INNOCENT III. in one and the same year, bestowed in the plenitude of his
power three royal crowns; to Ioanice, that of Walachia²¹⁷ ; to
Premislaus, that of Bohemia²¹⁸ ; to Peter II., that of Arragon. Peter
received his at Rome, and did the pope homage for his states, which
became tributary to the Holy See.²¹⁹ But Innocent, the dispenser of
kingdoms, and who even gave away that of Armenia, distinguished himself
still more frequently by his anathemas. Venice, France, England, the
emperor, all the great potentates of Europe, have experienced the force
of his spiritual arms.
²¹⁷ Fleury’s Eccles. Hist. 1. 76, n. 14,1. 76, n. 6.
²¹⁸ Ibid. 1. 76, n 9.
²¹⁹ Ibid. 1. 76, n, 10.
The Venetians, already powerful by their commerce, had assumed the cross
but for the purpose of extending it; they gained lands and riches in
meriting indulgences. Alone capable of equipping great fleets, they
exacted eighty-five thousand crowns of gold for transporting the
Christian army into Palestine; and, with the assistance of the legions
they conveyed, conquered important places in Dalmatia. Innocent, in
order to put a stop to their progress, thought of excluding them from
the bosom of the Church. But one of the effects of commercial prosperity
is, to weaken in people’s minds the dread of ecclesiastical censures:
the Venetians made themselves masters of the city and territory of Zara:
they continued to fortify and aggrandize themselves; the anathema
launched against their republic, had no important effect: the pontiff
abstained from renewing it.
He treated Philip Augustus more rigorously. This monarch of France
received from Innocent an express order to take back the divorced
Ingelburg, and send away Agnes or Maria de Meronie, whom he had married
after this divorce. The king at first assumed an attitude sufficiently
bold; but the kingdom was under interdict; the divine offices, the
sacraments, marriages, had ceased; the permitting the beard to grow
enjoined; the use of flesh forbidden; mutual salutation prohibited. It
was in vain that Philip humbled himself, he was obliged to ask of the
pope a new enquiry into the affair; it even became necessary to prevent
the result of this examination, by declaring that he was about to recall
Ingelburg. She was indeed allowed the titles of wife and queen, but it
was in the confinement of a castle. Emboldened by this success, Innocent
did not hesitate to erect himself into a supreme arbiter between the
kings of France and England, then armed one against the other. He
commanded them to assemble their bishops, abbots, and nobles of their
states, to deliberate on a peace, and to think on the best means of
restoring the churches and abbeys which had suffered during the war.
Philip replied that it did not belong to the pope to interfere in the
disputes of kings, nor especially to convey to them such ordinances.
Some French lords added, that the order to make peace was but another
reason for continuing the war.²²⁰ But Innocent replied, that an unjust
war being a crime, and all crimes having for their judge the Holy
Church, he fulfilled a pontifical office in disarming them both. On this
principle says Fleury²²¹ the pope is judge of all the wars between
Sovereigns: that is, to speak in plain terms, he is the sole Sovereign
in the world. However it may be, Philip, after having renewed his course
of conquest, thought proper to consent to a truce, and not irritate too
far a pontiff determined on the boldest undertakings. He thus deferred,
but by no means avoided, the excommunication. An anathema against Philip
was one of the last acts of Innocent III., and one of the results of a
new war kindled by this pontiff himself, between the king of England and
France, whom he had affected to reconcile.
²²⁰ Ego... nottim facio universil ad quos litteræ présentes
pervenerint, quod ego domino meo Ph. illustri regi Franco rum
consului, ut neque pacem neque treugam faciat regi Anglis, per
violentiam y el per coactionem domini papæ aut alicujus paps. Quod
si dominus papa eidam domino regi super hoc aliquam faceret
violentiam aut coactionem, concessi domino regi tanquam domino meo
ligio et creantavi super omnia qus ab eo teneo, quod ego super hoc
ei essem in auxilium de toto posse meo. Acts drawn up in this form
in the names of Renaud count of Boulogne, Raoul count of Soissons,
and of Odo duke of Burgundy, are to be found in the Chamber of
Charters, all under the date of 1202.
²²¹ Eccles. Hist 76 m. 60; 1. 79, no. 8.
In fact, this very king of Great Britain whom Innocent had appeared, in
1204, to support against the French, became, a few years after, one of
the victims of pontifical despotism. The pope having been desirous, in
contempt of the canons and the laws, to dispose of the see of Canterbury
in favour of cardinal Langton, John opposed himself to it only by fits
of rage which exposed his weakness. Innocent, who knew how to use his
power with more prudence, employed by degrees, three modes of repressing
this intractableness: first, an interdict upon the kingdom; next, the
personal excommunication of the monarch; finally, the deposition of a
king who had been so fully convicted of obstinacy in his disobedience to
the Holy See.²²²
²²² Bofisuet, Defens. eler. Gallie. 1. 3. c..21.
The English, already dissatisfied with their sovereign, were loosed from
the oaths which they had taken to him, and the crown of England was
decreed to Philip Augustus, who, imprudent enough to accept it, evinced
his gratitude, by releasing Ingelburg from the castle of Etampes, and
re-calling her to the throne. But while Philip prepared to reap, with
arms in his hands, the fruits of the pontiff’s liberality, a legate
named Pandolph, took advantage in England of the fright of the deposed
king, and presented him the means of recovering his sceptre, by
accepting it as a pure gift from the hands of the Church. On his knees
before Pandolph, John placed his hands between those of this priest, and
pronounced in the presence of the bishops and lords of Ireland, the
following words,²²³
“I, John, by the Grace of God, king of
“England, and lord of Ireland, for the expiation
“of my sins, of my perfect accord, and by the
“advice of barons, give to the Roman Church, to
“Pope Innocent and his successors, the kingdom of
“England and the kingdom of Ireland, with all the
“rights attached to the one and the other: I hence−
“forward hold them of the Holy See of which I shall
“be the faithful vassal, faithful to God, to the Church
“of Rome, to the sovereign pontiff, my lord, and to
“his successors lawfully elected. I pledge myself
“to pay every year, a tax of one thousand marks of
“silver; to wit, seven hundred for England, and
“three hundred for Ireland.”
²²³ Innoc. 3. Epist. 1. 15. ep. 77.—Rymer Act. pub. vol. 1, p. 67.
This discourse is scarcely ended, when the legate is presented with a
part of the tribute promised to St. Peter: Pandolph casts the money on
the ground, tramples it under his feet, nevertheless collects it again,
satisfied with thus expressing the subjection of temporal treasures as
well as temporal powers.²²⁴ The sceptre and the crown remain in his
hands: he keeps them five days; and when, after he has obtained some
additional securities, he finally restores them, he pretends forsooth,
that they are received as a perfectly gratuitous favour. He now passes
immediately into France to announce what he has performed in England.—
Philip learns from Pandolph, that John, the vassal of the pope,
occupies, under the protection of the Holy See, the throne of Great
Britain, and that henceforth every enterprise against this kingdom will
be punished by excommunication. Philip replied, that he took up arms at
the solicitation of the pope alone, that the preparations for it had
cost two millions, that a fleet, recently equipped, is in the road at
Boulogne, that it waits the troops destined to land at Dover, and that
the time for receding is departed. In the mean time, the rebellion of a
vassal compels the French monarch to carry the war into Flanders: to
this vassal the king of England, the emperor Otho IV. and almost all the
princes of Europe join themselves. But the victory which the French
obtain at Bouvines, dissipates the hopes of their enemies: Otho is no
longer emperor, save in name; and John would have been already
dethroned, if Rome had not obtained for him a truce of five years.
²²⁴ Velly’s Hist, of France, vol. 3. pa. 472.
It was the English themselves who at this interval pronounced,
regardless of the menaces of Rome, the dethronement of their monarch;
they offered his crown to Louis, son to Philip Augustus. New decrees of
Innocent’s prohibit both father and son from invading the State of a
prince, a feudatory of the Holy See. The father affects to disapprove a
conquest which Rome deems sacrilege, but furnishes, nevertheless, all
the means for its execution: the son, in fine, embarks; and the
sovereign pontiff, who clearly sees that the father and son understand
each other, excommunicates them both. Louis was almost in possession of
Great Britain, when the death of John gave a different direction to
men’s thoughts and their affairs.²²⁵
²²⁵ Velly’s Hist, of France, vol. 3. pm 468, 475.
As sovereign of Rome, and as possessing in Italy a very galling
preponderance, the Western Emperor was the most exposed to the attempts
of Innocent III. To depress the empire, it behoved above all things to
re-establish at Rome and in the ecclesiastical domains, the pontifical
authority; the pope commenced, therefore, by turning to account the
ascendancy which his birth, reputation, and talents, gave him over the
Romans; he abolished the consulate, and arrogated to himself the
imperial rights, invested a prefect, installed the public officers, and
received the oaths of the senators. It was at this moment, says
Muratori,²²⁶ that the imperial authority at Rome breathed its last
sigh.
²²⁶ “Spiro qua l’ultimo fiato l’autorita degli Augusti in Roms.”
Muratori, Annals of Italy, win. 1198.
Out of Rome, Orbitello, Viterbo, Ombria, Romagna, and the March of
Ancona, acknowledged Innocent III. for their sovereign. Reigning thus
from one sea to the other, he conceived the hope of conquering Ravenna,
which was still wanting to him, of possessing himself of the complete
heritage of Matilda, of subjecting still further the two Sicilies, and,
especially, prevent-ing their having for master the head of the empire;
this last point was always a principle in the policy of the Holy See.
Once should it govern in a direct manner the most part of the Italian
provinces, it would be content to exercise elsewhere, a spiritual
supremacy: the States which it could not possess, it would be satisfied
to bestow, to resume, or to confer on such princes as should render
themselves worthy by their docility. The conjunctures of the time
altogether, as we have said, favoured this plan, at the accession of
Innocent III. Frederick the II. was a child whom his father had caused
to be elected King of the Romans, and his mother Constance, had placed
him under the protection and even tutelage of the pope. One of this
guardian’s first acts was, to deprive his pupil of the title of King of
the Romans, as well as of the prerogatives attached to the crown of
Sicily. Between Philip of Swabia, and Otho of Saxony, simultaneously
nominated emperors, the first of whom represented the house of
Ghibeline, the second that of Guelph, Innocent determined in favour of
Otho, even in prejudice of Frederick, whom he considered as a third
competitor. It was, he said, to the Holy See belonged the privilege of
judging sovereignly the claims of these competitors of the empire. The
fortune of war favoured Philip of Swabia, with whom the prudent court of
Rome already treated, when he was assassinated.—His daughter became the
wife of Otho the IV. who thus having United all rights and suffrages,
considered himself sufficiently powerful to refuse the pope the heritage
of Matilda. Innocent now took the part of fulfilling his obligations as
a guardian; he opposed his ward, Frederick, to the ungrateful Otho,
excommunicated this prince, whom he had himself crowned, and raised
Upper Italy against him. In this conjuncture the Ghibelines were seen
armed by the pope against an emperor, whom the Guelphs sustained in his
resistance to the pontiff: an historical phenomenon, which ought not to
astonish us, as we have already observed, that these two parties were
attached rather to particular families than to opinions. We may add,
that it is the fate of permanent factions to experience many unlooked
for changes, to modify according to circumstances their original
designs, to retain their names, and their insignia, much longer than
their thoughts or their sentiments, to preserve, in fine, no other
invariable interest than that of remaining rivals, and falling foul of
each other; it suffices then to be, and to be at war, it matters not to
what end. It was especially the battle of Bouviines, which determined,
as we have remarked, the fall of Otho IV. and the preponderance of the
party of Frederick II. Innocent thus reaped in part the fruits of the
triumph of Philip Augustus.
These disputes were connected with the crusade of 1202, which like that
of 1095, and those of 1147 and 1189, placed in the hands of the pope the
clue of all the movements of Europe. Each of these expeditions
occasioned quarrels between the crusaders and the Greeks, and this
misunderstanding appeared to Innocent an open for re-conquering the
Eastern Church, escaped now two centuries from the domination of the
court of Rome. The Greek empire, worn out by war and by faction, became
the prey of the crusaders, who, being unable to retain Jerusalem, made
themselves masters of Constantinople. Baldwin, Count of Flanders, was
nominated Emperor of the East; after him four other Frenchmen filled
successively the same throne, while, having taken refuge in Nice, the
Greek emperors reigned only over some provinces. The palaces and temples
of Byzantium were plundered, and the booty, collected by the French
lords was estimated at a quantity of silver of two hundred thousand
pounds weight. They found it convenient to indemnify themselves in
Greece for the losses sustained in Palestine; the vow which they had
made, to combat only infidels, no longer repressed their covetousness;
the re-establishment of holy places was but a pretext for pillaging the
rich ones; and already the affectation of sentiments of religion was
relinquished.:
“They
“cast, says Fleury, the relics into unclean places,
“they scattered on the ground the body and blood
“of our Lord; they employed the sacred vases
“for profane uses, and an insolent woman danced in
“the sanctuary and seated herself in the chair of the
“priest.”
Innocent, who was not ignorant of these profanations and complained of
them, did not approve the less of the conquest:²²⁷
“God, said he, willing to
“console the church by the re−union of the schisma−
“tics, has caused the empire of the haughty, supersti−
“tious and disobedient Greeks to pass over to the
“humble, catholic, and submissive Latins.”
²²⁷ Hist, eccles. 1. 76. n. 2.; Innoc. III, Epist 1. 8. ep. 69.
Another benefit derived from the crusades was, the application of their
names to many other leagues formed or fomented by the Roman Church.
Innocent III. is the inventor of this artifice, which evinces an
abundant acquaintance with the means of leading minds astray by the
illusion of words: he applied to the service of his serious political
designs, the enormous power of a word which, for the period of one
hundred and ten years, had the effect of exciting through Europe the
most blind and restless enthusiasm. He preached therefore a crusade
against England when he had determined on dethroning John; a crusade
against the Hungarians when he affected to become the arbiter of their
intestine dissentions; a crusade against a king of Norway, whom also he
wished to depose; but above all, a crusade against the Albigenses, a
sect extended through the entire south of France. Raymond VI. Count of
Tholouse, because he protected the Albigenses his subjects, was
excommunicated as the abettor of heresy; and, one of the legates, who
excited these troubles, having received a mortal wound, the states of
the count, accused without any proof of the assassination, were declared
vacant, and the prize of the first crusader who possessed himself of
them. In vain Raymond humbled himself to degradation: in vain he had-the
more culpable weakness to take up the cross himself against his own
subjects; Simon de Montford obtained these wretched provinces, purchased
by torrents of blood, with which he had inundated them. Raymond took
refuge with his brother-in-law, Peter II. king of Arragon, who, after
useless intercession with Innocent, took arms against Simon de Montford,
and perished at the battle of Muret, in 1213. Two years afterwards the
pope in the midst of a Lateran Council, definitely deposed Raymond,
granting him a moderate pension, and bestowed his states on Simon, whom
they dared to name Maccabeus, and who died in 1218 at the siege of
Thou-louse. We do not mean to exculpate the Albigenses altogether,
sometimes also denominated Vaudois, because there are numbers residing
in the valleys of Piedmont, and often Good-men, from the regularity of
their manners; but, to exterminate thousands of worthy men, because they
were deceived, and to dethrone him who ruled them, because he did not
persecute them speedily enough, such excessive severity unveils the
character and displays the power of Innocent III.²²⁸
²²⁸ Velly’s Hist, of France, vol. 3, p. 430, 468.
It is not Without an object that this pope is applauded for the
establishment of the inquisition. In fact, Lucius III. from the year
1184, had ordered the bishops to seek ont heretics, to subject them to
Spiritual, and deliver them over to secular punishments; but this first
germ of so formidable an institution was developed before the time, when
Innocent III. thought of sending into Languedoc two Oistertian monks,
charged to pursue the Albigenses, to excommunicate them, and denounce
them to the civil authority, which was to confiscate their wealth, or
proscribe them, under pain of incurring itself ecclesiastical censures.
Friar Raynier, friar Guy, and the archdeacon Peter of Castelnau, are the
first inquisitors named and known in history. Innocent enjoined the
people and their rulers, to obey them; the sovereigns, to proceed
against the heretics denounced by these missionaries; the people, to
take up arms against disobedient princes, or those who evinced too
little zeal. Those first ministers of pontifical vengeance had soon
fellow helpers, among whom St. Dominick is distinguished; and from the
year 1215, their functions had acquired sufficient consistence and
splendour to be solemnly approved in the Lateran council.²²⁹ Without
doubt, the inquisition, a kind of permanent crusade, had not been
perfected or consolidated, save under the successors of Innocent: but,
without the memorable experiment he had the honour of making, it is
doubtful if it had so tremendously flourished or brought forth its
fruits.
²²⁹ Concilior, vol. 11, p. 142,—Director. Inquis. part 1,c. 2.
Among three hundred popes, or anti-popes, of which history presents us
with the names, we know none of them more imposing than Innocent III;
his pontificate is most worthy the attention and study of European
monarchs: there they may learn to what extent temporal power, united
with ecclesiastical functions, amplifies and perverts them; to what
universal supremacy was the papacy destined; in fine, what tyranny did
it not exercise over princes, and over people, whenever political
circumstances, even in a small degree, favoured sacerdotal ambition. A
pope, said Innocent, the vicar of Christ, is superior to man, if he be
inferior to God—_minor Deo, major homine_; he is the light of day; the
civil authority is but the pale planet of the night. It was Innocent
III. who discovered in the chapter of Genesis this celestial theory of
the two powers, and it was by similar allegories, proofs of the
ignorance of the age and of his own, that he subjugated the West,
troubled the East, and governed, and deluged the world with blood.:
“Sword, sword,” cried he, on learning the descent of the French on England;
“sword, sword
“spring from the scabbard and sharpen thyself to
“exterminate.”
Such were the words of his last address.²³⁰ In the midst of the
anathemas which he pronounced against Louis and Philip Augustus, he was
seized with a fever, which, in a very few days brought on a paralysis, a
lethargy, and finally the death of the most haughty of pontiffs, of the
most skilful enemy of kings. He had governed the Church, or rather
Europe, for eighteen years ten months and nine days; it is the most
brilliant period of the papal power. England, Poland, Portugal, and we
know not how many other States besides, became his tributaries. All
historians of this era²³¹ relate, that in a mysterious vision, St.
Latgarde saw Innocent III. in the midst of flames, and that this pious
maid having asked him, wherefore he was thus tormented, he answered,
that he should continue so to be till the day of judgment, for three
crimes which would have plunged him into the depths of the eternal fire
of hell, if the holy virgin to which he had dedicated a monastery had
not averted the divine wrath. We may be allowed to doubt respecting the
vision: but, says Fleury²³² this relation proves persons of the
greatest virtue were convinced that this pope had committed enormous
crimes. What were the three to which St. Lutgarde alluded? It would be
extremely difficult to select them in the life of Innocent.
²³⁰ Ionoc. III. Serm. de consec. pontif. op. yoI. i. p. 180.
²³¹ Fleury’s eccles. Hist 1. 77, n. 62.
²³² Thom. Cantiprat. in vita St. Lutg. virg. apud Surium 16
Jan.—Raynald. ad. ann. 1216.
²³³ Hist, eccles. 1. 77, n. 62.
After having had too weak a successor in Honorius III. his place was
more worthily supplied by Gregory IX. This pope announced his
pretensions by the extraordinary pomp of his coronation.— Historians²³³
describe this gorgeous ceremony, in which nothing was omitted which
could threaten Europe with a universal monarchy. Frederick II. who in
receiving the imperial crown from the hands of Honorius, had ceded the
heritage of Matilda, and placed his own son on the throne of the two
Sicilies, in order that this kingdom should not remain united to the
domains of the empire; notwithstanding so many compliances, and though
he was the foster child as it were of the court of Rome, Frederick II.
became the principal victim of the enterprises of Gregory IX.
²³⁴ Fleury’s eccles. Hist. 1. 79, n. 21.
Not content with creating against this prince a new Lombard league,
Gregory, impatient to remove him from the midst of European affairs,
summoned him to perform the vow which he had taken to go and combat the
infidels in Palestine. Frederick embarked, but called back to Brundosium
by illness, was excommunicated as a perjurer: he resumed his route, and
for proceeding without absolution he was excommunicated anew. He
arrives, he compels the sultan of Egypt to abandon Jerusalem, Bethlehem,
Nazareth, and Sidon to him, yet, because he treats with an infidel and
signs a truce, he is a third time excommunicated. On returning to
Europe, he found La Fouille invaded, Italy armed against the empire, and
his own son drawn by the pontiff into rebellion and almost into
parricide. He triumphed, nevertheless, over so many enemies, arrested
and imprisoned his unnatural son, and above all took advantage of a
sedition of the Romans against the pope. The Romans who had resumed
under Honorius the love of independence, banished Gregory IX. who,
compelled to negotiate with the emperor, consented to absolve him for a
large sum of money. But Gregory, among other pretensions, claimed
Sardinia as a domain of the Holy See. Frederick claimed it as a fief of
the empire. Now follows a fourth excommunication, in which Gregory, by
the authority of ‘Father, Son and Holy Ghost,’ the authority of the
apostles and his own, anathematizes ‘Frederick, late emperor,’ looses
from their oaths those who had sworn fidelity to him, and forbids them
to recognize him as sovereign. This bull, sent to all monarchs, lords,
and prelates of Christendom, was accompanied by a circular letter, which
commands the publication of the anathema, to the sound of bells,
throughout all the churches. Various writings of the Holy Father²³⁴
represent Frederick as one of the monarchs described in the Apocalypse;
political and religious crimes of every species are imputed to this
prince by him, even that of having termed Moses, Jesus, and Mahomet,
three impostors. Frederick stooped to reply to this torrent of
accusation and insult; and that the apology should correspond with the
accusation, he treated Gregory as Balaam, as Antichrist, the great
dragon, the prince of darkness. By a special epistle²³⁵ to the king of
France, Louis IX. or St. Louis the pope offered the empire to the
brother of this monarch, Robert count of Artois, on condition that the
French should make a crusade against Frederick. St. Louis replied, that
he saw with astonishment a pope attempt to depose an emperor; that such
a power belonged to a general council alone, and only on the plea of the
acknowledged unworthiness of the sovereign; that Frederick on the
contrary appeared irreproachable; that he had exposed himself to the
dangers of war and of the sea, for the service of Jesus Christ, while
Gregory, his implacable enemy, took advantage of his absence to plunder
him of his States; that the pope, counting for nothing the rivers of
blood which had flowed to satisfy his ambition or his vengeance, wished
to subject the emperor, for the sole purpose of afterwards subjugating
all the other sovereigns; that his offers proceeded less from a
predilection for the French, than from inveterate hatred for Frederick;
that he would, however, make inquiry as to the orthodoxy of this prince,
and if he proved a heretic, would make the most implacable war against
him, as in such case he would not fear doing with the pope himself. This
epistle, without doubt, mingled errors of the grossest kind with the
expression of the most generous resolutions. What! an assembly of
priests possess the right of dethroning a sovereign! What! the religious
opinions of a prince be a sufficient motive, with those who did not
possess the same, to declare war against him! Yes, such were the
indisputable results of those decretals from which the popes had
compiled the public law of Christendom.
²³⁵ Concilior. vol. 11, p. 340, 346, 357.
²³⁶ Matt Paris, ann. 1239, p. 444.—Daniels, Hist, of France, vol. 3.
p. 210.—Bossuet Def. Cler. Gall. 1. 4. c. 6.
But the more deplorable this madness, the greater is the homage due to
the prince, who, fettered by the bands of so many prejudices, could find
in his own excellent heart a disinterestedness, a loyalty, and a
courage, worthy of the happiest periods of history.
All the reputation of his exemplary piety was needed by Louis IX. to
escape the anathemas of Gregory IX. and even the enterprises of the
French bishops; for he repressed the bishops with firmness, whenever his
understanding allowed him to perceive the abuses of their spiritual
functions which they practised. They were seen, for the most trifling
temporal interest, shut the churches, and suspend the administration of
the sacraments. Experience had taught them the efficacy of these
measures; they obtained by this species of pettishness the various
objects of their desires. But a bishop of Beauvais, and an archbishop of
Rouen, having employed this system with too little caution, and thinking
proper to excommunicate some royal officers, St. Louis had their
temporalities seized, and obtained from the pope a bull which forbade
the interdiction of the royal chapels.:
“He had
“for a maxim, never to yield a blind respect to the
“orders of the ministers of the church, whom he
“knew to be subject to the intemperancies of passion
“as well as other men.”
Thus does Daniel the historian express himself, the least suspected
assuredly that we can instance here. Joinville relates how the clergy
complained bitterly of the little concern of civil officers for
sentences of excommunication, and how Louis IX. expressed himself so
decisively, on the necessity of ascertaining the justice of these
sentences, that they abstained from urging the matter on him. This pious
monarch one day caused the money levied for the Holy See to be seized,
being unwilling it should be applied to the accomplishment of the
ambitious projects of Gregory IX. The pontiff, to be revenged, annulled
the election of Peter Chariot to the bishoprick of Noyou; this person
was a natural and a legitimated son of Philip Augustus. Louis IX. was
not to be shaken; he declared that no other person should possess this
bishoprick. Gregory, though he exaggerated his pontifical power, though
he protested, that God had confided to the pope the privileges of empire
on earth as well as in heaven, confined himself to simple menaces; and
France was indebted to her pious sovereign for a firmness, which he had
still further occasion to manifest under the succeeding pontificates.
That of Gregory IX. more particularly memorable for the disputes with
the emperor Frederick II., is so, likewise, for the publication of an
ecclesiastical code compiled by Raymond de Pennafort the third general
of the Dominicans. Since the decree of Gratian, decretals, and
collections of decretals, had multiplied to that degree that one could
scarcely see his way among them. Gregory had, to his own decisions,
caused those of his predecessors from Eugenius III. to be added. There
resulted from it a collection, of which the subjects are distributed
into six books. A sorry verse²³⁶ which announces this distribution,
maybe too faithfully translated and appreciated in the following:
Judges, judgments, the clergy, marriages, and crimes.
²³⁷ Judex, judicium, clerus, sponsalia, crimen.
The canonists cite this code under the name of ‘The Decretals of Gregory
IX.’ or simply ‘The Decretals,’ and sometimes by the word ‘extra,’ that
is, without the decree of Grattan; which decree had been for two
centuries the sole source of ecclesiastical jurisprudence. As fruits of
the vast correspondence of Alexander III., of Innocent III. and of
Gregory IX., these five books are in every respect worthy to serve as a
sequel to the decree: they have with it contributed to the propagation
of maxims subversive of all government.
The election of Sinibald of Fiesque to the papacy, seemed to promise
some years of peace between the priesthood and the empire: Sinibald had
for a long time been connected by friendship with Frederick; but the
cardinal friend became a pontiff enemy, even as the emperor had
foretold. Innocent IV. the name of this pope, having placed on the
absolution of Frederick, conditions which he would not accept, war was
rekindled, and the pope, compelled to fly from Genoa, his country, came
thence to solicit an asylum in France. Louis IX. consulted his barons,
who maintained, that the court of Rome was always expensive to its
guests, that a pope would obscure the royal dignity, and would form in
the state another independent one.²³⁷ Rejected by the King of France,
refused also by the King of Arragon, Innocent addressed himself to the
English, whose reply was not more favourable. What! they say, have we
not already simony and usury, wherefore then need a pope, who would come
in person to devour the kingdom and our churches. Very well! cried the
pontiff incensed at this triple affront; we must finish with Frederick;
when we have crushed or tamed this great dragon, these petty serpents
will not dare to raise their heads, and we shall crush them under our
feet.²³⁸ To attain this object, he holds a general council at Lyons, a
city which at that time belonged neither to France nor the emperor: the
archbishops usurped to themselves the sovereignty in it, and maintained
that it had ceased to be a fief of the empire.²³⁹ There Frederick II.
was deposed:
“In virtue, says the pope, of the power to
“bind and to loose, which Jesus Christ has given
“us in the person of St Peter, we deprive the late
“emperor, Frederick, of all honor and dignity; we
“prohibit obedience to him, to consider him as em−
“peror or king, or to give aid or counsel to him,
“under the penalty of excommunication by the act
“alone.”
²³⁸ Velly, vol. iv. p. 306, 307.
²³⁹ Matt. Paris, p. 600.
²⁴⁰ While Innocent was at Lyons, some prebends of the church of this
city became vacant, and he attempted to bestow them, in the
plenitude of his authority, on foreigners, his relatives; but the
people, and even the clergy of Lyons, resisted him to his face,
and compelled him to relinquish this undertaking.
To annihilate the house of Swabia had been for a long time the most
ardent wish of the popes, especially of Innocent IV.; but he proclaimed
almost fruitlessly, a crusade against Frederick: real crusades occupied
them at the time, that is, expeditions into the East, and the fugitive
Innocent IV. did not inherit the omnipotence of Innocent III.. The low
clergy itself no longer adored the pontifical decrees: a curate of
Paris, announcing to his parishioners that which deposed Frederick,
addressed them in these remarkable words;:
“I am igno−
“rant my very dear brethren, of the motives of this
“anathema, I only know, that there exists between
“the pope and the emperor great differences, and an
“implacable hatred; which of them is right I can−
“not inform you: but I excommunicate as far as
“in me lies, him who is wrong, and I absolve him
“who is aggrieved in his privileges.”
This is the most sensible sermon which, to our knowledge, has been
preached in the 17th century. St. Louis, who censured more loudly than
the curate the deposition of Frederick, went to Cluni, and drew the pope
there also, whom he would not suffer to enter farther into the kingdom.
Their first conferences remain secret; and all that can be said of them
is, that the obstinate pontiff was deaf to the pacific counsel of the
sainted king. But history²⁴⁰ has handed down to us a little more of the
details of a second interview, which took place the following year, at
Cluni also, between Innocent and Louis.:
“The Holy−
“land is in danger, said the king; and no hope ex−
“ists of delivering it without the help of the emperor
“who holds so many ports, isles, and coasts under
“his authority. Most Holy Father, accept his
“promises, I beseech you in my own name, and
“in the name of the thousands of faithful pil−
“grims, in the name of the universal church:
“open the arms to him who seeks for mercy:
“it is the gospel which commands you to do
“so; imitate the goodness of him whose vicar you
“are.”
The pope ‘bridling up,’ says Fleury,²⁴¹ persisted in his refusal. Thus
these two personages, we may say, exchanged their provinces; it was the
monarch who assumed the charitable language of the gospel, it was the
priest who preserved the inflexible attitude of presumptuous power. At
the same period, we behold a sultan of Egypt, Melie-Saleh, giving
lessons of probity to the successor of St. Peter. Pressed by Innocent
IV. to abandon, contrary to the faith of treaties, the interests of
Frederick, Melie-Saleh replied:
“Your envoy has spoken to us about Jesus
“Christ, with whom we are better acquainted than
“you are, and whom we more worthily honour.—
“You pretend that peace between all nations is the
“object of your desires; we do not desire it less
“than you. But there exists between us and the
“emperor of the West, an alliance, a reciprocal
“friendship, which commenced with the reign of the
“sultan our father, whom may God receive to glory:
“we shall therefore, conclude no treaty unknown to
“Frederick, or contrary to his interests.”
²⁴¹ Matt. Paris, p. 697. Velly’s Hist, of France, vol. iv. p. 469.—La
Chaise’s Hist, of St Louis, p. 449.
²⁴² Hist. Eccles. 1. 83. n. 40.
However, after useless attempts at reconciliation, and various
vicissitudes of success and misfortune, Frederick died in 1250, probably
strangled, as they say, by his son, Manfred. On receiving this news,
Innocent IV. invites the heavens and the earth to rejoice; these are the
very words of a letter which he wrote to the prelates, lords, and people
of the kingdom of Sicily. He terms Frederick the son of Satan.²⁴²
²⁴³ Hist. Eccles. 1. 83, n. 25—26.
Conrade IV. son of Frederick II. was called to succeed him; and, in the
absence of Conrade, Manfred his brother governed the two Sicilies.
Innocent declares, that the children of an excommunicated person can
inherit nothing from their parent; he proclaims a crusade against them,
and draws into the revolt the Neapolitan nobles. Manfred succeeded in
subduing them; he took the city of Naples by assault, and compelled the
pope to fly once more to Genoa. The crusade is again preached against
the sons of Frederick, and their kingdom is offered to an English
prince. The quarrels which soon sprang up between the two brothers,
re-animated the hopes of the Court of Rome; it received the most lively
expectations from them, when it learned the death of Conrade, when
Manfred was suspected of parricide, and nothing more was wanting, but to
destroy the last branch of the house of Swabia, Conradine, a child of
ten years of age, the son of Conrade, and as grandson, legitimate heir
of Frederick II. The pope hesitated no longer to erect himself into king
of Naples: in order to support this title, he levied an army; but this
army had only a legate for its leader; it was beaten by Manfred.
Innocent IV. died from despair in consequence, at the moment he had
entered on a negociation with Louis IX. which had for its basis, the
conferring on a brother or son of this monarch, the kingdom of the two
Sicilies. This pope had excited a civil war in Portugal, by deposing the
king Alphonso II., already interdicted by Gregory IX., and calling to
the throne a count of Boulogne, brother of Alphonso. Innocent had
disputes also with the English, who complained loudly of his extortions,
his breach of the laws, and disregard of treaties.²⁴³
“The Peter's pence tax did not satisfy him,
“they said; he exacted from all the clergy enor−
“mous contributions; he had general taxes asses−
“sed, and levied, without the king's consent: in
“contempt of the right of patrons, he conferred
“benefices on Romans, who did not understand
“the English tongue, and who exported the money
“of the kingdom.”
²⁴⁴ Fleury’s Ecclesiastical Hist. 1. 82. n. 28. He relates also, 1.
83, n. 43, the reproaches which Robert Greathead, bishop of
Lincoln, a learned and pious prelate, addressed to the Court of
Rome, and particularly to Innocent IV. “The pope has not been
ashamed to annul the constitutions of his predecessors, with a Non
obstante: in which he evinces too great a contempt for them, and
gives a precedent for disregarding his own. Although many popes
have al-ready afflicted the church, this pope has reduced it to a
greater degree of bondage, principally by the usurers he has
introduced into England, and who are worse than the Jews. Besides,
he has directed the friars preachers and the friars minors, when
administering to the dying, to persuade them to bequeath by will
their property for the succour of the Holy Land, in order to
defraud the heirs of their wealth whether they should live or die.
He sells crusaders to the laity as formerly sheep and oxen were
sold in the temple, and measures the indulgence by the money which
they bestow towards the crusade: furthermore the pope commands the
prelates by his letters, to provide such a one with a benèfice,
according as he may wish to purchase, although he be a foreigner,
illiterate, in every respect unworthy, or ignorant of the language
of the country: so that he can neither preach nor hear
confessions, neither relieve the poor nor receive the traveller,
as he is not a resident.” Fleury adds, that Robert Greathead
enlarged on the views of the court of Rome, especially its avarice
and dissoluteness. “To swallow up every thing, it drew to itself
the wealth of those who died intestate; and in order to pillage
with the less restraint, it divided the plunder with the king. The
bishop of Lincoln still more laments that the pope employed, in
the collection of his extortions, the mendicant friars, learned
and virtuous men, thus abusing their obedience by compelling them
to mix with that world they had left; he sent them into England
with great power as legates in disguise, not being allowed to send
there in form and openly unless the king requested it.” Such were,
says Fleury, the complaints of the bishop of Lincoln, too sharp
indeed, but too well founded, as appears by the writings of the
period, even by the epistles of the popes.
Let us observe further, that in publishing crusades against Frederick
II. and against his son, Innocent granted greater indulgences to them
than to the expeditions into Palestine. The pope, said the French
nobles, extends his own sovereignty by crusades against the Christians,
and leaves our sovereign the task of fighting and suffering for the
faith. St. Louis was then in the Holy Land, just released from his
captivity. His mother, Queen Blanche, caused the property of the pope’s
crusaders against Conrade to be seized: let the pope, said she, maintain
those who are in his service, and let them begone never to return.²⁴⁴
Thus did the Guelph crusade miscarry in France, in spite of the
exertions of the ‘pious preachers’ and ‘pious minors,’ the zealous
servants of the Holy See. But from the accession of Gregory IX. Italy
and Germany never ceased to be torn by the factions of Guelph, and
Ghibeline, which assumed more and more their original direction, the
latter against the pope, the former against the emperor, and especially
against the house of Swabia.
²⁴⁵ Matt. Paris, p. 713,—Velly’s History of France, vol. v. p.
102—100.
Alexander IV. who succeeded Innocent in 1254, continued to contend with
Manfred, summoned him, excommunicated him, and designed him for the
victim of a crusade, which did not, however, take place. The pope
succeeded only in extorting from the king of England, Henry III. fifty
thousand pounds sterling. Henry had made a vow to go into Palestine;
this vow was commuted into a stipulated contribution, destined to the
support of the war against Manfred. To obtain such a sum, Alexander
promised the crown of Naples to prince Edward, son of Henry; which did
not, however, prevent his continuing the negociation with Louis IX. and
his brother Charles of Anjou. But Alexander was not sufficiently
favoured by circumstances, and was too little endowed with energetic
qualifications, to obtain much success; he could scarcely keep his
ground in the midst of his own domains: a sedition of the Romans
compelled him to withdraw to Viterbo, and his seven years reign produced
no important result, unless we consider as such the establishment of the
inquisition in the bosom of France. We are concerned we cannot conceal,
that St Louis had solicited as a favour such an institution. It had
become from the time of Innocent III. much consolidated: in 1229, a
council at Thoulouse had decreed, that the bishops should depute in each
parish one clergyman, and two laymen, for the purpose of seeking out
heretics, denouncing them to the prelates appointed to try them, and
delivering them to the officers charged with their punishment. Gregory
IX. in 1233, had invested the Dominicans, or brother preachers, with
these inquisitorial functions; the church was unquestionably enriched by
this new power, and St. Louis had the misfortune of not preserving his
subjects from it. He paid two enormous tributes to the ignorance of his
age, the crusade, and the inquisition.—He was even not far from assuming
the Dominican habit, and ceasing to be a king in order to become an
inquisitor.²⁴⁵ We enter into these particulars, because they are all
effects of the ascendancy of the popes, of that unbounded extent which
their temporal royalty gave to their ecclesiastical authority.—
Alexander IV. was a zealous protector of the monks, especially the
mendicants. This predilection made him unjust to the universities; he
was the avowed enemy of that of Paris. The historian of this university,
Egasse du Boulay,²⁴⁶ tells us, that the death of this pope gave peace
to the Parisian muses.
²⁴⁶ Velly’s Hist, of France, vol. v. p. 193—197.
²⁴⁷ Hist. Univ. Paris, vol. iii. p. 365.
It was a Frenchman, born at Troyes, who become pope by the name of Urban
IV. advanced principally the negociations with the count of Anjou.
Impatient to exterminate Manfred, Urban saw too well that the
publication of crusades, indulgencies, the equipment of pontifical
troops, with all the temporal and spiritual arms of the Holy See, would
remain powerless, without the active participation of a sovereign,
interested by the allurement of a crown, to complete the ruin of the
house of Swabia. Popular commotions rendered the residence of Rome
rather uneasy to the sovereign pontiff; Urban had retired to Orvieto,
whence by some mutinous acts, he was again driven to Perugia. He was,
therefore, solicitous to conclude with Charles of Anjou; although this
prince had seemed to detach himself from the pope, in accepting the
dignity of senator of Rome, and the treaty, was about to be signed when
Urban died: his successor, Clement IV. completed his design.
The incompatibility of the crown of Sicily with the imperial crown, as
also with the sovereignty over Lombardy, or over Tuscany; the cession of
Beneventum and its territory to the Holy See: annual tributes and
subsidies to the church; recognizance of the immunities of the clergy of
the Two Sicilies; inheritance of this kingdom reserved to the
descendants of Charles alone; in default thereof, power granted to the
pope to choose the successors to them. Such were the principal
conditions of the treaty, which called Charles of Anjou to reign over
the Neapolitans. He would have subscribed to still more humiliating
ones. He promised to abdicate before the expiration of three years the
title of senator of Rome; even to renounce it sooner, if he completed
before this period the conquest of the kingdom which had been bestowed
him, and, to neglect nothing to dispose the Romans to concede the
disposal of this dignity to the sovereign pontiff: he subjected himself
to interdiction, excommunication, deposition, if he should ever break
his engagements: he finally pronounced an oath, framed in these
terms:²⁴⁷
“I, per−
“forming full allegiance and vassalage to the church,
“for the kingdom of Sicily, and for all the territory
“on this side the Pharos of Messina, to the fron−
“tiers of the ecclesiastical state, now and hence−
“forward promise to be faithful and obedient to St.
“Peter, to the pope my supreme liege, and to his
“successors canonically elected; I shall form no
“alliance contrary to their interests; and, if from
“ignorance I shall be unfortunate enough to form
“such, I shall renounce it on the first order which
“they may be disposed to signify to me.
²⁴⁸ Velly’s Hist, of France, vol. v. p. 326—345.
It was in order to obtain so precarious a crown, to usurp a throne so
degraded, that Charles of Anjou entered Sicily, animated by his presence
the Guelphic faction, and set it at variance, from the Alps to Mount
Etna, with that of the Ghibelines. The latter attached itself more than
ever to Manfred, who, after some success, fell and perished at the
battle of Beneventum. The young Conradine, until now eclipsed by
Manfred, and detained by his mother in Germany, at length appeared:
everywhere the Ghibelines received him, and strenuously supported him
against the arms of Charles, and the anathemas of Clement; but, defeated
at the plain of Tagliaoozzo, he fell into the hands of his rival.
Charles was ungenerous enough to deliver his disarmed enemy into the
hands of corrupt judges: distrust and revenge borrowed juridical forms;
Conradine, at the age of eighteen, was decapitated at Naples, the 26th
October, 1258; and the most faithful defenders of his indisputable
rights shared his fate. The Ghibelines were proscribed through all
Italy; rivers of blood bathed the steps of the subaltern throne, in
which Charles went to seat himself at a pontiff’s feet. Some writers
assert that Clement disapproved of the murder of the young prince;
others accuse him of having advised it, and of having said, that the
saving of Conradine, would be the ruin of Charles; that the safety of
Charles exacted the death of Conradine²⁴⁸ However it was, the Holy See
triumphed by the extinction of the house of Swabia.
²⁴⁹ Vita Corradini, mors Caroli; mors Corradini, vita Caroli.
Giannone, Istoria di Napoli. 19, c. 4.
Full of the idea of his power²⁴⁹ Clement decided, that all
ecclesiastical benefices were at the disposal of the pope; that he could
confer them whether vacant or not vacant, giving them in the latter case
in reversion, or as they term it in expectancy. Such audacity astonished
Louis, and the indignation he conceived at it dictated an ordinance,
known by the name of ‘the pragmatic sanction’ of which the following is
a summary:
“The prelates, patrons, and collators to benefices,
“shall fully enjoy their privileges.
“The cathedral and other churches of the king−
“dom shall make their elections freely.
“The crime of simony shall be banished the
“kingdom.
“Promotions and collations to benefices shall be
“made according to common right and the decrees
“of councils.
“The intolerable exactions, by which the court of
“Rome has impoverished to such a wretched de−
“gree the kingdom, shall cease, save in cases of
“urgent necessity, and by consent of the king, and
“of the Gallican church.
“The liberties, franchises, immunities, rights and
“privileges, granted by the sovereigns to churches
“and monasteries are confirmed.”
²⁵⁰ “Nothing proves better,” says a modern author, “the influence of
superstition......than the number of crusades preached by order of
Clement IV. A crusade into Spain against the Moors, whom they
wished to exterminate; a crusade into Hungary, Bohemia and
elsewhere, against the Tartars, whose incursions they dreaded; a
crusade in favor of the Teutonic knights, against the Pagans of
Livonia, of Prussia and of Courland, over whom they Wished to
reign; a crusade into England against the barons, whom Henry III.
could not subject; a crusade into France and into Italy, to
deprive the house of Swabia of the kingdom of Naples and Sicily; a
general crusade for the conquest of the Holy Land. The crusaders
were often opposed; they were loosed from the obligation to the
one, when pressed to the execution of another; indulgences were
distributed at the will of the pope; the expenses of the war
exhausted kingdoms, and the pope’s bulls kindled flames throughout
Europe.” — Millot’s Elements of General History.—Mod. Hist. vol.
ii. p. 184, 186.
This act is so important, and does so much honour to Louis IX. that the
Jesuit Griffet²⁵⁰ disputes its authenticity. We may oppose to Griffet,
the authority of his brethren Labbe and Cossart;²⁵¹ of Bouchel, of
Tillet, Fontanon, Pinson, Girard, Lauriere, Egasse du Boulay, in fine,
that of all the jurisconsults, historians, and even theologians, who
have had occasion to speak of the pragmatic sanction of St. Louis. But
further, we see it cited in 1491, by the University of Paris; in 1483,
in the states held at Tours; in 1461 by the parliament Charles VII. on
the occasion of the pragmatic published by this king, expresses himself
in these words: in 1440, by John Juvenal des Ursins,:
“You are not the first who has done
“such things; thus did St. Louis, who is sainted and
“canonized, and we must acknowledge he did well,
“your father and others have approved it.”
²⁵¹ Note upon P. Daniel’s History of France, vol. iv. p. 563
²⁵² Concilior. vol. ii. Proofs of the liberties of the Gall. Church,
vol. i. pt. 2. p. 28, 60, 66, 76,—pt. 3, p. 41, and, Real’s
Science of Government, vol. vii. p. 72.
There is, then, no room to doubt, that the most pious of the French
kings was the most zealous defender of the liberties of the Gallican
church; and this glorious resistance, which he made in 1268 to Clement
IV. expiates the unfortunate consent that he gave to the treaty
concluded between this pope and Charles of Anjou.
Thirty months elapsed from the death of Clement, to the election of his
successor, Gregory X. Charles of Anjou profited of this interregnum to
acquire a great authority in Italy; he aspired even to govern it
altogether. Gregory X. who, perceived this, endeavoured to oppose four
obstacles to it: a new crusade; the reconciliation of the Eastern
church; the restoration of the Western empire, and the extinction of the
factions of Guelph and Ghibeline. Since the death of Conradine, the
discord of these factions was almost without object: it survived from
habit and personal animosities, rather than from opposition of political
interests. The Guelphs more powerful from day to day, were about
re-establishing the independence of the Italian cities, and perhaps
reuniting under a head who was not to be a pope.—To provide against this
danger, and to keep in check Charles of Anjou, Gregory X. confirmed the
election of a new German emperor: this was Rodolph of Hapsburg, head of
the house of Austria. This Rodolph renounced, in favour of the Roman
church, the heritage of Matilda, and was nevertheless excommunicated,
for having supported his sovereign rights over the Italian cities, and
for having neglected to assume the cross. They at length became tired of
these expeditions into Palestine, where the Christians, driven from the
pettiest hamlets, scarcely preserved a single asylum. The Greek church,
apparently reconciled to the second general council of Lyons, was not
actually so for a long period. The most complete result of the
pontificate of Gregory X. was the acquisition of the Comtat Venaissin,
in which, however, the king of France, Philip the Hardy, reserved to
himself the city of Avignon.
Nicholas III. annulled the oath taken to the emperor by the cities of
Romagna; he obliged Charles of Anjou to renounce the vicarship of the
empire, and the dignity of senator of Rome; he even incited Peter of
Arragon to recover the kingdom of Sicily, which belonged by right of
inheritance to his wife Constance. On which we must observe, that
Charles had refused to marry one of his granddaughters to a nephew of
Nicholas, and that this pontiff sprung from the house of the Ursini, had
conceived the idea of dividing among his nephews the crowns of Sicily,
of Tuscany, and of Lombardy, These projects did not succeed.
Martin IV. elected by the influence of Charles of Anjou, laid an
interdict on the city of Viterbo, excommunicated the Forlivians,
confiscated whatever they possessed in Rome, excommunicated Peter III.
king of Arragon, and excommunicated Michael Paleologus, emperor of
Constantinople. A league of the Venetians, of Charles of Anjou, and the
pope, had little success. Another crusade was undertaken against Peter
of Arragon, who beat the crusaders: the Sicilian vespers, not without
some appearance of justice, were attributed to this prince; a horrible
massacre, in which the French were the victims, in the year 1282, and
which Martin IV. and Charles of Anjou might have prevented by a more
prudent conduct.
When Celestine V. yielding to the advice of the cardinal Benedict
Cajetan, had abdicated the papacy, this cardinal succeeded him,
imprisoned him, and under the name of Boniface VIII., disgraced the
chair of St. Peter, from the year 1294 to 1303. He excommunicated the
family of the Colonnas, confiscated their estates, and preached a
crusade against them. They were Ghibelines; Boniface, who had belonged
to this faction, detested them for it the more. The pope answered in
plain terms, that the Roman pontiff, established by providence, over
kings and kingdoms, held the first rank on earth, dissipated every evil
by his sublime regards, and from the height of his throne, tranquilly
judged the affairs of men. You know, he writes, to Edward I. that
Scotland belongs to the Holy See of full right. He treated Albert of
Austria, elected emperor in 1298, as a usurper, summoned him to appear
at Rome, and dispensed his subjects from their allegiance; but he
menaced especially Philip the Fair, king of France.²⁵²
²⁵³ Bossuet Def. Cler. Gall. 1. iii. c. 33, 24, 35.
By the bull ‘Clericis Laïcos,’ Boniface had forbidden, under pain of
excommunication, every member of the secular and regular clergy from
paying, without the pope’s permission, any tax to their sovereigns, even
under the title of a gratuitous gift: Philip answered this bull by
prohibiting the transportation of any sum of money out of the kingdom,
without permission from under his hand. This measure at first seemed to
intimidate the pontiff who, modifying his bull, authorised, in cases of
pressing necessity, the contributions of the Clergy; but a legate soon
arrived to brave Philip, and summon him to alter his behaviour, if he
did not desire to expose his kingdom to a general interdict. This
seditious priest was arrested; his detention set the pope in a rage.:
“God has appointed me over empires, to pluck up,
“to destroy, to undo, to scatter, to build up and to
“plant.”
Thus does Boniface express himself in one of his bulls against Philip
IV. That which is known by the name of ‘Unatn sanctam,’ contains these
expressions:
“The temporal sword ought to
“be employed by kings and warriors for the church,
“according to the order or permission of the pope:
“the temporal power is subject to the spiritual, which
“institutes and judges it, but which can be judged
“of God alone; to resist the spiritual power, is
“to resist God, unless they admit the two principles
“of the Manicheans.”
An archdeacon, the bearer of these bulls, enjoined the king to
acknowledge, that he held from the pope his temporal sovereignty.
Finally, Bonifice excommunicated Philip: he ordered this monarch’s
confessor to appear at Rome, to render an account of the conduct of his
penitent; he destined the crown of France to this same emperor, Albert,
before treated as a criminal, but who now acknowledged by a written
document.:
“that the “Apostolic See had transferred from the Greeks to
“the Germans the Roman empire, in the person of
“Charlemagne; that certain secular and ecclesiasti−
“cal princes, hold from the pope the right of electing
“the king of the Romans, the destined successor to
“the empire; and that the pope grants to kings and
“to emperors the power of the sword.”
An euloguim is due to the victorious firmness of Philip, in opposition
to these extravagancies: the commoners and the nobles of France
supported him; the clergy, though already imbued with ultramontane
maxims, was led away by the ascendancy of the two former orders. The
prelates at all times adhered to the king with a reservation in favour
of ‘the faith due to the pope’, and thirty-four of them proceeded to
Rome in defiance of Philip.
A letter of this prince to Boniface, VIII. commences with these words:
“Philip, by the grace of God,
“king of the French, to Boniface pretended pope,
“little or no greeting. Let your very great Fatuity
“take notice, &c.”
These insulting expressions, but little worthy of him who employed them,
would have very badly succeeded, addressed to any pope who had at all
less merited them than Boniface; but his pretensions really bordered on
delirium, and he was altogether destitute of the political address
requisite for their success. Three men, in the course of the thirteenth
century, have checked the menacing progress of the pontifical power.
Boniface VIII. by disgracing it with his impotent excesses;²⁵³ Philip
IV., in publishing this discreditable conduct with unpunished insults;
but above all, Louis IX. whose resistance, edifying like his other good
works, had assumed against the worldly pride of the popes, the character
and authority of the religion of Jesus Christ.
²⁵⁴ For the manners and religious opinions of this pope, see the
pieces published by Dupuy. p. 523—560 of the Hist, of the dispute
between Boniface and Philip the Fair. Many witnesses depose, that
Boniface spoke with derision of the sacraments, of the mysteries,
of the gospel, and even of the immortality of the soul. "We must,"
he said, "speak like the people, but we need not think like them.”
Gregory VII. or Boniface VIII. would infallibly have excommunicated
Louis IX.: the anathemas of the former would have been formidable, those
of the latter could injure the court of Rome alone.
Boniface caused an ecclesiastical code to be compiled, which bore the
name of ‘Sexte,’ because it was considered as a sixth book, added to the
decretals compiled under Gregory IX., by Raymond de Pennafort. This
sixth book itself is divided into five, which correspond in the
distribution of their contents with those of Raymond’s collection, and
embrace, with the decretals of Boniface VIII., those of his predecessors
since the death of Gregory IX. When so many pontifical laws become
accumulated in the several codes, ecclesiastical tribunals, of course,
become requisite in order to apply them: episcopal courts therefore
sprung up. Father Thomassin fixes their origin under Boniface VIII. and
this opinion appears to us a more probable one than that which traces
this institution up to the twelfth century.
By officials, we understand, judges properly so called, attached to the
cathedrals, and to the sees of archbishops, for the purpose of
pronouncing special, civil, or even criminal sentences: now this
character does not sufficiently belong to certain dignitaries mentioned
in the writings of Peter de Blois, and of which, in 1163, a council of
Paris complained.—Furthermore, whether in the thirteenth or twelfth
century, the era of the establishment of ecclesiastical courts is
certainly long subsequent to the publication of the ‘False Decretals,’
and to the corruption, of the ancient discipline of the church.
Legates, another instrument of the papal power, were divided into two
classes: the first, chosen in the very places in which they exercised
their functions; the second, dispatched from the bosom of the Roman
court, like arms extended by St. Peter, over the wide extent of
Christendom. Among the former are also distinguished those who received
an express and personal mission, and those who born, as it may be said,
legates, held this title from a privilege annexed to the episcopal or
metropolitan see which they filled. Of all these various ministers, or
commissaries of the pontifical government, the most powerful would
always have been detached from their proper centre, if the very excess
of their pomp and power had not too often humbled, in every kingdom, the
prelates they came to eclipse and to rule. Their splendour, defrayed in
each place by the churches, the monasteries, and the people, excited
less of admiration than of murmurs; and even, after the third council of
the Lateran had reduced them to twenty-five horses, they were still
considered burdensome. It became necessary to dispose of sacred vases in
order to make them presents; and to purchase at enormous prices the
decisions, answers, favours, commissions, one had occasion to demand of
them.
“The legations, says Fleury²⁵⁴ were mines of gold to the cardinals, and
they usually returned from them loaded with riches.”
Their avarice was so notorious and so unchangeable, that St. Bernard²⁵⁵
speaks of a disinterested legate as a prodigy; but their pride, more
intolerable still, displayed too openly beneath the eyes of monarchs,
the pretensions of the court of Rome, and provoked a signal resistance.
Very early these Legates ‘a latere’ became unacceptable in France, and
it was ruled, that none should be received there, save when they should
have been demanded and approved of by the king: this is one of the
articles of the Gallican liberties.
²⁵⁵ 4th Disc, on Ecclesiastical History, no. 11.
²⁵⁶ De Consider. 1. 4, p 4, 5.
The thirteenth century is that in which the popes arrived at their
highest pitch of power: councils, crusades, anathemas, canonical codes,
monastic orders, legates, missionaries, inquisitors, all the spiritual
arms, re-tempered and sharpened by Innocent III. were, during this
century, directed against thrones, and often triumphed over them.
Innocent bequeathed a universal monarchy to his successors: they have
been unacquainted with the means of fully preserving this empire; but,
in the year 1300, some small portion of wisdom had sufficed to Boniface
VIII. to have been still the first potentate in Europe, and,
notwithstanding the disgrace of this last pontificate, the influence of
the Holy See still continued to sway that of other courts.