, extending
over a period of full seventy years (1305-1376), if we
reckon from the beginning of Clement's administration,
was scarcely more than an attachment to the French
monarchy. Among the demands which Philip the Fair made
upon his papal ally, one was peculiarly grievous to the
soul of Clement V. To condemn the memory of Boni
face in the manner in which the King wished to have
it condemned, seemed to him to involve a serious dis
honoring of the papacy itself. Thus he was placed in
a most uncomfortable dilemma ; for it was not easy to
resist the royal demand. With a venom which may
be described as truly diabolical, Philip the Fair deter-
1 Raynaldus, anno 1305.

346 THE MEDIJEVAL CHURCH.
mined to use pontifical authority to hand over the
name of Boniface VIII. to everlasting infamy. Up
to 1311 the spectre of this unseemly prosecution pur
sued the harassed Pope. He was compelled to listen to
charges against his predecessor which made him out
to have been a blasphemous infidel, criminal, and
profligate. At length, however, Philip, to the inex
pressible relief of Clement, consented to abandon the
prosecution, it being understood that he should be
acquitted of all blame for anything which he had
previously done to the prejudice of Boniface. The
occasion of this change of resolution is not a matter
of distinct record. A favorite conjecture has been,
that the King, anxious to consummate his savage cru
sade against the Templars, gave up the case against
Boniface, thereby purchasing the papal edict, which
came forth in 1312, for the abolition of this distin
guished order. As Martin expresses it, " The living
were to pay for the dead, the Templars for Boniface." x
There is hardly warrant, however, for the supposition
of a definite compromise between the King and the
Pope, though it is not unlikely that the presence of
the one cause materially affected the dealing with the
other. The downfall of the Templars is one of the darkest
tragedies of European history. On any view of their
fate, it is most painful to contemplate. If they were
guilty, the mind is shocked by the sight of men spe
cially devoted to the service of the cross falling into
gross apostasy. If they were innocent, the heart is
overwhelmed with pity for their terrible sufferings.
1 Histoire de France, livre xxvii.

POPES AND COUNCILS. 347
Whether they were guilty or innocent, all sense of
justice and humanity is revolted by the barbarity of
the procedure against them.
Jealousy of the power of the Templars was the main
spring of the onslaught. It was seen that they had
become a formidable organization. They numbered
some thousands of the best soldiers of the age, and
these were supported by a much larger body connected
with the order in the capacity of servants. Great
wealth had also accrued to them. The fact that they
cultivated a kind of haughty reserve, and dwelt mainly
by themselves, naturally increased the suspicion of those
inclined to look upon them with an evil eye.
While the order had been subjected to various criti
cisms in the preceding century, these were only such
as a privileged and aggressive body in the Church was
likely to encounter. None of them implied a serious
conviction that the order had apostatized from Chris
tian morals or faith. But near the beginning of the
fourteenth century damaging rumors began to insinu
ate themselves, though rather in the neighborhood of
the French King than elsewhere. Renegade Templars
helped to gain credence for the evil reports, until at
length an atrocious list of charges was provided. These,
as they were specified in the course of the prosecution,
included such abominations as spitting upon the cross
at initiation, denouncing Christ as an impostor, pay
ing homage to a hideous idol, and giving full scope to
unnatural lusts.
Such charges were music to the ears of Philip. He
abhorred the independent spirit of the order. He felt
that in combination with the nobility they could defeat

348 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
his scheme of monarchical supremacy. Urged therefore
by jealousy, as well as by an avaricious thirst for their
great possessions, he began to press energetically for
the overthrow of the Templars. On the 13th of Oc
tober, 1307, at early morn, in accordance with secret
instructions which had previously been sent to the
officers of the crown, all members of the order in the
realm were seized and thrown into prison. To accu
mulate confessions free use was made of the torture
rack. In this way a somewhat formidable array of evi
dence was secured. A number suffered the extreme
penalty. On a single occasion (1310), fifty-four who
retracted their confessions were burned at the stake.
Several years later (1314), the Grand Master Jacques
de Molay suffered the like fate. In 1312, as stated
"above, the Pope declared the ord r dissolved. He did
this, however, in a way which avoided a conclusion
respecting its guilt, issuing his sentence, not as being
judicially required, but as expedient, — non per modum
dijfinitivce sententice, sed per viam provisionis et ordina-
tionis apostohcce.1
The reserve which appears in the papal sentence has
its reflex in the later verdict of history. Writers have
been perplexed by the entanglements of the case, and
have found it difficult to decide how far the Templars
should be regarded guilty or innocent. Against them
may be urged the record of their confessions. In their
1 Raynaldus, anno 1312. The property of the order was given to the
Hospitallers to be used for the benefit of the Holy Land. Much of it,
however, found its way into the coffers of the rapacious monarch, since,
to say nothing about direct seizures, he made exorbitant charges for
the temporary custody of the confiscated goods.

POPES AND COUNCILS. 349
behalf may be cited such considerations as the follow
ing. (1) The man who instigated and urged on the
prosecution was every inch a tyrant, and was manifestly
moved by resentment and avarice. (2) Torture or fear
of torture was undoubtedly a main factor in eliciting
confessions. (3) Confessions of guilt were not obtained
in all quarters. " In France alone," says Milman, " and
where French influence prevailed, were confessions
obtained. Elsewhere, in Spain, in Germany, in parts
of Italy, there was an absolute acquittal ; in England,
Scotland, and Ireland there appears no evidence which
in the present day would commit a thief or condemn
him to transportation." x (4) The scores of knights
who were burned at the stake steadfastly maintained,
so long as they could find voice, that the order was
guiltless of the alleged iniquities. The Grand Master
declared himself worthy of death because of the false
admissions which dread of torture and the flattering
words of King and Pope had led him to make, and
solemnly asserted with his dying breath the innocence
of the order. (5) There is a certain intrinsic improb
ability that such a body of men should have stooped
to such enormous abasement as was charged against
them. Like the contemporary charges against Boni
face VIII., those against the Templars invite to in
credulity by their apparent extravagance. (6) Several
contemporary writers expressed the opinion that the
1 Latin Christianity, book xii. chap. ii. Compare Schottmiiller, Der
Untergang des Templer-Ordens ; Lea, History of the Inquisition of the
Middle Ages. An account of the process against the Templars in Eng
land may be found in Wilkins, Concilia Magnae Britannia? et Hibernise,
vol. ii., anno 1309.

350 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
order was unrighteously made the victim of Philip's
rapacity.1 Subserviency to the French crown did not exclude
the Popes from the political field. On the contrary, it
almost seems as if they sought compensation for vas
salage to France by an extra degree of arbitrary deal
ing with outside nations. Thus Clement V. issued an
atrocious bull against the Venetians on account of their
encroachments upon Ferrara. Not content with denoun
cing against them the full list of spiritual penalties, he
made their property liable to confiscation and their per
sons to enslavement wherever they might be seized.2
A bull expressive of the same extravagant rage, and
containing like specifications, was issued by Gregory
XI. against the Florentines.3 John XXII. (1316-1334)
during the last ten years of his pontificate kept up an
1 Gieseler, § 96; Schottmiiller, i. 532-645. A very decided verdict
appears in the following, which, however, assigns a share of the guilty
responsibility to William of Nogaret: "In diebus suis [Clement V.]
admirabilis novitas, et persequutio facta fuit super ordinem Templari-
orum ; quod processit ex invidia et cnpiditate Philippi Francorum
Regis, qui odio Templarios habuit, eo quod ausi fuerunt stare contra
ipsum ex sententia excommunicationis data per jam dictum Bonifacium
contra dictum Regem. . . . Guilielmus de Nogareto Regis Francise
Cancellarius auctor fuit pro posse ruinse ordinis Templariorum, eo quod
patrem ejus tanquam hsereticum comburi fecerunt." (Chron. Astens.,
cap. xxviii.)
2 Raynaldus, anno 1309.
8 Raynaldus, anno 1376. "Et ne ipsorum temeritas transiret prse-
sumptoribus in exemplum, bona ipsorum priorum, confallioneriorum
vexillaef erorum justitise, officialium populi et communis, et etiam quorum-
cumque Florentinorum, ubicumque consistentium, immobilia de eorun-
dem fratrum nostrorum consilio confiscavimus ; et personas ipsorum
omnium et singulorum, absque tamen morte seu membri mutilatione,
exponimus fldelibus, ut capientium fiant servi, et bona eorum mobilia
quibuscumque fldelibus occupanda."

POPES AND COUNCILS. 351
implacable war against the German Emperor, Louis of
Bavaria. A contested election had involved a prolonged
struggle. This had ended in victory for Louis. So
far as Germany was concerned, there was a full prep
aration for peaceful acquiescence in his rule. At this
point the Pope stepped in, required Louis to submit
his claim to the papal decision, and on his failure to
do this loaded him with the anathema. Clement VI.
pursued him with equal implacability. A bull which
he issued in 1346 may perhaps be regarded as the su
preme specimen of pontifical cursing. Surely it would
be difficult to transcend such terms as these : " We
humbly implore divine power to repress the insanity
of the aforesaid Louis, to bring down and to crush his
pride, to overthrow him by the might of its right hand,
to enclose him in the hands of his enemies and pursuers,
and to deliver over to them his prostrate body. Let
the snare be made ready for him in secret, and let him
fall into it. Let him be accursed coming in ; let him
be accursed going out. The Lord smite him with folly,
and blindness, and frenzy of mind. Let the heavens
send their lightnings upon him. Let the wrath of the
omnipotent God and of the saints Peter and Paul
burn against him in this world and in that to come.
Let the whole earth fight against him ; let the ground
open and swallow him up alive. In one generation let
his name be blotted out and his memory extinguished
from the earth. Let all the elements be against him.
Let his habitation become a desert ; let all the merits
of the saints above confound him, and make open dis
play of vengeance upon him in this life ; and let his
sons be cast out of their habitations, and with his own

352 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
eyes let him see them destroyed in the hands of ene
mies." 1 These aggressions were met by the German
people with a fair degree of spirit. But the Emperor
at length grew weary of the ban, and coveted recon
ciliation. In England the special grievances suffered
at the hands of the Popes were the usurpation of pat
ronage and exactions of money. To old devices for
amassing revenue, new were added. Thus John XXII.
introduced the tax called annates, the value of a year's
income from a benefice. Money thus gained was used to
swell the magnificence of the papal court at Avignon, to
carry through great building projects,2 and to forward
French interests by overthrowing the German Emperor.
If England had been restive at an earlier date under
such encroachments she could not be expected to bear
them patiently now ; and in fact very plain tokens of
her resentment were given. Among the most sub
stantial of these were the statutes of provisors and
praemunire, the former being directed against papal pre
sentations to benefices, and the latter sustaining it by
forbidding any questioning of judgments rendered in
1 Raynaldus. A distinguished Roman Catholic of modern times has
added this comment : " Thou ravest, O Peter ; thy great pride makes
thee mad." (Baader, Werke, vol. x.)
2 Green, in his History of the English People, says : " The mighty
building, half fortress, half palace, which still awes the traveller at
Avignon, has played its part in our history. Its erection was to the rise
of Lollardry what the erection of St. Peter's was to the rise of Luther-
anism. Its massive walls, its stately chapel, its chambers glowing with
the frescos of Simone Memmi, the garden which covered its roof with
a strange verdure, called year by year for fresh supplies of gold ; and
for this, as for the wider and costlier schemes of papal policy, gold could
be got only by pressing harder and harder on the national churches the
worst claims of the papal court." (i. 407.)

POPES AND COUNCILS. 353
the King's courts, or any resort to foreign tribunals.
These statutes were passed in 1351 and 1353 respect
ively, and were renewed in 1365. Near the same time
the papal claim to the tribute which John had stipulated
for the realm, and which for a considerable time had
not been paid, was effectually resisted, the Parliament
heartily sustaining the King in rejecting the ill-timed
demand of the Pope.
While obnoxious measures were a source of bitter
ness, the personal character of the Avignon Popes was
not, on the whole, such as to conciliate affection and
respect. Vice was rampant in their neighborhood.
A large discount may be made on the description of
Petrarch, who was an eyewitness, and it will still ap
pear that Avignon was a veritable sink of iniquity.
The Popes no doubt were not fully responsible for their
environment ; at the same time, they helped rather than
hindered the demoralization. Clement V. lavished upon
his relations great sums drained from the Church, or,
still worse, squandered them upon the Countess Bruni-
sand de Foix, who was commonly reputed to have been
his mistress. John XXII. left tokens of shameful ex
tortion in immense heaps of gold. Clement VI. was
an elegant voluptuary. When reminded that his pre
decessors had been less extravagant in their expendi
tures, he replied, " My predecessors did not know how
to be Pope." 1 " The life of Clement," says Milman,
" was a constant succession of ecclesiastical pomps, and
gorgeous receptions, and luxurious banquets. Ladies
were freely admitted to the court ; the Pope mingled
1 Ludwig Pastor, Geschichte der Papste seit dem Ausgang des Mit-
telalters. 23

354 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
with ease in the gallant intercourse. If John XXII.,
and even the more rigid Benedict, did not escape the
imputation of unclerical license, Clement VI., who af
fected no disguise in his social hours, would hardly be
supposed superior to the common freedom of the eccle
siastics of his day. The Countess of Turenne, if not,
as general report averred, actually so, had at least many
of the advantages of the Pope's mistress, — the distri
bution of preferments and benefices to any extent,
which this woman, as rapacious as she was handsome
and imperious, sold with shameless publicity."1
An episode of some note in the annals of the Avignon
Popes was an unfortunate dogmatic venture by John
XXII. He put forth the conclusion that the saints do
not enjoy the beatific vision till after the day of judg
ment. There is no just reason to doubt, too, that he
designed to sustain this conclusion. But so much of
the odium of heresy was cast upon him, that he was
finally glad, if we may trust the accounts given, to ac
cept the outlet of escape which the Paris University had
shrewdly suggested, namely, that he had enunciated
his proposition as a thesis for disputation, and not as
dogmatic teaching.2
1 Book xii. chap. ix. It was quite in accord with the prodigality of
this Pope that he should have scattered indulgences with a, free hand.
His jubilee bull (1350) was made out in generous terms. The off-hand
way in which he therein lays his commands upon the angels can hardly
be regarded as anything less than a festive stroke. Speaking of one who
should die on the way to the celebration, he says : " Mandamus angelis
paradisi, quod animam illius a purgatorio penitiis absolutam ad paradisl
gloriam introducant." (Amort, pars i. sect. iii. cap. iii.)
2 Raynaldus, annis 1331, 1334. The words which he is said to have
used just before his death are sufficiently humble, and savor little of the
consciousness of infallibility : " Et si forsan in praedictis sermonibus,

POPES AND COUNCILS. 355
III. Gregory XL, who ended the " Babylonish Cap
tivity " of the papacy by returning to Rome in 1376,
died two years later. The election of a successor took
place under the most disturbed conditions. The Ro
man people were determined to have an Italian Pope,
and reinforced their demand by fierce threatenings and
by alarming demonstrations around the hall of conclave.
The French party deemed it prudent not to press their
interest. An Italian, the Archbishop of Bari, who took
the name of Urban VI., was elected. The Romans
were placated, but the temporary calm was purchased
at no small price. The new Pope had been only a few
weeks in the chair of Peter, when a storm, destined to
last for more than a generation, broke upon the Church.
Among the causes precipitating the trouble, the charac
ter of the Pope, next to the antagonism of the French
and Italian interests, was the most conspicuous. As
Gregorovius has remarked, Urban VI. was dowered
with every quality fitted to make him a demon of
strife.1 He was rude, overbearing, implacable. His
cardinals were forthwith alienated, especially those with
French affinities. Withdrawing to Anagni they sent
forth the declaration that the election of Urban, as
having occurred under the pressure of deadly peril, was
invalid. Their cause, no doubt, had a very poor legal
basis ; for although it was true that the electors had
been threatened with violence if they should not choose
vel collationibus aliqua, quae vel Scripturae sacrae seu fldei orthodoxae
quovis modo essent vel viderentur obvia, ipsa prater intentionem a nobis
fuisse prolata dicimus et asserimus eaque revocamus expresse, non in-
tendentes illis adhaerere, nee ea in praesenti defendere, nee etiam in fu>
turum." 1 Geschichte der Stadt Rom im Mittelalter, vol. vi.

356 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
an Italian, they had not been compelled to cast their
votes for any particular Italian, and moreover had fol
lowed up the election by acts implying a full acknowl
edgment of its validity.1 But the merits of the case
were not carefully inspected. France readily gave ear
to the disaffected cardinals, and supported their nomi
nee. Castile, Aragon, Scotland, and some others of
the smaller kingdoms, followed the example of France.
Thus was inaugurated the most obstinate schism known
to papal history.
At the beginning, the contention was in large part
a struggle between Avignon and Rome, between the
French and the Italian interest. Later, it assumed
more the character of personal ambition and pretension.
After Europe in general had become heartily sick of
the strife and the scandal, the opposing claimants con
tinued each to assert, with desperate tenacity, his ex
clusive right. The schism covered four pontificates on
the Italian side; namely, those of Urban VI., Boni
face IX., Innocent VII., and Gregory XII. The con
temporary representatives of the French and Spanish
party were Clement VII. and Benedict XIII. Not one
in this list, unless it were Innocent VII., gained a title
to respect or confidence. The unbearable temper which
Urban VI. manifested in the first days of his rule was
no false prophecy of what was to appear later. The
1 Theodoric a Niem, who, as an official at the papal court, had ex
cellent means of learning the facts, says that at the time of Urban's in
stallation no one expressed a doubt as to the validity of his election :
" Tunc nullum dubium nullusque rumor sinister erat in urbe Roma,
etiam inter Cardinales et alios quoscunque, quod idem Urbanus non esset
verus Papa, aut quod per impressionem vel alias minus canonice foret
electus." (De Schismate Papistico, lib. i. cap. iii.)

POPES AND COUNCILS. 357
pastoral rod became in his hand an instrument of un
sparing tyranny.1 Among the expressions of his savage
severity were the torture and execution of five of his
cardinals.2 His successor, Boniface IX., was guilty
of shameless simony and nepotism.3 The others earned
a well founded dislike by their extortion or tergiver
sation. This time of disgrace and diminished power on the
part of the papacy was naturally a time of opportunity
for those who were inclined to press for a reform. The
loosening of hierarchical restraint gave scope to larger
freedom of thought and larger freedom of action. The
movements of Wycliffe and Huss attained greater
breadth and momentum than would have been possible
in the face of an undivided and unencumbered sover
eignty. Many who were unwilling to go as far as the
English or the Bohemian reformer became nevertheless
very free in their animadversions upon the papacy, and
very bold in asserting its secondary place in church
constitution. Indeed, the subordinate position of the
Popes was not merely set forth as a matter of individ
ual opinion, but was formally promulgated under what
was clearly meant to be ecumenical sanction.
The Church was in a manner driven to this action
by the exigencies of the case. All attempts to heal the
schism by inducing the two Popes to resign had proved
1 Walsingham describes the implacability of Urban VI. in these
strong terms : "Vir, cujus captiositas multis fuit exitio, et sibimet, ut
ferunt, damno. Rigidus erat sibi, sed suis multo rigidior ; ita ut delin-
quentibus nunquam ignosceret, aut eorum aerumnis aliquatenus compa-
teretur." (Anno 1389.)
2 Theodoric a Niem, De Schismate Papistico, lib. i. cap. xlv.-lx.
8 Ibid., lib. ii.

358 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
abortive. There seemed to be no way of escape from
the fearful scandal and demoralization which afflicted
Christendom, except in resorting to a higher tribunal.
What should this be ? The early history of the Church
with its record of councils which had manifestly occu
pied the place of supreme authority, furnished the an
swer. It was claimed that a council representative of the
Church at large had plenary right to accomplish what
ever the health of the Church might require, even to
the judging and deposing of a pope. This principle was
championed with special vigor by the Paris University
under the leadership of John Gerson. In the endeavor
also to give a practical application to the principle, the
university took a conspicuous part.
The first of the councils which was convened on this
basis was that of Pisa, in 1409. It dealt with the of
fending Popes in a very summary manner, declaring
them deposed as being notoriously guilty of schism, her
esy, contumacy, and perjury, whereby they had scan
dalized the whole Church.1 In this decree the council
addressed itself to only one part of its intent. It was
determined to fulfil its opportunity to carry through
greatly needed reforms. To this end pledges were ex
acted of the cardinals, before they proceeded to elect
a Pope, that the council should not be dissolved until
it had applied itself to redressing abuses. The pledges,
however, proved to be no adequate security. The new
Pope, Alexander V, parried the demand for reform.
Having only such consolation as might be found in the
promise of a new assembly for the consideration of the
subject, to be convened after three years, the council
1 Raynaldus, anno 1409.

POPES AND COUNCILS. 359
was dissolved. In both parts of its intent it had met
with failure , for the deposed pontiffs refused to accept
its sentence, and, while the larger part of Europe ad
hered to the nominee of the council, the other two
claimants had some following. The result was that
there were three instead of two who asserted their right
to the papal honors. The case was moreover aggra
vated by another disagreeable feature. Alexander V.
died soon after the dissolution of the council. It was
suspected, whether with or without just cause, that he
had been poisoned by his cardinal, Balthasar Cossa. But
this cardinal became his successor, the notorious John
XXIIL, who was charged by his contemporaries with
almost every namable crime, and was undoubtedly one
of the vilest in the catalogue of bad Popes. Such was
the issue of the high hopes and claims with which
doctors and bishops had assembled at Pisa, — the add
ing of a third contestant of peculiar worthlessness to
the two already contending for the papal chair.
The task which failed of accomplishment at Pisa fell
to the Council of Constance. In convening this coun
cil the recently elected Emperor Sigismund bore a
prominent part. Though John XXHI. had reason to
dread the action of a council assembled beyond the
bounds of Italy, he had been brought into such straits
by Ladislaus, the crafty and aggressive King of Naples,
that he could not well resist the pleasure of the Em
peror. Accordingly, he subscribed a call for a council
to be opened at Constance, November 1, 1414.
The attendance at the council was very large. The
members, with their following, amounted to eighteen
thousand. Among the dignitaries were three bearing

360 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
the title of patriarch, thirty-three archbishops, nearly
one hundred and fifty bishops, one hundred and twenty-
four abbots, and about three hundred doctors of theol
ogy and canon law. Many representatives of secular
princes were also present. Altogether, the council
brought to Constance and its neighborhood from fifty
to a hundred and fifty thousand people.
Within the council proper there was no doubt much
diversity of temper and purpose. A considerable per
centage of the membership was too closely allied with
the corrupt system of the times to entertain any hearty
sympathy with reform. But a very fair proportion
were men imbued with a resolute intention to grapple
with existing evils, and to put them under effectual
restraint. The predominance of this better element
was favored by the peculiar arrangement that the suf
frage should be taken by nations, and should also be
exercised by the doctors, and even by representatives
of princes, as well as by bishops and abbots. This ar
rangement diminished the relative weight of the Italian
officials, the factor most liable to take the part of ob
structionists. In dealing with the schism, the council was success
ful. Early in its sessions, the view that all three
claimants of the papacy must be required to abdicate
came into the ascendant. Any disposition to recognize
John XXIIL was hindered by reports of his criminal
and dissolute practices. Finally, all charity toward
him was cancelled by his flight from Constance, with
the evident design to break up the council. He was
therefore formally deposed (May 29, 1415). About a
month later, Gregory XII. voluntarily abdicated. This

POPES AND COUNCILS. 361
left Benedict XIII. alone in the way. As he stubbornly
refused to yield his claim, he was declared deposed
(July 26, 1417). The council now had matters in its
own hands. Many were of the opinion that it ought to
make the most of its opportunity ; that without wait
ing to elect a pope, who would very likely block the
wheels of reform, it should at once legislate against
evils and abuses in the Church. Others argued that
in such a work it was most fitting that a pope should
co-operate with the council. The division on this sub
ject was not very different from that which took place
at a more decisive crisis a century later. The German
and English nations were in favor of postponing the
election of a pope. Their preference, however, was
overborne by the representatives of the Italian and the
Spanish nations, and in part by those of the French
nation. The cardinals, in union with delegates from
the several nations, were authorized to proceed to an
election. The choice fell upon the Cardinal Colonna,
known as Martin V. It required no great length of
time to make it plain that the experience of Pisa was
to be repeated. The council found that it had a rival
in the Pope. There was no longer the unity which
was requisite to deal successfully with questions of
reform. The Pope was able, therefore, by entering
into concordats with the nations separately, to quiet
demands for the time being, at the expense of only
moderate concessions.
Among the more significant transactions at Constance
was the definition by the council of its own preroga
tives. These were set forth at the fifth session in the
following explicit terms : " The Council of Constance,

362 THE MEDIJEVAL CHURCH.
lawfully assembled in the name of the Holy Ghost, and
forming an ecumenical council representing the Cath
olic Church, has its power immediately from Jesus
Christ, to which every person of whatever rank and
dignity, the papal itself included, is bound to yield
obedience in those things which concern the faith, the
extirpation of the aforesaid schism, and the general ref
ormation of the Church in its head and members. It
likewise declares that if any one, of whatever condition,
rank, or dignity, the papal itself included, shall contu
maciously refuse obedience to the commands, statutes,
ordinances, or precepts of this or any other ecumenical
council legitimately assembled, in relation to the afore
said matters acted upon or to be acted upon, unless
he shall repent, shall be subjected to condign penance
and be duly punished." 1 We have here a declaration
that an ecumenical council is the superior of a pope in
point of authority. To be sure, the opening words
limit the reference to the Council of Constance ; but
what follows extends the application to ecumenical
councils generally. The unmistakable sense of the
decree is that an ecumenical council, as such, has its
authority immediately from Christ, and in both of the
great departments of ecclesiastical supervision, namely,
faith and administration, has a sovereignt)' to which
that of the Pope is subordinate. This is acknowledged
by so prominent a Roman Catholic writer as Alzog.
" The fault of the Council of Constance," he says,
" was this, that it set forth as a dogmatic sentence
\_dogmatischer Grundsatz], valid for all time, that
which was in a manner justified by the necessities of
1 Mansi, torn, xxvii. p. 590.

POPES AND COUNCILS. 363
the occasion." 1 So far, then, as the voice of the
council was concerned, the subordination of the Pope
was dogmatically established at Constance. What
more then was needed to give it a valid title to a
place in Roman Catholic dogmatics? Even in the
view of an Ultramontanist, nothing more could have
been requisite than confirmation by the Pope. And
this seems actually to have been given. Of course, it
may be surmised that Martin V. was not fully reconciled
to the notion of the council's superiority. But as he
owed his own official elevation to the action of the
council, he could not well assail its authority. Accord
ingly, we have the record that he ratified whatever in
matters of faith the council had done conciliariter, that
is, in a regular session ; 2 and also required assent to
its ecumenical character, as appears in the bull Inter
Cunctas. Now, as has been intimated, the council's defi
nition of its prerogatives was set forth as a dogmatic
sentence or matter of faith. This, indeed, may be
denied, but not without a certain inconvenience on
the part of a Romanist. If the definition of the coun
cil's prerogatives at Constance is not reckoned among
matters of faith, then what is to be said of the defi
nition of the Pope's prerogatives as rendered at the
Vatican Council in 1870 ? It is not an easy matter,
therefore, to exclude the application of the Pope's bull
1 Kirchengeschichte, § 271.
2 The text of the ratification as given by Mansi (session xlv.) is as fol
lows : " Quibus sic factis sanctissimus dominus noster dixit respondendo
ad pradicta, quod omnia et singula determinata, conclusa et decreta in
materiis fldei per prasens concilium conciliariter, tenere et inviolabiliter
observare volebat, et nunquam contravenire quoque modo. Ipsaque sic
conciliariter facta approbat et ratificat, et non aliter, nee alio modo.''

364 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
of confirmation from the famous decree of the fifth
session. In truth, a few years later, at the Council of
Basle, this bull was quoted as proving the superiority
of the council over the Pope.1 Moreover, the action
of this council, in confirming the decree "passed at Con
stance, seems to have received the consent of Eugenius
IV.2 In view of these facts, what judgment shall one
pronounce upon the decree promulgated at the Vatican
Council in behalf of the Pope's infallibility and un
qualified supremacy? On the one hand stands the
decree of the council and the confirmatory sentence
of the Pope ; on the other hand, and in direct contra
diction of the foregoing, stands the decree of the Pope
and the consent of the council.
Another decree should be noticed, as also exalting
the importance of the general council as a factor in
church constitution. At the thirty-ninth session it was
provided that such a council should be held once in
ten years. The independence which it was hoped
this decree would secure for the council would evi
dently be suited to make it a very formidable authority
over against the Pope.
In addition to healing the schism and inaugurating
reform, the Council of Constance took up the task of
extirpating heresy. Sentence was passed against the
opinions of Wycliffe and Huss, and the latter was
sent to the stake. A succeeding chapter will give the
details of these transactions. We notice here only
1 See the excellent work of Lenfant, Histoire du Concile de Con
stance. 2 Bossuet, quoted in our first volume of the Modern Church, pp. 473,
474.

POPES AND COUNCILS. 365
the somewhat remarkable fact, that the men who came
to Constance with the greatest zeal for reform had no
sympathy at all for such a reformer as Huss. Men like
Gerson and D'Ailly showed no inclination to befriend
him. The pontificate of Martin V. covered the interval
between the Council of Constance and that of Basle.
Under him a measure of the lost prestige of the papacy
was regained. The tenor of the effort and legislation
at Constance was conveniently ignored, and the old
line of papal prerogative and practice was pursued.
Even that feature of papal administration which had
become specially obnoxious, namely, its manifold modes
of extortion, was not perceptibly ameliorated. Some
of the most striking exposures respecting the insatia
ble and unprincipled greed of the Pope and the curia
which are on record pertain to the time of Martin V.1
The Council of Basle (1431-1449) was the last in
the list of reform councils which a scandalized and
awakened Church caused to be convened in this era.
Its history is a history of struggle against the stubborn
opposition of the papacy, a struggle which for a time
was somewhat successful, but finally ended in defeat.
The council was called by Martin V., whose death
occurred at the opening. His successor, Eugenius IV.,
1 See J. Voigt, Stimmen aus Rom fiber den p'apstlichen Hof im fiinf-
zehnten Jahrhundert. The correspondence of the ambassadors of the
Teutonic order which is therein quoted shows how little reverence was
inspired by a close inspection of the papacy. In a communication of
the year 1429 exhortation is given to despise the ban of the Pope in Ger
many, as it was despised in other quarters. " Only we poor Germans,"
it is said, " imagine that the Pope is an earthly god ; we should figure to
ourselves rather that he is an earthly devil, as in truth he is."

366 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
distrusting his ability effectually to control an assembly
in Basle, undertook, after a very brief interval, to trans
fer it to Bologna, advancing various pretences to cover
up his real motive. But this unreasonable and per
verse attempt was met with proper resolution. The
Cardinal Julian Caesarini, who had been appointed to
preside over the council, answered the reasons alleged
for a transfer, and showed that it would involve serious
damage in various ways, and especially in breaking up
the negotiations already set on foot for composing the
Hussite troubles.1 In the assembled prelates gener
ally, the spirit of independence was stirred up by the
Pope's opposition. Without regard to his approbation
the council was formally opened (Dec. 14, 1431). At
the second session (Feb. 15, 1432), the decrees passed
at Constance respecting the supreme authority of the
council were renewed. In subsequent sessions the
Pope was addressed as a subject rather than as a mas
ter, and was commanded to revoke the decree of disso
lution, and to present himself at Basle. For a time
Eugenius IV. was disposed loftily to ignore all such
demands. At length, however, impelled by the pre
carious condition of his affairs in Italy, he consented to
acknowledge the council, and sent legates to represent
him in its sessions (1433). The assembly now assumed
very worthy proportions, and, besides the plan of an
agreement with the Hussites, some important measures
were passed, such as the decrees limiting papal reser
vations, abolishing annates, and opposing the hasty
imposition of interdicts. This reform legislation, to
gether with the position taken respecting the authority
1 Lenfant, Histoire de la Guerre des Hussites et du Concile de Basle.

POPES AND COUNCILS. 367
of a general council, served as the basis of the " Prag
matic Sanction " which was enacted by the French
government in 1438.
It was understood, even while there was no formal
rupture between the Pope and the council, that he
was really its enemy, and only needed a pretext to
make manifest his hostility. Such a pretext was sup
plied by the negotiation of a plan of union with the
Greek Church. The council had hoped to secure the
Greek delegates ; but the Pope, being sooner able to
provide means of transportation, put them into relation
with himself, and, on the plea that Basle was unsuited
to the interest in hand, ordered the council, in 1437, to
meet in Ferrara. In January of the following year,
sessions were begun at the Italian city. Some months
later, owing to the breaking out of a pestilence, Flor
ence was made the seat of the Pope's synod ; and here
the union project with the Greeks was carried forward
to its consummation.1 Meanwhile, the Council of Basle
asserted its authority, refused to be dissolved, declared
Eugenius IV. deposed (1439), and installed as his suc
cessor Felix V. But this bold action was not sustained
by public feeling. The memory of the ordeal which
had so long tried their endurance was too fresh in the
minds of the nations for them to be pleased with a
renewal of the papal schism. The nominee of the
council found very little support, and was constrained
to abdicate in 1449. In making an unsuccessful ven
ture the council lost prestige, and served to strengthen
the hands of its rival. During its later years it had
scarcely more than a nominal existence.
1 Considered more fully in Chapter IX.

368 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
IV. Nicolas V. (1447-1455) made a skilful use of
the advantage bequeathed by the successful competi
tion of his predecessor with the council. His pontifi
cate, however, is less distinguished for political prestige
than for literary renown. He was the first great patron
of humanism. Entertaining the warmest appreciation
for books and for authors, he spared no pains to enrich
the libraries of Italy, and to encourage those engaged
in literary tasks. With a zeal which seems like a prov
idential adaptation to a great crisis, he sought to con
serve the treasures of learning which fugitive Greeks
were able to bear away from the Eastern capital as it
fell, in 1453, before the Turks. The cultivated tastes
of Nicolas V. were also exercised in the patronage of
architecture. Costly churches and public edifices rose
under his auspices. Among the larger projects of this
kind which he contemplated, but left his successors to
fulfil, was the rebuilding of St. Peter's.
The fall of Constantinople gave occasion to a re
newed effort to engage Europe in a crusade. This was
a leading interest with Calixtus III. (1455-1458). It
also fired the zeal of his successor, Pius II., insomuch
that he finally added the force of example to urgent
persuasions, and consumed his failing strength in an
attempt to help forward in person the expedition against
the Turks. Only an indifferent response, however, was
made to the summons of either Pope. The spectacle
of the nations uniting under the papal headship in a
common undertaking had become forever a thing of the
past. Too much money had gone into the papal treas
ury on the pretence of being stored up for the recovery
of the East, too long and painful an experience of

POPES AND COUNCILS. 369
naked selfishness and worldly greed in the Popes had
been endured, to allow their call to come to the nations
with any moral power or effectual authority.
Pius II. presents a marked example of the tendency
of liberal principles to expire in the chair of Peter.
As ^Eneas Sylvius he had been the lax humanist, the
fortune-seeking litterateur, the keen observer of men
and things, whose sketches gave a remarkably vivid
picture of his times, the secretary whose eloquent speech
sustained the Council of Basle against the Pope up to
the later years of its protracted sessions. As Pius II.
he was none of this. He was not even a patron of the
humanists, and treated them with a coldness which
caused them to sigh for the days of Nicolas V.1 As for
the principles which had been published at Constance
and Basle, the word execrabilis, which gives the name
to a bull of his, is no inapt index of how they were re
garded in his revised estimate. In this bull the sup
position that an appeal may be made from the Pope to
a higher tribunal is denounced in very emphatic terms.
His zeal for the old order of papal claims came also to
a conspicuous manifestation in the effort which he put
forth to secure the abolition of the Pragmatic Sanc
tion in France. Deluded by the hope of compensat
ing advantages, Louis XL, in 1461, surrendered this
charter of Gallican liberties, to the great disappoint
ment of the nation.2
1 G. Voigt, Enea Silvio de Piccolomini, als Papst Pius II., und sein
Zeitalter. 2 The Parliament refused to ratify the decree of abolition, and the
matter was not regarded as so definitely settled but that new action was
taken in the reign of Francis I. 24

370 THE MEDIMVAL CHURCH.
The period extending from 1471 to 1503, and covered
by the pontificates of Sixtus IV, Innocent VIII., and
Alexander VI., was one of almost unparalleled infamy
in the history of the papacy. A vicious system in the
hands of vicious men bore fruits which might well
bring the blush of shame to all interested in the good
name of the Church. The system was not new, but
its rankest growth fell at this time. Gregorovius de?,
scribes it, with characteristic felicity of phrase, as fol
lows: " With Sixtus IV. the priestly character of the
Pope began to vanish, and that of territorial lord be
came so prominent, that the successors of Peter in that
era appeared as representatives of Italian dynasties, only
accidentally holding the place of Popes and wearing
the tiara in place of the ducal crown. The thoroughly
worldly schemes to which the Popes now devoted
themselves required more than ever the use of worldly
means, such as financial speculations, traffic in offices
and in matters of grace, unprincipled arts of state-craft,
and the dominance of nepotism. Never before was
nepotism driven with such recklessness. It became
the principle of the entire administration of Sixtus IV.
Nothing could wear a more singular appearance than
did this illegitimate product in Rome. Papal protdg^s,
in most instances the actual bastards of the Popes,
Vatican princes, being brought upon the theatre of
Roman affairs with every new incumbent of the papal
office, advanced suddenly to power, tyrannized over
Rome and over the Pope himself, contended for count-
ships in a brief round of craft and intrigues against
hereditary lords and cities, kept in good fortune often
times only so long as the Pope lived, and founded, even

POPES AND COUNCILS. 371
when their power went to pieces, new families of papal
princes. Such adjuncts of the Popes gave expression
to their personal sovereignty, and at the same time
were the supports as well as the instruments of their
worldly dominion, their trusted ministers and generals.
Nepotism became the system of the Roman state ; it
supplied the lacking principle of hereditary right ; it
gave into the hands of the Pope an administration
party, and also a means of offsetting the opposition of
the cardinals." 1
The favor of Sixtus IV. to his nephews was like the
sunshine of imperial favor to some fortunate parasite
in the degenerate times of pagan Rome. They revelled
in the enormous proceeds of accumulated benefices.
Peter Riario, the younger of the nephews who were
raised to the dignity of cardinal, had an income of
60,000 gold florins. Yet even this sum was inadequate
to the demands of the senseless prodigality into which
the unbalanced young man was plunged by the excite
ment of his sudden elevation. Having wasted both
himself and his fortune, he died greatly in debt at the
age of twenty-eight.
It needs hardly to be stated that what the Pope gave
with one hand to such creatures he gathered by violent
or questionable means with the other. Infessura may
have written with some excess of asperity, as the rep
resentative of an opposing party, but there is a large
1 Geschichte der Stadt Rom, vol. vii. Some have supposed that
"nephew" was a euphemistic term in the vocabulary of more than
one Pope. Thus Guicciardini makes note of the peculiar shamelessness
of Alexander VI. in that he openly acknowledged his sons, whereas
preceding Popes had veiled their disgrace by calling their sons nephews.
(Istoria d' Italia, i. 25, 26.)

372 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
element of credibility in his words, when he says that
the mingled pomp and avarice, the vanity and extor
tion, the faithlessness and tyranny, of the Pope earned
for him a cordial hatred, and caused his death to be a
signal for rejoicing. Perhaps the most odious of the
transactions charged against Sixtus IV. was the part
which he took in the conspiracy of the Pazzi against
the Medici in Florence. In the execution of the atro
cious plot, a murderous attack was made upon Julian
and Lorenzo Medici during the time of service at
church. Julian fell mortally wounded ; Lorenzo barely
escaped a like fate. The conspirators expected that
the populace would join them and approve their bloody
work. But the contrary took place, and the instigators
of the murder were visited with summary vengeance.
The Pope's complicity in the attempted overthrow of
the Medici is beyond question. He may not have coun
selled the shedding of blood ; but there is no reason to
believe that he was specially anxious to avoid it. The
direction of his sympathies was sufficiently indicated
by the anathemas which he thundered against the
Florentines, because their wrath had broken over into
a swift and unsparing judgment against the conspir
ators.1 Innocent VIII. (1484-1492) abased the papacy no
less than his predecessor. His great care was to pro
mote and to enrich his numerous children.2 To this
1 Ludwig Pastor concludes that the Pope had cause to proceed against
the Medici, but thinks it unfortunate that, instead of resorting to open
war, he patronized a clandestine scheme for seizing the persons of the
two brothers. (Geschichte der Papste seit dem Ausgang des Mittelalters,
ii. 478-481.) 2 Infessura says that he had seven, born of different mothers. An

POPES AND COUNCILS. 373
end, offices were sold with perfect shamelessness. Still
further, the Pope sold himself to the arch-infidel, and
engaged to serve as his jail-master. For the sum of
forty thousand ducats annually he held the brother
of the Sultan Bajazet a prisoner, instead of employing
him, as a crusading zeal would have dictated, in weak
ening the Sultan's power. How httle can be said in
praise of this pontiff appears from the following words
of Alzog : " His efforts to destroy the last remnants of
the Hussite heresy, and also to uproot the practice of
magic and witchcraft, belong to the better ecclesiastical
measures of Innocent VIII." 1 How many hundreds
of innocent persons were miserably destroyed as re
puted witches by reason of the infatuated zeal which
the superstitious bulls of this Pope fostered, it would
be difficult to estimate.
Alexander VI. (1492-1503), representing the Spanish
family of Borgia, stands by general consent for the cli
max of papal wickedness.2 The bribery by which he
epigram of the times has been understood by some to teach that he
had sixteen. It runs as follows :
" Octo Nocens pueros genuit, totidem puellas,
Hunc merito poterit dioere Roma patrem."
Cardinal Hergenrother gives the stages of his evolution toward the
papacy as follows : first father, then husband, then widower, then priest.
(Conciliengeschichte, Fortsetzung, § 860.)
1 Karchengeschichte, § 273.
2 It is true that some adventurous apologists have attempted to white
wash even this Pope. But the task is a melancholy one. As Pastor af
firms, in the light of documentary evidence, the case is so decisive against
Alexander VL that any attempt to rescue his character is perfectly fu
tile. (Geschichte der Papste, i. 588, 589.) Cardinal Hergenrother seems
to have settled upon the same conclusion. (Conciliengeschichte Fort
setzung, §§ 865, 873.)

374 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
secured his election,1 and the adulterous connection
which gave him five children, were not perhaps in those
days tokens of extraordinary turpitude. They were
rather the snare by which the aged Borgia was pre
cipitated into an unequalled abyss. The crime by
which the validity of his election had been hazarded
was a spur to strengthen himself all the more energeti
cally by grasping every political advantage in his reach.
His love for his children and insatiate thirst to advance
them to princely greatness overcame every sentiment
of righteousness and shame. The most abhorrent ex
pedients of his predecessors for accumulating money
took on enlarged proportions. As an old epigram
has it, " Vendit Alexander claves, altaria, Christum."
Distinguished Roman families were despoiled on false
pretences. The property of dead cardinals was seized in
exercise of the " right of spoils," and some of the more
wealthy were believed to have been poisoned to hasten
the appropriation of their goods. Rome was in fact
terrorized and Christendom ruled in the interest of the
bastards of a Pope, who was supposed to be, in virtue
of his position, the champion of priestly celibacy.
Alexander VI., no doubt, was greatly helped on the
road to infamy, and urged beyond his real inclination, by
the evil demon of his pontificate, his son, Caesar Borgia.
The father became really the servant. In Caesar was
a spirit which brooked no rival and stopped at no arti
fice. To gain an open wa}' to the goal of his ambitions,
1 Guicciardini says he purchased openly the votes of cardinals by
offers of money or positions. (Istoria d' Italia, i. 11.)

POPES AND COUNCILS. 375
he murdered his brother, the Duke of Gandia, and
caused his body to be cast into the Tiber.1 So, at
least, many in that age believed ; and while the nature
of the case does not allow of absolute proof, the corre
spondence between the criminal audacity of the assas
sination and the known character of Caesar makes it
difficult to exclude the suspicion that his hand was
stained with a brother's blood. The murder of his
brother-in-law, the husband of his sister Lucretia, he
undoubtedly brought about, and that under circum
stances of great atrocity. These and other crimes were
not unknown to the Pope. But from a sense of in
ability to cope with his son, as also probably from a
certain satisfaction in his powerful diabolism, he over
looked his deeds of blood. As Caesar, after being raised
to the dignity of cardinal, resigned the ecclesiastical
state, the Pope warmly seconded his efforts to establish
himself as a secular prince. The petty principalities in
the estates of the Church were overthrown. A more
thorough subjugation of this territory was made than
had before been effected. Caesar as Duke of the Ro-
magna had everything under his hand.
But the ill-gotten power vanished sooner than it was
1 For a narrative of all the known details see Joannes Burchardus,
Diarium sive Rerum Urbanarum Commentarii (Jun., 1497). The story
indicates a prevalence of crime not a little appalling. The boatman who
saw the body thrown into the river did not think it necessary to report
the matter, as being only one of a hundred instances which had come
under his own observation, and about which no inquiry had been made.
" Interrogaverunt pontificis servitores cur ipse Georgius tantum crimen
non revelasset gubernatori urbis ; respondet se vidisse, suis diebus, cen
tum in diversis noctibus varie occisos in flumen projici per locum pre-
dictum, et nunquam aliqua eorum ratio habita fuit; propterea de causa
hujusmodi estimationem aliquam non fecisse."

376 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
acquired. A banquet, at which the Pope, Caesar, and
a cardinal were present, was followed by the severe
sickness of all three, — a fact giving some ground for
the suspicion of poison. The Pope died. Caesar in his
disabled condition could not manage the transition to a
new administration in his own interest. His power
waned from day to day. A year after the death of his
father he was a prisoner in Spain. After two years of
confinement, he escaped to the King of Navarre, in
whose service he fell in 1507.
The benefit of Caesar Borgia's conquests fell to Ju
lius II. If the one object of Alexander VI. had been
to advance his children, the one object of Julius II.
was to build up and to strengthen the temporal sover
eignty of the Pope. A more warlike pontiff never sat
in the chair of Peter. His ambition, if more respect
able than that of his immediate predecessors, was yet
altogether worldly. Whatever the gain may have been
which his policy brought to the papacy, it involved in
the issue great hazard and loss. The entanglements
of the Popes as temporal lords and political manoeu-
vrers gave large opportunities to the great revolt from
the Roman Church.
Leo X. (1513-1521), if he shared little in the martial
temper of Julius, was equally secular in tone. In place
of military strategy he put the arts of diplomacy. By
such means he gained no less an advantage than the
abolition of the Pragmatic Sanction in France. Poli
tics and literature filled up his horizon. A liberal pa
tron of the learned, fond of sumptuous fStes, intent only
upon worldly advantage, he did nothing to appease that
growing demand for reform which at length in his

POPES AND COUNCILS. 377
pontificate broke forth with irresistible energy, and
began to revolutionize the face of Europe.
The review which has been given of the papacy in
the preceding pages affords naturally a partial ground
of inference as to the state of the clergy in general.
While their chiefs were giving such examples of world
liness and license, it could not be expected that the
great body of ecclesiastics would be models of self-
denial, sobriety, and devoutness. In fact, there is a
sad accumulation of testimony respecting the corrup
tions and misdeeds of the clergy. With special fre
quency is the charge of incontinence urged against
them. In satires, in serious protests, in legislation, in
compromises, in despairing comments, the evidence is
heaped up to a superfluity of proof that the law of
celibacy was, to a very large extent, either a nullity or
an occasion of infamous laxity. The scandal of cleri
cal license engaged the attention of such fourteenth
century writers as Langland and Chaucer.1 The Uni
versity of Oxford, in a list of articles respecting the
reformation of the Church put forth in 1414, charac
terized the licentious lives of the clergy as a thing most
opprobrious to the Church and damaging to morals.2
A doctor of divinity at the Council of Constance de
clared that the unchastity of the prelates was a matter
of common fame.3 Pope Nicolas V. was obliged to
confess that the clergy seemed hardly to regard incon-
1 See "Piers Ploughman " and " The Persones Tale."
2 Wilkins, Concilia, iii. 364, 365.
3 "Versum est in proverbium quod praclati tot nutriunt meretrices
quot familiares."

378 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
tinence as sin. In some quarters a proper regard for
the purity of their homes led the people to demand
that their priests should have concubines. Record of
such a demand is found in connection with Spain and
some of the Swiss Cantons.1 Nicolas de Clemangis
says that it was insisted upon in a large proportion of
the parishes in his time ; 2 and Theodoric a Niem speaks
of the Scandinavian bishops not only as living openly
in concubinage, but as requiring their priests to do
likewise. How great a despair of successful dealing
with the evil was felt is indicated by the fact, that
both in the Council of Constance and that of Basle
eminent men gave their voice in favor of abolishing
the law of celibacy.
In the monasteries, there were many instances of a
like turpitude. Nothing could be more revolting than
the state of things at the renowned cloister of St. Al
bans, as described by the Archbishop of Canterbury in
a monitory letter to the abbot.3 According to Nicolas
de Clemangis, matters had reached such a pass in the
cloisters of women that to take the veil was to run im
minent peril of a life of prostitution.4
A reformation " in head and members," to use the
oft-repeated phrase of the councils of this era, was
plainly an imperative demand. It was to the credit of
1 H. C. Lea, Sacerdotal Celibacy.
2 De Ruina Ecclesiae, cap. xxii.
8 Wilkins, Concilia, iii. 632, anno 1490.
* " Quid, obsecro, aliud sunt hoc tempore puellarum monasteria, nisi
quaedam, non dico Dei sanctuaria, sed veneris execranda prostibula, sed
lascivorum et impudicorum juvenum ad libidines explendas receptacula ;
ut idem hodie sit puellam velare, quod ad publice scortandum exponere."
(De Ruina Ecclesiae, cap. xxxvi., apud Von der Hardt.)

POPES AND COUNCILS. 379
the age that to so large a degree it struggled to fulfil
this demand. It was to the credit of a great multitude
of earnest men and women, that in the midst of wide
spread degeneracy they kept themselves unspotted from
the world. Forms like that of the saintly Catharine of
Siena (1347-1380) appear all the brighter because of
the sombre background.1
1 See the graceful characterization by Gregorovius, vi. 509-511.

CHAPTER III.
REPRESENTATIVES OF CRITICISM AND REFORM.
THE above title does not refer to those currently
termed " Reformers before the Reformation."
Succeeding chapters will give to these that special
consideration which their importance demands. We
have here to make note of several individuals, who,
without earning the technical designation, showed some
thing of the critical insight, and in some cases some
thing also of the moral earnestness, which are necessary
in reformers. "~~ "— -¦-
Near the beginning of the period, the high papal
claims of Boniface VIII. called forth some noteworthy
specimens of criticism. Two men in particular sig
nalized themselves by the freedom of their comments,
namely, iEgidius of Rome and John of Paris, the for
mer an Augustinian monk who became Archbishop of
Bourges, the latter a Dominican theologian. .ZEgidius
argues that the Pope's jurisdiction is confined to the
spiritual domain, and that he is guilty of usurpation
against the prerogatives of princes when he assumes
control of secular affairs. His place as the vicar of
Christ should be regarded as enforcing this limitation.
For Christ renounced earthly dominion. When the peo
ple wished to make Him king, He fled from them ; and

CRITICISM AND REFORM. 381
when one asked His decision upon a temporal matter,
He declined judgment in such things as being foreign
to His vocation. His instructions also to His disciples
imply that He wished them to keep equally free from
the entanglements of the world. The conclusion that
he who is so exalted as to have dominion in things
spiritual must be, with still better right, lord over things
temporal, is based on a sophism. Only in respect of
things belonging to the same order can we conclude
from the greater to the less ; otherwise, it would follow
that he who is a physician of souls must needs be at
the same time a physician of bodies.
Similar statements are found with John of Paris.
The Pope's prerogative in things temporal he confines
to a chief share in the management of ecclesiastical
goods. In this management, as he teaches, the Pope
is by no means to be counted irresponsible. He can
be called to give an account of his stewardship. In
case of serious abuse he can be deposed, even as a
bishop or abbot can be deposed. In relation to tem
poral princes, the Pope has only spiritual weapons at
his command. It may be allowable for him to use such
for the overthrow of an unworthy ruler ; but it is to be
understood that a reciprocal right and duty lie with the
temporal ruler, it being incumbent upon him to use his
temporal power to depose a Pope who is clearly unfit
for his position. The plea that the Pope is beyond
reach of human judgment, since the spiritual man is
judged by none, is groundless ; for the Scriptures affirm
the exemption of the man who is truly spiritual, and
not of one who merely holds a so called spiritual office.
In relation to other members of the hierarchy, the Pope

382 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
has only a qualified supremacy. They are there by
right of original appointment, as well as he, and their
functions are not to be regarded as a grant from him.
" The power of the inferior prelates," says John of
Paris, " is not from God through the medium of the
Pope, but immediately from God, and from the suffrage
and consent of the people. For Peter, of whom the
Pope is the successor, did not send the other apostles,
whose successors are the other bishops ; nor the seventy-
two disciples whose successors are the presbyters. But
Christ sent them immediately. Nor did Peter breathe
upon the other apostles, to give them the Holy Spirit,
and power to remit sins ; but Christ breathed on them.
Paul also says that he received the apostolate not from
Peter, but immediately from Christ, or from God."
Like Dante, John of Paris, accepting the fact of Con-
stantine's donation, denied its validity.
Still bolder specimens of criticism appeared a few
decades later. A principal occasion for these was
found in the fierce onslaught against the German Em
peror which was begun by John XXII. An additional
stimulus to criticism was also supplied to a very zealous
class by this Pope, inasmuch as he decided against the
Franciscans of the Stricter Observance, and, much to
their disgust, supported the distinction between usu
fruct and proper possession of goods. Among the
writings which the agitations of the times called forth;
the most important place belongs to the Defensor Pads.
The author is understood to have been Marsilius of
Padua, at one time Rector of the Paris University. The
Franciscan John of Janduno may have rendered him
assistance.

CRITICISM AND REFORM. 383
The tone and contents of the Defensor Pads are well-
nigh matters for surprise. Propositions and arguments
which are commonly associated with the sixteenth cen
tury we find here, before the days of Wycliffe, ex
pressed with the utmost distinctness.1 The author
takes pains to assert a relative independence for the
State. To this end, he teaches that the New Testa
ment, unlike the Old, does not mix the civil and the
religious. It is occupied rather with religious teach
ings, and no more attempts to regulate directly the
civil relations of men, than it does to give instruction
in medicine, mathematics, or navigation. The object
of the State is to secure the good of men as members
of a temporal order ; the object of the Church is to
instruct and to assist men as members of a supernatural
order. In its own sphere the State is not to be coerced
or hindered. To it belongs the whole system of cor
poral punishments. If it chooses to proscribe heresy
within its limits, it may inflict temporal punishments
upon heretics. The Church cannot dictate its policy
in this matter, and must be content with visiting its
own penalties, namely, those of an ecclesiastical nature,
of which the maximum is excommunication. The tem
poral jurisdiction of the State is properly regarded as
extending over all its subjects, the clerical as well as
the lay. The immunity from civil jurisdiction claimed
by the former should not be granted, as such immunity
is a fruitful source of crimes, and is incompatible with
the interests of civil society. The allegiance of sub
jects is not to be tampered with by ecclesiastical man-
1 " If any one was a forerunner of Luther and Calvin," says Ludwig
Pastor, " it was Marsilius." (Geschichte der Papste, i. 69.)

384 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
dates. The authority which assumes to cancel the
obligation of oaths, though calling itself apostolic, is
rather to be described as devilish. The priestly pre
rogative of binding and loosing belongs within the
spiritual domain, and even there has its important lim
itations. God alone, properly speaking, can forgive
sins ; the priest can only adjust the penitent's ecclesi
astical relations, not his essential relations with God.
In dealing with the theory of the papacy the author
takes out the whole foundation. The words of the
Gospel, " Upon this rock I will build my Church," he
applies not to the confessing. Peter, but to the Christ
confessed. He rejects the plea that without the Pope
the Church would be without a head, claiming that
Christ is the head, who has promised to be with His
Church to the end of the world. He denies that Peter
had any primacy of authority among the apostles, and
maintains that, even if such a primacy had been con
ferred upon him, it is perfectly gratuitous to assume
that it was transmitted by him to the Roman bishop.
On the basis of Scripture, as he takes pains to assert, it
is far from clear that Peter was ever in Rome, and the
bishop of that city might more appropriately be termed
a successor of Paul than of Peter. So far was the
papacy from being a part of the original constitution
of the Christian Church, that at first there was not even
a distinction between presbyters and bishops. The
power of the Roman bishop was gradually acquired,
and resulted from the prominence naturally pertaining
to the chief pastor in the capital of the world. His
authority rests upon convention, and is far from final.
The Scriptures, as interpreted by the great body of

CRITICISM AND REFORM. 385
Christians in successive generations, are the supreme
authority. Among vehicles for expressing the mind
of Christians the general council takes precedence.
Having thus assailed the theory of the papacy, the
author proceeds with like boldness to attack its practice.
His picture of the Roman court is drawn with an un
sparing hand. " Those," says he, " who have crossed
the threshold of the Roman curia, or, to speak more
correctly, the house of merchandise, the abominable
haunt of robbers, know full well that it is the refuge of
all the vicious, who drive a trade with things spiritual
and temporal. For what -else does one find there except
a concourse of Simonists from all quarters? What
else but the clamors of advocates, the machinations of
those who feed on strifes and on persecutions of the
righteous ? The cause of the innocent is likely there
to be decided against them, or, unless they can expedite
it by means of gold, to be postponed so long that, finally
exhausted, wearied out by innumerable hardships, they
are compelled to abandon their cause, though it be just
and worthy of commiseration."
William Occam, the English Franciscan, who entered
into close relations with the German Emperor and used
his pen in his behalf, wrote with less openness than
Marsilius. Imbued with something of a predilection for
a subtle method, he brought forward arguments on both
sides of the subject. But still the drift of his discus
sion is sufficiently clear. Among the most important
of the points which he makes against the papal pre
rogatives in things temporal is the impertinence of the
appeal, continually made by the Popes, to the theocratic
system of the Old Testament. Christianity, he says,
25

386 THE MEDIMVAL CHURCH.
even as Pilate had the penetration to discover from the
words of Christ, is not a kingdom of this world. The
New Testament economy has not the same relations to
the State as had the Old Testament economy, so that
the latter cannot be taken as a precedent. " In this
distinction," says Neander, " between the Old and the
New Testament point of view, we see a downfall pre
pared for the theocratic system of the middle ages."
Reference to the papal schism has already given oc
casion to note how the voice of criticism and reform
claimed a hearing in the early part of the fifteenth cen
tury. Among the men of that era whose character
and opinions entitle them to the largest consideration
were Nicolas de Clemangis, John Gerson, and Peter
d'Ailly. The first of these was little inclined to in
novation in doctrine or polity. His boldness was prin
cipally exercised in a moral censorship. In his De
Ruina Ecclesice he uncovers the evils of the times
with a remorseless fidelity. All classes, from the Pope
down, are represented as coworking by their worldli
ness, their avarice, and, in a large proportion of eases,
their shameless vice, to bring in the abomination of
desolation. As a remedy for this woful condition,
Clemangis emphasized a general turning unto God in
heart and life. He had but moderate confidence in
the special expedients which engaged the zeal of some
of his distinguished contemporaries. Even a general
council seemed to him to hold out little promise of
good, unless the prelates should assemble in a spirit
vastly different from that by which most of them
seemed to be animated. The Church, he argued, de
served the humiliation and affliction which had over-

CRITICISM AND REFORM. 387
taken it, on account of the crying iniquities of its
members, and ought not to expect the cloud of divine
wrath to be lifted until works meet for repentance had
been brought forth. His watchword, in fine, was moral
and religious reform, as the essential preliminary to
peace and unity in the Church.
In Gerson we may note something of the same deep
religious vein as in Clemangis. Indeed, he is properly
classed among the representatives of mystical piety,
among the successors of the Victorines and of Bona
ventura. The traits, however, which warrant this clas
sification were most conspicuous in his closing years.
In the middle period of his life he was a foremost actor
upon the theatre of public events. He had a great
interest in practical expedients for healing the schism
and reforming the Church. As connected with these
ends, he was much concerned with questions of. church
constitution. His leading views upon these questions
have already been indicated, inasmuch as they found
expression in the decisions of the Councils of Pisa and
Constance, especially the latter. The position which
he took, as appears in his work De Modis Uniendi ac
Reformandi Eeclesiam, was by no means identical with
that of Marsilius. He was disposed to look upon the
hierarchy, with its different ranks, as a divinely sanc
tioned and permanent arrangement. He assigned an
important place to the Pope, only claiming that he
must not be regarded as endowed with an unqualified
and irresponsible authority. The Pope, he said, cannot
properly be called the head of the Church ; that desig
nation belongs to Christ ; the Pope is rather a foremost
member, and as such may be styled the vicar of Christ.

388 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
Under ordinary circumstances, he holds the place of
chief executive. The Church, however, can tempora
rily dispense with his rule, and suffer no serious detri
ment. His right is not indefeasible. As being a falli
ble man, he can err both in faith and practice, and that
to a degree which may threaten to subvert the interests
of the Church. In such a case he may be deposed.
The good of a single realm may justify the dethroning
of an hereditary prince ; much more then may the good
of Christendom justify the deposing of a pontiff who
holds his place in virtue of an election. An incor
rigible Pope is to be dealt with according to the rule
of conduct toward a sinning brother, as laid down in
the Gospel. If, after suitable effort to bring him to a
better mind, he does not show repentance and amend
ment, he is to be treated as a heathen man and a
publican. The prerogatives of his office cannot be
regarded as independent of character and conduct.
" That a mortal man should claim the power of binding
and loosing in heaven and on earth, while yet he is a
son of perdition, given to simony, avarice, mendacity,
unjust exaction, and fornication, proud, pompous, and
worse than the devil, is ridiculous." The pastoral
office, the prerogative to feed sheep, was given to
Peter on condition of love to Christ. Love to Christ
is made known by suitable works. He who does the
works of the devil may well be regarded as forfeiting
the pastoral office. The proper tribunal for dealing
with an unworthy and intractable Pope is the general
assembly of Christians, the ecumenical council. Such
a council may be called without the consent of the
Pope ; and indeed, where his title is in question, he can-

CRITICISM AND REFORM. 389
not properly be regarded as having the right either to
dictate the place of meeting or to preside over the ses
sions. The council, notwithstanding the lack of the
papal presidency, has plenary authority. Such consti
tutions, canons, or decrees as it may be pleased to
enact are of binding force, so that in no wise does it
lie within the option of the Pope to neutralize or im
pair them by his dispensations.
The leadership of Gerson ended with the Council
of Constance. His spirits were not a little dashed by
the poor success of the council in the matter of reform.
Moreover, he found it unsafe to resume his position as
Chancellor of the University of Paris, since his resolute
opposition to the doctrine of tyranncide had earned
him the hatred of the powerful Duke of Burgundy.
He passed, therefore, from Constance into Bavaria.
After the death of the Duke of Burgundy, in 1419, he
took up his abode in the city of Lyons, where he died
in 1429.
The Cardinal Peter d'Ailly, a disciple of Gerson,
was a leading spirit in the Council of Constance. He
coincided in general with Gerson's teaching respecting
the prerogatives of the council, and pressed for a re
form of abuses.1
In the time of the Council at Basle we meet with a
type of literature little known to the middle ages, a
genuine specimen of historical criticism. This came
1 On the writers thus far noticed in this chapter, Gieseler and Nean-
der afford very full information. The text of the Defensor Pads is
found in Goldastus, Monarchia, Roman. Imp. Von der Hardt's collec
tion of documents relating to the Council of Constance gives the writ
ings of Clemangis, Gerson, and D'Ailly bearing on questions of reform
and church constitution.

390 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
from the hand of Laurentius Valla, and consisted in a
disproof of the famous donation of Constantine, that
fable concocted in the eighth century. It was shown
by the critic, from the phrases of the document pur
porting to donate the Western Empire to the Pope,
from the lack of reference to it in early history, and
from the fact that no Pope had ever been in possession
of the power alleged to have been conferred, that the
document could not be genuine.1 Valla also declared
for the spuriousness of the Epistle of Abgarus to Christ,
and contended that the so called Apostles' Creed could
not have been composed by the joint agency of the
whole college of apostles.
Exploits of this kind in the field of criticism natu
rally aroused the guardians of the faith. Valla was
brought before the Inquisition. The good offices of
Alfonso, King of Naples, saved him from a capital in
fliction, and he made his escape at the expense of
the humiliating ordeal of scourging. Subsequently,
he chose to tread in less perilous ways. His literary
talents commended him to Nicolas V., and under the
favors of this pontiff the voice of the critic was effect
ually silenced.
1 Nicolas of Cusa had already expressed doubts about the genuine
ness of the donation of Constantine, and, independently of Valla, the
English bishop, Reginald Pecock, near the middle of the fifteenth cen
tury, attempted a disproof on historical grounds. (Pastor, Geschichte
der Papste, i. 16.)

CHAPTER IV.
THE WALDENSES.
THE origin of the Waldenses is traced back with
sufficient certainty to the third quarter of the
twelfth century. The founder was Peter Waldo, a rich
merchant of Lyons. Being directed to serious thought
by the sudden death of an acquaintance, he concluded
to apply to himself the advice which Christ gave to
the rich young man. Accordingly, he distributed his
wealth to the poor. At the same time, the little knowl
edge of Scripture which he had gained from the ser
vices of the Church excited his desire for a more
thorough introduction to the Bible. To gratify his
ambition in this direction he employed the labors of
two men, who made translations for him into the ver
nacular. What he learned in this way he felt impelled
to impart to others, many of whom in their turn became
teachers. So an association of Bible readers and ex
pounders was formed, which through an ever widening
circle endeavored to instruct the common people in the
truths of Holy Writ.
In the above we have the substance of several medi
aeval accounts respecting the rise of the Waldenses.
One of these is from Reinerus, or rather from the hand
of a later writer, who added to the treatise which the

392 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
Dominican inquisitor had written near the middle of
the thirteenth century. " Observe," says the writer,
"that the sect of the Poor Men of Lyons, who are
also called Leonists, arose in the following manner.
Once, when the principal citizens were assembled in
Lyons, it happened that one of them died suddenly
in the presence of the company ; whereby one of them
was so much alarmed that he immediately distributed
a large property to the poor. And from this cause a
great multitude flocked to him, whom he instructed to
be imitators of Christ and the apostles." 1 Stephanus
de Borbone, a Dominican of the thirteenth century,
gives a similar account of the beginning of the sect,
stating that thejr were called either Valdenses from the
first author of their heresy, who was named Valdensis,
or Poor Men of Lyons, because they first began in that
city the profession of poverty. He says he had his
information from many persons who had seen the earlier
members of the sect, and more especially from the
priests who served Peter Waldo in the work of trans
lation. On this last point his narrative is as follows:
" A certain rich man of the said city called Valdensis,
hearing the Gospels, and not having much learning,
yet being desirous to know what they contained, made
an agreement with the said priests, that the one should
translate into the vulgar tongue, and that the other
should write what he dictated ; and this they did. In
1 Contra Waldenses, cap. v., Max. Bib. Vet. Patrum, torn. xxv. See
also the same and other documents in R. S. Maitland's volume on the
Albigenses and Waldenses. Only chapter vi. in the " Contra Wal
denses " is legitimately attributed to Reinerus. (Dollinger, Sektenge-
schichte, i. 117.)

THE WALDENSES. 393
like manner [they translated] many books of the Bible,
and authorities of the fathers which they called Sen
tences." He adds : " This sect began about the year
of our Lord 1170, under John, surnamed Bolesmanis,
Archbishop of Lyons."1 The account which is im
properly attributed to Petrus de Pilichdorf, though
differing in some items, points to the same general con
clusion respecting the origin of the Waldenses.
It appears from the accounts ascribed to Reinerus
and Pilichdorf, that a rumor was current at a quite early
date embodying the notion that the Waldensian type
of sectaries had been in the Church ever since the time
of Constantine and Pope Sylvester.2 The former of
the two accounts seems to give a certain credit to the
rumor, inasmuch as it makes the sect of Leonists older
than the other sects mentioned. But in the very next
chapter we have the language quoted above, accord
ing to the plain import of which the rich merchant
of Lyons, who lived in the twelfth century, was the
founder of the Leonists or Waldenses. It must be sup
posed, therefore, that in the reference to the antiquity
of the sect the writer was not thinking of a definite
party occupying a distinct territory, but only of the
supposition that views very similar to those of the new
sectaries had long since found adherents; otherwise,
he stands in glaring contradiction with himself, that
is, if it be supposed that the same person wrote both
chapters. As for Pilichdorf (so called) he utterly discredits the
1 Quoted by Maitland.
2 The writing attributed to Pilichdorf belongs to the year 1395
(Edouard Montet, Histoire Litteraire des Vaudois du Piemont, p. 150.)

394 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
rumor, declaring the claim to a remote antiquity an in
vention for deceiving the simple. " They lie when
they say that their sect has existed from the time of
Pope Sylvester." 1 His testimony indicates that among
the Waldenses themselves the tradition of a remote
origin early found place, and it is understood that they
continued through the following centuries to cherish
the same tradition. This leaves the association which
gathered about the merchant of Lyons to be explained
either as an offshoot from a more ancient association, or
as an independent growth, which soon coalesced with a
more ancient organization. Where is that more ancient
association supposed to have had its seat? In the Cot-
tian Alps, the rugged country of Piedmont, the home
of the Vaudois, lying between Turin on the east and
Grenoble on the west. There, says the tradition, dwelt
a people who were preserved from the corruptions
which riches brought into the Church directly after its
alliance with the State, — a people who kept the faith in
its purity. Some modern writers have raised this tra
dition to the rank of indubitable fact. What could be
more positive in tone than the following, which appears
in the preface of quite an elaborate treatise ? " From
the apostolic age itself down to the present, that vener
able Church has been seated in the valleys of the Cot-
tian Alps. There it has never ceased to profess one
and the same unvarying theological system, thus faith
fully reflecting the sincere unadulterated gospel of primi
tive Christianity ; and there, both ecclesiastically and
morally, the practice of its members has happily cor-
1 Contra Sectam Waldensium, cap. i., Max. Bib. Vet. Fatrum,
torn. xxv.

THE WALDENSES. 395
responded with their religious profession."1 Such a
miracle, if it is well authenticated, certainly deserves
to be recognized, for nowhere else can a proper parallel
be found. The Cottian Alps alone have been witness
to a body of Christians who for eighteen centuries have
professed one and the same unvarying theological system.
A church of this description is simply a church on
paper. Very likely some of the tenets which entered
into the ultimate system of the Waldensian faith claimed
the sympathies of individual minds all through the cen
turies. Very possibly the region of Piedmont had its
full share of such minds. One can easily imagine that
the bold strictures which Claudius of Turin had passed
upon the worship of images and saints left their trace
in the sentiments of the people on the neighboring
heights. But the theory that the complete Waldensian
system had been in force in this region from the early
centuries is a baseless fancy. The tradition is easily
enough accounted for. The declaration that this or
that opinion was no novelty, that it had been enter
tained long ago, could easily serve as a basis for a
popular conviction that the earlier generations in that
region had in general anticipated the faith of the later.
Indeed, if the Waldenses had anything like the desire
to strengthen their position by the sanctions of an
tiquity which has animated some recent parties, such
a development could have been prevented only by
special care. The tradition, then, as being one that
might easily find place, is more than offset by the enor
mous improbability that for a period of many centuries
i G. S. Faber, An Inquiry into the History and Theology of the
Ancient Vallenses and Albigenses.

396 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
the searching inspection of Rome should not have dis
covered a distinctively anti-Romish sect, and that her
writers should have recorded nothing which clearly sup
poses its existence.1 The few uncritical references to a
remote antiquity which are found with Roman Catholic
writers in the fourteenth century or later have but little
weight ; and the evidence for the early date of the sect
which the Vaudois writings have been supposed to
contain has not been able to endure a critical inves
tigation.2 At the beginning of their career the Waldenses had
no idea of antagonizing the Romish Church. Their
movement was practical rather than doctrinal. They
considered themselves as laboring within the Church
in behalf of an earnest and self-denying piety. The
only innovation which they indulged lay in the stress
which they placed upon familiarity with the Scriptures
and the privilege of laymen to act as teachers and
preachers. They had no intention to set aside the
regular priesthood, but to afford a much needed supple-
1 It may be noted that Martin, in his " Histoire de France," refers to
a chronicle, written in the first half of the twelfth century, which speaks
of the inhabitants of the upper Alpine valleys as soiled with an inveter
ate heresy. But this is no statement that they eschewed Romanism in
toto, or cherished the complete Waldensian belief.
2 For this side of the subject see Montet, Histoire Litteraire des
Vaudois du Piemont. It is the conclusion of Montet, that some of the
Vaudois writers have allowed their zeal for the legend of the apostolic
doctrine and origin of their sect to get the better of their honesty :
" Malheureusement on ne se borna point a enregistrer la legende ; plu-
sieurs ecrivains vaudois, peu scrupuleux, ne craignirent point, dans le
but de re"tayer, de falsifier les textes vaudois ante"rieurs a la Reformation,
et meme, fait inou'i, plusieurs documents contemporains de la Reforme
protestante.''

THE WALDENSES. 397
ment to the priestly ministrations. How far they were
from designing a schism is evident from the fact, that,
when they were commanded by the Archbishop of
Lyons to cease from preaching, they appealed to Rome,
and asked Alexander III., in 1179, to confirm their
association, that they might continue their work as a
recognized instrumentality of the Church.
This request was denied. But so strong was the
conviction of the Waldenses respecting their providen
tial vocation, that they persisted in their labors. The
papal condemnation followed, and the violence of per
secution was soon felt. The bonds with Rome being
thus in large part sundered, the Waldenses were free
to reap the natural result of their diligent study of the
Scriptures. Various peculiarities of the Romish system
were renounced. The development in this direction
was not uniform. It is difficult, therefore, to give a
statement of belief which will apply to the whole sect
in the earlier stages of its history. According to the
pseudo Reinerus, they maintained that a teaching which
cannot be proved by the text of Scripture is without
authority ; that the Church had repeated the offence
of the Pharisees by imposing the yoke of its traditions ;
that certain ceremonies ordinarily connected with bap
tism should be abolished ; that a priest in mortal sin
could not celebrate the sacrament of the eucharist, and
that transubstantiation does not take place in the hand
of such a priest, but rather in the mouth of him who
worthily receives ; that indulgences are to be rejected ;
that a bad priest cannot absolve, while a good layman
has the power of absolving ; that every good layman is
a priest ; that confirmation, extreme unction, and orders

398 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
are not to be counted sacraments; that the marriage of
the clergy ought not to be prohibited ; that the worship
of saints and their relics, as also of images and pictures,
is illegitimate ; that Purgatory is a fiction ; that many of
the rites and observances of the Church are unprofitable
and idle ; that a Christian should not take an oath.1
It may be doubted whether the Waldenses generally
went so far in their deviation from the Romish system
as some of these specifications would indicate, until a
comparatively late date. Various of their opponents
are found to have credited them with a belief in the
seven sacraments, and with holding the major part of
the Catholic faith.2 Among the earliest of their doc
trinal innovations were the limitations which they placed
upon the sovereignty of the hierarchy ; also their denial
of purgatory, together with the associated tenets re
specting masses, prayers, and alms for the dead.
Even after their doctrinal divergence had become
quite pronounced, the Waldenses did not, at least uni
versally, renounce all connection with the Romish
Church. We read that in various places they attended
the services of the Romish priests, and allowed their
children to be baptized by them. Those in Lombardy
advanced soonest to an independent position.
The Waldenses seem to have spread with consider
able rapidity in the earlier part of their history. Before
1 The pseudo Reinerus gives the Waldenses a relatively good char
acter. " While all other sects," he says, " induce horror in the listener
by their monstrous blasphemies against God, this of the Leonists has a
great appearance of piety, in that they live justly before men, entertain
a worthy belief respecting God, and hold all the articles contained in the
symbol." (Cap. iv.)
2 Dollinger, Sektengeschichte, ii. 93.

THE WALDENSES. 399
the end of the twelfth century they were found in
Spain and Northern Italy. In the first half of the next
century they had touched various points in Germany.
By the opening of the fourteenth century so many had
settled in the Cottian Alps, as a refuge from persecu
tion, that the advisability of sending out colonies was
discussed, and parties were despatched to Calabria and
other districts of Italy. In the fifteenth century some
of the persecuted accepted the invitation of the Bohe
mian Brethren, and settled in their country. This led
to interchange of communications between the Breth
ren and the Vaudois, or the Waldenses in Piedmont ;
in consequence of which the latter were confirmed and
encouraged in their views, or carried forward to a more
distinctly anti-Romish position.1
Comparative immunity was enjoyed by the Walden
ses, for a considerable interval, in the mountain retreat
which served as the head-quarters of their communion.
But in the latter part of the fifteenth century they
began to share in the fiery trial which was appointed
to those who raised a protest against Rome. In an
swer to a summons sent forth in 1487 by Innocent
VIII., a powerful army crossed their borders both on
the Italian and the French side. In the first encounters
the ill prepared inhabitants suffered defeat, and their
lands were subjected to grievous devastation. But the
comparative ignorance of the invaders respecting the
rugged country finally told greatly in favor of the in
vaded. Few of those who came to slaughter the Vau
dois ever retraced their steps.
i See the valuable article of Herzog in his Encyclopaedia.

CHAPTER V.
JOHN WYCLTFFE AND HIS FOLLOWERS.
TOHN WYCLIFFE was undoubtedly the boldest
** and the ablest of the Reformers before the Ref
ormation. The ecclesiastical history of England from
its beginning to its end presents scarcely another ex
ponent of religious faith and enterprise who stands
upon the same plane with him as respects either origi
nality or breadth of achievement. At least as regards
the former title to eminence, English history may be
challenged to name his superior. Wycliffe was emphat
ically a pioneer, pointing out in the fourteenth century
the course which only daring souls were ready to enter
in the sixteenth. In a double sense he was an inno
vator. Both in doctrines and methods of religious
work he ran against the current of his age.
It might be expected that the biography of such a
man would be filled with stirring recitals. As he broke
more radically with the ecclesiastical system of his
time than did a Huss or a Savonarola, it might be ex
pected that he would appear as the centre of a greater
commotion, and that his life would be pre-eminently
rich in that dramatic interest which forms so large an
element in theirs. But the case is quite otherwise.
The form of Wycliffe retreats behind his work. He

WYCLIFFE AND HIS FOLLOWERS. 401
is made known to us as the thinker and organizer. His
record bespeaks a man in whom intellect and will were
more conspicuous factors than sensibility and passionate
enthusiasm. He saw his way with keenness of logical
insight, and pursued it with unshaken resolution. But
at the same time he pursued it without ostentation ; he
held himself in poise, and made no bids for a showy
tournament in the sight of the public. Moreover, the
balance of factors in Church and State tended to modify
the sharpness of assaults against his person. So it re
sults that we have a great man and a great work, but
no exciting drama, no list of scenes in which the hero
rivets our attention by the romantic interest of his ex
periences. Guided by Providence, or by his own discretion,
Wycliffe took plenty of time to lay the foundation. He
did not attempt his great task until he had been well
schooled in knowledge of men and things, and, most
important of all, in knowledge of himself. Two thirds
of his life had passed before he assumed to deal with
questions of public concern ; and it was only in the
last six years of his life that he entered, in the more
positive and comprehensive sense, upon the r61e of the
reformer. If we suppose that he was born about 1320
and entered Oxford at the age of fifteen (no unusual
age to begin university life in that era), his world for
the next thirty years was the university.
At Oxford, which, as one of the great seats of learn
ing, had its thousands of students,1 Wycliffe passed,
1 The halls for students in the thirteenth century are said to have
numbered three hundred, each of which could accommodate one hundred
boarders. 26

402 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
no doubt, through the ordinary mediaeval curriculum.
Having studied the seven arts composing the trivium
and quadrivium, namely, grammar, rhetoric, and logic,
music, arithmetic, geometry, and astronomy, he was
prepared to take up theology and canon law. Rising
erelong to the dignity of a teacher, he was allowed,
according to the custom of the time, to exercise his im
mature powers in lecturing on the Bible, and finally
was advanced to the high honor of lecturing on the
Sentences of Peter Lombard, in other words, upon the
approved list of topics in systematic theology. Mean
while, he became a candidate for official distinctions.
He appears as Fellow of Merton College in 1356, as
Master of Balliol in 1360, and as Warden of Canter
bury Hall in 1365. Some time within the decade fol
lowing this last date he was made Doctor of Theology.
Four years previous to the same date he received (at
Fillingham) the first of his pastoral charges, which,
however, are not supposed to have occasioned any
lengthy absence from Oxford. Lutterworth, the last
of his parishes, and the asylum of his closing years,
was appointed to him in 1374.
Wycliffe, then, up to an advanced point in his life
was a man of the university. As he stood at Oxford in
1365, he was simply the scholastic philosopher. He had
not attempted as yet to figure in any other character.
He was known as the learned teacher, the trained dis
putant, a man who carried keen weapons and had a
sure thrust, a formidable antagonist upon the field of
debate. Such qualities were a sure passport to distinc
tion. For the mediaeval valuation, we may say over
valuation, of logic was still rife. Skill in disputation

WYCLIFFE AND HIS FOLLOWERS. 403
was still the scholar's badge of honor. The renown of
the master disputants, the keen metaphysicians of the
preceding century — such as an Alexander Hales, a
Thomas Aquinas, and a Duns Scotus — still gave men
the standard of estimate. As being in this glorious
succession, Wycliffe occupied a most enviable place
among his English contemporaries. He was indeed
regarded by them as the most eminent scholastic of
the age. Even so strong an opponent as the chronicler
Knighton spoke of him in these terms : " In theology
he was the most eminent doctor in those days. In
philosophy he was reputed second to none, in scholastic
studies incomparable." x Another tribute to his pre
eminent rank as a scholastic, as some have judged, may
be found in the comparative immunity which he en
joyed, even after his position was known to be that
of sharp antagonism to the existing church system.
" Nothing," says Green, " marks more strongly the
grandeur of Wycliffe's position as the last of the great
schoolmen, than the reluctance of so bold a man as
Courtenay, even after his triumph over Oxford, to take
extreme measures against the head of Lollardry." 2 No
doubt the imperious archbishop had other reasons for
moderation than awe of Wycliffe's fame as a thinker
1 Quoted by Lechler, John Wycliffe and his English Precursors,
p. 424. A more remarkable testimonial still, if its genuineness could be
trusted, was that which appeared in 1406, in the name of the University
of Oxford. While vouching for the pure life and orthodox faith of Wyc
liffe, it extols him as a man " who had written upon the themes of logic,
philosophy, theology, and morals, without, we believe, an equal among
all the representatives of our university." (Wilkins, Concilia, iii. 302.)
Lechler is inclined to believe in the genuineness of this document ; but
such an indorsement of Wycliffe at that date seems rather incredible.
2 History of the English People.

404 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
and scholar ; but we can readily believe that directly or
indirectly this was one of the causes which held the
persecutor in check.
What are we to say of this high estimate of contem
poraries ? Taken literally, it is no doubt overdrawn.
While in recent times too little account has been made
of Wycliffe's distinction as a great scholastic doctor, a
full acquaintance with his writings is not likely to make
him fairly a rival of the more celebrated names of
scholasticism. Even among those of his own century
there were two, namely, Durandus and Occam, who
will in all likelihood continue to take precedence of him.
Within the circle of scholasticism Wycliffe was not the
greatest. His honor is, that he was not confined to that
circle, that he was a great deal more than a scholastic,
that he thought himself clear of the trammels of the
school at so many points, that his nature was broad and
many-sided enough to give an ample place to the prac
tical alongside of the speculative, and to correct the
aberrations of the latter by means of the data supplied
by the former.
One of the distinguishing features in the philosophic
teaching of Wycliffe was his advocacy of realism. Un
der the lead of Occam in the fourteenth century, nomi
nalism, which had been generally repudiated since the
initial stage of scholasticism, claimed a revival. This
naturally called out the champions of realism. There
was a division of parties on the subject at Oxford,
as there was likewise at Paris and Prague. Wyc
liffe, like his Bohemian disciple, John Huss, was an
emphatic realist. His position was essentially the Pla
tonic. As Plato regarded universals — the notions of

WYCLIFFE AND HIS FOLLOWERS. 405
genus and species, the Ideas as they were called in his
system — as the prius of all individual being, objec
tively the ground of existence in individual things and
subjectively the principle of rational thinking, so also
did Wycliffe. There was, however, this difference be
tween Plato's representation and that of Wycliffe.
The former left the relation of the Ideas to the Divine
Mind ambiguous. The latter affirmed with great dis
tinctness and emphasis that the Ideas are in the mind
of God. They are the thoughts of God. God thinks
them in the Logos. The Logos is the inclusive con
tent of the Ideas, and as the Logos is of the essence
of God, so are the Ideas. While formally distinguished
from God, they are essentially identical with Him.1
The theological bearing of this tenet with Wycliffe
was the same as it has been with others who have held
it in an equally unqualified form. It nurtured in him
a bias to go back of the concrete to the general, to
make the universal overshadow the individual, to mag
nify the agency of God to the limitation of the auton
omy of the creature. In a word, it impelled him, as
embracing it with warmth and enthusiasm, to make
God all in all. The practical advantage of this tendency
is that it ministers to self-humiliation, to devotion, to
worship. Its speculative danger is, that, unless held
in check, it is liable to push one across the border of
theism into the limbo of pantheism. Wycliffe at times
seems to approach dangerously near to the pantheistic
edge. Joining the declaration that the Ideas which
God thinks in the Logos are of the essence of God
with the declaration that they are at the same time the
1 Trialogus, i. 8-10, ii. 3.

406 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
ground of being in every existing thing, he stands in
face of the conclusion that every existing thing is in
its ground identical with God. Still, Wycliffe had no
notion of accepting the pantheistic outcome, and uttered
his caveat against it. If criticism be passed upon him,
the criticism should be, that on the very difficult sub
ject of adjusting the relation of God to the creature
he hardly posited for the latter a sufficiently distinct
sphere. Wycliffe next appears in the character of patriot or
ecclesiastico-political reformer. From 1366 to 1378 his
career was such as is most aptly described by these
terms. " In the first twelve years of his public activ
ity," says Lechler, " the worst mischief of the Church ap
peared to him to be the usurpations of the papacy upon
the sovereign rights of the English crown, the financial
spoliation of the country for the benefit of the curia in
Avignon, the general secularization of the clergy, includ
ing the monasteries and foundations, simony, and the
corruption of morals. All these evils were ecclesiastico-
political matters ; and accordingly the means and ways
which he recommended, and in part himself applied,
were chiefly of an ecclesiastico-political character." J
In this line of activity, Wycliffe was allying himself
with an already prepared public opinion. The nation
had long groaned under the burden of papal exactions.
In Wycliffe's time the burden was the more intolerable,
because it was manifest that the Popes were acting as
the agents of a rival kingdom, as the lieutenants of
France. It was at the instigation of the French King
that the Pope made the galling demand upon Edward
1 John Wycliffe and his English Precursors.

WYCLIFFE AND HIS FOLLOWERS. 407
III. that the annual tribute stipulated by John, which
had long been discontinued, should be paid, together
with the arrears. This demand, as we have seen, the
nation heartily resented, and rejected by the mouth of
its Parliament in 1366. Some have supposed that
Wycliffe was a member of this body and a leading spirit
in its proceedings. At any rate a critic of the decision
rendered by the Parliament directed his attack against
Wycliffe, and called forth a reply from his pen. From
this time Wycliffe was known as a leading champion
of the national cause. His prominence in the eyes of
the government is evident from the fact that in 1374 he
was made one of a commission to treat with the repre
sentatives of the Pope at Bruges.
With characteristic bent to thoroughness, Wycliffe
was not content with putting in a protest against the
spoliations by the Pope. He felt deeply aggrieved by
the worldliness of the Church at large. It stirred his
dndignation to think that so many rich benefices were
being enjoyed by men who cared only for the revenue,
and had no regard for the spiritual welfare of their
charge. It seemed to him a righteous thing that these
evil stewards should be dispossessed, and, as under
the circumstances there was no other power to effect
this end, he thought that the civil government should
take the initiative. In developing this subject, he
showed how well the scholastic still held a place in
his composition. He must have a theory as broad as
the case. And so he brought out his famous theory
of dominion. The ground that he took was this. To
God alone belongs unqualified dominion ; He alone has
the unrestricted right to property; men have only a

408 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
delegated right, and this delegated right they forfeit by
mortal sin. Tenure of property depends upon the
state of grace in the holder. " God is," he says, " and
has dominion over all. Each man in his degree is
bounden to serve God, and if he does not render this
service he is no lord of goods of true title, for he that
standeth in grace is the true lord of things, and who
ever faileth by default of grace, he falleth short of the
right title of that which he occupieth, and makes him
self unfit to have the gifts." l This has truly some
thing of a revolutionary sound. But notice that on
Wycliffe's premises it points more largely to an ideal
ground of property right than to a practical standard
of decision among men. For he held very emphati
cally the opinion that a man's state of grace is God's
secret. Nevertheless, he was not satisfied to leave the
theory without any practical application. He used it
to offset the notion that goods once given to the Church
are held by a strictly inalienable title, and drew the in
ference that in cases of notorious misuse of spiritual
positions the civil authority must take pains to deprive
the incumbent. In doing this, however, as he was
careful to state, it must proceed within the limitations
of law. He implies also that the Church itself should
be consulted, and the grounds of deprivation brought
before its assemblies. Presented under these limita
tions, the doctrine of dominion does not appear spe
cially extravagant. Some have even concluded that it
was not calculated to affect the relative position of
Church and State. But this can hardly be conceded.
Wycliffe expressely taught that the Scriptures place us
1 Quoted by A. R. Pennington in his Life of Wycliffe.

WYCLIFFE AND HIS FOLLOWERS. 409
under obligation to render obedience and service even
to bad rulers, whereas in case of wicked priests they
impose no such duty upon us. As applied to the exist
ing relation of Church and State, Wycliffe's teaching
upon the subject favored to noticeable degree the pri
macy of the latter.
Naturally, the champion of such views was regarded
by the hierarchy as a dangerous foe, who needed to be
silenced or crushed. The first attempt in this direction
was at the hands of the English bishops. In February,
1377, Wycliffe was cited to appear before Archbishop
Sudbury and before Courtenay (then Bishop of Lon
don), in St. Paul's Cathedral. Wycliffe presented him
self, but had no occasion or opportunity to answer
charges. The meeting broke up in a tumult, owing
to the intemperate language of the Duke of Lancaster
(John of Gaunt), who came forward as Wycliffe's de
fender. Failing in this attempt, the bishops now so
licited the aid of the Pope. The desired aid was given
in generous measure. In May, 1377, five bulls were
issued, designed to weave the toils so effectually about
Wycliffe that escape would be impossible, and calling
upon the King, the royal princes, the Privy Council, the
chief of the nobility, and the University of Oxford, to
render their pious assistance in bringing the disturber
to justice. A schedule of nineteen errors charged
against Wycliffe accompanied the bulls.1 But the
1 According to Lechler, the nineteen theses of Wycliffe fall, in respect
of subject matter, into three groups : (1) That concerning rights of
property and inheritance. (2) That concerning church property, and its
rightful secularization in certain circumstances. (3) That concerning
the power of church discipline and its necessary limits.

410 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
meshes of the net were not equal, even in this case,
to holding the prey. Wycliffe indeed appeared before
the Pope's commissioners and commenced to explain
and to justify his teachings. He had not proceeded
far, however, when the conference was cut short by
the interference of the government and the London
populace in his behalf. Again he went out as free as
he had come in, being under injunction of silence, it
is true, but having given no promise to that effect.
We have now reached the year 1378, the year which
begins the stadium of Wycliffe's career, in which he
accomplished his most daring, most significant, most
far-reaching work. It is here, if anywhere, that we
shall find warrant for the remarkable words of John
Milton. In his Areopagitica he wrote : " Had it not
been for the obstinate perverseness of our prelates
against the divine and admirable Wycliffe, to suppress
him as a schismatic and innovator, perhaps neither the
Bohemian Huss and Jerome, no, nor the name of Luther
or Calvin, had been ever known. The glory of reform
ing all our neighbors had been completely ours."
Let us see, then, how far Wycliffe supplied the
proper basis for a reformation, if only his age had
been willing to build thereupon, — how far he fulfilled
the double r61e of a reformer of theological principles
and a reformer of methods of propagating religious
truth among the people.
It is quite certain that Wycliffe anticipated the for
mal principle of the Reformation of the sixteenth cen
tury, the doctrine of the sole authority of Scripture
as opposed to any traditions of men. His own words
will give ample evidence on this point. " We ought,"

WYCLIFFE AND HIS FOLLOWERS. 411
he says, " to believe in the authority of no man unless
he say the Word of God. It is impossible that any
word or any deed of man should be of equal authority
with Holy Scripture. . . . Believers should ascertain for
themselves what are the true matters of their faith, by
having the Scriptures in a language which all may under
stand. For the laws made by prelates are not to be re
ceived as matters of faith, nor are we to confide in their
public instructions, nor in any of their words, but as they
are founded in Holy Writ, since the Scriptures contain
the whole truth. ... It is the pride of Lucifer, and even
greater pride than his, to say that the teachers of man's
traditions, made of sinful fools, are more profitable and
needful to Christian people than the preachers of the
Gospel." As regards the interpretation of Scripture,
Wycliffe was not at all behind the writers of the six
teenth century in asserting the right of the individual
Christian to judge for himself. There is no human
tribunal set over him to force him to its point of view.
But while he has the right of judgment, he has by no
means the right to exercise it in a flippant and egoistic
manner. He can judge properly only under the con
ditions of a holy life and great study. " Christian
men," says Wycliffe, " should stand to the death for
the maintenance of Christ's gospel, and the true under
standing thereof, obtained by holy life and great study,
and not set their faith nor trust in sinful prelates and
their clerks, nor in their understanding thereof. . . .
And if Antichrist say that each man may feign that
he has a right faith and a good understanding of Holy
Writ, when he is in error, let a man seek in all things
truly the honor of God, and live justly to God and

412 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
man, and God will not fail to him in anything that is
needful to him, neither in faith, nor in understanding,
nor in answer against his enemies." x
As regards the material principle of the Reformation,
the doctrine of justification by faith alone, it cannot
be said that Wycliffe so distinctly anticipated the teach
ing of the sixteenth century. We need not lay much
stress, in a comparative view, upon the fact that he did
not make justification purely forensic. For while this
became a tenet of Protestantism, it was not always as
serted at the outset. Luther certainly, in one and an
other instance, seems to make justification something
more than a forensic act, something more than mere
pardon, and to include in it an incipient sanctification.
He was more intent to repudiate the Romish prescrip
tions as to the way of attaining justification, than the
Romish conception of justification itself. The chief
point in Luther's pre-eminence over Wycliffe on this
subject lies in the fact, that with full consciousness and
all the energy of a prophetic vocation the German re
former urged men to look immediately to the atoning
Redeemer, and to trust in Him alone for pardon and
salvation. But if Wycliffe did not so positively incul
cate this sole trust in Christ for justification, he did in
culcate it in a negative way. With great explicitness
and decision he removed all the intervening objects
which in the Romish system are calculated to intercept
the trust of the believer, and prevent its being centred
in Christ. Observe how he deals with such imperti-
1 See Tracts and Treatises of John De Wycliffe, edited for the
Wycliffe Society, London, 1845 ; also Life and Writings of John Wiclif,
by Rudolf Buddensieg.

WYCLIFFE AND HIS FOLLOWERS. 413
nent mediums as an exaggerated trust in one's works,
dependence upon the pardons, the indulgences, and the
absolutions of the priesthood, and reliance upon the
supererogatory merits and intercessions of the saints.
As regards one's works, he may in terms have con
nected with them a kind of merit, a meritum de congruo,
but in his general system of thought this reduces to a
quasi merit. He really held without qualification the
Augustinian maxim, that all of man's merits are God's
gifts. " We should know," he says, " that faith is the
gift of God, and so God may not give it to man except
He give it graciously. And thus, all the goods which
men have are the gifts of God. And thus when God
rewardeth a good work of man, He crowneth his own
gift." The system of indulgences Wycliffe denounces in
strong terms, calling it " a subtle merchandise of Anti
christ's clerks, to magnify their counterfeit power, and
to get worldly goods, and to cause men not to dread
sin." Again he remarks : " It is plain to me that our
prelates in granting indulgences do commonly blas
pheme the wisdom of God, pretending in their avarice
and folly that they understand what they really know
not. They chatter on the subject of grace as if it were
a thing to be bought and sold, like an ass or ox." All
this artificial mechanism for removing sins, he contends,
is worthless in comparison with a penitent and God
fearing temper. "Christian men should know that
whoever liveth best prayeth best ; and that the simple
pater-noster of a ploughman who hath charity is better
than a thousand masses of covetous prelates and vain
religious."

414 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
Respecting auriculur confession, Wycliffe allows that
under proper conditions it might serve to restrain some
in special need of a curb ; but he plainly indicates his
belief that its universal prescription has no warrant in
Scripture, and has been the cause of great demorali
zation. His opinion of supererogatory merits is thus ex
pressed : " The Pope and the friars pretend that there
is laid up in heaven an infinite number of supereroga
tory merits belonging to the saints, above all the merit
of Christ, and that Christ has set the Pope over all this
treasure, that he may dispose of it at his pleasure, and
distribute therefrom to an infinite extent, since the re
mainder will still be infinite. All this is wild blasphemy.
Neither the Pope nor the Lord Jesus Christ can grant
indulgences to any man except as the Deity has deter
mined by His just counsel." In the words just cited we
have a hint of Wycliffe's predestinarianism. On this
subject he held the full Augustinian theory.
After denying the doctrine of superfluous merits,
Wycliffe naturally could acknowledge little or no place
for prayer to the saints. Accordingly, we find him
using this language : " As the Scripture assureth us,
Christ is the only mediator between God and man.
Hence many hold that, if prayer were directed only to
that middle Person of the Trinity for spiritual help,
the Church would be more flourishing and make greater
advances than she now does, when many intercessors
have been found out and introduced."
On the subject of the Church, its officiary, and its
sacraments, Wycliffe was likewise a radical innovator,
and a precursor of sixteenth century teaching. He

WYCLIFFE AND HIS FOLLOWERS. 415
took pleasure in considering the Church on its invisi
ble side, and, passing over the Romish conception of a
definite outward organism, defined it as the whole body
of God's elect.
As for the claims of the papacy, Wycliffe treated
them with about as little ceremony as did Luther, his
reverence for the successor of Peter being doubtless
not a little abated by the great schism which, in 1378,
began to scandalize Christendom. Rebutting the claim
that it is necessary to believe that the Pope is the head
of the Church, he asks, " How then shall any sinful
wretch, who knows not whether he be damned or
saved, constrain men to believe that he is head of holy
Church ? Certainly, in such a case they must some
times constrain men to believe that a devil of hell is
head of holy Church, when the Bishop of Rome shall
be a man damned for his sins." Again he remarks :
" It is supposed, and with much probability, that the
Roman pontiff is the great Antichrist." There is no
need of going to Rome, as he maintains, to find a head
for the Church. "If they say that Christ's Church
must have a head here on earth, true it is, for Christ
is the head which must be here with His Church until
the day of doom." Indeed, Wycliffe had so little re
gard for the hierarchical conception of church govern
ment that he was willing apparently to spare a good
deal besides the papacy. He emphasized the fact that
the primitive Church had only presbyters and deacons,
and declared his conviction that all orders above these
had been introduced by Csesarean pride.
Wycliffe criticised the scholastic doctrine of the
sacraments at various points ; but his special departure

416 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
in this sphere was his denial of transubstantiation. In
the view of his opponents, this was above all other sins
of heresy the unpardonable sin. Nor from their stand
point was the verdict altogether illogical. For if the
infallible authority of the Church is the foundation of
Romanism, its doctrine of the eucharist, taken in its
totality, is the next stone to the foundation, and the
basis for an immense superstructure. It was with much
vehemence that Wycliffe attacked this idol, for he re
garded it as a chosen means of Satan to sink men to
perdition. As to the positive view which Wycliffe en
tertained of this sacrament, it may be briefly defined
by its relation to two of the Reformation types, that of
Luther and that of Calvin. Lechler, in his admirable
work on Wycliffe, expresses the opinion that it was
nearer to the former than to the latter. To us, the
reverse appears to be the truth. Indeed, we think
that with only moderate change of expression the view
of Wycliffe might be made to appear identical with that
of Calvin. Unlike Luther, Wycliffe taught that the
glorified body of Christ is locally confined in heaven.
Unlike Luther also, he taught that it is not so pres
ent in the elements as to be received by the wicked.
On both of these points he agreed with Calvin ; and he
agreed further with Calvin in teaching a spiritual and
virtual or efficacious presence of the body of Christ.
The extent of Wycliffe's departure from current beliefs
might be illustrated in other particulars. He took ex
ception, for example, to the enforced celibacy of the
clergy. He also criticised monasticism as he found it
in his day, and came in particular, in his last years, to
regard the mendicant friars as a public pest. His en-

WYCLIFFE AND HIS FOLLOWERS. 417
counter with the Mendicants is said to have been the
occasion of a noteworthy scene in his history. Wyc
liffe, so Vaughan recounts, was confined to his chamber
in Oxford by sickness. " From the four orders of friars,
four doctors were formally deputed to present them
selves to their expiring enemy ; and to these the same
number of civil officers, called senators of the city and
aldermen of the wards, were added. When these per
sons entered the apartment of the sick man, he was
seen stretched on his bed. Some expressions of sym
pathy were dropped, and some of hope concerning his
better health. But it was presently intimated that he
must be aware of the many injuries which the whole
mendicant brotherhood had sustained at his hands, hav
ing been the special object of attack in many of his
sermons and writings ; and as it was now manifest that
death was about to bring his course to its conclusion,
it was only charitable to hope that he would not con
ceal his penitence, but that with due Christian humility
he should revoke whatever he had said tending to the
disreputation of fraternities so eminent in learning,
sanctity, and usefulness. Wycliffe continued silent and
motionless until this address was concluded. He then
beckoned his servants to raise him in his bed ; and this
done, he fixed his eyes on the persons assembled, and,
summoning all his remaining strength, exclaimed, ' I
shall not die, but live ; and shall again declare the evil
deeds of the friars ! ' " We can easily believe that it
was a hasty retreat which was effected by the honorable
delegation, and that they had a feeling that they had
made an unfortunate bid for a death-bed repentance.
One item more in Wycliffe's views should be men-
27

418 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
tioned ; for while it is without special connection with
his theological system, it indicates how decided became
his bent to think for himself. I refer to his attitude
toward war. In terms wellnigh anticipating the peace
policy of the Quakers, he denounced the barbarous ap
peal to the sword. He defined the right of conquest as
the right of wholesale robbery, and disparaged the honor
which the knight claimed as an adept in slaughter, by
comparing him with the hangman, who killeth more and
with a better title.1
We come now to the second part of the twofold
character in which Wycliffe appears as a reformer, and
have to consider the practical expedients to which he
resorted for the religious enlightenment of the masses.
Perhaps we shall not be at fault in including among
these that marvellous .issue of tracts which engaged his
later years. No longer reposing confidence in the pat
ronage of the learned and wealthy, " he appealed,"
says Green, " and the appeal is memorable as the first
of such a kind in our history, to England at large.
With an amazing industry he issued tract after tract
in the tongue of the people itself. The dry syllogistic
Latin, the abstruse and involved argument which the
great doctor had addressed to his academic hearers,
were suddenly flung aside, and, by a transition which
marks the wonderful genius of the man, the schoolman
was transformed into the pamphleteer. If Chaucer is
the father of our later English poetry, Wycliffe is the
father of our later English prose. The rough, clear,
homely English of his tracts, the speech of the plough
man and the trader of the day, though colored with
1 On the Seven Deadly Sins.

WYCLIFFE AND HIS FOLLOWERS. 419
the picturesque phraseology of the Bible, is in its liter
ary use as distinctly a creation of his own as the style
in which he embodied it, the terse vehement sentences,
the stinging sarcasms, the hard antitheses which roused
the dullest mind like a whip."
A second practical expedient was the order of itin
erant preachers which Wycliffe instituted and su-
perintended. They were called the order of "poor
priests." According to the directions of their founder,
they preached the ethics and religion of the Bible in
language level to the understanding of the common
people. " These men went forth," writes Lechler, "in
long garments of coarse red woollen cloth, barefooted,
with staff in hand, in order to represent themselves as
pilgrims, and their wayfaring as a kind of pilgrimage,
their coarse woollen dress being a symbol of their pov
erty and toil. Thus they wandered from village to
village, from town to town, and from county to county,
without halt or rest, preaching, teaching, warning,
wherever they could find willing hearers ; sometimes in
church and chapel, wherever any such stood open for
prayer and quiet devotion ; sometimes in the church
yard, when they found the church itself closed ; and
sometimes in the public street or marketplace." Refer
ring to this method of evangelism, Canon Pennington
remarks, " Wycliffe was unquestionably the Wesley of
his day."
The third and most renowned of Wycliffe's practical
expedients for enlightening the masses was hisjfeans-
lation of the Bible into English. The idea was not
wholly a novel one. There had been attempts at trans
lation at various intervals in the preceding history.

420 THE MEDIJEVAL CHURCH.
But none of these, if we are to judge by extant re
mains or distinct accounts, had resulted in the trans
ference of the whole Bible to the vernacular. The
Anglo-Saxon versions comprised little besides the Pen
tateuch, the Psalter, a few of the historical books of
the Old Testament, and the four Gospels. The Nor
mans are said to have had a version of the Bible in
their own tongue in the thirteenth century; but this
was not in the language of the great body of the peo
ple, being French rather than English. Excluding
metrical renderings, which were not translations proper,
it appears that prior to the labors of Wycliffe the Psalter
(two versions of which were executed before the mid
dle of the fourteenth century) was the only part of the
Bible that had been rendered into Old English. The
enterprise of Wycliffe had also this distinctive feature,
that it was designed not merely for the accommodation
of a few scholars, nobles, or princes, but was to serve pre
eminently as a means of acquainting the common people
with Holy Writ. Herein it challenged an obstinate
prejudice of the age. What the partisans of the hierar
chy thought on the subject is clearly enough revealed
by the language of the chronicler, Knighton. In a
passage which was probably written before the year
1400, " he maintains that Christ gave the Gospel, not
to the Church, but only to the clergy and doctors of the
Church, to be by them communicated to the weaker
brethren and the laity according to their need ; whereas
Wycliffe had rendered the Gospel from Latin into Eng
lish, and through him it had become the possession of
the common people, and more accessible to the laity,
including even women who can read, than it used to be

WYCLIFFE AND HIS FOLLOWERS. 421
to the well educated clergy. The pearl is now thrown
before swine, and trodden under foot." x Some years
later Archbishop Arundel and his suffragans, in a me
morial to the Pope, vented their indignation against
the work of translation by calling it the completing act
in the malice of the arch-heretic.
The details pertaining to the execution of this great
enterprise are lost to history. It is commonly under
stood, however, that the first version was completed
in 1382 ; that the New Testament was rendered by
Wycliffe himself ; that Nicholas Hereford rendered the
larger part of the Old Testament; that the remainder
of the Old Testament (beginning in the Book of Baruch)
was rendered by Wycliffe ; that a revision of the whole
under the editorship of John Purvey was completed by
1388, and that this revised version was widely circu
lated. How far was this translation influential upon later
ones ? What permanent contributions did it make to
our English Bible ? An exact answer is as difficult as
the question is interesting. Following, however, the
hints of skilled investigators, we conclude that the in
direct influence of the Wycliffite version was considera
ble; that the direct influence, while perhaps appreciable,
was not large. It exercised a moulding influence upon
the speech of the people ; it gave to the peculiar phra
seology of many familiar texts a right of possession, so
to speak, which later translators could not easily dis
card. In this way it supplied materials to Tyndale,
Coverdale, Whittingham, and other distinguished archi
tects of the English Bible. But as a translation of a
1 Lechler, chap. vii. § 2.

422 THE MEDIJEVAL CHURCH.
translation (being from the Vulgate), executed with
helps much inferior to those which were at the com
mand of the later translators, it could hardly have
served them to any great extent as a specific model.
No doubt, the name of Wycliffe will always hold an
eminent place among those whose shaping genius has
given us our English Bible. Still, impartial history
will probably assign the foremost position in the honored
list of translators to that tireless laborer and heroic
martyr, William Tyndale.1
What now were the personal fortunes of Wycliffe in
the midst of these great innovations? By his attack
upon transubstantiation he forfeited in large measure
the support which he had received from the University.
In 1381 the Chancellor issued a mandate forbidding
some of Wycliffe's theses on the Lord's Supper to be
longer taught in the University as being plainly hetero
dox. At the middle of the next year the archbishop
sent orders to the University prohibiting attendance
upon the preaching of Wycliffe, and requiring public
notice that he had been suspended from all scholastic
functions. Near the end of the same year he was sum
moned before a provincial synod in Oxford. According
to Knighton, he responded to the summons, and escaped
censure by a recantation. The former statement may
be true ; the latter, instead of being sustained by any
evidence, is contradicted by the confession of Wycliffe,
which Knighton inserts at this point in his Chronicle, —
the confession being the reverse of a retractation. Such
1 W. F. Moulton, History of the English Bible. J. I. Mombert, Eng
lish Versions of the Bible. John Stoughton, Our English Bible, its
Translations and Translators.

WYCLIFFE AND HIS FOLLOWERS. 423
was the extent of the persecution against Wycliffe.
Without any restriction upon his personal liberty, or
any restraint upon his labors, except in the University,
he was allowed to finish his course. The last two years
were spent in his parish of Lutterworth. Meanwhile
his principal adherents, such as Aston, Repyngdon, and
Hereford, did not escape so easily. They were pursued
with unrelenting vigor, and found no refuge except in
recantation or exile.
Wycliffe died on December 31, 1384. He died in
fellowship with the Church. Singular immunity ! In
an age when free thought was branded as treason, the
most daring innovator, the man who dealt his powerful
blows against the whole framework of the Romish sys
tem, passed to his end unscathed. This, however, in
dicates rather the restraining hand of circumstances,
than the pleasure of the hierarchy. What their real
pleasure was, they indicated clearly enough in 1415,
when, in the great Council of Constance, they con
demned a list of Wycliffe's propositions, and com
manded his body to be removed from consecrated
ground. Thirteen years later, the command was ful
filled. The bones were exhumed and burned, and the
ashes cast into the neighboring stream.1
The Council of Constance, which condemned John
Huss to the flames, was not at fault in associating Wyc
liffe's name with his. Huss was in truth a disciple of
i The little river Swift. " The little river," in the celebrated words
of Thomas Fuller, " conveyed Wycliffe's remains into the Avon, Avon
into the Severn, Severn into the narrow seas, they to the main ocean.
And thus the ashes of Wycliffe are the emblem of his doctrine, which is
now dispersed all the world over."

424 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
Wycliffe. Recent research has made it entirely certain
that he drew largely from the writings of the English
reformer.1 Thus the fire which was kindled in England
ignited a kindred flame in distant Bohemia. The
influence of Wycliffe early started forth upon its far-
reaching circuit.
Shortly after the death of Wycliffe the name of Lol
lards, which had been occasionally used before, became
the current designation of those who embraced his
teachings. The name seems to have been imported
from the Netherlands. Some have supposed that it
was derived from the Latin lolium, meaning darnel or
tares ; others connect it with the old German lollen, to
hum or whine. On either supposition, the satirical in
tent with which the term was applied is sufficiently
manifest. For a number of years the Lollard party was of no
mean strength. Knighton probably expressed himself
in exaggerated terms, when he said that one could
scarcely meet two men on the road one of whom would
not be found to be a disciple of Wycliffe. Still, the
party was numerous, and counted among its adherents
representatives of all the different ranks of society.
So great was their confidence and courage in 1395, that
they presented to Parliament a document in the interest
of reform, wherein their most radical beliefs were stated
without reserve.
But the tide soon turned against the Lollards. The
revolution by which Richard II. was deposed, and the
house of Lancaster in the person of Henry IV. was
1 See Prof. J. Loserth, Wiclif and Huss.

WYCLIFFE AND HIS FOLLOWERS. 425
brought to the throne, was one in which the hierarchy
took a conspicuous part; A close alliance resulted be
tween the King and the prelates. To repay the latter,
and to insure their continued support, Henry IV. read
ily responded to their request for repressive measures
against the Lollards. At the opening of the year 1401
the act De Hceretico Comburendo, the grim provision for
the burning of heretics, was entered into the statute-
book. This act authorized the bishops, not only to
arrest and imprison those suspected of heresy, but also
to hand over obstinate and relapsed heretics to the civil
officers " to be by them burned on a high place before
the people." Scarcely was the law recorded before it
was given practical application. In March, 1401, Wil
liam Sawtree, a London priest, was burned in Smith-
field. Some years later, the same place witnessed the
burning of John Badby. Others experienced in the
hardships of imprisonment a fate scarcely more to be
coveted. The most distinguished victim was Sir John Old-
castle, or Lord Cobham. He was a man of distinction,
having served with credit in the French wars. Though
he made no secret of his opinions, respect for his char
acter secured him comparative freedom from attack
during the reign of Henry IV. But under Henry V.
he was adjudged a heretic, and consigned to the tower.
Escaping thence, he remained concealed several years.
A high price was set upon his head, as he was accused
of being the patron and instigator of the insurrection
ary movements which took place at this time. Whether
there was any truth in this charge or not, it is difficult
to determine. Very different verdicts have been ren-

426 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
dered by historians. In any case, all that we know of
the man, whether in life or in the ordeal of martyrdom,
favors the conclusion that he was loyal to his conscience,
let his attitude toward his King have been what it
may. Having been apprehended in 1417, he was brought
to London and sentenced to the double punishment
of being hanged as a traitor and burned as a heretic.
" This sentence was literally carried out. He was
placed upon a sledge, as if he had been a traitor of the
deepest dye, and thus dragged through the town to St.
Giles's Fields. On arriving there he was taken down
from the sledge, and, immediately falling on his knees,
he began to pray for the forgiveness of his enemies.
His prayer ended, he rose, and, addressing the assem
bled multitude, warned them to obey God's commands
written down in the Bible, and always to shun such
teaching as they saw to be contrary to the life and
example of Christ. He was then suspended between
two gallows by chains, and the funeral pile was kindled
beneath him, so that he was slowly burned. So long
as life remained in him, he continued to praise God, and
to commend his soul to His divine keeping." x
After the death of Lord Cobham no conspicuous
leader appeared in the ranks of the Lollards. While
never wholly exterminated, the party was reduced to a
small remnant, which obtained immunity only because
of its quietness and obscurity.
1 Lechler, chap. x. § 6.

CHAPTER VI.
JOHN HUSS AND THE HUSSITES.
BOHEMIA at the end of the fourteenth century
presented perhaps a more favorable theatre for a
reform movement than any other country of Europe.
The gospel message had come to it in the first instance
from the East. Traces of its Greek origin were long
apparent in the Bohemian Church. Even down to the
beginning of the fourteenth century such customs were
prevalent as preaching in the vernacular, marriage of
the clergy, and the extension of the eucharistic cup to
the laity.1 In the course of the century, it is true, the
bonds with Rome were strengthened, and there was a
movement toward a more decided ascendency of the
Roman scheme. But the old order of things could not
have been wholly forgotten, and whatever stimulus may
have come from this source was reinforced by an intel
lectual awakening. The founding of the University of
Prague by Charles IV. in 1348 gave to Bohemia the
first great institution of learning which had yet ap
peared beyond the Rhine. A few years after the
opening of its doors, it had gained an attendance and
acquired a fame which made it wellnigh a rival of the
universities at Paris and Oxford. Such a rapid unfold-
1 Hagenbach, Kirchengeschichte, Vorlesung xxx.

428 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
ment of educational facilities was naturally of itself a
source of mental quickening to the Bohemians. At
the same time, the extraordinary development attained
by their language supplied a ready vehicle for an un
usual diffusion of intelligence among the people. " The
state of education and average general culture in Bo
hemia," says a recent biography of Huss, " was higher
than that of any other country, and the Czesko-Slavonic
language had reached a pitch of flexibility and culti
vation which had not been attained by any other Euro
pean tongue save that of Italy, where it was rather
poetry than prose that was in the ascendant." a Among
those who labored zealously and effectually to adapt the
Bohemian tongue to theological use was a representa
tive of the nobility, Thomas Stitny. His enlightened
zeal in this direction is very finely indicated by his
own words. " A sermon of St. Augustine," he says,
" has encouraged me to be bolder in writing Bohemian
books which relate to the Holy Scriptures ; for from
it every one can see how good a thing it is to read the
Holy Scriptures. And those who condemn books in the
Bohemian language, even if good ones, wishing perhaps
to be the only persons who appear wise, might well
dread the vengeance of God, when they reflect how
guilty those are who wish to stop the letters and neces
sary messages therein, and to prevent the Lord God,
the Eternal Bridegroom, from teaching His bride His
will, and comforting her in her distress thereby. Yea,
justly would he be in terror who should stop the letters
of a king addressed to his queen, if he knew that the
king was aware of it. And how much greater is the
i A. H. Wratislaw.

JOHN HUSS AND THE HUSSITES. 429
Lord God than any king ! How much dearer to Him
is His bride — that is every soul that longeth for Him
— than was any queen dear to any king ! Wiser men
understand this, and know that a Bohemian is as pre
cious to Him as a Latinist."
Among the clergy in Bohemia three men in particu
lar may be regarded as the precursors of Huss ; namely,
Conrad of Waldhausen, Milicz of Kremsier, and Mat
thias of Janow. Conrad was a native of Austria, and
was known as an effective preacher at Vienna before
his arrival in Bohemia, which occurred about the year
1360. His great aim was a reform in the lives of the
people and the clergy. Accepting the current system
of doctrine, he employed all his energy in assailing cor
ruptions in practice. Much attention was awakened by
his stirring addresses, insomuch that the church where
he ministered at Prague became too narrow to contain
the assembled crowd. As a moral censor, he naturally
made enemies. The mendicant monks in particular
were displeased with his severe criticisms, and it was
probably owing to their accusations that he had oc
casion to defend himself before the Pope's legate. Con
rad died in 1369. A contemporary has thus described
the wholesome effect of his labors : " A man of great
learning and greater eloquence, he saw, when he came
to Bohemia, all men given up to excessive luxury, and
exceeding all limits in many respects ; and through his
preaching he so reformed the morals of people in our
country, that many put aside the vanities of this world
and served God with zeal." x
Milicz, though probably at the time in holy orders,
1 Benesz Krabice, quoted by Wratislaw.

430 THE MEDIJEVAL CHURCH.
was for a considerable interval in government employ,
first at the court of the Margrave John of Moravia, and
then at that of the Emperor Charles IV. In 1363, re
signing his offices, he betook himself to the one task of
preaching the gospel. At first his style of address was
not attractive ; but erelong his spiritual devotion and
enthusiasm gained the ear of the people, and their eager
ness to hear was only surpassed by his willingness to
instruct. It speaks in favor of the tact as well as of
the philanthropy of the man, that he is said to have
rescued two hundred of the fallen women of Prague,
and provided them with the necessary aids to a virtu
ous life in a reformatory institution. Milicz, like Con
rad, appears not to have been an innovator in doctrines.
He held, to be sure, some rather eccentric views about
the coming of Antichrist. But he did not mean to
impugn any part of the established system of faith or
polity. So the authorities seem to have concluded.
For while his enemies caused him trouble, and he had
occasion to clear himself at Rome, and again at Avignon,
the Pope readily acquitted him in the former instance,
and there are indications that he met with favorable
consideration in the latter instance. His death occurred
in 1374, at Avignon, whither he had repaired to defend
his cause before the papal court.
Matthias of Janow was rather the scholar and writer
than the popular orator. Educational advantages of
the first order had been enjoyed by him. Besides
studying for an interval in Prague, he spent six years in
Paris, where he received the degree of Master of Arts.
From 1381 to his death in 1393 he held a position
among the clergy of Prague. The writings of Matthias,

JOHN HUSS AND THE HUSSITES. 431
of which the five books entitled " De Regulis Veteris et
Novi Testamenti " formed the principal part, indicate
that his views were somewhat more radical than those
of his predecessors, and came nearer to a veritable
breach with the Romish system. He exalted the Scrip
tures far above human traditions, emphasized the im
mediate relation of the believer to Christ, complained of
the legalism which had substituted a long list of com
mandments and restrictions for the simple rule of life in
the gospel, opposed the tendency to separate too widely
between the clergy and the laity, favored the practice
of frequent communion on the part of all Christians,
and condemned the abusive extreme to which the wor
ship of images was commonly carried. The preference
of Matthias for the Bible, and his desire to make it the
foundation of his teaching, is vividly set forth in the
preface to his chief work. " In these writings of mine,"
he says, "I have throughout made most use of the
Bible, and but little of the sayings of the doctors ; both
because the Bible occurs to me promptly and abundantly
for writing on every matter, and because out of it and
through its most divine verities, which are clear and
self-evident, all opinions are more solidly confirmed, are
founded with greater acuteness, and are meditated on
more usefully ; and because it is that which I have
loved from my youth up, and have named my beloved
friend and spouse, yea, the mother of beauteous affec
tion and knowledge and fear and holy hope."1 His
words on the subject of human commandments are
especially noteworthy. Having called attention to the
fact that Christ and His apostles laid but few com-
1 Quoted by Wratislaw.

432 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
mands upon Christians, he adds : " Whence it appears
that those later persons have acted and still act cruelly
and barbarously, who have introduced and authorita
tively confirmed their numerous inventions, various
doctrines, and rigid commands in the family of God and
the Lord Jesus, binding and burdening their subjects
overmuch. . . . Wherefore I have concluded in my
own mind, that, for the purpose of renewing peace and
union in the general body of Christians, it is expedient
to root out all that plantation, and curtail again the
word upon earth, and bring back the Church of Christ
Jesus to its salutary and compendious beginnings, re
taining proportionately few, and those apostolic, com
mandments." What is here mentioned as a matter of
desire was also proclaimed by Matthias as a matter of
expectation. With a confidence approaching to pro
phetic assurance he declared : " I believe that all the
aforesaid works of men, prescriptions, and ceremonies
shall be destroyed from the foundation, and God alone
will be exalted, and His Word will abide eternally ; and
the time is near at hand when those prescriptions will
be brought to naught."
But with all his enlightened sentiments Matthias was
only a tentative reformer. He professed himself ready
to receive correction from the Church, and seems not
to have put in the proviso that the correction should be
through arguments convincing to his reason and con
science. So we have the record, that, in answer to the
demand of a synod in 1389, he formally recanted several
of the opinions which he had advanced.1
Such developments as we have sketched prepared the
1 Wratislaw.

JOHN HUSS AND THE HUSSITES. 433
ground for Huss. Not only this ; they exercised un
doubtedly a certain influence upon his own mind.
Nevertheless, it is probably no erroneous judgment
which assigns them the second rank in the tuition of
the Bohemian reformer. From no other source did
Huss draw so much as from that most able and daring
innovator of the preceding generation, John Wycliffe.
This is proved by the combined evidence of his own
acknowledgments, the charges of his accusers, and the
contents of his extant writings. No doubt his enemies
went beyond warrant in proclaiming the identity of his
teachings with those of Wycliffe. The Bohemian was
less radical than the English agitator. The former,
for example, retained the doctrine of transubstantiation,
which was so sharply condemned by the latter. He
occupied also a more tolerant attitude than Wycliffe
toward the custom of venerating the Virgin and the
saints. But Huss made no secret in his later years of
his appreciation for Wycliffe. Once, in the presence of
the Archbishop of Prague, he is said to have exclaimed
that he hoped that his soul might be with that of the
Oxford teacher. He admired him first as a philosopher,
as an able advocate of realism. Later he admired him
as a reformer in practice and doctrine, and borrowed
largely from his writings. " I am attracted," wrote
Huss, " by his writings, in which he expends every ef
fort to conduct all men back to the law of Christ, and
especially the clergy, inviting them to let go pomp and
dominion of the world, and to live, like the apostles, ac
cording to the law of Christ. I am attracted by the
love he has for the law of Christ, maintaining its
28

434 THE MEDIMVAL CHURCH.
truth and holding that in no point can it prove to be
false."1 As early as bis student days Huss had an opportunity
to look into the works of Wycliffe. The liberality of
a Bohemian nobleman by the name of Ranconis had
provided a fund by which youth of his country might
be enabled to study at Paris and Oxford. The connec
tion thus established between Bohemia and the English
university was greatly strengthened by the marriage of
Anne, sister of the Bohemian King Wenzel (or Wen-
ceslas), to Richard II. The prominence of Wycliffe of
course drew the attention of the foreign students, and
they were eager to possess themselves of his writings,
and to carry them back to their own country.2 We
learn from Jerome of Prague, who was one of those that
made a sojourn at Oxford, that he himself took pains to
copy and to carry home some of the principal of Wyc
liffe's writings.
Such was the preparation made for Huss. Viewed on
its intellectual or dogmatic side, his work was to some
extent a copy. He cannot claim the same distinction
as his English predecessor in respect of originality or
mental daring. He was more eminent as a confessor or
witness than as a thinker. His noblest distinction was
his moral worth, his humble, unswerving, courageous
fidelity to his convictions. His greatest natural gift
was the power of persuasive address.
John Huss was born in 1369 at the town of Husinetz
in the southern part of Bohemia. His parents were
poor, and in the earlier stages of his education he had
1 Neander, Kirchengeschichte, ix.
2 J. LoBerth, Wiclif and Hus.

JOHN HUSS AND THE HUSSITES. 435
to shift for himself, much after the manner of Luther at
a later date, gaining his bread by singing in the churches
and performing menial services. In 1396 he took the
degree of Master of Arts at the University of Prague,
and two years afterwards began to deliver lectures as a
public teacher. In 1401 he was made Dean of the
Faculty of Arts for the ensuing half-year. In 1402 he
was Rector for the like term. The same year marks
also a very important call for Huss, his nomination to
the office of preacher in the Bethlehem Chapel, a foun
dation which was due to the charity and enterprise of
two laymen. According to the provisions of the foun
dation, preaching in this chapel was to be in the vernac
ular. This was welcome to the zeal of Huss for popular
instruction, and gave him an opportunity to leaven the
minds of the people with those reform principles which
now were beginning to burn in his own heart. By
no other means, perhaps, did he so effectually impress
the Bohemian people as by his sermons in Bethlehem
Chapel. It was first in 1410 that Huss began to be seriously
molested in his work. Several causes combined to ren
der him an object of attack. In the first place, in his
impartial denunciations of iniquity he was no more in
clined to spare the clergy than the people. The vices
and abuses which in this degenerate age were scanda
lously prevalent in the priesthood he assailed with scath
ing rebuke. Naturally his censures created ill will in
those not inclined to reform. While they felt the smart
of cutting reproofs, they feared also for their revenue,
since an unscrupulous dealing with relics, and simoni-
acal charges for spiritual services, were among the things

436 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
most emphatically reprobated by the reformer. In the
second place, the attitude of Huss toward the writings
of Wycliffe gave an occasion for attack. As early as
1403, these writings were brought under censorship.
Forty-five articles purporting to be extracted therefrom
were laid before an assembly of the university magis-
ters. The German element, which was predominant,
was forward to condemn the articles. Among the Bo
hemians, on the other hand, there were several promi
nent teachers who were ready to defend Wycliffe, either
on the ground that the articles did not truly represent
his sentiments, or were capable of being understood in
an orthodox sense. Huss sympathized with this latter
verdict. He had no disposition to defend Wycliffe at
every point; but at the same time he was strongly
averse to the wholesale condemnation of the articles
which was carried through by the assembly. Attention
was recalled to the subject at intervals. In 1408 there
was an order for the delivering up of Wycliffe's writ
ings. This order was in part obeyed ; its execution was
not vigorously pressed. Thus far the position of Huss
was not definitely and openly compromised by his rela
tion to Wycliffe. But even the qualified apology which
he offered for the English reformer, who was now re
puted in Romish circles to have been the great here-
siarch of his time, gave his enemies a most effectual
instrument for stirring up prejudice against him. A
third cause for assailing Huss was the part which he
took in overcoming the preponderance of the Germans
in the management of the university. In three out of
the four " nations " which were represented in the uni
versity, the German element was dominant. This gave

JOHN HUSS AND THE HUSSITES. 437
them three votes to one of the Bohemians. The result
was, that the Bohemians were compelled to see most of
the offices and benefices which were at the disposal of
the university in the hands of strangers. Huss relished
this as little as others of his nation, and approved the
effort to persuade the King to ordain a more just dis
tribution of privileges. As the appeal came at a time
when the King was angry with the Germans for oppos
ing his policy in reference to the rival claimants of the
papacy, it proved effective. A royal decree was issued
in January, 1409, by which it was provided that the
Bohemian nation should have three votes in the univer
sity. So great was the displeasure of the Germans at
this action that a few months later they left Prague in
large numbers, ^neas Sylvius says that five thousand
joined in the exodus, and a contemporary Bohemian
writer carried the estimate up to a total of twenty thou
sand. A large proportion of the emigrants settled at
Leipzig, where a new university was started. As the
depletion of their university was observed, it naturally
occurred to some that too high a price had been paid for
Bohemian ascendency. The result accordingly was not
altogether favorable to Huss, even as respects the opin
ion of his own countrymen. As regards the Ger
mans, they were of course much embittered against him.
Even before this they cherished toward him no friendly
feeling. As nominalists they were ill affected from the
start toward Wycliffe, as being a distinguished champion
of realism. They were quite ready to believe him to be
a theological heretic, who was known to them as a her
etic in philosophy. The simple fact then that Huss em
braced the philosophical realism of Wycliffe was a source

438 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
of suspicion in their minds as to his orthodoxy in theol
ogy. They were alert to interpret any show of appre
ciation for Wycliffe as a token of heresy. Accordingly,
as they went from Prague the sharpened feeling of per
sonal hostility which they carried with them was a sure
pledge that they would be industrious in sowing the
seeds of ill will against the Bohemian reformer.
In 1410 Zbynek (or Zbinco), Archbishop of Prague,
opened the positive attack on Huss. He had been an
gered by the utter failure of his attempt in the pre
ceding year to champion the cause of Gregory XII.,
one of the schismatic Popes. The King had supported
Alexander V., the nominee of the Council of Pisa, and
in this measure had received the co-operation of Huss
and of the greater part of the clergy. The archbishop,
after witnessing the nullity of his censures, had made
a virtue of necessity, and transferred his allegiance
to Alexander. But he felt his humiliation, and eagerly
sought a compensation. In pursuance of a papal bull,
obtained through his representations some months be
fore, the archbishop in July, 1410, ordered the burning
of such copies of Wycliffe's writings as had been col
lected, the surrender of such as were still retained by
their possessors, and desistance from further preaching
in private places, on pain of excommunication. This
last requisition was designed to put a stop to the
preaching of Huss in the Bethlehem Chapel. Such a
demand Huss could not conscientiously obey. He re
garded it as putting unlawful bonds upon the Word of
God. He therefore appealed to the Pope, and went on
with his preaching, at the same time uttering a protest
against the burning of Wycliffe's writings. The arch-

JOHN HUSS AND THE HUSSITES. 439
bishop on his part burned the proscribed writings, ex
communicated Huss, and opposed his petition at the
papal court. Huss was cited to answer before that
court, and on his failure to appear incurred the papal
excommunication. As Huss was supported by the
King and a large part of the people and the clergy, all
these censures, as well as the interdict which the arch
bishop imposed upon Prague, effected little. At length
Zbynek yielded so far as to listen to a plan of arbitra
tion and to remove the interdict. His death, occurring
at this time, deprived him of the opportunity, either to
consummate peace, or, what was more probably in his
intention, to renew hostilities.
Huss by this time was well established in his prin
ciple of action. As he had refused, at the command of
the archbishop, to cease from preaching, so he con
cluded to sacrifice the dictates of his conscience to no
earthly authority. His maxim was steady adherence
to a conviction of truth or duty so long as he was not
proved to be in the wrong by considerations that ap
peared consonant with the divine oracles. No arbitrary
authority, however august the pretensions with which
it might clothe itself, was to be allowed to determine
his course. Such a principle under the circumstances
was a sure passport to martyrdom.
Before the close of the year 1411, Huss had occasion
to declare his attitude toward papal authority. In an
swer to the bull of John XXIIL, summoning the faith
ful to support a crusade against Ladislaus, King of
Naples, who sustained the rival Pope, Gregory XII.,
the traffic in indulgences was opened in Bohemia. It
being understood that Huss was determined to oppose

440 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
the traffic, he was summoned before the archbishop
(Albic) and the papal legates. Being asked by the
latter if he would obey the apostolic commands, he
replied very promptly in the affirmative. But as the
legates expressed their satisfaction at his ready submis
sion, he added : " Understand me, gentlemen ! I term
the doctrine of Christ's apostles apostolic commands,
and so far as the commands of the Pope of Rome agree
with that doctrine and those commands I am willing
to obey them gladly ; but when I see the contrary, I
shall not obey, even if ye place before me fire to con
sume my body." This declaration Huss followed up,
with straightforward resolution. While some of his
former allies, notably Stephen Palecz and Stanislas,
voted for neutrality, Huss, both in public disputation
and in his pulpit addresses, denounced the purchase of
Pope John's indulgences as an unworthy patronizing of
an unrighteous and a bloody enterprise. A significant
token of his temper was given as he took leave of
Palecz. Plainly perceiving that there was no longer
any ground of fellowship with him, he said : " Palecz
is a friend, truth is a friend ; and since both are friends,
the blameless course is to give the preference to truth."
Not only did he oppose indulgences as a means of help
ing on the unrighteous crusade of the Pope, but, like
Luther at a later date, he greatly qualified the value of
indulgences in general, and emphasized the view that
priestly absolution is to be regarded as conditional, it
being impossible without special revelation to know
whether the penitent has met the divine requirements
for remission.
Among the people of Prague' a large party responded

JOHN HUSS AND THE HUSSITES. 441
warmly to the sentiments of Huss. Sometimes their
zeal was not kept within the limits of discretion. Huss
himself was far from countenancing wild-fire and vio
lence. But the agitation was too great to be controlled
fully by his word or example. The patrons of the
Pope's indulgences were lampooned. A procession
was gotten up, and documents bearing the semblance
of papal bulls, after being borne through the streets,
were committed to the flames. In several instances
preachers who attempted to recommend the indul
gences were interrupted with a cry of denunciation.
Three young men, among those who testified in this
lawless way against the iniquity, were arrested and hur
ried to execution by the magistrates, — an exhibition of
cruelty which exasperated far more than it intimidated.
In the popular view their death was a martyrdom, and
Huss himself did not forbear to praise their honest zeal
and devotion.
These developments were of course a sure guaranty
against any favorable decision on the case of Huss,
which had been pending at the papal court. Malignant
representatives of his enemies in Prague, among whom
the renegade Michael de Causis acted a conspicuous
part, were on hand to give the worst account of the do
ings of the reformer. Accordingly, in July, 1412, sen
tence was given for the public proclamation in Prague
of the excommunication of Huss, together with the
requirement that no Christian should have any inter
course with him, and that the place of his abode, if
he should remain obstinate for twenty days, should be
under interdict. Soon after came the more violent in
junctions that Huss should be delivered over to the

442 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
archbishop, or other judge, to be condemned and
burned ; that the Bethlehem Chapel should be levelled
with the ground ; and that all implicated in the heresy of
Huss should recant within thirty days on pain of sum
mons to appear before the court of Rome. These meas
ures caused intense excitement. Between the bitter
enemies of Huss on the one hand, and his warm admirers
on the other, violent and bloody altercations were im
minent. Such a state of things was very unwelcome to
Huss. It was also a grief to him that the people should
on his account be deprived of the rites of religion, as
they were in a measure through the partial observance
of the interdict. While, therefore, so far as he himself
was concerned, he was willing to hold his ground, he
decided for the sake of the general interest to retire for
a season from Prague. Refuge and entertainment were
readily offered him by friendly nobles.
During his absence Huss was by no means inactive.
He still kept his hand upon affairs in Prague, and in
deed visited the city at intervals. He found occasion
to preach at various points to multitudes who were
eager to hear his voice. He was also much occupied
with his pen. His most elaborate treatise, De Ecclesia,
was produced at this time. In this work Huss brings
out a conception which was fundamental to his depart
ure from the Romish basis. Like Wycliffe before him,
he emphasizes the idea that the Church is properly the
whole company of the elect. Union with Christ is the
essential condition of membership. From this point of
view he naturally draws the conclusion that the papal
headship cannot be admitted except in a very quali
fied sense. A pope may not be even a member of the

JOHN HUSS AND THE HUSSITES. 443
Church, in which case it would be preposterous to re
gard him as the head. Christ alone is properly the
head of the Church. That the Church can dispense
with a pope is evident from the fact that in the earlier
ages of its history there was no pope. Up to the time
of Constantine the Roman bishop was simply the col
league of the other bishops. As it is not necessary to
have a pope, so obedience may be refused to him when
he does not rule as a true representative of Christ. In
deed, the Christian is bound to keep his gaze fixed upon
the example and the precepts of Christ, and to give heed
neither to pope nor prelate when their injunctions are
counter thereto.1 From these and other teachings of
Huss it is quite evident that he entertained the formal
principle of the Lutheran reformation. A compe
tent investigator of the subject remarks : " As regards
Huss's doctrine concerning the sources of Christian be
lief and concerning its exposition, it may be taken as
proved that Holy Scripture was looked upon by him
as the alone source of religious truth, despite the fact
that in several places he expresses himself in another
sense." 2
The opening of the Council of Constance in the latter
part of the year 1414 summoned Huss to a new theatre
of testimony. At the instance of the Emperor Sigis-
mund, who had been largely instrumental in calling the
council, and who was anxious to compose the disturb
ance in Bohemia, it was provided that Huss should be
invited to appear at Constance to answer for himself.
The safe-conduct of the Emperor was promised in case
1 See Neander, Kirchengeschichte, ix.
2 Loserth, Wiclif and Hus.

444 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
he should accept the proposal ; and this, it would ap
pear, was understood to imply a free departure from
the council, as well as protection on the way thither.
" King Sigismund's intention," says Wratislaw, " as
signified to Huss by the noblemen commissioned to
communicate with him, was not only to give him a safe-
conduct on his way to Constance, but also to procure
him a free and safe public hearing in the council, in
such manner, indeed, that, if he were unwilling to sub
mit to the judgment of the council, he was to have a
free and safe journey back to his own country. Such is
Huss's own statement in a letter written after June 5,
1415, and also in an earlier but undated letter, in which
he expressed the wish that he could but once at any
rate speak with the King, since he had come thither at
his wish and under his promise that he should return
safe to Bohemia."1 The language of the safe-conduct
itself speaks for the same conclusion : " Sigismund, by
the grace of God King of the Romans, etc., — To all
princes, ecclesiastical and lay, and all our other sub
jects greeting. Of our full affection we recommend to
all in general, and to each individually, the honorable
man, Master John Huss, the bearer of these presents,
going from Bohemia to the Council of Constance, whom
we have taken under our protection and safeguard, and
under that of the Empire, requesting when he arrives
among you that you will receive him kindly and treat
him favorably. . . . Let him freely and securely pass, so-
1 Chap. vii. Palacky, who concludes that the safe-conduct, while
made out at Speier, October 18th, did not reach Huss till after his
arrival in Constance, assigns equal scope to the document. (Geschichte
von Bohmen, iii. 318.)

JOHN HUSS AND THE HUSSITES. 445
journ, stop, and return."1 Notwithstanding the Emper
or's guaranty, there were not wanting those who appre
hended peril for Huss, and warned him that Constance
would prove fatal ground to him. Huss understood
himself that there was some occasion for the warning.
From his farewell letter it is clear that he was by no
means confident of escaping imprisonment and death.
But he was resolved to brave the danger. The spirit
of a confessor dwelt in his bosom, and no prospect was
more welcome than the opportunity to justify his teach
ings before the supreme tribunal of Christendom.2
Huss reached Constance on the 3d of November. His
most virulent enemies from Prague, if not already on
the ground, were forthwith at hand, and with unwea
ried industry were endeavoring to poison the minds of
his judges. Their machinations were all too success
ful. Before the end of November Huss received a fore
taste of the mercy that was to be awarded. The prison
closed its doors upon him by the order of Pope and
cardinals. In a foul and noisome dungeon he learned
the worth of the safe-conduct which had bespoken for
him kindly treatment in every place of his sojourn.
His health was speedily broken, and his trial would
have been anticipated by his death had he not been
removed to more wholesome quarters.
i Quoted from Von der Hardt by E. C. Gillett, Life and Times of John
Huss, vol. i. chap. xiii.
2 The feelings with which he looked forward to the council are on rec
ord in a letter which he addressed to the Emperor Sigismund, Sept. 1,
1414 : " Sicut nihil in occulta docui, sic opto non in secreto, sed in pub-
lica audientia audiri, examinari, praedicare, et omnibus, quotquot arguere
voluerint, juvante spiritu domini respondere. Nee spero verebor con-
fiteri Christum dominum, et pro ejus lege verissima, si oportuerit, mor
tem pati." (Quoted by Palacky, iii. 312.)

446 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
How was this violation of the imperial pledge re
ceived by Sigismund? At first he expressed, and no
doubt felt, great indignation. But his heart was set
upon making the council a success in the healing of
the papal schism. He found that he could not defend
Huss and maintain the terms of the safe-conduct with
out endangering a rupture with the council. He con
cluded, therefore, after some show of displeasure, to
leave Huss to his fate. The assembled doctors on their
part offered a salve to his conscience, setting forth the
doctrine that no secular power can obligate itself to
keep faith with a heretic, to the prejudice of the Church.1
In this, whatever may be thought of the special appli
cation made, the council no doubt stood on historical
ground. The plain import of the legislation of Inno
cent III. was that no secular ruler is authorized to pro
tect an heretical -subject, or to stand in the way of his
being visited with the extreme penalty. It follows
1 The decree of the council on the subject of safe-conducts reads as
follows : " Prassens sancta synodus ex quovis salvo conductu per Im-
peratorem, Reges et alios seculi principes haereticis, vel de haeresi dif-
famatis, putantes eosdem sic a suis erroribus revocare, quocumque
vinculo se adstrinxerint, concesso, nullum fidei catholicae vel jurisdic
tion! ecclesiastical praejudicium generari, vel impedimentum praestari
posse seu debere, declarat, quo minus dicto salvo conductu non obstante
liceat judici competenti et ecclesiastico de hujusmodi personarum errori
bus inquirere, et alias contra eos debite procedere, eosdenique punire,
quantum justitia suadebit, si suos errores revocare pertinaciter recusa-
verint, etiamsi de salvo conductu confisi ad locum venerint judicii, alias
non venturi." (Mansi, Sess. xix. p. 799, torn, xxvii.) A decree of the
council, as reported by Von der Hardt (torn. iv. p. 522), specifically jus
tifies the violation of the safe-conduct held by Huss : " Sancta synodus
declarat, dictum invictissimum principem circa praedictum quondam
Johannem Huss, non obstante memorato salvo conductu, ex juris debito
fecisse, quod licuit, et quod decuit Regiam Magistatem."

JOHN HUSS AND THE HUSSITES. 447
necessarily on this basis, that any pledge of security
from a temporal ruler given to a subject accused of
heresy must be conditional. Faith with a heretic can
in no case be inviolable, at least in no case in which the
faith is not pledged by the supreme spiritual authority
itself.1 From the first, it was manifest that the council was
bent upon humbling Huss, if not upon accomplishing
his destruction. It occupied toward him the position
of magisterial authority, requiring him to acknowledge
and to recant the errors alleged to have been taught
by him. At his trial (on the 5th, 7th, and 8th of
June, 1415) the testimony of the most bitter and preju
diced witnesses was received, but no opportunity was
provided for friendly testimony. Of the various articles
which were cited as being taught in his writings and
proving his heresy, some had never received his sanc
tion. Nevertheless he was called upon to abjure the
whole list, and thereby to allow the inference that he had
taught things which in fact he had never entertained
or inculcated. No door of escape was left open except
that at which conscience stood guard, and Huss was
not the man to thrust conscience aside. He denied
that he had taught some of the alleged errors ; he main
tained that others properly understood were true ; he
refused to make the indiscriminate recantation and
submission that were required. Near the close of
1 Of course the council might have respected the safe-conduct, if it
had been so disposed. While the theocratic system gave it the option
to make public faith a nullity, it did not require it to do this. It could
have shown some regard for plighted faith, and spared Sigismund the
blush which is said to have mantled his cheek as Huss, before the as
sembled dignitaries, referred to the safe-conduct. (Palacky, iii. 364.)

448 THE MEDIJEVAL CHURCH.
the trial, as several under the guise of friendly advice
urged him to cast himself upon the mercy of the coun
cil, Huss responded : " Most revered fathers, I came
here freely, not to defend aught obstinately ; but if in
some points I have stated things incorrectly or defect
ively, I wish to submit to the instruction of the coun
cil. But I pray that a hearing may be granted me to
explain my meaning as to the articles charged against
me, and to cite the writings of holy doctors; and if
my reasons and citations be not strong enough, I will
humbly submit to the instruction of the council."
Later, in answer to a private solicitation to satisfy the
council by subscribing a formula of recantation, Huss
replied : " I dare not submit myself to the council ac
cording to the tenor of the recantation exhibited to me,
both because I must condemn many truths, which, as
I heard from themselves, they designate scandalous,
and because I must incur the guilt of perjury by ab
juration, through admitting that I have held the errors;
whereby I should greatly scandalize God's people, who
have heard the contrary from me in my preaching. If
then the holy Eleazar, a man of the old law, an account
of whom is in the Book of the Maccabees, would not
lyingly admit that he had eaten the flesh forbidden by
the law, lest he should act against God and leave an
evil example to posterity, how should I, a priest of the
new law, though an unworthy one, for fear of a punish
ment which will soon be over, be willing to transgress
the law of God more grievously by withdrawing from
the truth, by committing perjury, by scandalizing my
neighbors? Indeed, it is better for me to die, than,
avoiding a momentary punishment, to fall into the

JOHN HUSS AND THE HUSSITES. 449
hands of the Lord, and perhaps afterwards into fire
and everlasting reproach. And because I have ap
pealed to Christ Jesus, the most powerful and the most
righteous of judges, committing myself and my cause
to Him, I therefore await His decision and sentence,
knowing that He will judge every man, not according
to false or erroneous witness, but according to truth
and deserving." J Such was the position which Huss
maintained with constant resolution. In the face
of persuasion and menace alike, he revealed not the
slightest token of a tendency to waver in his chosen
course. All that remained now was the final sentence and
the ordeal of martyrdom. On the 6th of July, 1415, as
the council was assembled in state, Huss was brought
into its presence. After a sermon by the Bishop of
Lodi, which dwelt on the duty of extirpating heresy,
articles from the writings of Wycliffe were read and
condemned. Then accusations against Huss and articles
from his writings were read. No opportunity was given
him to reply except as he managed at intervals to inter
ject a few sentences. Among the charges, it was stated
that he had appealed to God, to the disparagement of
ecclesiastical authority. To this Huss replied by re
newing his appeal in words like these : " O Lord Jesus !
Lo, this council now condemns Thine own action and
law as an error ! For, when Thou wast oppressed by
Thine enemies, Thou didst commit Thy cause to Thy
Father, the most righteous Judge, giving herein an ex
ample to us poor sinners, when aggrieved in any way,
to have recourse to Thee, the most righteous Judge,
1 Quoted by Wratislaw.
29

450 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
humbly asking Thine aid." As sentence was pro
nounced against him, Huss fell upon his knees and
prayed, saying : " Lord Jesus Christ ! pardon all my
enemies, I pray Thee, for the sake of Thy great mercy.
Thou knowest that they have falsely accused me, brought
forward false witnesses, and concocted false articles
against me. Pardon them for the sake of Thine in
finite mercy."
Being vested with the priestly garments prior to the
ceremony of degradation, he was exhorted by the
bishops having the matter in charge to abjure. Huss
replied, as he turned to the assembly, " See ! these
bishops would have me abjure. I fear to do so lest
I should be a liar in the sight of God ; lest I should
offend my conscience and God's truth, never having
held the articles which they falsely allege against me,
but rather having taught, written, and preached the
contrary ; and also lest I should offend and scandalize
the great multitude to whom I have preached, and like
wise others who are faithfully preaching the Word of
God." The priestly vestments were then removed, and the
eucharistic chalice was taken from his hand with the
exclamation, " We take from thee, accursed Judas,
the cup of salvation." But Huss replied, " I trust in
God, my Almighty Father, that He will not take from
me the cup of His salvation, and I have a steadfast hope
that I shall yet to-day drink it in His kingdom." As
the concluding mockery was taking place, and a paper
crown disfigured with the pictures of fiends was put
upon his head, the bishops said, " Now we give over
thy soul to the devil." "But I," said Huss, looking

JOHN HUSS AND THE HUSSITES. 451
heavenward, " commend to Thee, 0 Jesus Christ, the
soul which Thou hast redeemed."
Like words were repeated by Huss while he was
being led to the stake. As the pile of mingled wood
and straw which encompassed his body was kindled, he
commenced to chant with a loud voice, " O Christ, Son
of the living God ! have mercy upon me ! " The smoke
and flame which the wind drove into his face soon
quenched his voice, but it could be seen from the
motion of his lips that as long as life remained he was
continuing his sublime devotions. Thus died one of
the world's heroes, a man than whom a more honest or
devoted was probably never sent to heaven by the
pathway of fire.
The voice of the accuser had triumphed. The coun
cil had vindicated its authority against the man who
dared to appeal to Christ and to conscience, instead
of humbly submitting to its arbitrary mandate. But
neither accuser nor council, nor both combined, could
annul the verdict which was written in the hearts of
thousands of Bohemians. They knew the worth of
their countryman. It is no marvel that the flame of his
martyrdom became a torch which kindled all Bohemia
into a conflagration.
The council which had no compassion upon Huss
would not be likely to spare his disciple, Jerome of
Prague ; for Jerome was a man who gave more occa
sion of provocation than Huss. He was more impetu
ous and more venturesome, superior in genius but less
in constancy. Of singularly restless and inquiring
mind, he kept up a continual journeying. We find
him at Oxford, at Paris, at Cologne, at Heidelberg, at

452 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
Vienna, in Moravia, in Poland, and in Palestine.
Wherever he went, he expressed himself with freedom
and boldness. Judging from the stir which he made
at different universities, he must have been a very keen
disputant. That he was a man of extraordinary elo
quence we know from other evidence.
Urged probably by a desire to assist Huss, Jerome
came to Constance in the early part of April, 1415.
He was apprised at once by his friends that his coming
was of no avail, and that he must depart at once if he
valued his safety. This advice he was soon constrained
to follow. Having remained in a neighboring town for
a few days, he began to pursue his journey toward Bo
hemia. But he failed to escape. When within a day's
journey of the border, he was arrested and sent to
Constance. There chains and imprisonment proved to
be more effectual arguments with him than they had
been with his inflexible master. After several months
of suffering, he was prevailed upon to renounce the
doctrines of Wycliffe and Huss, and to acknowledge the
justice of the condemnation which befell the latter.
But recantation did not mean acquittal for Jerome.
One party among the members of the council was in
deed disposed to advocate his release from prison. The
opposing party, however, carried the day, and Jerome
was brought again to trial. At a public hearing which
was granted him on the 23d and the 26th of May,
1416, he responded to the numerous articles that were
produced against him. It was a long effort, and the
tax was all the more severe as he was greatly worn by
the hardships of his imprisonment. Nevertheless, at
the conclusion, Jerome was ready to improve the op-

JOHN HUSS AND THE HUSSITES. 453
portunity which was given him to speak more at length.
He was master of the situation, for he had become mas
ter of himself. With a spirit which rose above all consid
eration of temporal consequences, he gave the message
of his convictions to his astonished listeners, ending by
repairing the wrong which he had done to Huss, de
claring that no sin beside lay so heavy upon his con
science as that which he had committed in assenting to
the condemnation of that holy man.
The impression made by Jerome's eloquence may be
judged from the report of the papal secretary, Poggio
Bracciolini, a writer who had more than common op
portunities to hear the most distinguished orators of his
time. " I own," he says, " that I never saw any one
who, in pleading a cause, especially one for life and
death, approached more nearly to the eloquence of the
ancients, whom we admire so much. It was marvellous
to observe with what words, what eloquence, what ar
guments, what expression of countenance, what vis
age, what confidence, he answered his adversaries, and
finally concluded the pleading of his cause. . . . Mafty
he smote with jests, many with invectives; many he
frequently compelled to laugh in what was no laughing
matter, by jeering at the reproaches made to him by his
adversaries. . . . This, however, was a token of the
greatest intellectual power, that, when his discourse was
frequently interrupted, and he was assailed with vari
ous outcries by some who carped at his sentiments, not
one of them did he leave unscathed, and, chastising them
all alike, compelled them either to blush or to hold their
peace. . . . His voice was sweet, clear, and sonorous,
accompanied with a certain dignified oratorical gesticu-

454 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
lation, either to express indignation, or to move com
passion, which however he neither asked for nor wished
to obtain. He stood fearless and dauntless, not merety
despising but even desiring death, so that you would
have said he was another Cato."
In approving Huss, Jerome had unmistakably con
demned the council. His own condemnation followed
as a matter of course. On the 30th of May he was sent
upon the fiery pathway which Huss had trod before
him ; and he pursued it with no less of triumph over
the fear of death. On the way to the stake he chanted
with a loud voice the Catholic creed and various hymns.
As the wood and straw were being placed about him, he
sang through the Easter hymn, Salve, festa dies ! Ob
serving that the executioners were about to light the
fire behind his back, he said to them, " Come here and
light the fire in m}*- sight ; if I had feared it, I should
never have come to this place." As the flames sprang
up, he committed his soul to God, and sent out his last
breath in fervent prayer.
The manner in which Huss and Jerome met their
fate is certified by no partisan testimony. Poggio says :
" Jerome suffered the tortures of fire with a calmness
greater than that with which Socrates drank the hem
lock." JEneas Sylvius says of both Huss and Jerome :
" They braved a violent death with constant mind, and
proceeded to the flames as though they had been invited
to a banquet, uttering no word which might betoken sor
row. No philosopher is recorded to have met death with
fortitude equal to that with which they endured burning."
How happened it that a council which was designed
to reform the Church had so little sympathy for men

JOHN HUSS AND THE HUSSITES. 455
whose whole energy was given to the work of reforma
tion ? It may be rephed, that a large proportion of those
who had a place in the council were corrupt ecclesias
tics, who desired nothing less than the abrogation of cur
rent abuses. This is no doubt true. But there were
earnest men in the council, who bemoaned the condition
of the Church, and were inwardly pledged to put forth
every effort for its correction. And men of this very
class, no less than others, urged on the prosecution
against the Bohemian leaders. John Gerson, before the
assembling of the council, was among the most emphatic
in his denunciations of Huss. Peter d'Ailly took a
conspicuous part in the trial of Huss. Gerson vigor
ously supported the proposition for renewing the pro
cess against Jerome after his recantation. How is this
to be explained? The answer is twofold. In the first
place, they approached the case of the Bohemian re
formers through the thick air of prejudice. The dis
tinguished theologians from Paris had their grudge, as
advocates of the nominalistic philosophy. And this
bias of theirs was reinforced by the representations of
the Germans, who brooded over the wrongs which they
thought had been done to them in their relations to the
University of Prague, and also by the English theolo
gians, who regarded Huss and Jerome as allies of the
abhorred sect of Wycliffe. In the second place, they
disliked the method of the reform which was under
taken in Bohemia. In their view, the aristocratic was
the true method. Reform should be initiated by the
highest authorities in the Church, and be carried for
ward in accordance .with their prescriptions and under
their leadership. The method of Huss, on the other

456 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
hand, was popular and democratic. He discussed the
needs of the Church in the presence of the people. He
proceeded on the supposition that a strong pressure
upon the corrupt ecclesiastics was necessary, both from
people and princes, in order to dispose them to any real
correction of the existing evils. This from the aristo
cratic and hierarchical standpoint seemed revolutionary,
a method perilous to the fabric of the Church. Hence
the intolerant feeling with which Huss and his asso
ciates were regarded.1
The Bohemian people repaid those who had sacri
ficed their leaders as might have been expected. While
there was a party which acknowledged the authority of
the council, it was not strong enough to deal with the
thoroughly aroused and indignant friends of the mar
tyrs. The council found its authority despised and its
measures treated as complete nullities. It cited before
its judgment seat the nobles who had complained in bit
ter terms of the burning of Huss and the cruel treat
ment of Jerome. Not one of the nobles responded to
the summons. It proscribed the practice of giving the
cup to the laity. The Hussites maintained the practice
with growing zeal and tenacity. This was a departure
from Romish usage for which Huss was not primarily
responsible. It seems to have been first advocated
while he was in prison at Constance, its leading cham
pion being Jacobus of Misa, commonly called Jacobel-
lus. But Huss, as the matter was brought to his notice,
confessed that the practice accorded with Scripture and
early usage, and gave it his sanction.
i Compare Wratislaw, chap. ix.

JOHN HUSS AND THE HUSSITES. 457
In addressing a people thus inflamed with a sense of
injury, prudence would seem to have dictated a tone of
moderation, not to say conciliation. But in fact the
very opposite was employed. The council issued. a de
cree in 1418, the plain intent of which was an uncom
promising war against the memory of Huss, and against
all who were in any wise favorable to his cause. The
newly elected Pope added a bull sanctioning and com
manding every means and method of inquisitorial rigor
and tyranny which might be effectual for the uprooting
of heresy.
Such measures simply poured oil upon the fire. The
Hussites began to combine. A large company of the
more zealous, that they might enjoy the eucharist ac
cording to the prescriptions of the New Testament, left
Prague and encamped upon a mountain which they
called Tabor. This became thenceforth a gathering
point, and served as a stronghold against enemies.
As the movement went on, it became apparent that
there were divergent parties among the Hussites. The
more radical wing were not content to stop short of a
thorough renunciation of Romanism. They wished for
a simple style of worship, claimed that the Bible is the
one supreme authority, and discountenanced prayers for
the dead, invocation of saints, and veneration of relics.
As this party was in the ascendant at the encampment
on Mount Tabor, they came to be called Taborites.
That there was a genuine evangelical basis underneath
their creed may be judged from the fact that the Bohe
mian and Moravian Brethren of later times were largely
their descendants. At the same time, it cannot be de
nied that in the first stage of their history their zeal was

458 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
frequently heightened into fanaticism and iconoclastic
fury. Fanciful views, especially on the interpretation
of prophecy, had for a time much currency among them.
This in the long run was of course an element of weak
ness. But at the first their highly wrought enthusiasm
added to the warlike energy which made them a terror
to their foes.
The more conservative wing of the Hussites, as laying
the principal stress upon the cup in the eucharist, were
called Calixtines or Utraquists. Their position is well
expressed by the four articles which they early set forth
as a basis of treating with Sigismund : (1) the full
and unrestricted freedom of the preaching of the gospel
throughout Bohemia ; (2) the freedom of the commun
ion of the cup ; (3) the exclusion of the clergy from
large temporal possessions or civil authority ; (4) the
strict repression and punishment of gross public sins,
whether in clergy or laity.
In 1419, the death of the weak and worthless King
Wenzel left the Emperor Sigismund heir to the Bohe
mian crown. Naturally, the Hussites were not favor
ably disposed toward the prince who had sacrificed
their leader in the face of his plighted faith. The
Taborites had no disposition to acknowledge him as
their king, and the more conservative Calixtines, after
a season of negotiation, concluded to repudiate his
claim, since it became apparent that religious liberty
could hope for nothing at his hands. Sigismund in
fact was fully bent upon a policy of repression. Aided
by the decrees of the Pope, who summoned the faithful
to join in a crusade against the heretics of Bohemia, he
marched into the country with a large army. But the

JOHN HUSS AND THE HUSSITES. 459
Hussites were equal to the encounter. Under the
lead of Ziska, the ablest general of the age, and of
those who were trained under his tuition, they were
completely victorious over the imperial forces. Inva
sion after invasion ended in defeat for the Emperor and
his allies. At length, after the country had suffered
fearfully from the ravages and atrocities of both parties,
it was concluded that the Hussites were not to be over
come by force. Resort was therefore made to diplom
acy. The Hussites were invited to negotiate with the
Council of Basle near the beginning of its sessions.
The result was a compact in which there was a par
tial concession to the demands of the Calixtines. This
wing of the Hussites was accordingly reconciled to
the Church, and inasmuch as they joined arms against
the opposing Taborites, the strength of the latter was
broken. Thereafter the military ardor by which they
had been so remarkably distinguished subsided. The
surviving remnant took on the character of a peaceful
brotherhood. As for the Calixtines, they enjoyed very
unequal advantages from their compact at different
times. However, they maintained themselves until
new and wider issues were brought to their attention
in connection with the great Reformation of the six
teenth century.
Such is the astonishing record of the Bohemian move
ment. A part of a small nation withstood the assaults
of Church and Empire, compelled the verdict that they
could not be subdued by force, and in the public settle
ment which was effected obtained terms of compromise
from a professedly ecumenical and infallible council.

CHAPTER VII.
THE MYSTICS.
THE culmination of scholasticism was followed by
an extraordinary outburst of mysticism. From
the first years of the fourteenth century the ferment of
mystical speculation and mystical devotion spread far
and wide through Germany. Gifted teachers announced
the most daring tenets respecting the union of the soul
with God. A multitude of earnest men and women,
who had little faculty for speculating on such high
themes, had an ardent zeal to possess the truth through
the medium of experience. The cloisters of the women
in particular, notably those connected with the Domin
ican order, supplied many instances of a mystical piety
which expressed itself in visions and ecstatic exercises.
Both in the speculative teaching and in the emotional
excitement an element of unhealthy exaggeration may
be discerned. Nevertheless, in both phases of the
movement good was contained. The deeper require
ments of piety, its great inward demands, were duly
emphasized in opposition to mere formality and ritual
ism. In the enlarged scope given to the subjective,
there was naturally a tendency to limit the notion of
hierarchical authority, and a point of connection with
the Protestant Reformation was supplied.

THE MYSTICS. 461
Among the mystics of this era Eckhart was no doubt
the greatest master of speculative thought. He ap
pears almost wholly in this character. Only a meagre
outline of his life is preserved. He was born about
1260. Probably before the age of manhood he entered
the Dominican order. His education was perfected at
Cologne and Paris. At the latter place he took the
degree of Master. For eight years (1303-1311) he held
office in his order as provincial prior of Saxony. He
then lectured for a year at Paris. Later he appears as
teacher and preacher in Strasburg, as prior in Frank
furt, and as teacher in Cologne. In 1325 Eckhart's
orthodoxy was called in question. He was suspected
of holding tenets like those of the Brethren of the Free
Spirit, who were then being sought out and brought to
punishment. At this time he was acquitted ; but the
process was renewed against him two years later, at the
instance of the Archbishop of Cologne. An appeal to
the Pope by the accused was answered with a condem
nation of twenty-eight of his sentences. This answer
came in 1329, a year or two after the death of Eckhart.
The papal document assumes that he had recanted his
errors before his death. But there is no record of a re
cantation, and the Pope's statement was probably based
upon the general declaration which Eckhart is known
to have made, that he would readily recant anything
which might be shown to be unsound.1
In his speculative system Eckhart cannot be said to
have adhered closely to any one philosophic master.
He drew from Neo-Platonism, especially as found in the
works of the pseudo Dionysius, from Augustine and
1 Wilhelm Preger, Geschichte der deutschen Mystik im Mittelalter.

462 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
from Aquinas. But he was a man of original force,
and gave his own impress to the materials with which
he dealt.
He starts with the conception of absolute being, un
differentiated, but containing in itself potentially all
distinctions. The more immediate products of the dif
ferentiation are the Persons of the Trinity. Beyond
the circle of the Trinity, by a process of emanation, the
different orders of creatures are produced. This ema
nation is not conceived as taking place by a blind
necessity, apart from the will of Deity; still it is a
veritable emanation. Things have real existence only
as the being of God is in them.
In this general view of the relation of God to the
creature there is manifestly a very close affiliation
with pantheism. Eckhart, moreover, indulged various
specific statements which might give occasion to the
charge of pantheistic teaching. We find in his writings
such sentences as these: "Before the creatures were,
God was not God." " All things are God Himself."
" The ground of God and the ground of the soul are
one essence." " The Father cannot understand Him
self without me." " The eye with which I see God is
the eye with which He sees me." " The soul should so
renounce its own individual being, that nothing but
God remains." The soul in its ground — so he taught
in his later years — is uncreated ; and the Son of God
is brought forth therein in the same way in which He
was brought forth in eternity. These are strong state
ments, and their pantheistic sense seems sufficiently
unequivocal. But some account must be taken of Eck
hart's fondness for paradox. As offsetting features, we

THE MYSTICS. 463
may mention his strong emphasis upon man's free will,
and his evident intention to teach the permanence of
man's personal subsistence.
It should be noticed, in praise of Eckhart, that, while
he luxuriated in these theosophic flights, he did not
forget the demands of practical Christian activity. An
inert quietism was no part of his theory. Indeed, he
was so far from that type of mysticism that he gave a
theoretical preference to the active over the contem
plative life.
Among those who, in a general way, may be called
followers of Eckhart, a foremost place belongs to John
Tauler. He was born at Strasburg in 1290. About
the age of eighteen he entered the Dominican cloister
in his native city. Soon afterwards he began to study
at Paris. On his return to Strasburg, as is supposed,
he met Eckhart. Under his teaching and also that
of the less speculative mystic, Nicolas of Strasburg,
his bent to the mystical theology and piety was con
firmed. In his chosen path Tauler found many congenial
spirits among the so called " Friends of God." This
was not a sect, but a kind of pietistic association whose
growth was favored by the exigencies of the times.
The quarrel which was started by the interference of
the Papacy with the Empire in the time of Louis of
Bavaria involved prolonged miseries for Germany. Re
ligious services were largely interrupted by interdicts.
The days were exceedingly dark. For mutual encour
agement, those most interested in a spiritual type of
piety entered into an association bearing the above
name. The society spread widely in Germany. Its

464 THE MEDIJEVAL CHURCH.
adherents were especially numerous in the region of
the Upper Rhine.1
In the controversies between the civil power and the
papacy, Tauler took sides with the former. Counting
it an inhuman robbery to deprive the poor people of
spiritual consolations, especially during the fearful or
deal of the plague which fell upon Strasburg in the
year 1348, he refused to observe the papal ban. Not
only this : in connection with two co-laborers he sent
forth a written protest against the hard and unrighteous
dealing of the Pope. This bold course provoked attack,
and Tauler was obliged to retire from Strasburg. Little
is known of his later years. He died in 1361.
Tauler did not elaborate so complete a speculative
system as is found with Eckhart. Still he did not limit
himself entirely to the practical , aspects of piety. His
more radical statements hardly fall short of the most
daring propositions of Eckhart. Taken literally, his
representations respecting union with God imply a thor
ough elimination of finite personality, a sinking back of
the soul into the undistinguished essence with which
its ground is identical. But it is safe to allow for the
exaggeration characteristic of the mystical dialect. In-
1 There was, it has been supposed, a head of the Friends of God, " the
great Friend of God from the Oberland," whom Carl Schmidt and
others have identified with the layman Nicolas of Basle. A somewhat
prolix account is extant purporting to be a narrative of the way in
which the layman introduced himself to a distinguished master (Tauler)
in the year 1340, and was instrumental in leading him to a more thorough
conversion. Recent criticism, however, is inclined to be sceptical re
specting this representation, and at any rate to question the identity of
Nicolas of Basle with the "Friend of God from the Oberland." (See
Heinrich S. Denifle, Taulers Bekehrung ; also Hermann Haupt, Zeit-
schrift fur Kirchengeschichte, Band vii. 508, 509.)

THE MYSTICS. 465
deed, in apparent contradiction with some of his own
representations, Tauler warns against the pantheistic
idea of a complete identity with the divine.1
A few sentences from his sermons will indicate the
drift of Tauler's thinking on the union of the soul with
God. " I have," he says, " a power in my soul which
enables me to perceive God. I am as certain as that
I live, that nothing is so near to me as God. He is
nearer to me than I am to myself." " I tell thee by
that Truth, which is God Himself, if thou art ever to
become a man after the will of God, everything must
die in thee to which thou art cleaving, whether it be
God's gifts, or the saints, or the angels, or even all that
would afford thee consolation for thy spiritual wants :
all must be given up." " This ground and substance
of the soul will God possess alone, and will not that
any creature should enter therein. In this chamber of
the heart God works through means in the one class of
men, and without means in the other and more blessed
sort. But what He works in the souls of these last,
with whom He holds direct converse, none can say, nor
can any man give account of it to another, but he only
who has felt it knows what it is ; and even he can tell
thee nothing of it, save only that God in very truth
hath possessed the ground of his soul." " Time and
place are parts, and God is one ; therefore, if our soul
is to know. God, it must know Him above time and
place." " God touches this brimming vessel [the souls
of spiritual men] with His finger, and it overflows, and
pours itself back again into its Divine Source, from
whence it has proceeded. It flows back into its source
1 See Carl Schmidt, Johannes Tauler.
30

466 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
without channel or means, and loses itself altogether;
will, knowledge, love, perception, are all swallowed up
and lost in God, and become one with Him. Now God
loveth Himself in these men, and worketh in them all
their works." "While we are beholding, we are not
one with that which we behold; so long as there is
anything in our perceptions or understandings, we are
not one with the One ; for where there is nothing but
One, we can see nothing but One ; for we cannot see
God except in blindness, or know Him except in igno
rance." J In this last, we have in all its length and
breadth the Neo-Platonic theory of a transcendental
nescience. If Tauler had indulged only in sentiments of this
order, he could hardly have been, as he was most as
suredly, one of the most popular and effective preachers
of his century. A large part of what he said came
much nearer to the common understanding, and was
eminently adapted to edify and inspire. His sermons
still contain food for the religious mind. A deeply
spiritual tone characterizes them throughout. They
show also clear traces of practical good sense. Tauler
was far from directing men to a visionary life. He
strongly insisted upon practical righteousness. Let his
own words testify. " You should not," he says, " trust
in virtue that has not yet been put in practice." " There
is no work so small, no art so mean, but it all comes
from God, and is a special gift of His." " If I were not
a priest, but were living as a layman, I should take it
as a great favor that I knew how to make shoes, and
should try to make them better than any one else."
1 Translation by Susanna Winkworth.

THE MYSTICS. 467
"Our Lord did not rebuke Martha on account of her1
works, for they were holy and good ; He reproved her
on account of her anxiety." " If, when at thy work,
thou shouldest feel thy spirit stirred within thee, receive
it with solemn joy, and thus learn to do thy work in
God, instead of straightway fleeing from thy task."
A contemporary of Tauler, destined like him to a
wide and long-continued appreciation, was Henry Suso
(1295-1366). At the age of thirteen he entered the
Dominican cloister in Constance. After ten years of
severe discipline, which his earnest spirit imposed upon
him, he carried forward his education at Strasburg and
Cologne. For some years preceding 1336 he was prior
at Constance. Accusation of heresy caused him to be
deposed from this position. But he was not troubled
further on account of his faith, and soon by his writings
greatly extended his fame and popularity. His Horolo-
gium osternce Sapiential, completed in 1338, speedily at
tained a wide circulation.
Suso shared to a conspicuous degree the speculative
views of Eckhart, though far from being his equal in
genius for speculation. As compared with Tauler, he
was a man of less practical force. The emotional ele
ment was peculiarly his dower, and the quickness and
warmth of his sympathies were made manifest both in
his writings and his converse. Through these traits he
naturally was qualified to minister effectively to women.
Many sisters in the cloisters were stimulated by him to
enthusiastic piety, and many daughters of nobles were
incited by his influence to renounce the world.
Shortly after Tauler and Suso had passed off the
stage, an important movement took place in the Neth-

468 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
erlands. We refer to the rise of the society known as
the Brethren of the Common Life. Before its organi
zation, mystical piety had found in the Netherlands an
enthusiastic representative. This was Ruysbroek, long
a priest at Brussels, in his later years an inmate of the
cloister of Griinthal. Throughout his long life (1293-
1381) he was a man who delighted in spiritual con
templations. His fervor sometimes led him, like his
distinguished contemporaries in Germany, to over-em
phatic expressions respecting the union of man and
God. Gerson, though highly pleased with some parts
of Ruysbroek's writings, thought it necessary to cen
sure others as tinged with pantheistic heterodoxy.1
Ullmann, however, concludes that the fault was rather
in expression than in belief, that a total survey of the
writings of Ruysbroek must lead to the conclusion that
his standpoint was theistic rather than pantheistic.2
The devotion of Ruysbroek, freed from the element
of dubious speculation, was represented by the Brethren
of the Common Life. The founder of this association
was a younger contemporary of Ruysbroek, his friend
and admirer, Gerhard Groot (1340-1384). In Gerhard
the bent to action was more prominent than that to con
templation. He was an energetic preacher, and travelled
largely for the sake of bringing the gospel message to
the people. At the same time he took a great interest
in the spread of religious literature, and employed asso
ciates in multiplying copies of good books. The sug
gestion that those employed in this way might live more
economically by having all things in common, was the
1 Gerson's mysticism was much like that of the Victorines.
2 Reformatoren vor der Reformation.

THE MYSTICS. 469
occasion of his institute. First a house for the new
brotherhood was established at his native place in
Deventer. Soon the association had houses in many
places. These houses differed from monasteries in that
no irrevocable vow was imposed, and the life of the
brethren was not fettered by an elaborate rule. A
single house contained about twenty members. At
first the proportion of priests was small ; later the
relative number of those in orders increased. Besides
houses for men, there were also those for women. Soon
after the death of the founder, in accordance with a
plan which he had broached, houses of canons regular
were added to the brotherhood.
An eminently useful vocation was fulfilled by the
Brethren of the Common Life. They gave an example
of industrious and pious living. By zeal in multiplying
books, by preaching, and by lectures, they greatly helped
to diffuse religious intelligence. The explicit emphasis
which some of their number placed upon the translation
of the Scriptures into the vernacular, and upon their
general use by the people, served to enlarge the sphere
of enlightened sentiment on this subject. Especially
fruitful of good was their relation to the instruction and
training of youth. In some instances they made a free
connection with existing schools, supplying shelter and
aid to those in attendance. In other cases they had
schools of their own. Tuition was remitted to the indi
gent. So a multitude received from them the stamp of
a pious education.
It was under the fostering influences of this associa
tion that Thomas a Kempis developed the lofty piety
which found immortal expression in the " Imitation of

470 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
Christ." Thomas was born in 1380, at the town of
Kempen, in the diocese of Cologne. At the age of thir
teen he was sent to the school at Deventer, where he
enjoyed the kind offices of the Brethren of the Com
mon Life. After a happy sojourn here of seven years,
Thomas proceeded, by the advice of Florentius, the suc
cessor of Gerhard Groot, to join the house of canons
regular which had been instituted at Mount St. Agnes.
In this cloister, absorbed in literary and religious labors,
he pursued the even course of his quiet and contempla
tive life. He died at an advanced age, in 1471.
The spiritual proverbs and meditations of Thomas a
Kempis, as they are gathered in his noted work, maybe
regarded as largely expressing the spirit of the brother
hood to which he belonged. The speculative and the
dogmatic had a subordinate place. A piety at once
mystical and practical, having indeed more of a monas
tic coloring than belongs to the purest ideal, still of a
very noble and spiritual type, was cultivated by Thomas
a Kempis and by many of his associates. As is observed
by Ullmann, their relation to the Roman Catholic
Church and the theology of the day resembled that of
the Pietists to the strict Lutheranism of the seventeenth
century. Their aim was a reform of life, rather than of
dogmas. There was, it is true, a dogmatic tendency in
their subjective type of piety. The little stress which
they placed upon the outward organism of the Church
was not in the direction of the strict Romish con
ception. But this tendency was not a matter of con
scious design. They had no ambition to innovate
upon the existing theological system ; they only wished
to give it the best practical application. There was

THE MYSTICS. 471
one, however, the earlier stages of whose education
were largely shaped by them, who apprehended in a
measure the need of dogmatic reform. We speak of
John Wessel.
This distinguished forerunner of Luther was born at
Groningen in 1419 or 1420. Being by nature of a ra
tional turn of mind, averse to superstition, inclined to
demand substantial grounds for belief, he had a special
aptitude for a critical examination of the current dog
matic system. To this were added extraordinary educa
tional advantages. He acquired Greek and Hebrew.
As scholar or teacher, he attended the leading universi
ties of Europe. Proceeding in early manhood from the
instruction of the Brethren of the Common Life, he stud
ied at the University of Cologne. Later, through a long
series of years, he sojourned at Paris, Louvain, Rome,
various cities of Italy, and Heidelberg. Equipped
with the fruits of this ample and varied tuition, he de
voted the last decade of his life to those literary la
bors which made him a conspicuous factor in the great
Reformation of the following century.
Luther gave an emphatic testimony to the kinship of
Wessel's teaching with that of the Reformation, when
he said that it might seem as though he had taken all
his doctrines from his distinguished predecessor. This
is beyond the proper limits. Still, Wessel proceeded
far toward the standpoint of the Reformation. He em
phatically denied the necessity of the papal headship.
He declared that the Church is founded upon the Scrip
tures, and not the Scriptures upon the Church. He
assumed the fallibility of the Pope and the hierarchy.
While allowing a certain presumption in favor of an

472 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
opinion upon which many learned bishops have agreed,
he maintained that such an opinion will still bear in
vestigation, and that in prosecuting this investigation
greater reverence must be paid to the Scriptures than
to any verdict whatever of men. He clearly acknowl
edged the common priesthood of believers. If he did
not openly reject the Romish dogma respecting the real
body of Christ in the eucharist, he laid the whole stress
upon the spiritual appropriation of Christ by meditation
and faith, and claimed that the essential grace of the
sacrament may be received apart from the visible ele
ments. He denied that the priest has any judicial func
tion in the sacrament of penance, and reprobated the
notion that forgiveness is conditioned upon works of
satisfaction. He denounced indulgences as having no
warrant either in Scripture, tradition, or reason. He de
nied the penal character of the discipline in purgatory,
regarded the purifying fire as a spiritual agency, namely,
the presence of God and His truth, and maintained that
the interior advancement of the subject toward complete
purity, rather than the power of the Church, determines
the duration of the purgatorial process. In fine, Wessel
exhibited a faculty for rational criticism and insight
which entitles him to an honored place among the her
alds of the Reformation.1
1 See Ullmann, Reformatoren vor der Reformation.

CHAPTER VIII.
SAVONAROLA.
HPHE career of Savonarola was not so far reaching in
•*¦ its results as that of Wycliffe and Huss. But if
his influence was circumscribed, it was peculiarly in
tense in the field which it covered. Few men have ex
ercised a more potent influence over any community
than was wielded by Girolamo Savonarola over Flor
ence in the last decade of the fifteenth century.
He was born at Ferrara in 1452. His life, therefore,
fell in one of the most corrupt eras in the history of the
Church. Before he had reached the age of manhood,
that succession of godless pontiffs had begun which
contains the names of Sixtus IV, Innocent VIII., and
Alexander VI. The twin vices, ferocity and sensuality,
were rampant in Italy as never before perhaps, since
the days of the pagan Empire. The renaissance in art
and literature was far from being accompanied by a re
vival of piety. While in other quarters the new zeal
for classic learning was commonly associated with a
spirit of reform, in Italy it was largely associated with
unbelief and secularism. Circles of the cultured might
be found in such places as Florence and Rome, who
evidently had more sympathy with classic heathenism
than with Christianitv.

474 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
Serious and devout from childhood, Savonarola was
naturally revolted by the moral and religious apostasy
of the age. Following the usual expedient of earnest pi
ety in mediaeval times, he betook himself to the cloister.
At the age of twenty-three he joined the Dominicans in
Bologna. Near the close of the year 1482, he proceeded
by the direction of his order to Florence, as teacher of
the novices in the cloister of San Marco. The next
year, he was called upon to exercise his talents as a
preacher. The result was far from being prophetic of
his oratorical fame. The people were not interested,
and declined to hear his message. But the fire was al
ready burning in the heart of the devoted monk, and
must needs command effective utterance. More willing
listeners were found in other places. The tone of a
high-wrought enthusiasm began to blend with his mes
sage. In his exposition of the Apocalypse at Brescia, in
1486, he gave a premonition of his prophetic vocation in
the earnestness and confidence with which he urged his
warnings and counsels.
In 1489, near the end of the rule of that distinguished
representative of the Medici family, Lorenzo the Mag
nificent, Savonarola returned to Florence. Two years
later he became prior of San Marco. It was chiefly,
however, as the impassioned preacher that he made
his power felt. In striking contrast with his former
ill success, he now commanded the attention of vast
throngs. His theme and his manner were both awaken
ing. Coming into the pulpit with a mind steeped in the
visions of the Apocalypse, he used its bold imagery to
paint the on-coming judgments of God. The corruptions
of the Church, the impending chastisements of Heaven,

SAVONAROLA. 475
the necessity and the certainty of reform, were the ever-
recurring thoughts which he endeavored to burn into
the minds of the people. He presented the mien of a
prophet ; yea, assumed for himself positively the func
tions of a prophet. This with him assuredly was no art
of deception. The anticipations which took such defi
nite shape in his mind he believed to be revelations
from above.1 A multitude of the people also believed
in his prophetic office. Says that great exponent of
state-craft, Machiavelli : " The people of Florence seem
not to be ignorant or rude. Nevertheless, they have
been convinced by Fra Girolamo that he speaks with
God. I will not decide whether it is true or not ; for
concerning so great a man it behooves us to speak with
reverence. But multitudes believed it, and it sufficed
for their faith, without seeing anything wonderful from
him, to regard his life, his teaching, and the tendency
of his career." 2 As to the merits of this claim to pro
phetic powers, it would be no superstition to acknowl
edge a marked impress of the Spirit in his longings for
the renovation of the Church, and possibly also in his
presentiments of coming reform. It must be allowed,
moreover, that some of his specific predictions, as those
relating to the invasion of Charles VIII. and his own
martyrdom, seem to have been fulfilled. Others, how-
i In numerous passages he distinctly claims for them this origin. But
in some instances he seems to arrogate no higher enUghtenment than
any well instructed Christian might attain through familiarity with the
Bible, and reflection on the condition and needs of the Church. As
Villari concludes, it is impossible fully to harmonize Savonarola with
himself on this subject. (Life and Times of Girolamo Savonarola,
translated from the Italian by Linda Villari.)
2 Quoted by Karl Hase, Neue Propheten.

476 THE MEDIJEVAL CHURCH.
ever, such as the conversion of the Turks and the sig
nal prosperity of Florence after her season of chastise
ment, failed of any adequate realization. Taking his
prophesying as a whole, there is reason to regard it as
rather the product of an ardent fancy, intense convic
tions, and burning desires for the reform of the Church,
than the result of specific communications from God.
Florence for a time bowed to the authority of her
prophet. The invasion of Charles VIII. in 1494, as be
ing incidental to the expulsion of the Medici family,
who naturally were opposed to the bold preacher, tended
to increase his importance. A conspicuous part was
assigned to him in the inauguration of the popular gov
ernment which followed the expulsion. At the request
of the citizens, Savonarola drew the outlines of the new
constitution. His draft was by no means discreditable.
A republic based on a limited suffrage, with an execu
tive board, and with two assemblies, a larger and a
smaller, for legislative purposes, — these were the main
features in the scheme. There was nothing here par
ticularly savoring of theocratic notions. The plan of
government as presented by Savonarola was fully within
the bounds of statesmanlike sobriety. It was only in
the part which he took as prophet or oracle, over against
the civil government, that he verged on the theocratic
extreme. His pulpit for several years was the real
throne in Florence. While his desires for the purifica
tion of morals were by no means fully realized, there
were still conspicuous tokens of a transformation. The
most marked of these perhaps was the new style of car
nival which was inaugurated in February, 1497, an auto
de fS of vanities, at which a vast collection of articles

SAVONAROLA. 477
of luxury and ostentation — masks, dresses, instruments
of music, books of doubtful tendency, etc. — were pub
licly burned in the marketplace.
This date marks the culmination of Savonarola's
influence. Opposition had never been wanting ;
henceforth it advanced toward the proportions of an
overwhelming tide. Young nobles, disliking the re
straints put upon them, and the partisans of the Med
ici, spared no pains to stir up enmity against the bold
preacher. Such found naturally an ally in the un
principled Pope, Alexander VI. At first he proceeded
in a rather temporizing manner. He invited Savona
rola to Rome (1495), ostensibly to a friendly con
ference ; then inhibited his preaching ; then sought
through an agent to buy him off from his reformatory
work with the red hat of a cardinal. Savonarola re
tired from the pulpit for a short interval. To the offer
of a cardinal's place he refused all consideration, and
declared that he desired no other red hat than one red
with the blood of martyrdom. The Pope for his part
was not loath to bestow the coveted honor ; indeed, he
is said to have expressed his final resolution respecting
the prophet monk in these fierce terms : " Though he
were John the Baptist, he must die." Sentence of
excommunication was issued in 1497. For a time,
Savonarola had sufficient support to be able to discard
the Pope's ban. But at length the party of his oppo
nents gained the ascendency. Shortly afterwards, the
people were alienated by the miscarriage of a proposed
ordeal by fire, which Savonarola had reluctantly allowed
to be undertaken between a monk of his order and a
Franciscan.

478 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
The scale was now effectually turned against the re
former. He was apprehended with mob-like violence,
condemned by a cruel and arbitrary process, during
which he was several times put to the torture, hanged
upon a cross-shaped gibbet with two devoted adherents
of his order (May 23, 1498), and burned. The ashes
of the martyrs were cast into the Arno.
Savonarola died convinced of the righteousness of
his cause. The excruciating pains of torture may
have wrung from him some half-involuntary expres
sions which might be construed into a confession of
error respecting his prophetical vocation. But he
meant at heart no such confession, as he himself de
clared more than once when he was freed from the
torments. The final ordeal was met by him with quiet
heroism. The feeling with which he looked toward
the shameful death is indicated by his own words.
" My Lord," he said, " was willing to die for my sins ;
should not I be willing from love to Him to surrender
this poor life ? "
As powerfully emphasizing the need of reform, and
stirring up thought in that direction, Savonarola may
be numbered among the forerunners of the Protestant
Reformation. It should be understood, however, that
we find with him no distinct anticipation of the Protes
tant creed. He accepted the whole list of Roman
Catholic dogmas which claimed general assent in his
time. He revered even the prerogatives of the Roman
pontiff, only claiming the right to appeal from a pope
who, like Alexander VI., had been virtually discrowned
by his iniquities. His affiliation with Protestantism
was in spirit rather than in formal belief, and appears

SAVONAROLA. 479
especially in his attachment to the Scriptures, and his
disposition to appeal directly to the grace of God in
Jesus Christ.
Whatever errors of judgment he may be charged
with, one cannot fail to recognize in Savonarola a man
of rare piety and exemplary singleness of purpose. We
are sure that we are presented with the genuine ex
pressions of a deep and sincere heart, when we read
such lofty sentiments from his pen as the following :
" I will endure all things for the sake of that redeeming
love which makes all other things sweet and pleasant
to me. This is sufficient for me, and fills up all my de
sires. This is my exceeding great reward." " Thou,
Lord, art my supreme good, without admixture of
evil; Thou art my joy without sorrow, my strength
without weakness, my essential truth without error ;
Thou, Lord, art my all in all. Thou kindlest the af
fections into love, and canst beatify all the powers of
the mind and the heart." " Behold, O my God, how
great are Thy mercies! Time would be insufficient
to enumerate them. No man can glory in himself.
Let all the just in heaven and earth stand forth, that
in Thy presence we may interrogate them, if it be by
their own merits they have been deemed worthy to
obtain salvation ; assuredly will they all respond, ' Not
unto us, but to Thy name, give glory for Thy mercy
and Thy truth.' "
Though condemned by the Pope in terms of strong
denunciation, Savonarola has by no means been regarded
with universal disfavor in the Roman Catholic Church.
The publication of his writings was only temporarily
estopped by Alexander VI. The Congregation of the

480 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
Index, which examined them in 1558, took but little ex
ception to them. Not a few have been willing to grant
the saintship of Savonarola. Even a Pope (Benedict
XIV.) is said to have allowed that he was worthy of
canonization.

CHAPTER IX.
THE MEDIEVAL GREEK CHURCH,
THE more important events in the history of the
Greek Church, after the close of the iconoclastic
controversy, grew out of its relation to the imperial
government. Schemes and projects of the Emperor
gave rise to the principal agitations that occurred. It
will be fitting, therefore, to take a glance at the for
tunes of the Eastern Empire before directing our atten
tion to ecclesiastical affairs.
A little more than a score of years from the close of
the iconoclastic controversy, a distinguished dynasty
came to the throne at Constantinople. The founder
was Basilius I., whose deed of blood put aside the un
worthy Michael III. The Basilian dynasty ruled for
nearly two centuries (867-1057). During this time the
Empire attained an unusual degree of prosperity. The
wave of Mohammedan invasion was turned back, and
encroachments from other directions were successfully
repelled. " Antioch and Edessa were reunited to the
Empire. The Bulgarian monarchy was conquered, and
the Danube became again the northern frontier. The
Slavonians in Greece were almost exterminated. Byzan
tine commerce filled the whole Mediterranean, and
legitimated the claim of the Emperor to the title of
31

482 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
' Autocrat of the Mediterranean Sea.' " J This pros
perity, however, was not without its offset. Under the
Basilian line the government became, even more than in
the preceding centuries, concentrated in the sovereign.
Responsibility to the State was merged in responsibility
to the Emperor, and self-respecting officials gave way
very largely to the subservient creatures of an auto
cratic will.2
Following the Basilian line, we have a period reach
ing down to the conquest of Constantinople by the cru
saders (1057-1204). During this period the house of
Comnenus was in power. It is commonly characterized
as a time of decline. The loyalty of the more distant
provinces waned. Byzantine society in general was
depressed by grievous burdens of taxation. That re
serve power which belongs to a healthy moral tone was
largely wanting, and tended to diminish more and more
under the corrupting example of the court. Thus it
came about that some twenty thousand crusaders were
able to take possession of the throne at Constantino
ple, and that the domination of the Latin intruders was
endured for upwards of half a century.
During the period of Latin rule the Empire was dis
membered into a number of sections. Aside from Con
stantinople, Trebizond and Nicaea claimed each to have
the true heir to the throne, and to be the seat of impe
rial sovereignty. The last city in the end verified its
title. On the downfall of the Latin power, the sceptre
was transferred from Nicaea to Constantinople by Michael
1 George Finlay, History of the Byzantine Empire.
2 G. F. Hertzberg, Geschichte der Byzantiner und des Osmanischen
Reiches.

THE MEDIAEVAL GREEK CHURCH. 483
Palaeologus (1261). The restored Empire, however,
was not that of previous times. Its territory was nar
row, and tended ever to more contracted limits, espe
cially from the end of the thirteenth century, when
Othman led his Turks into Bithynia. The administra
tion was not of the order required to meet successfully
the enormous difficulties of the situation. Distinguished
neither by honesty nor vigor, given to an intriguing and
wavering policy, the house of Palaeologus was ill quali
fied to save the Empire. Its greatest honor was won
by its last representative. Constantine XI. refused to
survive the final catastrophe (1453), and fell valiantly
fighting against the victorious Turks, who planted the
crescent over the city which had revered the cross for
more than a thousand years.
The desperate straits of the Empire in the later stages
of its history explain the concessions that were made to
the Latins, at various times, as conditions of a reunion
of the two branches of the Church. All such conces
sions were inspired by the government, were political
expedients on the part of the sovereign, and were re
pudiated at the first opportunity by the general voice of
the Greek communion. Take for example the union
scheme which was patronized by the founder of the
house of Palaeologus. This Emperor was placed in a
difficult position. His relation with the Greeks was
somewhat compromised by the fact that he had played
the part of a usurper, having taken the reins of gov
ernment during the minority of the rightful heir, and
having refused later to lay them down. With the Lat
ins also he was open to the charge of usurpation, since
he had overthrown the Latin dominion at Constanti-

484 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
nople. He had abundant reasons, therefore, to take
measures for his own security, especially as it became
apparent that Charles of Anjou, King of Sicily, was de
termined to capture the Eastern capital. As a means
of persuading the Pope to put a curb on Charles, the
Emperor agreed to a union scheme involving an ac
knowledgment of the Latin dogma respecting the Holy
Spirit and the acceptance of the papal supremcy. Such
a scheme was subscribed by his representatives at the
Council of Lyons in 1274. Begotten in diplomacy, the
project also ended in diplomacy. The Eastern Church,
rather alienated than conciliated by such means, re
mained as remote as before from fellowship with the
Western branch, and under the next Emperor the union
was openly repudiated.
Union projects equally artificial and equally fruitless
were attempted by some of the sovereigns of the four
teenth century. But the most noted effort of this kind
occurred in the fifteenth century, in connection with the
Council of Florence (1438). As the price of Latin as
sistance against the fatal encroachments of the Turks,
the Emperor John VII. was willing to sacrifice the pride
and independence of the Eastern Church. Present in
person at the council, with the Greek patriarch and the
leading bishops, he constrained the whole delegation,
with the exception of the Bishop of Ephesus, to sub
scribe terms of union agreeable to the Pope. These
terms included assent, (1) to the Latin doctrine of the
double procession of the Spirit ; (2) to the propriety
of using unleavened as well as leavened bread in the
Lord's Supper ; (3) to the fact of a purgatory in the
other world, the inmates of which may be assisted by

THE MEDIAEVAL GREEK CHURCH. 485
the good offices of the Church in this world ; (4) to the
papal supremacy. The price was paid to the full at
Florence , but the hoped for return was not forthcom
ing. The bishops who had humbled themselves to ac
quiescence in the demands of the West were met with
such a storm of popular reprobation, that many of them
condemned and retracted their own subscription to the
obnoxious compact. Under such circumstances, the
zeal of the Latins for the relief of Constantinople, lan
guid enough in any case, was far from being quickened
into liberality and enthusiasm. So the doomed city
passed on to its fate.
As respects theological developments, the Greek
Church in these centuries offers little that is worthy of
attention. While there may have been a certain activ
ity of mind, it was not of a fruitful order. Disputation,
where it took on any semblance of originality, dealt
mainly with subjects little worthy of serious considera
tion. Thus, it is recorded that the question whether the
light of the transfiguration scene was created or uncre
ated light occasioned the assembling of several synods
near the middle of the fourteenth century. x
Among mediaeval Greek scholars, several pertain
ing to the eleventh and the twelfth centuries occupy
a leading place. Here belong Theophylact, Nice-
tas Choniates, Euthymius Zigabenus, Nicolaus of Me-
thone, and Eustathius. The last in this list, according
to Neander, is entitled, in virtue of his pure character
and intelligent understanding of the claims of prac
tical piety, to be called the Chrysostom of the twelfth
century. i Gieseler, § 128.

486 THE MEDIJEVAL CHURCH.
The inauguration of Turkish rule at Constantinople
did not overthrow its ecclesiastical headship in the
Greek Church. On the contrary, the conqueror, Mo
hammed II., early took occasion to strengthen the
allegiance of his Greek subjects by proclaiming him
self the protector of their Church, and providing for the
continuance of the patriarchal dignity. George Scho-
larios (or Gennadios), an ecclesiastic who had been
especially conspicuous in the preceding years for his
hostility to the union with the Latins, was the first
to receive the high office at the hands of a Moham
medan sultan.
An important adjunct to the rule of the Greek patri
arch, after the close of the tenth century, was found in
the Russian Church. As the Russians had received
Christianity from Constantinople, so they readily ac
knowledged the ecclesiastical headship of its patriarch.
Instances are indeed on record in which the Russian
metropolitan was installed without the co-operation of
the patriarch.1 But a general token of supremacy was
yielded to the latter, in that the metropolitan was con
secrated by his hand.
The original metropolitan seat was Kieff. For an
interval, during the devastations of the Tartars, it was
transferred to Vladimir. In 1320 i*-- was located at
Moscow. The metropolitan, as the immediate head of
the Russian Church, exercised very important preroga
tives. He consecrated the bishops, assembled synods,
disciplined the unworthy and disobedient among the
clergy, anointed the sovereign at his coronation, and
stood in close relations with him as an honored adviser.
1 Strahl, Geschichte des russischen Staats, vol. i.

THE MEDIAEVAL GREEK CHURCH. 487
While tenacious of his spiritual prerogatives, he mani
fested for the most part a prudent deference to the will
of the sovereign in secnlar matters. As the same tem
per characterized the Russian hierarchy in general, it
was not often that there was any serious collision be
tween the spiritual and the temporal order.
In its ceremonial, and the general tone and ordering
of religious life, the Russian Church followed the Byzan
tine type, only the copy among a rude people was nat
urally somewhat less refined than the original. Very
great account was made of pictures as an aid to wor
ship. As in mediaeval Europe generally, so also in Rus
sia monasticism was an important factor in religious
life and theological culture. The cloisters afforded the
principal means of learning. However, it was a very
limited contribution which they supplied. As for the
secular priest, taken at the average he was a being of
exceedingly humble attainments, scarcely able him
self to understand the poorly translated homilies of
the fathers which he sometimes read to the people.
The relative lack of intellectual activity and progress
in the Russian Church was but one phase in the back
wardness of Russian civilization in general. Long after
the modern era had dawned upon other portions of
Europe, Russia, as is well known, remained fixed in
her ancestral customs. This retardation may be ex
plained in part by the comparative isolation of the
country. Besides this, and in a manner accessory to
it, we have the fact of long subjection to Tartar rule,
which gave prominence to Oriental connections as op
posed to European. Speaking of the effects of this
rule, a recent historian says : " By separating Russia

488 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
from the West, by making it a pohtical dependency of
Asia, it perpetuated in the country that Byzantine half-
civilization whose inferiority to European civilization
became daily more obvious." J
The Tartar avalanche touched the borders of Russia
in 1224. It was at this date that a lieutenant of Gen
ghis Khan (1154-1227), whose conquests had already
covered one of the largest domains ever ruled by a
single sceptre, coming through the region of the Cau
casus, entered the southern steppes of Russia. Re
sponding to the call of a neighboring tribe for aid, the
Russian forces marched against the invaders. They
suffered a total defeat before the impetuous hosts of
the Tartars. Subsequent encounters were equally dis
astrous. Russia became a part of the Mongol empire.
For upwards of two centuries its princes were in
tributary relations to the victor, who held the su
premacy over the country, but did not largely occupy
its soil.
The Tartar yoke . was thrown off by Ivan the Third
(1462-1505). In another respect, also, the reign of
this sovereign is noteworthy. Through the good offices
of the Pope, the Byzantine princess Sophia, a niece of
the last sovereign from the house of Palaeologus, was
given in marriage to Ivan. Her entrance into the realm
brought new means of intellectual quickening. " With
Sophia," says Rambaud, "a multitude of Greek emi
grants came to Moscow, not only from Rome, but
from Constantinople and Greece. They gave to Rus
sia statesmen, diplomatists, engineers, artists, and theo
logians. They brought with them Greek books, the
1 Alfred Rambaud, History of Russia, vol. i.

[THE MEDIAEVAL GREEK CHURCH. 489
priceless inheritance of ancient civilization." In this
way a new impulse was given to learning and enter
prise. The change, however, was not sufficient to can
cel the general aspect of immobility in the Russian
civilization.

CHAPTER X.
MEDIEVAL HYMNS, ARCHITECTURE, AND FAINTING.
I. — HYMNS.
1. Greek Hymns. — It has been noticed that the
crowning era of Greek hymnology began in the eighth
century. This era was represented by Andrew of
Crete, John of Damascus, Cosmas of Jerusalem, Theo
dore of the Studium, Theophanes, and others. Among
these John of Damascus bears the palm according to
the verdict of competent critics. His more celebrated
hymns are the three canons on Easter, the Ascension,
and St. Thomas's Sunday. The triumphant strain with
which the first of these opens is well known through
Neale's version. 'T is the Day of Resurrection,
Earth, tell it out abroad!
The Passover of gladness,
The Passover of God I
From death to life eternal,
From earth unto the sky,
Our Christ hath brought us over,
With hymns of victory.1
1 'Avaardo-etos 7j/j.4pa, \afnrpvv6aficv \aol,
Tldo'xa Kvplov, Tldo-xa. 'Ek yap Bavdrov
irpbs C&>V, Kal 4k yfjs vpbs ovpavbv, Xpiffrbs
i ®ebs r)p.as SiePtfiao-ev, ivivliaov £p$oi>Tas.

MEDIAEVAL HYMNS. 491
Cosmas, the foster brother of John of Damascus,
and his close companion in literary labors, composed
noted canons on the Nativity, the Epiphany, and the
Transfiguration. We quote a couple of stanzas from
the last : — In days of old on Sinai
The Lord Jehovah came,
In majesty of terror,
In thunder-cloud and flame:
On Tabor, -with the glory
Of sunniest light for vest,
The excellence of beauty
In Jesus was expressed.
All hours and days inclined there,
And did Thee worship meet;
The sun himself adored Thee,
And bowed him at thy feet;
While Moses and Elias
Upon the holy mount
The co-eternal glory
Of Christ our God recount.
Among the productions of Theodore of the Studium
is a judgment hymn, not equal, to be sure, to the in
comparable " Dies Irae " of the Latin Church, but
showing not a little of the strength and solemnity of
tone befitting the theme. The following is a part of
the first ode : —
That fearful day, that day of speechless dread,
When Thou shalt come to judge the quick and dead,—
I shudder to foresee,
O God! what then shall be I

492 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
When Thou shalt come, angelic legions round
With thousand thousands, and with trumpet sound,
Christ, grant me in the air
With saints to meet Thee there.
Weep, 0 my soul, ere that great hour and day,
When God shall shine in manifest array,
Thy sin, that thou may'st be
In that strict judgment free.
In the early part of the third era, the most prolific
writer of hymns was Joseph, surnamed Hymnographus,
the contemporary and friend of the distinguished Pho
tius. Though enjoying great popularity in the Greek
Church, his labored effusions, with their burden of ver
biage and bombast, have little that is worthy of interest
or attention.
2. Latin Hymns. — Distinguished service was ren
dered to Latin hymnology at the end of the sixth and
the beginning of the seventh century by the Roman
Bishop Gregory the Great, and by Venantius Fortuna-
tus, Bishop of Poitiers at the time of his death. In the
matter of composing hymns the contribution of Greg
ory may not have been of special note ; his contem
porary was much more eminent in this respect. Still,
Gregory rendered a very important service to the cause
of sacred song, in that he gave an improved organiza
tion to the church music. Among the numerous pro
ductions of Fortunatus, two of his passion hymns have
elicited special attention, and from these the following
extracts have been taken.

MEDIAEVAL HYMNS. 493
Vexilla regis prodeunt,1
Fulget crucis mysterium,
Suo carne carnis conditor
Suspensus est patibulo.
Arbor decora et f ulgida
Ornata regis purpura,
Electa digno stipite
Tarn sancta membra tangere.
Beata, cujus brachiis
Pretium pependit sseculi,
Statera facta corporis
Prsedam tulitque tartarL

Pange lingua gloriosi 2
Prselium certaminis,
Et super crucis trophseo
Die triumphum nobilem,
Qualiter redemptor orbis
Immolatus vicerit.

l The royal banners forward go :
The cross shines forth with mystic glow
Where He in flesh, our flesh who made,
Our sentence bore, our ransom paid.
0 tree of beauty ! tree of light!
0 tree with royal purple dight !
Elect upon whose faithful breast
Those holy limbs should find their rest !
On whose dear arms, so widely flung,
The weight of this world's ransom hung,
The price of human kind to pay,
And spoil the spoiler of his prey I
2 Sing, my tongue, the glorious battle, with completed victory rife,
And above the cross's trophy, tell the triumph of the strife ;
How the world's Redeemer conquered, by surrendering of his life.

494 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
Hie acetum, fel, arundo
Sputa, clavi, lancea
Mite corpus perforatur,
Sanguis unda profluit,
Terra, pontus, astra, mundus
Quo lavantur flumine.
Crux ftdelis, inter omnes
Arbor una nobilis,
Nulla talem sylva profert
Fronde, flore, germine,
Dulce lignum, dulces clavos,
Dulce pondus sustinens.
Flecte ramos, arbor alta,
Tensa laxa viscera,
Et rigor lentescat ille,
Quern dedit nativitas,
Ut superni membra regis
Miti tendas stipite.
Sola dig n a tu fuisti
Ferre pretium saeculi,
Atque portum prseparare
Nauta mundo naufrago,

He endured the shame and spitting, vinegar, and nails, and reed;
As His blessed side is opened, water thence and blood proceed :
Earth, and sky, and stars, and ocean, by that flood are cleansed indeed.
Faithful cross ! above all other, one and only noble tree !
None in foliage, none in blossom, none in fruit, thy peers may be ;
Sweetest wood and sweetest iron, sweetest weight is hung on thee !
Bend thy boughs, 0 tree of glory ! thy relaxing sinews bend ;
For a while the ancient rigor, that thy birth bestowed, suspend;
And the King of heavenly beauty on thy bosom gently tend.
Thou alone wast counted worthy this world's ransom to uphold;
For a shipwrecked race preparing harbor, like the ark of old :
With the sacred blood anointed from the wounded Lamb that rolled.

MEDIEVAL HYMNS. 495
Quern sacer cruor perunxit,
Fusus agni corpore.
The noblest hymn in the three centuries following
the era of Fortunatus was the Veni, Creator Spiritus.
It has been variously attributed to Gregory the Great,
to Charlemagne, and to Rabanus Maurus. The last
mentioned seems to have the superior claim. We give
it in full : — Veni, Creator Spiritus,
Mentes tuorum visita.
Imple superna gratia
Quae tu creasti pectora.
Qui Paracletus diceris,
Donum Dei altissimi,
Fons vivus, ignis, charitas,
Et spiritalis unctio.
Tu septiformis munere,
Dextrse Dei tu digitus,
Tu rite Promissum Patris,
Sermone ditans guttura.
Accende lumen sensibus,
Infunde amorem cordibus;
Infirma nostri corporis,
Virtute firmans perpetim.
Hostem repellas longius,
Pacemque dones protinus.
Ductore sic te prsevio,
Vitemus omne noxium.
[Da gaudiorum prsemia,
Da gratiarum munera,
Dissolve litis vincula,
Astringe pads fcedera.]

496 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
Per te sciamus da, Patrem,
Noscamus atque Filium,
Te utriusque Spiritum,
Credamus omni tempore.
Another hymn of peculiar merit, in celebration of the
offices of the Holy Spirit, was produced in the middle
ages. It has commonly been associated with King
Robert of France (970-1030).
Veni, Sancte Spiritus,
Et emitte ccelitus
Lucis tuse radium.
Veni, Pater pauperum,
Veni, dator munerum,
Veni, lumen cordium.
Consolator optime,
Dulcis hospes animas,
Dulce refrigerium:
In labore requies,
In sestu temperies,
In fletu solatium.
O lux beatissima,
Keple cordis intima,
Tuorum fidelium.
Sine tuo numine
Nihil est in homine,
Nihil est innoxium.
Lava quod est sordidum,
Riga quod est aridum,
Sana quod est saucium.
Flecte quod est rigidum,
Fove quod est languidum,
Rege quod est devium.

MEDIAEVAL HYMNS. 497
Da tuis fldelibus,
In te confitentibus,
Sacrum septenarium;
Da virtutis meritum,
Da salutis exitum,
Da perenne gaudium.
Notker, a monk of St. Gall, who lived in the interval
between Charlemagne and King Robert, has the dis
tinction of introducing sequences, a hymn in rhythmical
prose, quite similar to the ode of the Eastern Church.
Among the hymn-writers of the eleventh century
mention may be made of Fulbert of Chartres, and the
Cardinal Damiani, the friend of Hildebrand. Damiani
is supposed to have been the author of the hymn on the
Glory and Joys of Paradise, though it has sometimes
been attributed to Augustine. We select a few stanzas
from the midst of its description of the celestial country.
Virent prata, vernant sata, rivi mellis influant ;
Pigmentoruin spirat odor, liquor et aromatum ;
Pendent poma floridorum non lapsura nemorum.
Non alternat luna vices, sol, vel cursus siderum ;
Agnus est felicis urbis lumen inocciduum,
Nox et tempus desunt ei, diem fert continuum.
Nam et sancti quique velut sol prseclarus rutilant,
Post triumphum coronati mutue conjubilant,
Et prostrati pugnas hostis jam securi numerant.
Hildebert, who became Archbishop of Tours in 1125,
wrote extensively : indeed, he is credited with no less
than ten thousand verses. We quote the very animated
description of heaven which forms the concluding part
of his Oratio Devotissima ad Tres Personas SS. Trinitatis.

498 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
Me receptet Syon ilia,
Syon, David urbs tranquilla,
Cujus faber Auctor lucis,
Cujus portse lignum crucis,
Cujus muri lapis vivus,
Cujus custos Rex festivus.
In hac urbe lux solennis,
Ver seternum, pax perennis ;
In hac odor implens ccelos,
In hac semper festum melos ;
Non est ibi corruptela,
Non defectus, non querela ;
Non minuti, non deformes,
Omnes Christo sunt conformes.
Urbs ccelestis, urbs beata,
Super petram collocata,
Urbs in portu satis tuto,
De longinquo te saluto,
Te saluto, te suspiro,
Te affecto, te requiro.
Quantum tui gratulantur,
Quam festive eonvivantur,
Quis affectus eos stringat,
Aut quae gemma muros pingat,
Quis chalcedon, quis jacinthus,
Novunt illi qui sunt intus.
In plateis hujus urbis,
Sociatus piia turbis,
Cum Moyse et Eli&,
Pium cantem Alleluya. Amen.
Among the hymnists of the twelfth century an illus
trious place belongs to Bernard of Clairvaux. Indeed,
in certain respects he was unsurpassed by any in the
whole list of mediaeval writers. No one of them ex
celled him in the expression of impassioned love for

MEDIJEVAL HYMNS. 499
Christ. No one of them equalled him as respects ap
preciation for the inner Christ, Christ dwelling iu the
heart of the believer as his deep joy and complete satis
faction. • Protestant hymn-books very generally have
been enriched by extracts from the hymn in which this
feature is especially prominent, the Jesu, Dulds Memoria,
a poem of about two hundred lines. We need therefore
to quote only a few stanzas to indicate the character of
the Latin verse : —
Jesu, dulcis memoria,
Dans vera cordi gaudia,
Sed super mel et omnia
Ejus dulcis prsesentia.
Nil canitur suavius,
Nil auditur jocundius,
Nil cogitatur dulcius
Quam Jesus dei filius.
Jesu, spes pcenitentibus,
Quam pius es petentibus,
Quam bonus es quserentibus,
Sed quid invenientibus.
Jesus, dulcedo cordium,
Fons vivus, lumen mentium,
Excedens omne gaudium
Et omne desiderium.
Nee lingua potest dicere,
Nee litera exprimere,
Expertus potest credere
Quid sit Jesum diligere.

500 THE MEDIMVAL CHURCH.
A passion hymn of Bernard deserves mention as be
ing the model which suggested the noble composition of
Paul Gerhard, as well as for the depth of feeling by
which it is itself penetrated. It has this stanza : —
Salve, caput cruentatum,
Totum spinis coronatum,
Conquassatum, vulneratum,
Arundine verberatum,
Facie sputis illita.
Salve, cujus dulcis vultus,
Immutatus et incultus,
Immutavit suum florem,
Totus versus in pallorem,
Quern cceli tremit curia.
Another Bernard, a monk of Cluny, who lived at the
same time as the mighty Abbot of Clairvaux, is known
from his Laus Patriae Coelestis, an enraptured descrip
tion of heaven. The English version of such lines as
the following has been made familiar by frequent use in
public worship : —
O bona patria, lumina sobria te speculantur,
Ad tua nomina sobria lumina collacrimantur:
Est tua mentio pectoris unctio, cura doloris,
Concipientibus sethera mentibus ignis amoris.
Urbs Syon aurea, patria lactea, cive decora,
Omne cor obruis, omnibus obstruis et cor et ora.
Nescio, nescio, quse jubilatio, lux tibi qualis,
Quam socialia gaudia, gloria quam specialis :
Laude studens ea tollere, mens mea victa fatiscit:
O bona gloria, vincor; in omnia laus tua vicit.

MEDIAEVAL HYMNS. 501
In the twelfth century we have also the distinguished
name of Adam of St. Victor. Trench assigns him a very
high place, is indeed inclined to regard him as the great
est of the Latin hymnologists of the middle ages. He
was undoubtedly a writer of no inconsiderable genius.
This appears in the very subtle art with which he wove
into his productions Biblical types and theological dis
tinctions, as well as in his graceful management of his
verse. But, as might be expected, this subtlety is better
suited to please and to stimulate the mind than to melt
or to kindle the heart. For purposes of devotion the
poetry of Adam of St. Victor cannot well be assigned a
foremost place. The following stanzas, selected some
what at random, may serve to illustrate the peculiar
traits of this author : —
Verbi vere substantivi,
Caro cum sit in declivi
Temporis angustia,
In seternis verbum annis
Permanere nos Johannis
Docet theologia.
Dum magistri super pectus
Fontem haurit intellectus,
Et doctrinse flumina,
Fiunt, ipso situ loci,
Verbo fides, auris voci,
Mens Deo contermina.
Unde mentis per excessus,
Carnis, sensiis super gressus,
Errorumque nubila,
Contra veri solis lumen

502 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
Visum cordis et acumen
Figit velut aquila.1
Verbum quod non potest dici,
Quod virtute creatrici
Cuncta fecit valde bona,
Iste dicit ab eeterni
Patris nexu non secerni
Nisi tantum in persons.

Potestate, non naturS
Fit Creator creatura,
Reportetur ut factura
Factoris in gloria.
Prsedicatus per prophetas,
Quern non capit locus, setas,
Nostra? sortis intrat metas,
Non relinquens propria.

Tria dona reges ferunt:
Stella duce regem quserunt,
Per quam certi semper eruut
De superno lumine.
Auro regem venerantes,
Ture deum designantes,
Myrrha mortem memorantes,
Sacro docti Flamine.
i Another stanza, so much in the spirit of this that one is naturally
inclined to assign it to the school of Adam of St. Victor, may fitly be
quoted here as an almost ideal characterization of the Apostle who was
at once Evangelist and Revelator : —
Vol at avis sine meta
Quo nee vates nee propheta,
Evolavit altius :
Tarn implenda, quam impleta,
Nunquam vidit tot secreta
Purus homo puriua.

MEDIAEVAL HYMNS. 503
Ecce dies Celebris !
Lux succedit tenebris,
Morti resurrectio.
Lsetis cedaut tristia,
Cum sit major gloria,
Quam prima conf usio.
Umbram fugat Veritas,
Vetustatem novitas,
Luctum consolatio.
Pascha novum oolite;
Quod praeit in capite,
Membra sperent singula ;
Pascha novum Chxistus est,
Qui pro nobis passus est,
Agnus sine macula.
Hostis, qui nos circuit,
Praedam Christus eruit;
Quod Samson prsecinuit,
Dum leonem lacerat.
David fortis viribus
A leonis unguibus,
Et ab ursi faucibus,
Gregem Patris liberat.
As a specimen of scholastic dogma in verse, we give
a part of the hymn of Thomas Aquinas, the great theo
logian of the thirteenth century, on the body of Christ
in the eucharist : —
Dogma datur Christianis,
Quod in carnem transit panis
Et vinum in sangninem.
Quod non capis, quod non vides,'
Animosa firmat fides,
Prseter rerum ordinem.

504 THE MEDIJEVAL CHURCH.
Sub diversis speeiebus,
Signis tamen et non rebus
Latent res eximise:
Caro cibus, sanguis potus :
Manet tamen Christus totus
.Sub utraque specie.
A sumente non concisus,
Non confractus, non divisus,
Integer accipitur.
Sumit unus, sumunt mille,
Quantum isti, tantum ille,
Nee sumptus consumitur.
Sumunt boni, sumunt mali,
Sorte tamen insequali
Vitse vel interitus :
Mors est malis, vita bonis,
Vide, paris sumptionis
Quam sit dispar exitus.
Bonaventura was the author of several very worthy
passion hymns. Among these the following may per
haps be accounted the best. We copy four out of fif
teen stanzas : — Recordare sanctse crucis,
Qui perfectam viam ducis,
Delectare jugiter.
Sanctse crucis recordare
Et in ipsa meditare
Insatiabiliter. Quum quiescis aut laboras,
Quando rides, quando ploras,
Doles sive gaudeas,
Quando vadis, quando venis,
In solatiis, in poenis
Cruoem corde teneas.

MEDIAEVAL HYMNS. 505
Crux in omnibus pressuris
Et in gravibus et duris
Est totum remedium.
Crux in posnis et tor mentis
Est dulcedo pise mentis
Et verum refugium.
Crux est porta Paradisi,
In qua sancti sunt confisi,
Qui vicerunt omnia.
Crux est mundi medicina,
Per quam bonitas divina
Facit mirabilia.
In the century of Thomas Aquinas and Bonaventura
lived James de Benedictis (or Jacopone, as he is called)
the author of a hymn descriptive of the sorrow of the
Virgin, which must be pronounced very tender and
beautiful, though it is not wholly free from the taint
of Mariolatry. Stabat mater dolorosa
Juxta crucem lacrimosa,
Dum pendebat filius,
Cujus animam gementem
Contristantem et dolentem
Pertransivit gladius.
O quam tristis et afflicta
Fuit ilia benedicta
Mater unigeniti!
Quam mcerebat et dolebat
Et tremebat, cum videbat
Nati pcenas inclyti I
To the thirteenth century also belonged the disciple
of St. Francis, Thomas of Celano, the probable author
of that crowning specimen of mediaeval hymnology, the

506 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
great judgment hj'mn, the Dies Irce. Respecting the
excellences of this hymn, Trench says : " The meter
so grandly devised, the solemn effect of the triple
rhyme, which has been likened to blow following blow
of the hammer on the anvil, the confidence of the poet
in the universal interest of his theme, a confidence
which has made him set out his matter with so majestic
and unadorned a plainness as at once to be intelligible
to all, — these merits, with many more, have given
the Dies Iroe a foremost place among the masterpieces
of sacred song." Dies irse, dies ilia i
Solvet sseclum in favillS,
Teste David cum Sibylla.
Quantus tremor est futurus,
Quando Judex est venturus,
Cuncta stricte discussurus.
Tuba, mirum spargens sonum
Per sepulchra regionum,
Coget omnes ante thronum.
1 It will be observed that the translation of Mr. Irons, which is
subjoined, substitutes for the third line the amended reading, Crucis
expandens vexilla : —
Day of wrath! 0 day of mourning!
See ! once more the cross returning, —
Heaven and earth in ashes burning !
0 what fear man's bosom rendeth,
When from heaven the Judge descendeth,
On whose sentence all dependeth !
Wondrous sound the trumpet flingeth,
Through earth's sepulchres it ringeth,
All before the throne il bringeth.

MEDIAEVAL HYMNS. 507
Mors stupebit et natura,
Quum resurget creatura,
Judicanti responsura.
Liber scriptus proferetur,
In quo totum eontinetur,
De quo mundus judicetur.
Judex ergo quum sedebit,
Qiiidquid latet, apparebit,
Nil inultum remanebit.
Quid sum miser turn dicturus,
Quern patronum rogaturus,
Quum vix Justus sit securus ?
Rex tremendse majestatis,
Qui saivandos salvas gratis,
Salva me, f ons pietatis 1

Death is struck and nature quaking, -
All creation is awaking,
To its Judge an answer making !
Lo the book, exactly worded !
Wherein all hath been recorded : —
Hence shall judgment be awarded.
When the Judge his seat attaineth,
And each hidden deed arraigneth,
Nothing unavenged remaineth.
What shall I, frail man, be pleading,
Who for me be interceding,
When the just are mercy needing ?
King of majesty tremendous,
Who dost free salvation send us,
Fount of pity I then befriend us !

508 THE MEDIJEVAL CHURCH.
Recordare, Jesu pie,
Quod sum causa tuse viae ;
Ne me perdas ilia die !
Quserens me sedisti lassus,
Redemisti crucem passus :
Tantus labor non sit cassus
Juste Judex ultionis,
Donum fac remissionis
Ante diem rationis !
Ingemisco tanquam reus.
Culpa rubet vultus meus :
Supplicanti parce, Deus I
Qui Mariam absolvisti,
Et latronem exaudisti,
Mibi quoque spem dedisti.

Think, kind Jesu ! my salvation
Caused Thy wondrous incarnation:
Leave me not to reprobation !
Faint and weary Thou hast sought me,
On the cro«s of suffering bought me ; —
Shall such grace be vainly brought me ?
Righteous Judge of Retribution,
Grant Thy gift of absolution
Ere that reckoning-day's conclusion ;
Guilty, now I pour my moaning,
All my shame and anguish owning;
Spare, 0 God, Thy suppliant, groaning.
Thou the sinful woman savedst,
Thou the dying thief forgavest,
And to me a hope vouchsafest.

MEDIJEVAL HYMNS. 509
Preces mess non sunt dignse,
Sed tu bonus fac benigne,
Ne perenni cremer igne !
Inter oves locum prsesta,
Et ab hsedis me sequestra,
Statuens in parte dextra.
Confutatis maledictis,
Flammis acribus addictis,
Voca me cum benedictis.
Oro supplex et acclinis,
Cor contritum quasi cinis:
Gere curam mei finis.

Worthless are my prayers and sighing,
Yet, good Lord, in grace complying,
Rescue me from fires undying !
With Thy favored sheep, 0 place me!
Nor among the goats abase me ;
But to Thy right hand upraise me.
While the wicked are confounded,
Doomed to flames of woe unbounded,
Call me, with Thy saints surrounded !
Low I kneel, with heart-submission ;
See like ashes, my contrition:
Help me in my last condition !

In some versions the following is given as the concluding stanza: —

Lachrymosa dies ilia,
Qua resurget ex fa villa
Judicandus homo reus ;
Huic ergo parce, Deus !
Pie Jesu Domine
Dona eos requie.

510 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
The foregoing specimens present the more favorable
side of mediaeval hymnology. They may serve to in
dicate that, though Protestantism can show a larger
body of hymns in which poetic talent and high religious
sentiment have been happily wedded together, it may
still consider with profit the contributions of the Pre-
Reformation Church. But the less favorable side, the
alloy of saint-worship, must in justice to history receive
some attention. How considerable an element this is
may be readily discerned by consulting F. J. Mone's
collection of Latin hymns. Out of three volumes one
is devoted to God and the angels, another to the Virgin,
and the remaining to the saints. Even if allowance be
made for bias in the collector, these proportions are
sufficiently indicative as to the direction of mediaeval
hymnology. In truth, the hymns of that era give un
mistakable testimony to the polytheistic cast of the
worship. Whatever distinctions theologians may have
indulged between latreia, hyperduleia, and duleia,1 the
creature was actually placed in the throne of God, and
worship was divided between the Most High and His
workmanship. The Virgin in particular was invested
with the functions of Deity. She was as truly a god
dess in the conception of a majority of the people as
was Diana in the view of the Ephesians, who clamor
ously shouted her praises in the days of Paul. Men
of as high standing as Bonaventura 2 thought it proper
to celebrate her in terms which the most ardent devo
tion is wont to address to God. Not infrequently
1 In the order given, these terms were used to indicate the worship
due to God, to the Virgin, and to the saints respectively.
2 So must one conclude, if it be allowed that Bonaventura was the
author of the " Psalter of the Virgin," attributed to him.

MEDIAEVAL HYMNS. 511
another sentiment than that of worship has left its
impress. There are hymns in which the strain of re
ligious adoration is mixed with such expressions as a
Troubadour might have employed in singing the praises
of his lady love.
The following stanzas are taken from a variety 6f
hymns belonging to different centuries: —
Ave, maris Stella,
Dei Mater alma
Atque semper Virgo,
Felix coeli porta.
Solve vinc'la reis,
Profer lumen coeds,
Mala nostra pelle,
Bona cuucta posce.

Ave, Virgo gratiosa,
Virgo sole clarior,
Mater Dei gloriosa,
Favo mellis dulcior,
Tu es ilia speciosa,
Qua nulla est pulchrior,
Rubicunda. plusquam rosa,
Lilio candidior.

Ave mundi spes, Maria,
Ave mitis, ave pia,
Ave plena gratia,
Omnis boni copia.
Angelorum imperatrix,
Peccatorum consolatrix,

512 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
Consolare me lugentem,
In peccatis jam fcetentem.
Me habeto excusatum
Apud Christum tuum natum,
Cujus iram expavesco
Et f urorem coutremisco.
Nam peccavi tibi soli:
O Maria Virgo, noli
Esse mihi aliena,
Gratia coelesti plena.
Esto custos cordis mei,
Signa me timore Dei
Confer vitse sanitatem
Et da morum honestatem.

O Maria, sponsa dia,
Quam CEelestis hierarchia
Jugi laudat symphonia,
Audi preces, mater pia,
Tibi supplicantium.

O regina angelorum
Atque mundi domina,
Imperatrix infernorum
Hera sublimissima,
Vera mater orphanorum,
Piarum piissima,
Vera salus infirmorum,
Sana mea vitia.
Me molestum et lugentem,
Pia mater, respice,

MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE. 513
Sana in te confidentem,
Mater indulgentise,
Peccatorem pcenitentem
Ne damnes pro crimine,
In te figo meam mentem,
Noli me relinquere.

Ave virgo virginum,
Ave lumen luminum,
Ave stella prsevial
Mediatrix hominum
Ablutrixque criminum,
Ave Virgo regia!
Castitatis lilium,
Consolatrix omnium,
Peccatorum venia.

II. — ARCHITECTURE.
The Romanesque style,1 which dominated the archi
tecture of the West in the early part of the mediaeval
period, received some contributions from the Byzan
tine. In its general character, however, it was a fur
ther development of the Christian basilica. It appears
as the type which the classic era had handed down,
worked over and modified by the genius of the Ger
manic nations.
Many varieties as respects details appeared in the
architecture of different countries, or even of the same
1 For our use of terms, see the corresponding section in "The Early
Church." 33

514 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
country, within the period assigned to the Romanesque.
This makes it somewhat difficult to determine just what
should be included in a full list of the cardinal features
of this style. Several characteristics, however, are
clearly marked. In the use of pillars there was much
greater freedom from the classic rule as to proportions
than appears in the early basilicas. New phases of
ornamentation were brought in by the genius of the
Lombard sculptors. The use of the round arch to a
profuse degree was a specially prominent feature of the
Romanesque. " Its chief characteristic," says Milman,
" is delight in the multiplication of the arch, not only
for the support, but for the ornamentation, of the build
ing. Within and without there is the same prodigality
of this form." x The portals, under the influence of the
strong preference for the arcuated form, often became
receding arches, arches within arches. The same pref
erence introduced vaulted ceilings over the aisles and
the nave. In the later Romanesque such ceilings were
very common. Another feature was the enlarged area,
as compared with the plan of the primitive basilica,
which was given to the eastern end of the church, or
the part beyond the meeting point of nave and transept.
This secured more room to the clergy, and enabled
them to retreat farther from the congregation, — an
architectural development accordant with the hierarch
ical tendencies of the age. A feature which may, per
haps, be regarded as still more characteristic, was the
tower, at first an adjacent structure, but afterwards in
corporated with the main building. Many churches
had more than one tower. In some instances there were
1 Latin Christianity, book xiv. chap. viii.

MEDIMVAL ARCHITECTURE. 515
towers on the transepts and the choir, as well as on
both sides of the front. The intersection of the cross
was surmounted in some cases by a dome, in others by
cupolas or towers of varied patterns, the large square
form having the preference in certain countries.
The Norman, which flourished in Northern France
and in England after the Conquest, is classed as a
special branch of the Romanesque. It was charac
terized in general by a plain and bold style of orna
mentation, strong pillars, a square central tower of
large dimensions rising to a moderate height, and a
general impression of solidity. The apse was often
omitted in favor of a rectangular outline. Churches in
this style in England were commonly distinguished by
great length as compared with breadth and height.
Of the Romanesque in general, it may be said that it
conveys an impression of strength and firmness, has a
settled, restful aspect. Herein the style of the edifice
was not out of accord with its office. In that age of
transition and turbulence, the church was not merely a
place of worship ; it was also a refuge, a stronghold of
civilization and religion.1
One of the most noteworthy specimens of the Ro
manesque in France was the abbey church of Cluny,
built between 1089 and 1130, and preserved till the
time of the Revolution. The body of the church,
which had five aisles, was 365 feet long. An extensive
fore-hall, with three aisles, carried the total length up
to 500 feet. The breadth was 110 feet ; the height of
the nave, 100 feet. The tendency to multiply the apse,
which appears in not a few specimens of the Roman-
1 Compare F. Kugler, Geschichte der Baukunst.

516 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
esque, was here carried to a maximum ; no less than
fifteen apses adorned the choir and the arms of the
cross. Seven towers entered into the ornamentation
of the exterior. In Germany, among noted examples
of this style were the Apostles' church and St. Mar
tin's in Cologne, and the cathedrals of Spires, Worms,
and Bonn. Among the Romanesque or Norman
churches of England, those at St. Albans, Ely, Peter
borough, Winchester, Norwich, and Durham held a
celebrated place.
The Gothic as a distinct style appeared in Northern
France about the middle of the twelfth century, quickly
crossed into England, then came to Germany, and near
the same time began to be introduced into Spain and
Italy. By the middle of the fourteenth century it had
reached its highest bloom. In Italy, where it was never
very fully naturalized, a decided reaction against it
arose before the middle of the fifteenth century. In
most other European countries it continued to be cul
tivated, to a considerable extent, well into the sixteenth
century. The crowning era of the Gothic style may be re
garded, both in the extent and character of its pro
ductions, as one of the most brilliant epochs, perhaps
the most brilliant, in the whole history of architecture.
" Not even the great Pharaonic age in Egypt, the age of
Pericles in Greece, nor the great period of the Roman
Empire, will bear comparison with the thirteenth cen
tury in Europe, whether we look to the extent of the
buildings executed, their wonderful variety and con
structive elegance, the daring imagination that con-

MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE. 517
ceived them, or the power of poetry and lofty religious
feelings that is expressed in every feature and every
part of them." a
Though having its starting point in the later Ro
manesque, especially in those specimens of it which
contained vaulted ceilings, the Gothic was still a truly
distinct style. Its general tone appears in strong con
trast with that of its predecessor. The Romanesque
building stood firmly upon the earth, had an aspect of
strength, solidity, and rest. The Gothic seemed to-
mount upward. The one invited to a refuge, an earthly!
stronghold. The other summoned men to forget the
earth in the eager flight of thought and aspiration to
ward heaven. Its effort, as described by Liibke, was ;
to overcome the horizontal, to spiritualize the material,
to construct an edifice which should seem to spring
miraculously toward the sky.
In realizing this character the pointed arch performed
a conspicuous service. This was not altogether a new
invention. It was not unknown to some of the ancient
nations, and had been used to a considerable extent in
Saracenic architecture. But in the Gothic it received
a new significance. Here it was no longer a mere
ornament, an adjunct, or a means of variety; it was
rather a most suitable means of carrying out the essen
tial idea of the building.
The importance of the pointed arch should not cause
the fact to be overlooked, that it was only one in a
group of features which entered into the Gothic style.
The reduction of the points of support to the smallest
practicable area, the substitution in large measure of
1 Fergusson, part ii. book ii. chap. ix.

518 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
glass windows for solid walls, the continuing of shafts
in the mouldings of arches, the prolongation of vertical
lines in towers and in buttresses, which frequently
rose above the line of parapets and ended in pinnacles, —
all these, as well as the pointed arch, were elements of
the Gothic ideal.
A very important factor in the production of the
interior effect were the windows, with their infinitely
varied patterns and their rich colors, by which the un
distinguished glare of the day outside was turned into
a scene of variegated beauty, and made to cast a mellow
radiance through the lofty aisles. In fine, it would be
difficult to imagine anything so serviceable in beautify
ing the interior as the windows of colored glass which
were common from the beginning of the Gothic era.
" The painted slabs of the Assyrian palaces," says Fer-
gusson, " are comparatively poor attempts at the same
effect. The hieroglyphics of the Egyptians were far
less splendid and complete ; nor can the painted tem
ples of the Greeks, nor the mosaics and frescos of the
Italian churches, be compared with the brilliant effect
and party-colored glories of a perfect Gothic cathedral,
where the whole history of the Bible was written in
the hues of the rainbow by the earnest hand of
faith."1 Among the more astonishing features of the great
Gothic cathedrals is the amount of sculpture embodied
in them, by which the exterior was made to appear
scarcely less ornamented than the interior. In some
instances sacred history and religious conception were
wellnigh exhausted for subjects ; and besides, a liberal
1 Part ii. book ii. chap. viii.

MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE. 519
draft was made upon the field of natural and secular
history. "Thus the great cathedrals of Chartres and
Rheims even now retain some five thousand figures, scat
tered about or grouped together in various parts, begin
ning with the history of the creation of the world and
all the wondrous incidents of the first chapter of Genesis,
and thence continuing the history through the whole of
the Old Testament. In these sculptures the story of
redemption is told, as set forth in the New Testament,
with a distinctness, and at the same time with an ear
nestness, almost impossible to surpass. On the other
hand, ranges of statues of kings of France and other
popular potentates carry on the thread of profane his
tory to the period of the erection of the cathedral itself.
In addition to these, we have, interspersed with them, a
whole system of moral philosophy, as illustrated by the
virtues and the vices, each represented by an appro
priate symbol, and the reward or punishment its invari
able accompaniment. In other parts are shown all the
arts of peace, every process of husbandry in its appro
priate season, and each manufacture or handicraft in all
its principal forms. Over all these are seen the heavenly
hosts, with saints, angels, and archangels. In the mid
dle ages, when books were rare, and those who could
read them rarer still, this sculpture was certainly most
valuable as a means of popular education." J
Among the earlier specimens of the French Gothic
that of Amiens, along with the two mentioned in the
preceding paragraph, ranks as the most noble. Among
the later specimens the abbey church of St. Ouen, at
Rouen, bears the palm for beauty. An English histo-
1 Fergusson, part ii. book ii. chap. ix.

520 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
rian has not hesitated to say that it " may claim the first
place among all the edifices that human skill has ever
reared."1 The glory of the German Gothic is the cathe
dral of Cologne, erected at the end of the thirteenth and
the beginning of the fourteenth century. In poetic ef
fect it hardly equals some other churches, but in gran
deur of conception and nicety of execution it has few
rivals. It has been pronounced the most perfect piece
of masonry which was produced in the middle ages.
After the Cologne cathedral a place of high interest be
longs to the cathedral of Strasburg, the church at Frei
burg, and St. Stephen's of Vienna. Among the Gothic
churches of England, Westminster Abbey, as it is the
richest in historical association, may also be pronounced
the noblest in general architectural effect. But there
are others which are not far from the place of rivals.
Some of the old Norman churches, which were recon
structed to a greater or less extent in the Gothic era,
present very noble specimens of this style. The York
Minster and the cathedrals of Ely and Winchester are
distinguished examples. Italian Gothic is represented
in particular by the cathedrals of Siena and Milan.
The latter, though not a model as respects distinctive
Gothic features, and perhaps also failing somewhat in
religious impression, is a structure of marvellous rich
ness and beauty. In Spain the most celebrated monu
ments of this style were erected at Toledo, Burgos, and
Seville. In respect of size, the cathedral of Seville ranks first
among all the mediaeval churches (St. Peter's being ex
cluded from this category), while that of Milan holds
1 E. A. Freeman, History of Architecture.

MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE. 521
the second place. The one covers the immense area of
124,000 square feet, the other 108,277 square feet.1
The Gothic style found support in the imaginative
and idealizing tendencies of the middle ages. It was
not equally well adapted to satisfy a utilitarian age,
since it was not distinguished by subordination to defi
nite practical ends. With the decline, therefore, of the
mediaeval spirit, one aid to its dominion was withdrawn,
or at least greatly diminished. At the same time the
enthusiasm for classic learning naturally begot a prefer
ence for the classic models in architecture. The result
was that the Renaissance style, first in Italy and then
in other countries, began to encroach upon the Gothic.
Without being limited to a very definite pattern, the
new stj'le borrowed various details from the classic
Roman. In some of its more noted embodiments the
elongated dome was a very conspicuous feature. This
was especially the case with the cathedral at Florence,
and with St. Peter's at Rome, the enormous dimensions
of whose domes suggest that the task of raising the
pantheon high in air has veritably been accomplished.
St. Peter's, if not the purest, may be pronounced the
grandest example of the Renaissance. Several architects
with differing ideas successively directed the long pro
cess of its construction. This was not favorable to unity
of design. Some of the decorations also are far from
being in the best taste. But the magnificent propor
tions of the building (covering an area of about five
acres), the mighty dome by which it is crowned, and the
wealth of materials which it embraces, make it one of
the most imposing of religious temples in the world.
1 Figures by Fergusson.

522 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.

III. — PAINTING.
The staid Byzantine and the rude native style —
which latter flourished most conspicuously among the
Lombards — helped by their modifying influence upon
each other to initiate a style more satisfactory than
either. This reached its flower in Italy in the thirteenth
century. The development, as Kugler remarks, is not
fully open to inspection. " We only perceive that earlier
or later, according to the local conditions of each dis
trict, the Byzantine style and the old native Lombard
become amalgamated into a new whole, — first one and
then another constitutent feature predominating, but
always impelled forward by the same tendency."
Tuscany, with its enterprising cities, like Siena and
Florence, was the most prominent theatre of this ad
vance in art. Cimabue and Duccio were the brilliant
lights of the new school in the last half of the thirteenth
century. The fame of the former is perpetuated by
wall paintings in the church of St. Francis in Assisi, —
a fitting place for his genuis to record itself, for the
religious enthusiasm which emanated from Francis was
one of the sources of the new inspiration in painting. A
specially renowned work of Duccio is the large picture
which he contributed to the altar of the cathedral in
Siena. In the fourteenth ceutury two distinguishing tenden
cies made themselves manifest among the Tuscan paint
ers, the one having its centre at Florence and the other
at Siena. The Florentine painters were characterized

MEDIAEVAL PAINTING. 523
by energy of representation, by power of grouping, and
by a realistic bent. The Sienese exhibited less intensity,
were less realistic, delighted in calm and deep feeling,
and sought to impress by the sweetness and sanctity of
individual faces, rather than by dramatic combinations.
The former took pleasure in portraying the manifold
diversities which appear in earthly and spiritual rela
tions. The latter were content with a narrower range,
and sought to do justice to such subjects as had been
more commonly included in the cycle of Christian art.
At the head of the Florentine school in the fourteenth
century stood Giotto (1276-1336). An interesting ac
count of his induction into an artistic career has been
given us by Ghiberti. " The art of painting," he says,
" took, its rise in a village of Etruria, nigh to Florence,
by name Vespignano. A child was born there of ad
mirable genius. Cimabue, the painter, passing by on
his road to Bologna, beheld him sitting on the ground,
and drawing a sheep from nature on a smooth stone.
Marvelling to see a child so young design so well, and
perceiving that he had the art from nature, he inquired
his name. The child answered and said, ' I am called
Giotto, and my father's name is Bondone, and he lives
in this cottage hard by.' Cimabue went in with Giotto
to his father; Cimabue's presence was most noble;
he begged the boy of the father, and the father was
wretchedly poor ; he gave up the child to Cimabue ;
Cimabue took him away with him, and Giotto was his
disciple."1 So apt was the .scholar that at the age of twenty he
1 Quoted by Lord Lindsay, Sketches of the History of Christian Art,
vol. ii.

524 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
was past the instruction of his patron ; and his influence
was on a plane with his proficiency. He stood in
friendly relations with distinguished contemporaries,
being praised by such masters of verse as Dante and
Petrarch. Popes and princes were glad to employ his
talents, and leading monasteries counted it good fortune
to possess a work from his hand.
Giotto enriched the domain of painting with a multi
tude of new creations, and raised the art to a new stage
as regards the vivid and careful delineation of character.
He was not altogether successful in dealing with the
stronger passions. Still his works gave new emphasis
to the idea that art should furnish an image of reality.
" From the point of view of his age, Giotto's advance
toward nature, considered relatively to his predecessors,
was in truth enormous." J
Among the pupils of Giotto a prominent place was
held by Taddeo Gaddi. The greatest successor, how
ever, in the Florentine school was Andrea, or Orcagna,
as he is commonly called. Like Giotto, he was not
merely a painter, but also an architect and sculptor.
Three great pictures of his representing the Last Judg
ment, Hell, and Paradise, are found on the walls of the
Capella Strozzi in the Santa Maria Novella at Florence.
Liibke remarks of the last : " The arrangement is still
generally stiff, and without picturesque grouping ; but
the grand beauty of the heads, the rich, free character
ization of the figures, and the inexhaustible abundance
of the noblest forms of drapery, are truly enchanting.
No picture throughout the whole Gothic epoch com
bines so much rich beauty." Two renowned pictures in
1 Woltmann and Woermann.

MEDIJEVAL PAINTING. 525
the Campo Santa at Pisa, the Last Judgment and the
Triumph of Death, have been attributed to Orcagna.1
The former has been favorably compared with the great
work on the same subject by Michael Angelo, who was
content to borrow from it some suggestions.
A principal representative of the Sienese school was
Simone di Martino, a contemporary of Giotto. In har
mony with the description which has been given of
this school, we find his works expressing tenderness of
emotion, calm devotion, and peaceful aspiration, rather
than dramatic energy. With Simone are to be asso
ciated Lippo Memmi, Pietro di Lorenzo, and Ambrogio
di Lorenzo.
The spirit of the Sienese school found in the fifteenth
century a distinguished exponent in the Dominican
monk, Fra Giovanni Angelico. The sphere of his
representations was limited, but within that sphere he
has scarcely been excelled. " The inspired fervor of
the Christian mind," says Liibke, " the angelic purity
and beauty of the soul, have never been so gloriously
portrayed in plastic art as they are in his works. The
tender breath of an almost supernaturally ideal life
plays around his creations, and smiles from the rosy
features of the youthful heads, or is wafted to us like
heavenly peace from the dignified figures of his aged
men. The expression of humility, of a cheerful resting
in God, the calm sabbatic rest of those who are devoted
in true love to the Most High, forms the range of his
1 Most of our authorities make this assignment, but Woltmann and
Woermann argue that the style of these pictures differs too widely from
that of the authenticated works of Orcagna to justify their being referred
to his hand.

526 THE MEDIJEVAL CHURCH.
representations. The varied emotion, the changeful
course of life, the energy of action and passion, are
absent from his works."
Before proceeding with the succession of Italian
painters, it is incumbent upon us to turn a glance
toward those of Germany and the Netherlands, since
Italian art in the fifteenth century was not without
obligations to the northern region.
Contemporary with the rise of Gothic architecture
and the growth of chivaliy, German painting gave some
evidences of the freer impulses at work in society.
Notable achievements, however, were not made till the
fourteenth century. In the latter part of that century
three schools attained a measure of celebrity ; namely,
that of Prague under the patronage of the Emperor,
Charles IV., that of Nuremberg, and, most important
of all, that of Cologne. Each of these exhibited some
what of the traits of the Sienese school in Italian art.
They were skilled in the representation of the passive
virtues. They gave to the countenances of their sub
jects a peculiar cast of purity, meekness, and spiritual
ity. This was their talent. The genius which is able
to impart motion to form, to set forth the energy of
passion, or even to portray manly strength in compara
tive rest, they did not possess.
The school of Cologne, whose most eminent masters
were Wilhelm and Stephan, flourished during the last
two decades of the fourteenth century and the first
three of the fifteenth. At this time there arose in the
Netherlands a school of special historical significance.
Its founders were the brothers Hubert and John van

MEDIJEVAL PAINTING. 527
Eyek. The distinguishing traits of the school as stamped
upon it by the two brothers were a decided bent to
realism, a predilection for exact truthfulness, and cer
tain points of special proficiency in execution. Under
the last designation belong an improved dealing with
perspective, which prepared for an advance in landscape
painting, and some discovery respecting the use of oils
that was of great service to art.1
The most renowned work of the founders was the
Adoration of the Lamb, an altar-piece in twelve panels
in the cathedral of Ghent. This was begun by Hubert,
and completed by John a few years after the death of
his brother, in 1426.
Among the numerous successors of the Van Eycks,
an eminent place was held by Memling, who combined
with the realism of the Flemish school much of the
tenderness and feeling for quiet beauty which charac
terized the school of Cologne. A later representative of
considerable note was Quintin Matsys.
The painters of the Netherlands showed little capacity
1 There appears to have been some question as respects the exact
nature of this discovery. As a recent verdict well entitled to considera
tion we quote the following : " The real improvement they introduced
was not in the mixing, but in the application of colors. In tempera paint
ing, as it was then practised, the colors were ground and prepared sepa
rately, and then applied side by side with the colors already laid on and
dried, or as a fresh layer over the dry color. The Van Eycks introduced
the new method of painting over and into wet color ; and to this end
they took advantage of the slow-drying properties of oil color, which, on
the old system, had been an insuperable objection. They mixed the
colors with the medium on the palette, and worked them together on the
picture itself, thus obtaining more brilliant effects of light, as well as
more delicate gradations of tone, with an infinitely nearer approach to
the truth of nature" (Woltmann and Woermann.)

528 THE MEDIAEVAL CHURCH.
to rise above the plane which the Van Eycks had occu
pied. An advance to a higher stage was first realized,
so far as respects the Germanic peoples, in the early
part of the sixteenth century, when the annals of early
Protestantism were adorned by the names of two such
consummate artists as Albert Diirer and the younger
Holbein, not to mention that very prolific painter, Lucas
Cranach. With the bent to realism characteristic of
the Netherlands school Diirer and Holbein united larger
original power, greater energy of conception and facility
of grasp. Diirer was distinguished in engraving no less
than in painting. Among the trophies of his genius in
the former line the most celebrated pieces are the Mel
ancholy, and Death and the Knight.
The great era of Italian art, beginning shortly before
the middle of the fifteenth and reaching into the six
teenth century, was the unrivalled age of Christian
painting. A still broader statement is allowable.
While the age of Pericles continues to bear the palm
as respects sculpture, no other era in all history can
boast of such achievements in painting as can the
era of the Italian Renaissance. All the conditions
of a flowering age were then at hand : the imaginative
literature of the great Italian poets, rich and awe-
inspiring religious temples bequeathed by one of the
greatest epochs in the annals of architecture, the ideals
which the mystic piety of the middle ages had wrought
out, supplemented by the skill and grace which were
naturally born of an enthusiastic study of classic re
mains. To be impressed with the exceptional wealth
of the era, one has only to look over the names of its

MEDIEVAL PAINTING. 529
distinguished artists, each of which calls up forms of
almost ideal beauty, such names as Masaccio, Fillippo
Lippi, Domenico Ghirlandajo, Luca Signorelli, Andrea
Mantegna, Pietro Perugino, Giovanni Bellini, Francesco
Francia, Leonardo da Vinci, Bernardino Luini, Fra
Bartolommeo, Andrea del Sarto, Michael Angelo Buo
narroti, Raphael Sanzio, Antonio Allegri da Correggio,
Giorgione, and Tiziano Vecellio.
To three of these, Leonardo da Vinci, Michael An
gelo, and Raphael, common consent assigns a pre-emi
nent place. Correggio and Tiziano (Titian) are also
ranked as stars of the first magnitude, — the former an
adept in the use of light and shade, the latter, like
Beilini and Giorgione, exhibiting the characteristic skill
of the Venetian school in the use of colors, a portrait
painter of almost unrivalled fame, gifted in the represen
tation of earthly magnificence, but leaving also among
the products of his long career some noble works on re
ligious subjects.
Leonardo da Vinci (1452-1519) was a man of com
prehensive ability. In person and in mind he was one
of the most gifted of the sons of men. He was comely,
strong, and skilled in bodily exercises. He was at once
painter, sculptor, civil engineer, architect, musician, and
poet. With high genius he joined great industry and
painstaking. Whatever respect he had for antique
Inodels, he thought it necessary to have continual re-
course to the direct lessons of nature, saying that " such
teachings at second hand make the artist not the child,
but the grandchild of nature." He spent much time
in the study of anatomy, took note of expression on all
occasions, followed criminals to execution to catch the
34

530 THE MEDIJEVAL CHURCH.
lineaments of horror and despair, and entered into
amusing conversation with peasants the better to ac
quaint himself with the image of artless mirth. His
high rank as a painter is due to his combination of deep
sentiment with scientific accuracy. Says Kugler :
" With scientific study and accuracy he joined a sound
subjective feeling, a refined enthusiastic sentimentality
which in some sort may be compared with the charac
teristics of the Umbrian school. In some of his works
the one or the other of these tendencies predominates ;
in the principal ones, on the other hand, both seem to
balance each other in purest harmony. . . . He who
investigated common life, even to its minutest modifica
tions and details, could also represent the holy and the
divine with a dignity, calmness, and beauty of which
the greatest genius alone is capable."
Milan and Florence were the chief seats of Leonardo's
activity. It was in the former, on the walls of the
refectory of the convent of Santa Maria della Grazie,
that he executed his world-renowned painting, the Last
Supper. This is known to us mainly by early copies
and engravings, as the original was shamefully defaced
long since. The arrangement of the disciples and their
Master at the table was borrowed rather from the cus
tom of the refectory than from the original scene. But
this departure from the externals of history had its ade
quate compensation in the better scope provided for
reproducing its spirit. It ministered to a more effectual
exhibition of feeling by attitude and gesture, and was
subservient to a special dramatic effect in that it ena
bled the artist to dispose the disciples in several groups.
The whole is well described as a remarkable fusion of

MEDIAEVAL PAINTING. 531
the real and the ideal. The scene is laid at the an
nouncement of the betrayal, and an echo of the words,
" One of you shall betray me," appears in the sorrow
ful mien of the Master, as also in the agitated faces of
the disciples. .
Michael Angelo (1474-1563) reveals quite as re
markable a range of abilities as Leonardo. He was
almost equally great in architecture, sculpture, and
painting, and was besides a musician, a poet, and a
consummate anatomist. While he devoted no incon
siderable portion of his long life to painting, his own
preference was for sculpture. Very distinct traces of
this predilection appear even in his paintings. The}r
reveal the instincts of the sculptor in being confined
almost entirely to the one subject which is of supreme
interest in sculpture. " He no more thought of repre
senting space and distance than of the elaboration of a
detailed foreground ; his treatment of color is broadly
massive and he disdained all the artifice of atmospheric
effects. His pictures represent the human form under
every variety of impulse, but nothing else." 1
A powerful subjectivity is reflected in the works of
Michael Angelo. He took scarcely any account of tra
ditional types. He wrought out his own conceptions,
and stamped them with the impress of his own lofty
and independent spirit. One feels, as he looks over the
crowded assembly of his creations, that he has given
only one side of reality. Strength, grandeur, energy,
and intensest will are there. Of meekness and gentle
ness, of contriteness and humility, of wrapt devotion
and serene blessedness, there is little glimpse.
* Woltmann and Woermann.

532 THE MEDIJEVAL CHURCH.
Michael Angelo's masterpiece in painting is on the
ceiling of the Sistine Chapel in Rome. Liibke speaks
of this as " the mightiest monument of painting through-
, out all ages." It contains probably the most successful
venture which human audacity has ever essayed in the
representation of Deity, — the picture of the Almighty
flying forth on the wings of the wind in the work of
creation. A peculiar majesty attaches to the forms
of prophets and sibyls, and in the list of Biblical scenes
reaching onward from the creation there are many ap
proaches to the lofty height of the sacred theme.
A second renowned work of Michael Angelo, exe
cuted in his later years, has been preserved on the wall
of the same chapel. It is an extensive work, contain
ing more than a hundred figures, in whose expressions
and attitudes one sees at a glance that the sentence
of doom, the great fiat of the Judgment Day, has
gone forth from the enthroned Christ. The picture
shows the power of the master, but also his limitation.
There is no adequate glimpse of the transfigured life of
heaven, to stand in contrast with the fevered agony
of the lost. In general, the physical is over promi
nent. The athletic element, so to speak, trenches on
the spiritual. Of the two great paintings, the one on
the ceiling is the nobler memorial of a sublime artistic
genius. Raphael (1483-1520) received his first lessons in art in
the Umbrian school. This school resembled the Sienese
of the preceding era, being characterized by serenity
and mystical tenderness rather than by dramatic energy.
Such qualities were displayed in eminent degree by
Pietro Perugino, the early teacher of Raphael, and the

MEDIAEVAL PAINTING. 533
first works of Raphael bear the same general stamp.
Later, he enriched and ennobled his style by com
munion with the Florentine masters.
A supreme sense for beauty joined with wonderful
skill and delicacy of execution may be described as
the distinguishing features of Raphael's genius. " The
magic power in Raphael," says Kugler, " is the spirit of
beauty, which filled his whole being and shines through
all his creations. A beautiful and harmonious develop
ment of form is his first aim, but not in the restrictive
sense in which it was studied by the masters of the
fifteenth century. In Raphael beauty of form is the
expression of elevation of mind, and of the utmost
purity of soul. In Leonardo da Vinci, the chief aim
appears to have been a characteristic and thorough ex
pression of the theme he had to treat ; in Michael An
gelo we remark a peculiar, grand, subjective mode of
conception ; in both, beauty of form is to be considered
a secondary element : it is the reverse in Raphael."
Though dying at the early age of thirty-seven, Ra
phael left in vast number the trophies of his genius.
No other artist ever produced so much and of such
uniform excellence in so short a time. Among his
more distinguished works are the four large wall paint
ings in the Camera della Segnatura of the Vatican, en
titled Theology, Poetry, Philosophy, and Ethics; the
frescos in the Chamber of Heliodorus, including the
Expulsion of Heliodorus from the Temple, the Mass
of Bolsena, the March of Attila, and the Deliverance
of St. Peter; the ample list of Biblical scenes em
ployed in the ornamentation of the Loggia, and called
Raphael's Bible ; the Cartoons, in which the great

534 THE MEDIjEVAL CHURCH.
scenes of the apostolic history are reproduced; the
Transfiguration; and the Madonnas. Upon each of
these there has been no dearth of admiring comment.
To some of them art has not yet been able to present
a worthy rival. Respecting the creations in the Camera
della Segnatura, Muntz says : " The profundity of the
ideas, the nobility of the style, and the youthful vitality
which prevails in every detail of the decoration, make
up a monumental achievement which is without parallel
in the annals of painting." J
Of the Madonnas, the Sistine, executed near the close
of Raphael's life, is the most remarkable creation. No
better description of this can be devised than that
which has been given in the words of Kugler : " Here
the Madonna appears as the queen of the heavenly host
in a brilliant glory of countless angel heads, standing on
the clouds with the Eternal Son in her arms ; St. Sixtus
and St. Barbara kneel at the sides. Both of them seem
to connect the picture with the real spectators. A
curtain-drawn back encloses the picture on each side.
Underneath is a light parapet on which two beautiful
boy angels lean. The Madonna is one of the most
wonderful creations of Raphael's pencil ; she is at once
the exalted and blessed woman of whom the Savior was
born, and the tender earthly virgin whose pure and
humble nature was esteemed worthy of so great a des
tiny. There is something scarcely describable in her
countenance ; it expresses a timid astonishment at the
miracle of her elevation, and at the same time the free
dom and dignity resulting from the consciousness of
1 Life, Works, and Times of Raphael, translated from the French.

MEDIJEVAL painting. 535
her divine situation. The child rests naturally, but not
listlessly, in her arms, and looks down upon the world
with a serious expression. Never has the loveliness of
childhood been blended so touchingly with a deep-felt
solemn consciousness of the holiest calling as in the
features and countenance of this child. The eye is
with difficulty disenchanted from the deep impressions
produced by these two figures, so as to rest on the
grandeur and dignity of the Pope, the lowly devotion
of St. Barbara, and the cheerful innocence of the angel
children." The great genius of Raphael is matter for no dispute
or division of opinion. But some have been disposed
to question his service to art in its specifically Christian
sense. They have alleged that he yielded to the spirit
of the pagan renaissance, that he went outside of Chris
tian subjects to glorify the characters of the classic
world, that he helped on the tendency of his age to
sacrifice spirituality to the exact portrayal of earthly
forms. Thus John Ruskin says : " Raphael in his
twenty-fifth year was sent for to Rome, to decorate
the Vatican for Pope Julius II., and having until that
time worked exclusively in the ancient and stern medi
aeval manner, he, in the first chamber which he deco
rated in that palace, wrote upon its wall the Mene,
Tekel, Upharsin, of the arts of Christianity. And he
wrote it thus. On one wall of that chamber he placed
a picture of the World or Kingdom of Theology, pre
sided over by Christ. And on the side wall of that
same chamber he placed the World or Kingdom of
Poetry, presided over by Apollo. And from that spot,
and from that hour, the intellect and the art of Italy

536 THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH.
date their degradation. Observe, however, that the
significance of this fact is not in the mere use of the
figure of the heathen god to indicate the domain of
poetry. Such a symbolical use had been made of the
figures of heathen deities in the best times of Christian
art. But it is the fact that, being called to Rome
especially to adorn the palace of the so called head of
the Church, and called as the chief representative of
the Christian artists of his time, Raphael had neither
religion nor originality enough to trace the spirit of
poetry and the spirit of philosophy to the inspiration of
the true God, as well as that of theology ; but that, on
the contrary, he elevated the creations of fancy on the one
wall to the same rank as the objects of faith upon the
other; that in deliberate, balanced opposition to the
Rock of Mount Zion, he reared the rock of Parnassus
and the rock of the Acropolis ; that among the masters
of poetry we find him enthroning Petrarch and Pindar,
but not Isaiah and David, and for lords over the do
main of philosophy we find the masters of the school
of Athens, but neither of those greater masters by the
last of whom that school was rebuked, — those who
received their wisdom from heaven itself in the vision
of Gibeon (1 Kings iii. 5), and in the lightning of
Damascus. The doom of the arts of Europe went
forth from that chamber, and it was brought about in
great part by the very excellences of the man who had
thus marked the commencement of decline. The per
fection of execution and the beauty of feature which
were attained in his works, and those of his great con^
temporaries, rendered finish of execution and beauty of
form the chief objects of all artists, and thenceforward

MEDIEVAL PAINTING. 537
execution was looked for rather than thought, and
beauty rather than veracity." x
This fervid specimen of Pre-Raphaelite criticism, what
ever element of truth it may contain, assigns to Raphael
by far too large a responsibility in the decline of art.
Where genius is a principal factor in working out re
sults, steady advance is never maintained. The age of
flower and fruit is likely to be followed by the age of
comparative decline. It has been so in the history
of poetry. Analogy would lead us to expect that it
would not be otherwise in the history of art. Had
Raphael, within the limits of his genius, wrought other
wise than he did, the era of decadence probably would
not have been much retarded. It was beyond his
power to control the issue. Very likely he did not
reach the ideal as respects the union of beauty with
spiritual depth. But his contribution toward the ideal
is of permanent and inestimable worth to the race.
Art at the acme of its future triumph may give greater
and more successful heed to spiritual depth than did
Raphael; it will not make less account of beauty of
form. 1 Lectures on Architecture and Painting.

APPENDIX.

APPENDIX.

I.
THE SEVEN SACRAMENTS.
1st the early centuries, while the term " sacrament " was
pre-eminently associated with baptism and the eucharist, it
was given a wide application, being made to include any
thing to which a special sanctity pertained. Thus, Ter-
tullian spoke of the work of Christ as " the sacrament of
human salvation," and styled the death of Christ "the
sacrament of His passion." Hilary, Leo the Great, and
Gregory the Great likewise spoke of " the sacrament of the
Lord's passion." Augustine referred to the Sabbath and
circumcision, among other things, as sacraments. The
pseudo Dionysius, the author of mystical writings in the
fifth century, prepared a ground for a somewhat more
definite usage, since he specified six Christian mysteries ;
namely, baptism, eucharist, anointing, priestly consecration,
dedication to monastic life, and the ceremonial for the
dead, — an anointing of the body of the deceased. This
Dionysius, as being accounted in the Middle Ages the veri
table Areopagite converted by Paul, was much of an author
ity. Still, his list of mysteries, or sacraments, seems not to
have regulated very largely the usage of the scholastics.
Great indefiniteness continued to characterize the subject,

542 APPENDIX.
until at length in the twelfth century Peter Lombard set
forth the following list of seven sacraments : " baptism,
confirmation, eucharist, penance, extreme unctiou, holy or
ders, marriage." This list was accepted by Thomas Aqui
nas and Bonaventura, and was officially sanctioned by Pope
Eugenius IV., near the middle of the fifteenth century.
The scholastic conception of baptism was essentially the
same as prevailed in the Church in the time of Augustine.
It was understood to effect absolution from guilt and ame
lioration of inherited corruption, and was regarded as neces
sary to salvation. However, in virtue of the proper desire,
faith, and purpose, one debarred from baptism might be
saved. As infants cannot offer these compensations, their
death without baptism was regarded by the mediaeval theo
logians as dooming them to hell, though not to the sharp
torments visited upon most of the lost. Dante was not
unfaithful to the common thought when he thus described
the Umbus puerorum .¦ —
" A place there is below not sad with torments,
But darkness only, where the lamentations
Have not the sound of waiUng, but are sighs."
The formula for confirmation was as follows: "I sign
thee with the sign of the cross, and confirm thee with the
chrism of salvation, in the name of the Father, the Son, and
the Holy Spirit, Amen." This sacrament was understood
to supplement baptism, affording strength in the standing
to which the candidate had been introduced by the initial
rite. The sacrificial notion was dominant in the mediaeval
thought of the eucharist. The table of communion was
displaced by an altar of sacrifice, upon which the actual
body of Christ was supposed to serve as a propitiatory offer
ing for the living and the dead. At the height of the scho
lastic era some refinements were made on the doctrine of

APPENDIX. 543
the real presence, though always at the expense of the
reality in the case. Thus the idea which Radbertus seems
to have entertained in the ninth century respecting a sun
dering of the body of Christ into parts, was displaced by
the theory (adopted by the Council of Trent) that the body
is entire under any separate portion of the species of bread.
The first ecumenical sanction of transubstantiation appeared
in the language of the fourth Lateran Council in 1215.
According to the completed scholastic doctrine, the valid
execution of the sacrament of penance requires, on the side
of the penitent, contrition, confession, and sincere engage
ment to do the prescribed works of satisfaction ; on the
part of the priest, a formal sentence of absolution. (See
pp. 254-256.)
Extreme unction, designed for bodily alleviation and for
the cancelling of venial sins, was ministered by the use of
vocal prayer, and by anointing the body of the sick on the
eyes, the ears, the nostrils, the lips, the hands, the feet, and
the loins.
Like the other sacraments incapable of repetition, namely,
baptism and confirmation, the sacrament of order was sup
posed to impress an indelible character upon the recipient.
Ecclesiastical dignities above the priestly were not counted
as representing distinct orders. Accordingly, the list of
seven orders, as given by Peter Lombard, runs as follows :
"door-keepers, readers, exorcists, acolytes, subdeacons, dea
cons, priests.
The sacramental character of marriage was generally
acknowledged, though as late and prominent a writer as
Durandus took the ground that marriage can be called a
sacrament only in a general way (largo modo). No cause,
not even that of adultery, was regarded as adequate to
annul the bond of marriage, so long a? both parties should
continue to live.

544 APPENDIX.

II.

GENUINENESS OF THE FAMOUS BULL OF
ADRIAN IV.
The fact that this bull, which assumes to transfer Ireland
to English rule, is not found in the Vatican library cannot
count for much, since that library, according to Theiner,
contains no document relative to any dealing with Ireland
which antedates 1215.1 As the originals of other documents
touching on Irish affairs have been lost from the Vatican,
so this from Adrian may have been lost also. The condi
tions therefore leave full force to any positive evidence for
the genuineness of the over-generous grant of the Pope to
Henry II. of England.
As Lanigan shows,2 the evidence is not scanty. John
of Salisbury, who claims that he acted as the agent of
Henry II. in eliciting the bull, has left this declaration :
" Ad preces meas illustri regi Anglorum, Henrico II., con
cessit et dedit [Adrianus] Hiberniam jure haereditario pos-
sidendam, sicut literae ipsius testantur in hodiernum diem." 8
Giraldus Cambrensis, the leading authority for the history
of the Anglo-Norman invasion of Ireland, gives the text
of the bull.4 It is given also by Matthew Paris.6 Pope
Alexander III. expressly mentioned and confirmed Adri
an's grant in a letter addressed to Henry II. in 1172.6
John XXII. evidently had the document by him, as he at
tached a copy of it to a brief which he sent to Edward II.
1 Stokes, Ireland and the Anglo-Norman Church.
2 Eccl. Hist, of Ireland, iv. 165, 166. 3 Metalogicus, iv. 42.
4 De Rebus a se Gestis ii. 11 ; Expngnatio Hibernica, ii. 5.
6 Sub Anno, 1155.
6 Giraldus Cambrensis, Expngnatio Hibernica, ii. 5.

APPENDIX. 545
Baronius informs us that he took the copy of the bull which
appears in his history from the Codex Vaticanus.1
Such a weight of evidence cannot easily be offset. The
testimony of John of Salisbury, supplemented by that of
Giraldus, and confirmed by the action of Alexander III.,
is of decisive force. As Stokes remarks : " It will require
something more than a priori presumptions to convince us
that a document publicly proclaimed, boasted of, confirmed
within twenty years of its original grant, was a carefully
planned swindle."
We add the main portion of the text of Adrian's bull, as
also of the confirmatory sentence of Alexander III. : —
"Sane Hiberniam, et omnes insulas, quibus sol justitiae
Christus illuxit et quae doeumenta fidei Christianae ceperunt,
ad jus beati Petri et sacrosanctse Romanae ecclesiae, quod
tua etiam nobilitas recognoscit, non est dubium pertinere.
Unde tanto in eis libentius plantationem fidelem et germen
gratum Deo inserimus, quanto id a nobis interno examine
districtius prospicimus exigendum. Significasti siquidem
nobis, fili in Christo carissime, te Hibernise insulam, ad
subdendum ilium populum legibus, et vitiorum plantaria inde
extirpanda, velle intrare ; et de singulis domibus annuam
unius denarii beato Petro velle solvere pensionem ; et jura
eeclesiarum illius terrae illibata et integra conservare. Nos
itaque, pium et laudabile desiderium tuum cum favore con-
gruo prosequentes, et petitioni tuae benignum impendentes
assensum, gratum et aeceptum habemus, ut pro dilitandis
ecclesiae terminis, pro vitiorum restringendo decursu, pro
corrigendis moribus et virtutibus inserendis, pro Christianae
religionis augmento, insulam illam ingrediaris, et quae ad
honorem Dei et salutem illius terrae spectaverint exequaris ;
et illius terras populus honorifice te recipiat, et sicut domi-
num veneretur. Jure nimirum eeclesiarum illibato et integro
1 Annal. Eccl. xii. 418, anno 1159.
35

546 APPENDIX.
permanente, et salva beato Petro, et sacrosanctae Romanae
ecclesiae, de singulis domibus annua unius denarii pensione.
" Alexander episcopus, servus servorum Dei, carissimo in
Christo filio, illustri Anglorum regi, salutem et apostolicam
benedictionem. Quoniam ea, quae a decessoribus nostris ra-
tionabiliter indulta noscuntur, perpetua merentur stabilitate
firmari, venerabilis Adriani papae vestigiis inhaerentes, ves-
trique desiderii fructum attendentes, concessionem ejusdem
Hibernici regni dominio vobis indulto, salva beato Petro et
sacrosanctae Romanae ecclesiae, sicut in Anglia sic et in
Hibernia, de singulis domibus annua unius denarii pensione,
ratam habemus et confirmamus." III.
SORCERY AND WITCHCRAFT.
Belief in the reality of sorcery, or the efficacy of certain
means to secure the co-operation of a supernatural power, —
generally conceived as demoniacal or diabolical, — was a
common inheritance of Christians. It was current among
the Jews, the Greeks, the Romans, and the barbarian tribes.
In the conception of the polytheistic nations the belief
may often have had less distinct reference to an evil super-
naturalism than was characteristic of it among the profes
sors of a monotheistic faith ; but everywhere it embraced
kindred elements.
Before the modern era, it is true, there was an occasional
manifestation of scepticism respecting the reality of the
"black arts." The tenor of the communication which
Gregory VII. addressed to the King of Denmark does not
indicate any confidence in the reality of such arts. The
German Emperor, Frederic II., gave tokens of a very scant
faith in some of the marvellous effects which were credited

APPENDIX. 547
to sorcery. In rare instances a learned jurist, like Ponzi-
nibio, who wrote near the beginning of the sixteenth century,
had the courage to pronounce magic in general a delusion.
But in the view of the great mass of mediaeval Christians
the wonder-working sorcerer was a decidedly real being.
Imperial Rome gave a precedent for severe dealing with
sorcerers. The more obnoxious of their rites were punish
able with crucifixion, delivery to beasts, or burning alive.
Among Christian emperors, Constantius, Valens, and Valen-
tinian furnished examples of great severity toward reputed
sorcerers. The laws of the Christianized Germanic tribes
contained specifications against sorcery. Still, throughout
the earlier part of the Middle Ages there was no attempt
at violent repression except in limited areas. By the end
of the twelfth century prosecutions had well-nigh ceased.
But a terrible revival was begun in the fourteenth century.
The prying industry of the Inquisition and the declarations
of the popes, notably those of John XXII., breathed new
life into the delusion, and stimulated whatever of illicit
appetite existed for dabbling with magic.
In the fifteenth century the current belief began to take
on a more sombre hue. Instead of the conception of a
sorcerer who, as a means of livelihood or diversion, used
extraordinary powers, sometimes for good and sometimes
for evil ends, there commenced to prevail the idea of a
witch wholly sold to evil, bound by an infernal compact,
and accustomed to frequent nightly assemblies presided
over by the devil. This version of the subject met indeed
with some objection, but it advanced toward ascendency.
The popular faith in the power of the witch to work all
kinds of evil, to blast nature, animals, and human bodies,
and to indulge iu unclean intercourse with demons, was
taken up and promulgated from the highest seats of au
thority. Innocent VIII., in the bull Summis desiderantes

548 appendix:
(Dec. 2, 1484), sanctioned this faith in all its length and
breadth. In the preface to his order for condign punish
ment upon witches he uses this description : "Nuper ad
nostrum, non sine ingenti molestia, pervenit auditum, quod
in nonnullis partibus Alemaniae superioris, etc., quamplures
utriusque sexus personae, propriae salutis immemores, et a
fide catholica deviantes, cum daemonibus incubis, et succubis
abuti, ac suis incantationibus, carminibus, et conjurationi-
bus, aliisque nefandis superstitiis, et sortilegiis, excessi-
bus, criminibus, et delectis, multorum partus, animalium
foetus, terrae fruges, vinearum uvas, et arborum fructus,
neenon homines, mulieres, jumenta, pecora, pecudes, et
alia diversorum generum animalia, vineas quoque, poma-
ria, frata, pascua, blada, frumenta, et alia terrae legumina
perire, suffocari, et extingui facere." 1 Such deliverances
served naturally to swell popular terror, and to multiply
accusations. In the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries
the witchcraft delusion wrought with deadly effect. The
historian of the Inquisition, Paramo, was able to boast that
by the middle of the sixteenth century the Holy Office had
burned no less than thirty thousand witches.2 Protestants,
as they shared the traditional belief respecting witch
craft, helped industriously to swell the awful aggregate
of victims.8
1 Raynaldus, anno 1484, n. 74. Shortly afterwards one of the Pope's
agents, the Inquisitor Sprenger, prepared the celebrated treatise, Maleus
Maleficarum, — a kind of handbook for zealots against witches. This was
first published in 1489.
2 De Origine et Progressu Inquisitionis. De peculiari quodam lamiarum
gene.re, quae in Germania et Italia, ab anno 1404 cuidam religioni a diabolo
excogitatae mancipantur, contra quas adeo acerrime ab inquisitoribus de-
pugnatum est, ut centum quinquaginta annis, ad hanc diem, triginta lami
arum millia ut minimum fuerunt concremata (p. 296).
8 For a full summary on mediaeval sorcery and witchcraft, see H. C.
Lea, "The Inquisition in the Middle Ages," iii. 377-549.

APPENDIX.

549

Astrology, though viewed as more or less allied with a
questionable magic, and occasionally made a ground of
persecution, was treated with a relative tolerance. It had
patrons among high dignitaries in Church and State.

IV.

POPES AND EMPERORS.

Date of
accession.

Popes.

Emperors.

582 ..- - 

Maurice.

590 .

Gregory I.
602 .
Phocas.
604 .
Sabianus.
607 .
Boniface III.
608 .
Boniface IV.
610 .
Heraclius.
615 .
Deusdedit.
619 .
Boniface V.
621 .
Honorius I.
638 .
Severinus.
640 .
John IV.
641 .
Constantine HI.
641 .
Constans II.
642 .
Theodoras I.
649 .
Martin I.
654 .
Eugenius I.
657 .
Vitalianus.
Constantine IV.
672 .
Adeodatus.
676 . .
Donus or Domnus I.
678 .
Agatho.
682 .
Leo II.
Benedict II.
685 .
John V.
Justinian II.
550

APPENDIX.

liate ot
accession.

Popes.

686 ... . Conon.

687 .

Sergius I.
697 .
701 .
John VI.
705 .
John VII.
708 .
Sisinnius.
708 .
, Constantine I.
711 .
713
715 .
Gregory II.
716 .
716
731 .
. Gregory III.
741 .
. Zacharias.
752 .
. Stephen II.
752 .
Stephen III.
757 .
. Paul I.
767 .
Constantine II.
768 .
Stephen IV.
772 .
Adrian I.
795 .
Leo III.
814 .
816 .
Stephen V.
817 .
. Paschal I.
824 .
Eugenius II.
827 .
. Valentinus.
827 .
Gregory IV.
840 .
844 .
Sergius II.
847 .
LeoIV.
855 .
. Benedict III.
Emperors.
Leontius. Tiberius HI.
Justinian H. (restored).
Philippicus Bardanes.
Anastasius II.
Theodosius III.
Leo III. (the Isaurian).
Constantine V. (Copro-
nymus).
Germanic Rulers.
Charlemagne.
Charlemagne (crowned
by Pope).
Louis the Pious.
Lothaire I.
Louis II.
APPENDIX.

551

Date of
Accession. 858867 872 875881
882 8S4S85
887 891S96 S96
897 897898899900
903 903
904 911913
914919928 929
931936 939
942946956963964965972

n.

Popes.
. Nicolas I.
. Adrian II.
. JohnVIH.

•
. Marinus I.
. Adrian HI.
. Stephen VI.
•
. Formosus.
. Boniface VI.
. Stephen VH.
. Romanus.
. Theodoras H.
. John IX.
•
. . Benedict IV.
. LeoV.
. . Christophorus.
. Sergius HI.
. Anastasius HI.
. Lando.
. John X.
•
. Leo VI.
. Stephen VHI.
. John XI.
. Leo VII.
. Stephen IX.
. Marinus IL
. . Agapetus H.
. John XH.
. Leo VHI.
. Benedict V.
. JohnXIH.
. Benedict VI.
Emperors.
Charles the Bald.
Charles the Fat.
Arnulf.
Louis (the Child).
Conrad L
Henry I. (the Fowler).
Otto I. (or Otho I.).
552

APPENDIX.

Date of
Accession. 973974974983 984
985

10021003
10031009 1012
10241033103910451046104810491055
1056 1057
1058105810611073108610881099
1106 11181119
1124112511301138 1143

Popes.

Emperors.

•

. . Boniface VII.
. Benedict VH.
. . John XIV.
. Boniface VH. (again).
. John XV.
. Gregory V.
. Sylvester II.

•

. John XVII.
. John XVIIL
. Sergius IV.
. Benedict VIII.
. John XIX.
. Benedict IX.

•

. Gregory VI.
. Clement II.
. Damasus II.
. Leo IX.
. Victor II.

•

. Stephen X.
. Benedict X.
. Nicolas II.
. Alexander II.
. Gregory VII.
. Victor III.
. Urban II.
. Paschal II.
#
. Gelasius II.
. Calixtus II.
. Honorius II.
¦
. Innocent II.
. . Celestine H.
Otto II.
Otto III.
Henry II.
Conrad II.
Henry IH.
Henry IV.
Henry V.
Lothaire II.
Conrad IH.
MH"MMI-'H»M>--'H^MMMMMI--'l-Jh-»l-'l-Jl--'l-JMH'h-'MMh-'l--'l-JMMI--'MMMMMM ?..
oo©ooeSa»^Ms^-5-5oiofflo\**>ioi-'POtDcoaiij)ij)()ioiae«t«i^*85§M»SS»aSH-10aSSHO\H^OMHSOOllJll»HO<I<IO\H!Ofrt«IOOlf5S

S p

.^x

w o
O CD
p 5"
P ET.
8 P
to CO
3^

gKg^^

o o ci t»
HI "T-* >-( 1 — •

S 2
eg 3
2 <o

Q

5- S ^ 5
* » H s
a ^ R i-i

O 0
CD O
P

t> i> t>
P P ft-
¦ p -

5-<<l HhP.h

R3f R

H 3

p ^
2 2

M o

6:

COCOp

ap
p.o K

i-l 8=
CO Q.

l-H

^
O i-ri
r-t-
r^
O
&•
l-H
?fs
<J
o
Hb
no
SI
p
o-
R
<<i
H
B
©7Or CO
554

APPENDIX.

Date of
Accession. 1308 .

Popes.

1314131613341342134713521362
1370 1378
1378 1389
1394 14001404 1406141014101417 1431
143814401447145514581464 1471
148414921493150315031513

•

. . John XXIL
. Benedict XII.
. Clement VI.
. Innocent VI.
. Urban V.
. Gregory XI.
. Urban VI.
. Clement VII. (anti-
Pope).
. Boniface IX.
. Benedict XHI. (anti-
Pope).

*

. Innocent Vn.
. Gregory XH.
. Alexander V.
. John XXIIL
. Martin V.
. Eugenius IV.

.
. Nicolas V.
. Calixtus IIL
. Pius II.
. Paul 11.
. Sixtus IV.
. Innocent VIII.
. Alexander VI.
•
. Pius III.
. Julius II.
. Leo X.
Emperors.
Henry VII. (of Luxem
burg).
Louis IV. of Bavaria.
Charles IV.
Wenzel (of Luxemburg)
Rupert (of the Pala
tinate).
Sigismund.
Albert II.
Frederic HI.
Maximilian I.
INDEX.

Abelakd, 282 ff.
Absolution, development of the extreme
sacerdotal view of, 254 f.
Adam of St. Victor, 501 ff.
Adamnan, 24 ff .
Adoptionism, 92.
Adrian I., 110,122; IV., 192 ff., 544 f.
Aegidius of Rome, 380 f .
Aelfric, 106.
jEneas Syvias (Pius IL), 437, 454.
Agobard of Lyons, 90, 137, 144.
Aidan, 32 f .
Alaric, 17.
Alani, the, 17.
Albertus Magnus, 299, 304, 315.
Albigenses, 95, 231 ff., 240.
Alcuin, 34, 43, 67, 87 f., 126.
Alemanni, the, 13 f .
Alexander II., 124, 144, 169; III., 136,
144, 195 ft., 205, 397; V., 358 f.; VI.
373 ff., 477 ff.
Alfonso, King of Naple3 and Sicily,
324.
Alfred the Great, 63 ff.
All Saints, festival of, 136 f.
Alzog, 103, 113, 134, 169, 172 f ., 211,
247, 362.
Amalrich of Bena, 306 f.
Amort, 126.
Anacletus IL, anti-Pope, 191, 278.
Andrew of Crete, 490.
Angelico, Fra Giovanni, 525.
Anglo-Saxons, 15 f., 27 ff.
Annates, 352.
Anselm 'of Canterbury, 163, 191, 304.
Appeals, as promoting papal assump
tions, 121.
Aquinas, Thomas, 299, 304, 314, 503.
Architecture, 513 ff.
Arianism, 18, 20.
Aristotelianism, 302.
Arnold of Brescia, 192 f,
Arnulf, Bishop of Orleans, 111 f.

Attila, 19.
Augustine and Augustinianism, 92 f.
Augustine, missionary, 28 ff.
Aug us tines, the, 287.
Avignon, the line of Popes at, 345 ff.
Baptism, 132 f .
Barbarian tribes, premonitions of their
destructive invasion, 7 ; their charac
teristics and beliefs, 8 ff. ; chief con
federacies in the third and fourth
centuries, 13; successive inroads, 13
ff. ; fall of the Western empire, 19 f . ;
the prospect for Christianity, 20 ff.
Badby, John, 425.
Bardanes, 71.
Bartholomew of Pisa, 291.
Basilius I., Eastern emperor, 481.
Basle, Council of, 365 ff., 378.
Bajazet, Sultan, 373.
Becket, Thomas, 196 ff.
Beda, 27 f ., 32, 34, 66, 67, 109, 140 ff.
Beghards, 301.
Beguines, 301.
Belisarius, 18.
Benedict IX., 113; XI., 344; XHI.
(anti-Pope), 356, 361.
Benedict of Aniane, 140.
Berengar, 93.
Bernard of Clairvaux, 191, 272 ff., 309
ff., 498 f.
Bernard of Cluny, 500.
Bertha, 29.
Berthold of Calabria, 287.
Bishops, connected with civil affairs,
99 f . ; under authority of the State as
to appointment, 103 f. ; objection to
bishops at large, 108; country
bishops, 108 ; peculiarity of the epis
copate in Ireland and Scotland, 25,
108 ff. ; right of confirming assumed
by the Pope, 124; bishops largely
subjects of papal patronage, 249 f.
Boethius, 65.

556

INDEX.

Bogomilies, 94, 233.
Bohemia, planting of Christianity in,
47 ; reform movement in, 427 ff .
Bohemian Brethren, 399, 457.
Bohemond of Tarentum, 264 f .
Bonaventura, 299, 304, 314 f., 504, 510.
Boniface III., 117; IV., 136 f.; VIII.,
149, 257, 332 ff., 345 1, 380; IX.,
356 f.
Boniface, missionary, 38 ff.
Borgia, Caesar, 374 ff.
Brethren of the Common Life, 468 ff.
Bruno, 271.
Bulgaria,1 Christianity in, 47 f.
Burgundians, 17 f .
CjBSArins, 300.
Calixtines, 458.
Calixtus IIL, 368.
Canonizing, regular mode of, provided,
136.
Canons, institution of houses of, 105 f.
Canterbury, 30.
Canute, 65.
Capetian line, 157 f.
Capuchins, 301.
Carmelites, 287.
Carthusians, 271.
Cathari, 95, 233 ff.
Catharine of Siena, 379.
Celestines, 300.
Celibacy of the clergy, 106 f., 177 f.,
252 f., 377 f., 416.
Charles of Anjou, 154 f., 247, 484.
Charles the Bald, 63, 100.
Charles the Fat, 66.
Charles VII. of France, 329; VIII.,
475 f.
Charles IV., of Germanv, 156.
Charles II., King of Naples, 323, 334.
Charlemagne, 42 f., 60 ff., 87, 92, 103,
111, 122, 143.
Charles Martel, 38 f., 58 f.
Chivalry, as related to the Crusades,
261.
Chrodegang of Metz, 105 f., 125.
Church, in relation to the State, 96 ff.
Church constitution, peculiarity of the
Scottish or Celtic, 25, 108 ff.; growth
and culmination of the papal theoc
racy, 114 ff., 165 ff. ; various features
that appeared between Gregory VIII.
and Boniface VIII., 248 ff.
Church discipline, 125 ff., 254 ff., 320 f.
Cimabue, 522.
Cistercians, 271 ff.
Cities, as factors of the Empire, 156.

Clarendon, Constitutions of, 202 ff.
Claudius of Turin, 90, 137, 395.
Clement V., 257 f., 344 ff., 350; VI.
351, 353 f.; VII. (anti-Pope), 356.
Clementines, 258.
Clermont, Council of, 263.
Clotilda, 15.
Clovis, 14 f.
Cluny, Order of, 140; Church of, 515 f.
Cobham, Lord, 425 ff.
Celestine V., 332 f.
Cologne, cathedral of, 520.
Colonna, house of, 334 f., 338, 343, 345,
361.
Columba, 24 ff.
Columbanus, 34 ff.
Comnenus, house of, 482.
Conall, 25.
Confession, 125 f., 254.
Conrad IL, 66; IIL, 265,285.
Conrad of Waldhausen, 429.
Consolamentum, Catharist rite, 237.
Constance, Council of, 301, 321,359 ff.,
378, 423.
Constantine XL, 483.
Constantine Copronymus, 84 f.
Controversies, 76 ff., 90 ff.
Conventuals, 301.
Corman, 31 f.
Correggio, 529.
Cosmas of Jerusalem, 490 f.
Councils: Aachen (836), 139; Amalfi
(1089), 252; Aries (813), 131, (1234),
257; Basle (1431—), 365 ff.; Bourges
(1031), 98; Calcuith (816), 109; Cha
lons on the Saone (813), 109; Cler
mont (1095), 263; Cloveshoe (747),
127 ; Constance (1414), 359 ff. ; Con
stantinople (sixth ecumenical in 680),
71 ff. ; Constantinople (iconoclastic in
754), 84 f.; Florence (1438), 367, 484
f.; Frankfort (794), 87; Friaul (796),
107; Lateran, the Second (1139),
192; Lateran, the Fourth (1215),
238 ; Lyons (1274), 484; Mentz (813),
134, (847), 127, (888), 107; Metz (813,
847), 97 f., (888), 107, 129; Nantes
(658), 107; Nicaea, the Second (787),
85 f., 88; Norbonne (1243), 257;
Paris (614), 98, (825),87 f., (829), 131,
(1209), 306 f. ; Pavia (876, 1018), 107;
Pisa (1409), 358 f.; Placentia (1095),
263 ; Rathbreasail (1110), 109 : Bies-
bach (799), 107; Rheims (624), 98
(813), 131 ; Rome (743), 107, (1080),
173 ; Rouen (1072), 98 ; Soissons
(744), 107, (813), 138 ; Toledo (589),

INDEX.

557

90, (633), 107, (655), 107 ; Toulouse
(1229), 240 f.; Tribur (895), 133 f.;
Valence (855), 143 ; Vatican (1869),
74, 363 f.; Whitby (664), 33 f.;
Worms (1076), 181.
Courtenay, 403, 409.
Criticism"of the Church, representatives
of, 380 ff.
Crusades for the recovery of the Holy
Land, 175, 226 ff., 259 ff., 368 f.
Crusades against heretics, 230 ff., 321.
399.
Culdees, 26 f .
Cunibert of Turin, 106 f.
Cuthbert, 32 f.
Damiani, 139, 497.
Danes in England, 65.
Dante, 326 f.
David of Dinanto, 307 f .
D'Ailly, Peter, 333, 365, 389, 455.
Decretals, 122 f ., 257.
Defensor Pacis, book of Marsilius of
Padua, 382 f .
De Haeretico comburendo, the statute,
425.
De Molar, Jacques, 348 f .
De Montfort, Simon, 231 f., 240.
Denmark, Christianity preached in, 38,
44.
Dionysius, the pseudo Areopagite, 541.
Dollinger, 73 f.
Dominicans, 287, 292 ff .
Dominion, Wycliffe's theory of, 407 ff.
Donation of Constantine, the fable criti
cised, 390.
Duccio, 522.
Duel, as ordeal, 143.
Diirer, Albert, 528.
Duns Scotus, 299, 304.
Dunstan, 140.
Durandus, 304, 404.
Easter, conflict between British and
Roman custom on the time of cele
brating, 33 f.
Ebbo, archbishop of Rheims, 44 f.
Eckhart, 461 ff.
Education of clergy, 105 f.
Edward I. of England, 332, 336 f; III.,
329 f., 406 f.
Edwin, King of Northumberland, 30 f.
Elfleda, abbess, 141.
Elipandus of Toledo, 92.
Empire, the Holv Roman, 155 ff., 326 ff.
Empire, the Eastern or Greek, 20, 153,
227 f., 481 ff.

Episcopacy, 25, 103 f., 107 ff., 124.
Erigena, John Scotus, 67, 303 ff.
Ethelberga, 30,
Ethelbert, 29.
Eucharist, 93, 133 f .
Euchites, 94.
Eugenius III., 192, 280; IV., 364 ff.
Euthymius Zigabenus, 485.
Excommunication, 128 ff., 253.
Extravagantes, 258.
Felix V., anti-Pope, 367.
Felix of Urgelis, 92.
Feudalism, 63, 161, 175, 203, 269, 329.
Flagellations, custom of, 138 f .
Florence, council of, 367, 484 f .
Francis of Assisi, 288 ff.
Francis I. of France, 326.
Franciscans, 287 ff.
Franks, 14 f .
Fraticelli, 300.
Fredegonda, 15.
Frederic I. (Barbarossa), emperor,
193 ff., 266; II. 209, 217, 242 ff.,
267; IIL, 328.
Frederic, Spanish King of Sicily, 323 f.,
334.
Freeman, E. A., 83, 159.
Free Spirit, Sect of the, 307.
Friedrich, missionary to Iceland, 46.
Frisians, missionary labors among,
37 ff.
Fulbert of Chartres, 497.
Gallus, 36.
Gerbert, 112.
Germanus, Patriarch of Constantino
ple, 84.
Gerson, John, 358, 365, 387 ff., 455.
Ghibellines, 152, 326 f.
Ghiberti, 523.
Gibbon, 19.
Giotto, 523 f.
Godfrey of Bouillon, 264 f.
Gothic style, 516 ff.
Goths, 16 f.
Gottschalk, crusader, 264.
Gottschalk, predestinarian, 92 f.
Gratian, compiler of canon law, 257.
Green, J. R. 16, 64, 403, 418.
Gregory (I.) the Great, 23 f., 27 f., 65,
77, 98, 114 ff., 132, 492 ; IL, 39, 73;
IV., Ill, 137; VI. 113; VII., see be
low; IX; 243 f., 247, 250, 257; XL,
350, 355 ; XII., 356, 360.
Gregory VII. (Hildebrand), his prepa
ration for the papal office, 165 f.;

558

INDEX.

character, 166 ff.; election, 168 f.;
conception of papal prerogatives,
171 ff. ; proposed reforms, 175 f. ;
edict against priestly marriage and
concubinage, 177 f . ; decree against
simony and lay investiture, 179 ; con
flict with Henry IV., 180 ff.; exile
and death, 185 f.; referred to, 93,
104, 162.
Gregory of Tours, 15, 102.
Greek Church, 90 f., 228, 367, 481 ff.
Groot, Gerhard, 468 f.
Guelfs, 152.
Guibert, anti-Pope, 185.
Guizot, 100, 158.
Hacon, King of Norwav, 46.
Hagenbacb, K. R., 294."
Hales, Alexander, 299, 304, 314.
Hallam, 62, 102, 124, 151, 161, 330.
Harald, King of Denmark, 44.
Hefele, 73, 75 f., 84.
Henricians, 234.
Henry (I.) the Fowler, 48, 66.
Henry II., emperor, 66; IIL, 66, 104,
114; IV., 66, 180 ff.; V., 66, 187 ff.;
VI., 209; VII., 326, 328.
Henry I. of England, 191; II., 196 ff.;
IV., 424.
Henrv of Lausanne, 234.
Heraclius, 68 ff., 96.
Hereford, Nicholas, 421, 423.
Heresies, 94 f., 232 ff., 306 f.
Hilda, abbess, 141 f.
Hildebert, 497 f.
Hildegard, 298.
Hincmar of Rheims, 92, 119 f.
Hohenstaufen line, 154, 156, 193, 209,
242.
Holbein, 528.
Honorius I., 69 ff.; IIL, 250.
Hospitallers, or Knights of St. John,
268.
Hugh Capet, 157.
Hugh of Lusignan, 266.
Hugh, count of Vermandois, 264.
Hugo of St. Victor, 311 f.
Humanism, 319 f.
Hungarians, Christianizing of the, 48.
Huns, 16 ff., 60.
Huss, John, and the Hussites, causes
tending to a reform movement in
Bohemia, 427 ff . ; forerunners of Huss
in Bohemia, 429 ff. ; his indebtedness
to Wycliffe, 433 f . ; his education and
early engagements, 434 f. ; events
leading to his excommunication,

435 ff.; his De Ecclesia, 442 f.; the
safe-conduct of the Emperor under
which he came to the council of Con
stance, 443 ff. ; his trial and martyr
dom, 447 ff . ; refusal of his followers
to submit to the mandates of the
Church, and their singular success
in withstanding attempted subjuga
tion, 456 ff. ; other references, 321,
357, 364 f., 366, 423 f.
Hymns, 490 ff.
Iceland, receives Christianity, 46.
Iconoclastic controversy, 76 ff.
Iconoclasts, 79 f., 83 ff.
Ignatius, Patriarch of Constantinople,
118.
Image-worship, 77 f., 80 ff., 85 ff.
Immunities, clerical, 96, 98 f., 199 ff.,
250 f., 320.
Indulgences, 127, 226 f., 231, 255 f.,
320 f., 338, 413, 439 ff.
Index, Congregation of the, 479 f.
Infallibility of the Pope, contradicted
by facts, 71 ff., 361 ff.
Innocent n., 191 f., 278, 280; HI., see
below; IV, 244 f., 250; VII., 356;
VIII., 321, 372 f.
Innocent IIL, advantageous circum
stances under which he came to the
papal throne, 209 f. ; his place in the
line of Popes, 210 f . ; his conception
of the papal office, 211 f . ; his relations
with Italy, 213 f . ; with Germanv,
214 ff.; with France, 217 ff.; with
England, 220 ff.; with the Spanish
States, 225 f. ; his attempt to manage
the fourth crusade, 227 f. ; his sever
ity against heretics and part in in
augurating a thorough scheme of
repression, 228 ff.; referred to, 257,
290, 306.
Inquisition, steps toward its organiza
tion, 238 ff., 240 f. ; connection of
Dominicans with, 294. (For a sketch
of the work and methods of the In
quisition see Modern Church, vol. i.)
Interdict*, 128 ff., 218, 222, 225.
Inna, 25.
Ireland, 23 f ., 109 f., 193 f.
Irene, patroness of image worship, 85 f.
Irnerius, 257.
Jacobus of Misa, 456.
James de Benedictis, 505.
Jerome of Prague, 451 ff.
Joachim of Floris, 301, 303 f .

INDEX.

559

Joan of Arc, 329.
John XII., 113; XV., 136; XXIL, 320,
350 f., 352 f.; XXIIL, 321, 359 f.;
439 f.
John VII., Eastern emperor, 484.
John, King of England, 220 ff.
John of Damascus, 67, 81 f., 490.
John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster, 409.
John of Janduno, 382.
John of Paris, 381 f.
John of Salisbury, 198.
Joseph Hymnographus, 492.
Julius n., 376.
Jus exuviarum, 248 f.
Jus primarum precum, 248.
Jus regalue, 248 f .
Kempis, Thomas a, 469 f .
Killian, 37.
Knighton, 422, 424.
Koran, 52 ff.
Kugler, Franz, 530, 533.
Lacordaire, 295.
Ladislaus, King of Naples, 439.
Lanfranc, 160, 304.
Langton, Stephen, 22i f., 224.
Lateran Council, the Fourth, 238.
Lav investiture, 175 f ., 179, 189 ff.
Lechler, 406, 419.
Leif, son of Eric the Red, 46 f.
Leo IL, 72 f. ; IX., 154 ; X., 376.
Leo IV., emperor, 85.
Leo the Armenian, 86.
Leo the Isaurian, 83 f .
Leonardo da Vinci, 529 ff .
Libri Carolini, 87 ff.
Lingard, 99, 127 f., 134, 136, 138.
Liudger, 43.
Lives of the Saints, 135 f.
Lollards, 424 ff.
Lombards, 20, 60.
Lombard, Peter, 254 f., 304.
Lothaire I., 100; IL, 119.
Louis of Bavaria, emperor, 320, 351 f.
Louis the Pious, 44, 137.
Louis, son of Louis the Pious, 100.
Louis VI. of France, 157 ; VII., 157,
265, 278; IX. (Saint), 157 ff., 245 ff.,
267; XI., 329.
Lucius II., 192.
Liibke, 525.
Luidhard, 29.
Lyons, Council of, 484.
Machiavelli, 475.
Magna Charta, 162, 224.

Malcolm Canmore, 26.
Manichaean beliefs among mediaeval
sects, 233.
Margaret, Queen of Scotland, 26.
Maronites, 71.
Martin I., 70, 111 ; V., 321, 361, 363,
365.
Martin, Henri, 61, 162, 220, 346.
Marriage, regulations respecting, 97 f ¦
Marsilius of Padua, 382 ff.
Mass, the ; see Eucharist.
Mary, the Virgin, honors to, 84 f., 86,
322, 510 ff.
Matilda, Countess, 170, 183.
Matthew Paris, 246, 298 ff.
Matthias of Janow, 430 ff.
Maximus, monk, 70.
Medici family, 325, 372, 474.
Memling, 527.
Mendicant orders, 287 ff., 416 f.
Merovingian line, 15, 58, 60, 102.
Methodius, missionary, 47.
Metropolitans, 110.
Michael Angelo, 531 f.
Michael Cerularius, 91.
Milan, political fortunes of, 325 f.
Milicz of Kremsier, 429 f.
Milman, H. H., 42, 80, 118, 232, 349,
353 f., 514.
Milton, John, 410.
Missionaries, co-operation of the Ro
man bishop and the monks in foster
ing their work, 23; their labors in
Scotland, 24 ff.; in England, 27 ff.;
in Austrasia and Burgund)', 34 ff.;
in Germany, 38 ff . ; in the Scandina
vian countries, 43 ff. ; among the
Slavonian races, 47 ff.
Mohammed and Mohammedanism,
50 ff.
Monasticism, 139 ff., 271 ff.
Mone, F. J., 510.
Monophysites, 68 f.
Monothelite controversy, 67 ff.
Montalembert, 141 f.
Moravia, planting of Christianity in
47.
Moravian Brethren, 457.
Miiller, Wilhehn, 21.
Muir, Sir William, 54 f.
Mysticism, 305 ff., 460 ff.
Mythology, the Germanic and Scandi
navian, 10 ff.
Naples, kingdom of, 323 f .
Neander, 78, 286.
Nepotism, 248, 370 ff.

560

INDEX.

Nicetas Choniates, 485.
Nicolas I., 47 f., 117 ff., 123, 144; IIL,
248 ; V, 368, 390.
Nicolas de Clemangis, 378, 386 f .
Nicolas of Strasburg, 463.
Nicolaus of Methone, 485.
Nilus, 142.
Ninian, 24.
Nominalism, 404, 437, 455.
Norman Conquest, its effect on the
ecclesiastical relations of England,
162 f.
Normans in southern Italy, 153 ff.
Norman style of architecture, 515.
Norway, evangelization of, 45 f.
Notker, 497.
Observants, 301, 382.
Occam, William, 304, 385 f ., 404.
Odoacer, 19 f .
01nf Haroldson, 46.
Olaf Tryggvason, 46.
Oldcastle, Sir John, 425 f.
Olga, 48.
Omar, 56.
Orcagna, 524 f.
Ordeals, 142 ff.
Orosius, 65.
Oswald, 31.
Otho (or Otto) the Great, 48, 66, 103,
113; IL, 66; III., 66, 104; IV. 214 ff.
Painting, 522 ff .
Palaeologus, Michael, 482 f.
Palecz, Stephen, 440.
Pantheism, as characteristic of hetero
dox mysticism, 305 ff .
Papacy, obstacle to its later claims
in the heresy of Honorius I., 71
ff. ; its position in the iconoclastic
controversy, 78 ; hindrances to su
premacy, 111 ff. ; helps to suprem
acy, 114 ff. ; acquisition of tem
poral power, 121 f. ; provision for a
definite mode of election, 124 ; asser
tion of the right to confirm all
bishops, 124; management of the
process of canonizing assumed, 136;
difficulty of maintaining temporal
sovereignty, 153, 213 f. 324 f.; theo
cratic rule as represented by Gregory
VII., Innocent IIL, and others, 165
ff. ; causes initiating decline of au
thority, 245 ff. ; patronage over the
episcopal office, 249 f . ; effect of the
crusades to render the people less
passive subjects, 269 ; stages of papal

history in the fourteenth and fifteenth
centuries, 331 ; height of pretension
in the bull Unam Sanctam, 339 ff.;
transference of the papal throne to
Avignon for seventy years, 345 ff. ;
the great schism, 355 ff.; papal au
thority declared subordinate to that
of a general council, 361 ff., 366;
era of moral disgrace at the end of
the fifteenth century, 370 ff.; sharp
criticisms of the papal theory, 380 ff .,
415, 442 f.
Paschal IL, 187 ff.
Paterines, 230.
Paulicians, 94, 233.
Paulinus, 30 f .
Pazzi, conspiracv of the, 372.
Penance, 125, 127 f .
Pepin, 41, 59, 121 f.
Persecution of heretics, 95, 228 ff ., 240 f .
257, 321, 399, 425.
Peter of Aragon, 155.
Peter the Hermit, 263 f.
Petrarch, 324, 353.
Petrobruscians, 234.
Philip, emperor, 214 ff .
Philip Augustus, 157 f., 217 ff., 266.
Philip the Fair, 157 f., 268, 332, 336 ff.
Phocas, 116.
Photius, 48, 67, 118 f.
Picts, conversion of, 25.
Pierre de Bruys, 234.
Pilgrimages, 137 f., 261 f .
Pilichdorf, Petrus de, 393 f.
Pisa,' Council of, 358 f .
Pius II., 368 f.
Poggio, 454.
Poland, planting of Christianity in, 47.
Poor men of Lyons, 230, 392.
Popes ; see Papacy.
Praemunire, statute of, 352 f .
Pragmatic Sanction, 247 f., 367, 369.
Preaching, 132, 287 f., 297, 419.
Predestination, controversy over in the
ninth centurv, 92 f .
Preger, Wilheim, 315.
Priscillianists, 233.
Procession of the Spirit, dispute over,
90.
Provisors, statute of, 352 f .
Pseudo-Isidore decretals, 122 f.
Pullus, Robert, 254 f.
Purgatorv, 398.
Purvey, John, 421.
Rabanus Maurus, 67, 92, 495.
Radbertus, Paschasius, 93, 543.

INDEX.

561

Rambaud, Alfred, 487 f.
Raphael Sanzio, 532 ff .
Ratramnus, 93.
Raymond of Pennaforte, 257.
Raymond (VI.) of Toulouse, 231, 240;
VII., 240.
Realism, 404 f., 433.
Reccared, 99.
Reformation, preparation for the, 319.
Reinerus, 235, 391 ff.
Relic-worship 134 f.
Renaissance style of architecture, 521.
Republican development in Northern
Italy, 151 f.
Richard (I.) Cceur de Lion, 266 ; IL,
424.
Richard of St. Victor, 312 ff.
Rienza, Cola di, 324 f.
Robert, King of France, 496.
Robert of Molesme, 271.
Robertson, J. C, 199 f.
Roger IL, King of Sicily, 154.
Romanesque style of Architecture,
513 ff.
Romnald, 142.
Rudolf of Hapsburg, 156.
Rudolph, rival of Henry IV., 174,
184 f .
Ruskin, John, 535.
Russia, planting of Christianity in, 48 ;
sketch of the mediaeval Russian
Church, 486 ff.
Ruysbroek, 468.
Sacraments, the seven, 541 ff.
Saint Clara, Order of, 290.
St. Ouen, church of, 519 f.
St. Peter's, 521.
Saint-warship, 134 f., 414.
Saladin, 266.
Sawtre, William, 425.
Savonarola, 473 ff.
Saxons, 15 f., 42 f.
Schism, the great papal, 355 ff.
Scholarios, George, 486.
Scholasticism, 302 ff.
Scriptures, reading of, interdicted to
the laity, 241 f . ; placed above church
authority by Wvcliffe, 410 ff. ; trans
lated by Wycliffe and his associates,
419 ff.
Serenus of Marseilles, 77.
Sergius, Patriarch of Constantinople,
69, 72 f.
Servites, the, 287.
Sforza, Francesco, 325.
Sicilian Vespers, 155, 323.

Sigismund, emperor, 359, 443 ff.
Simeon, Patriarch of Jerusalem, 263.
Simone di Martino, 525.
Simony, 104, 179, 374.
Sixtus IV., 370 ff.
Sorcery, 546 ff .
Spain, Mohammedan conquest of, 56;
Arabic learning in, 57; reconquest
by Christians, 163 ; claimed as papal
fief, 174.
State, its jurisdiction over ecclesiastical
affairs, 101 ff., 248 f.
Stephanus de Borbone, 392.
Stephen VI., Pope, 144.
Stephen, King of Hungary, 48.
Stitny, Thomas, 428.
Suevi, the, 17.
Sunday, laws on the observance of, 131.
Supererogatory merits, 255, 414.
Suso, Henry, 467.
Sweden, evangelization of, 44 f.
Sylvester IIL, 113.
Synods ; see Councils.
Taborites, 457.
Tacitus, 8 ff.
Tancred, 265.
Tartars, 488.
Tauler, John, 463 ff.
Templars, 268, 346 ff.
Temporal power of the Popes, 121 f.
152 f., 191 f., 213 f. 324 f ., 370 f.,
375 f:
Tertiaries, 296 f ., 301.
Testament, matters of, regulated bv the
Church, 98.
Teutonic Knights, 268.
Theobald, Archbishop of Canterbury,
197.
Theodora, patroness of image-wor
ship, 87.
Theodore, Archbishop of Canterbury,
34.
Theodore of the Studium, 490 f .
Theodoric a Niem, 378.
Theodoric, the Ostrogoth, 20.
Theodosius, 17.
Theodulphus, Bishop of Orleans, 125.
Theophilus, emperor, 86.
Theophylact, 485.
Thomas Aquinas; see Aquinas.
Thomas of Celano, 290, 505 ff.
Thorwald, 46.
Tithes, 98.
Tiziano, 529.
Transubstantiation, controversy over,
93 ; denied by Wycliffe, 416.

36

562

INDEX.

Trench, R. C, 501, 506.
Truce of God, 144 f.
Turks, 260 f., 483, 486.
Tyndale, William, 421 f .
Ullmann, 470.
Ulric of Augsburg, canonized, 136.
Unam Sanctam, the famous bull of
Boniface VIII., 339 ff.
Union projected between the Latin and
the Greek Church, 367, 483 ff.
Universities, date of their rise, 304,
426, 437.
Urban IL, 187, 252, 263 f.; VI., 320,
355.
Utraquists, 458.
Valens, 17.
Valla, Laurentius, 390.
Vandals, 17 f.
Van Eyck, Hubert and John, 526 f.
Vaudois, the, 394.
Venantius Fortunatus, 492.
Victor IV., anti-Pope, 195.
Villemain, 169.
Visconti family, 325 f.
Visigothic code, 100.
Vladimir, 48.
Waldenses, 237 f., 321, 391 ff.
Waldo, Peter, 391 ff.
Walter the Penniless, 264.
Wenzel, King of Bohemia, 434, 437 f .
Wessel, John, 471 f .

Wilfrid, 33 f ., 37.
Willehad, 43.
William the Conqueror, 159 ff ., 174,
199 f .
William, Bishop of Paris, 255.
William of Nogaret, 343 f.
William Rufus, 249.
William of St. Amour, 299.
Willibrord, 37, 39.
Winfrid; see Boniface, missionary.
Witchcraft, popular delusion respecting
encouraged by Innocent VIII., 373,
547 f .
Wratislaw, 444.
Wycliffe, scantiness of his personal
history compared with the greatness
of his work, 400 f . ; long period of
preparation for his reformatory task,
401; his connection with Oxford
University, 401 f. ; his standing as
scholastic doctor, 402 ff. ; his prin
ciples and activity as an ecclesiastico-
political reformer, 406 ff. ; his work
as a reformer of theological teaching,
410 ff . ; his expedients for bringing
religious knowledge to the masses,
418 ff. ; his influence upon the reform
movement in Bohemia, 423 f., 433 f .
York, episcopal see of, 29 f.
Zbynek, Archbishop of Prague, 438 f .
Ziska, 459.