A History of the Reform Papacy in Several Parts. Part One: Clement II to Leo IX

[Junius]

I have been studying Papal history during this term, and I put together a little essay outlining the emergence of the Reform Papacy of the 11th and 12th Centuries. This is the first part of it, from Clement II to Leo IX. I continue it up to Innocent IV, which may take a small while.

A History of the Reform Papacy in Several Parts

Part One: From Clement II to Leo IX

The Papacy of the early Middle Ages had been in the control of the wealthy Roman families.
That the Papacy controlled large tracts of land in Central Italy made it an alluring and rich position. The ease with which the noble families could manipulate the election of the Pope, there was still no College of Cardinals at this time and he was still elected by the lay people of Rome, though still with the Emperor’s consent. Very often, due to the situation in Germany, he could not exercise this right however.

This situation could not go on indefinitely, there were feuding families who would vie for control of the Papal throne. After the death of John XIX, in 1032, the Tusculum, one of the powerful noble families, managed to get one of their members elected once again, John and his predecessor were both Tusculum, as Benedict IX. In 1045 the Crescentii, the Tusculums main rival, organised a rebellion in Rome and put one of their own on the throne of St. Peter, Sylvester II. Sylvester was soon expelled from Rome, though he still claimed the title of Pope. Benedict soon after resigned his Papacy in favour of Gregory VI, his godfather, who gave the revenue from the Peter’s Pence in England to his godson in return. These accusations seem to have originated from his enemies, and John Gratian, his name before becoming Pope, was a well respected priest, and one of the new party of reformers, whose most prominent member was Peter Damian. However, Benedict soon renegade on his deal and again claimed the throne. Now there were three Popes, each with various claims to the throne.

It was now the Emperor-elect stepped in. Henry III, King of Germany, Lombardy and Burgundy, was a deeply religious man, who took his role as protector of Christendom seriously. He also wanted to be crowned as Emperor, and for that he needed the legitimate Pope, to make his coronation legitimate. He marched through Italy in 1046 and summoned a Council at Sutri. There he deposed all three Popes and installed a German in their stead. Suidger of Bamberg took the name of Clement II, but his rule was short, dying in 1047, though he did manage to make Henry emperor. Opposed by the nobility of Rome and by some figures in the Roman church, who saw it as their right to elect the Pope, and not that of the Emperor, there is evidence that he could have been poisoned. On his death Benedict IX again seized the throne, taking the Lateran Palace, the residence of the Pope, before much could be done. In 1048 German troops forced Benedict out and Damasus II, another German bishop, was appointed in his place. His reign was shorter still, lasting less than a month in the swampy and infection filled Roman summer.

It is important to note here that there was considerable theological difference between the German Church and the Roman Church. The Roman clergy saw secular and spiritual power as one and the same. The Pope was both a secular lord and a spiritual one, and both were equal. The Germans, however, saw the secular life as below the clerical one. In this they had been influenced by the new breed of theologians who were appearing, in Burgundy and Lorraine. Wazo of Liege, who had opposed the interference of the secular Henry III in Papal affairs, wrote strongly for the clergy to disassociate themselves from worldly affairs, and lead a pious, spiritual life, untouched by the malign influences of the material world. Bishops in the Empire had sought to remove themselves from worldly interference, particularly from local lords. They looked to the Emperor, as ‘Protector of Christendom’, for protection. Though they looked to the Emperor for protection, they nevertheless made it clear that their sees were independent of him. It was these serious, pious and independent men who formed the learned circle around Henry III and from which the German Popes were drawn.

The next appointment to the Papacy was Bruno, Bishop of Toul. He was an important figure in the spreading of the Clunaic interpretation of the Order of St. Benedict, and was accompanied on his journey to Rome by Hugh the Great, Abbot of Cluny, as well as a young monk called Hildebrand, remember that name. His first action as Pope was to hold a synod at Easter in the Lateran. At this he made clear that the high clergy, from archdeacon up, were to lead celibate lives. He also started his condemnation of simony, the buying of church positions. These two objectives were to form the backbone of his Papacy. To enforce them, though, he needed to have the Pope recognised as head of the Catholic faith. While the Bishop of Rome was seen as one of the primates of the Church, he was not universally seen as it’s head. Many bishops and metropolitans saw themselves as independent from Papal interference, as viewed him only as primus inter pares. Leo IX launched on a journey around Western Christendom, calling councils and synods in France and Germany. The most important of these was at Rheims, where he consecrated the new church there. Instead of placing the relics of St. Remigius, who had converted Clovis, King of the Franks, to Catholicism, into the crypt, he placed them on the high altar. Then he demanded that the bishops and abbots present, a small number owing to the opposition of the French king, swear that they had not been given their office due to simony. Some fled, like the Bishop of Langres, and the Bishop of Besancon could not defend himself, being rendered unable to speak in the presence of the relics. News spread, and Papal authority had been established in France. There were many confessions of simony, many of which were forgiven and the sinner’s office would be returned to him after he had denounced it. Some, however, were fully deposed, such as those bishops who had refused to come to Rheims.

The Emperor had always been the protector of the Papacy, since the time of Pepin II and Charlemagne. On the death of Clement II the Roman nobles had unsuccessfully tried to re-establish their control of the Papacy, only to have their efforts be suppressed by German troops. The Papacy enjoyed the protection of Henry III, and had no desire to break off the relationship, which served both parties well. Henry III died in 1056, however, and left the six year old Henry IV as his successor. The Empire was ruled by a regent, at first Henry IV’s mother, which gave the enemies of the Emperor the impetuous to rebel against a ‘weak’ woman. When in 1057 Leo died the more radical reformers in the Lateran Palace saw their chance to move the Papacy away from the control of the Empire, towards independence.

Part Two: Stephen IX to Alexander II to follow.

[hellheaven1987]

Good post. Papacy during 10th Century to 13th Century went through a series of transformation to coup the collapse of Carolingian, which the development of Crusade gave ambitious Popes a way to gain more political power.

[HannibalB]

please delete

[konny]

Very good!

It is indeed important to keep in mind that emperors, and Heinrich III in particular, were originally regarded as, and truley were, supporters and protectors of the reform papacy; and also that the episcopate within the empire was considered "exemplary", as opposed to the clerical situation in France and England. In return, the crown demanded it as her right to (at least) approve of any papal election before the elected would be allowed to call himself pope. Both will become of importance in the following events.

as well as a young monk called Hildebrand, remember that name.

Gregor most likely never was a monk, ASFAIK. His clerical carreer seemed to have been focused on the Holy See, where he held a number of high ranking posts under the German popes (amongst other things was he responsible for the papal military). He also appeared frequently as papal legat with far reaching authorities.

The idea that he was a monk most likely resulted in his enemies calling him "false monk".