The power of the first Otto was so overwhelming that the papacy could not
escape the temporary subjection which its vile state deserved. And the
Empire was its honest patron, for the good of both. So on through the
reigns of Otto II., who died in 983, aged twenty-eight, and his son Otto
III., who died in 1002, at the age of twenty-two, a dreamer and would-be
universal potentate. Then came the practical-minded rule of the second
Henry (1002-1024), who still aided and humbly ruled the Church. Conrad
II., of Franconia, followed, faithful to the imperial tradition.[289] He
was succeeded in 1039 by his son Henry III., beneficent and prosperous, if
not far-seeing, who again cared for both Church and State, and imperially
constrained the papacy, itself impotent in the grip of the Roman barons
and the Counts of Tusculum. Henry did not hesitate to clear away at once
three rival popes (1046) and name a German, Clement II. It was this worthy
man, but still more another German, his successor, Leo IX. (1049-1054),
who lifted the papacy from its Italian mire, and launched it full on its
course toward an absolute spiritual supremacy that was to carry the
temporal control of kings and princes. But the man already at the helm was
a certain deacon Hildebrand, who was destined to guide the papal policy
through the reigns of successive popes until he himself was hailed as
Gregory VII. (1073-1085).[290]
With Hildebrand’s pontificate, which in truth began before he sat in
Peter’s chair, the reforming spirits among the clergy, aroused to his keen
policy, set themselves to the uplifting of their order. In all countries
the Church, heavy with its possessions, seemed about to become feudal and
secular. Bishops and abbots were appointed by kings and the great
feudatories, and were by them _invested_ with their lands as fiefs, for
which the clerical appointee did homage, and undertook to perform feudal
duties. Church fiefs failed to become hereditary only because bishops and
abbots could not marry; yet in fact great numbers of the lower clergy
lived in a state of marriage or “concubinage.” Evidently the celibacy of
the clergy was a vital issue in Church reform; and so were investitures
and the matter of simony. Under mediaeval conditions, the most open form
of this “heresy” called after Simon Magus, was the large gift from the new
incumbent to his feudal lord who had invested him with abbey or bishopric.
Such simony was not wrong from the feudal point of view, and might
properly represent the duty of bishop or abbot to his lord.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account