11. Gregory was more successful in extending the territories of the Romish church in Italy, and enlarging the patrimony of St. Peter. For he persuaded Matilda, the daughter of Boniface the very opulent duke and marquis of Tuscany, who was a very powerful Italian princess and with whom he was on terms of peculiar intimacy, after the death of her first husband Godfrey the hump-backed, duke of Lorrain, and of her mother Beatrix in the year 1076 or 1077, to make the church of Rome heir to all her claiming that kingdom by virtue of an absolute surrender of it to the see of Rome made by king Stephen, and in consequence of an acknowledgment by the emperor Henry II. after conquering it that it belonged to St. Peter. And as Solomon had done homage for it estates both in Italy and out of it. A second marriage of this very heroic and prosperous lady in the year 1089, with Guelph, the son of Guelph, duke of Ba varia, contracted with the consent of the Roman pontiff Urban II. seemed to prejudice this more than princely donation. But being repudiated by her husband in the year 1095 and thus again made free and independent, Matilda in the year 1102 formally renewed the gift. The pontiffs indeed had to encounter severe contests, first with the emperor Henry V. and then with others, respecting this splendid inheritance, nor were they so fortunate at last as to secure the whole of it to St. Peter; yet after various struggles and hazards they succeeded in obtaining no small share of it, which they hold to this day. 1 The life and achievements of this extraordinary princess (than whom the Roman church had no stronger bulwark against the emperors, and Gregory VII. no more obedient daughter) are described by Luchin, Mellin, Contelorius, Julius de Putea, and espe cially by Florentini, in his Monuments of the Countess Matilda, written in Italian; and by Bachini in his Hist. Monasterii Podalironensis which was founded by her. The ancient biographies of her, one by Donizo and another anonymous, are given by Leibnitz, in his Scrip. Brunsvicens. tom. i. p. 629, &c.; and by Muratori, in his Scrip. Rerum Italicar. tom. v. p. 335, &c. with notes, and also the formula of her second donation mentioned above. Well worth perusing also are the remarks concerning this woman of so masculine an understanding, which are found in the Origines Guelphicæ, tom. i. lib. iii. cap. v. p. 444, &c. and tom. ii. lib. vi. cap. iii. p. 303, &c. where also is an account of her second husband Guelph. to the king of the Teutones, Gregory now threatens him with the loss of his kingdom unless he shall acknow. ledge the Pope, and him only, to be his liege lord. Mur.] He laboured most zealously to bring the more potent princes of Germany in particular under subjection or fealty to St. Peter. Hence in lib. ix. ep. iii. p. 1480, he strongly exhorts the bishop of Padua to persuade Guelph, duke of Bavaria, and the other German chiefs, by all the means in his power, to subject their territories to the see of St. Peter, lib. ix. ep. iii. p. 1480. "We would have you admonish Duke Guelph to do homage to St. Peter. For we wish to place him wholly in the bosom of St. Peter and to draw him in a special manner into his vassalage. If you shall find such a disposition in him or in other men of power influenced by love of St. Peter, labour to bring them to do fealty." He approaches Sueno, king of Denmark, lib. ii. ep. li. p. 1300, with much flattery to persuade him "to commit with pious devotedness his kingdom to the prince of the Apostles, and obtain for it the support of his authority." Whether he was more successful in Denmark than in England and France, I know not; but in other places his efforts certainly were not fruitless. A son of Demetrius, king of the Russians (to whom he addressed the lxxiv. ep. book ii. p. 1319), came to Rome, Some distinguished men infer from the terms of "and wished to obtain the kingdom" (which he ex- the conveyance, that Matilda gave to the church of pected to inherit from his father) "by gift from St. Rome only her allodial possessions, and not the terriPeter through the hands of Gregory, paying due fealty tories which she held as fiefs of the empire; and of to St. Peter, the Prince of Apostles:" the import of course that she did not include in the donation the which language will be quite intelligible from what has marquisate of Tuscany and the duchy of Spoleto. For been said. Gregory granted his "devout prayer," she says: "Ego Mathildis-dedi et obtuli ecclesiæ S. being certainly not backward to perform such offices, Petri-omnia bona mea jure proprietario, tam quæ tunc and "in behalf of St. Peter committed the government habueram, quam ea, quæ in antea acquisitura eram, of the kingdom" to the Russian prince. More such sive jure successionis, sive alio quocunque jure ad me examples might be adduced. Demetrius, surnamed pertinent." See the Origines Guelph. tom. i. lib. iii. Suinimer, duke of Croatia and Dalmatia, was created p. 148, &c. But I doubt whether this is so clear that a king by Gregory in the year 1076, and was solemnly it must be admitted without hesitation. For the words inaugurated at Salona by the Pontiff's legate, on the jure proprietario, from which learned men conclude condition that he should annually pay to St. Peter on that Matilda gave to St. Peter only what she possessed Easter day a tribute of two hundred golden Byzantines jure proprietario, or her allodial possessions, manifestly [a Grecian golden coin, of from twenty-three to twenty-refer, or I am greatly mistaken, not to the possession by four carats.- Schl.] See Du Mont's Corps Diploma- the owner, but to the mode of the gift, and are to be tique, tome i. par. 1. no. 88, p. 53; Lucius, De Regno construed with the verbs dedi and obtuli. The princess Dalmatia lib. ii. p. 85. Up to this time however the does not say, "I have given all the estates which I emperors of Constantinople held the sovereignty over possess and hold jure proprietario," which had she said the province of Croatia. Boleslaus II. king of Poland, we must have acceded to the opinion of the learned having killed Stanislaus, bishop of Cracow, Gregory gentlemen; but she says, "I have given all my estates not only excommunicated him, but likewise deprived to the church jure proprietario, i.e. it is my will that him of his crown; and not contented with this seve the church should possess all my estates, jure prority, by a special mandate he forbade the Polish bishops prietario, as their real property. Besides the words to crown any one king of Poland without first obtain- which follow refute the construction of the learned ing the consent of the Roman pontiff. Dlugoss, Hist. gentlemen. Had Matilda intended to include only Polon. tom. i. p. 295. But I desist.-If Gregory's suc- what she possessed, jure allodii, she could not have cess had equalled his wishes and his purpose, all Europe said as she does say, "whether belonging to me by would at this day have been one great empire of St. right of inheritance or (alio quocunque jure) by any Peter, or tributary to the Roman pontiffs; and all other right whatever." Certainly she excludes no kings, feudal lords or vassals of St. Peter. But Gre- species of possessions, but by using this very compregory did not utterly fail in his attempts; for from this hensive language embraces all. Possibly some one time onward the state of the whole of Europe was however may object and say, The church of Rome changed, and many of the rights and prerogatives of never contended that the fiefs of the empire which emperors and kings were either abridged or annulled. Matilda possessed were included in this donation, and Among those annulled was the right of the emperor to therefore they claimed only her allodial possessions. 1 ratify the election of a pontiff, which became extinct in am not sure that such was the fact; many reasons inGregory and could never after be revived. duce me to believe that the pontiffs wished to secure t 12. The design of Gregory VII. to raise | year of his reign, or A.D. 1074, attacked the church above all human authority, and them with increased energy and firmness; to render it perfectly free and independent, for in a council held at Rome he renewed was obstructed especially by those two all the laws of the former pontiffs against capital vices of the European clergy, con- simony, severely forbidding the sale of cubinage and simony. The Roman pontiffs ecclesiastical benefices; and enacted that from the time of Stephen IX. had combated no priests should henceforth marry, and with zeal, but without much success on that such as now had either wives or conaccount of their inveteracy, these monstrous cubines should relinquish either them or vices.1 Gregory therefore in the second their sacred office. After these enactments he wrote letters to all bishops, requiring their church all the estates of Matilda. But allow it to them to obey these decrees on pain of inbe so: as I cannot now go into the inquiry, that fact will not disprove what I contend for. Our inquiry is curring severe punishments, and also sent not how moderate were the Roman pontiffs in claiming ambassadors into Germany to Henry IV. the property bequeathed to them by Matilda, but what is the import of the words used in the bequest. king of the Romans, demanding of him a council for trying the causes of those eswere contaminated with pecially who simony. Monstrous vices we may justly call them; for, although no honest man will deny that in hunting down these vices, Gregory violated not only the principles of religion but also those of natural justice and equity, and committed deeds without number which were most incompatible with the character he professed to sustain, yet it must be acknowledged that evils of no slight magnitude resulted from both these vices of the But there were also in all parts of Europe a vast num clergy to the church and to civil society; and that it was necessary restraint should be laid upon them. Very many among the married clergy were pious and upright men, whom Gregory ought to have spared. ber, not only of priests and canons, but likewise of monks, implicated in illicit amours; who kept concutheir pleasure, substituting others and often a plurality in their place; who basely squandered the property of the churches and colleges which they served, even dividing it among their spurious offspring, and committed other insufferable offences. How extensive the crime of simony had become in this century, and what pernicious effects it produced everywhere, will be manifest from those examples (not to mention innumerable others) which the Benedictine monks have interspersed in various parts of their Gallia Christiana. I will give a few specimens. In the first volume of this excellent work, Append. Docum. p. 5, we have the document by which Bernard, a viscount, and Froterius, a bishop, give or rather openly sell to Bernard Almar and to his son the bishopric of Alby, reserving to themselves a large part of its revenues. Immediately after follows a writing of Pontius, a count, in which he bequeaths to his wife this bishopric of Alby [and moieties of another bishopric and an abbey; the reversion of which at her death was to belong to his children]: "Ego Pontius dono tibi dilectæ sponsæ meæ episcopatum Albiensem-cum ipsa ecclesia et cum omni adjacentia sua-et medietatem de episcopatu Nemanso-et medietatem de Abbatia S. Egidii:post obitum tuum remaneat ipsius alodis ad infantes qui de me erunt creati." Similar and even worse instances are stated, p. 24, 37, and elsewhere. In vol. ii. Append. Docum. p. 173, there is a letter of the clergy of Limoges, in which they humbly entreat William, count of Aquitain, that he would not sell the bishopric [and to give them a pastor, not a devourer of the flock]: "Rogamus tuam pietatem, ne propter mundiale lucrum vendas S. Stephani locum; quia si tu vendis episcopalia, ipse nostra manducabit communia.-Mitte nobis ovium custodem, non devoratorem." In vol. ii. p. 179, Ademar, viscount of Limoges, laments that he "had heretofore simoniacally sold the charge of souls to abbots who purchased of him." In fact, it appears from authors and documents which are above all exception, that the licentiousness of this age in buying and selling sacred offices exceeded all bounds and almost all credibility. I will subjoin only one short extract from Abbo's Apologeticum in Pithoeus, Codex Canon. Ecclesiæ Romanæ, p. 398, which is worthy of notice as containing the argument by which the traders in sacred offices attempted to justify their base conduct: "There seems to be almost nothing appertaining to the church which is not put upon sale; viz. bishoprics, presbyterships, deaconries, and the other lower orders, archdeaconries also, deaneries, superintendencies, trea bines under the name of wives which they dismissed at 13. Both these decrees appeared very proper, salutary, and accordant with the principles of the religion of the age; for it was then maintained that priests should be elected and that they ought to live single. Yet both gave rise to the most lamentable contentions and to very great calamities. When the decree respecting celibacy was promulgated, serious tumults were excited in most of the countries of Europe, by those priests who were connected with either lawful wives or concubines; many of whom, surers' offices, baptisteries."-" And these traffickers are accustomed to offer the cunning excuse that they do not buy the blessing by which the grace of the Holy Spirit is conveyed, but the property of the church of the possessions of the bishop" [non se emere benedictionem, qua percipitur gratia Spiritus Sancti, sed res ecclesiarum, vel possessiones episcopi]. An acute distinction truly! [See also what Glaber Radulphus, lib. v. cap. v. says of the Italian churches in the middle of this century: "All ecclesiastical offices were at that time as much accounted things vendible as merchandise is in a common market."- Schl. The histories of these times are full of the commotions excited by those priests who had either wives or concubines. For an account of the insurrections among the German priests, see Sigonius, De Regno Italia, lib. ix. tom. ii. p. 557; and Tengnagel's Col lectio Veter. Monumentor. p. 45, 47, 54, &c. and the other writers of German history. [Two councils were held in Germany, one at Erfurth and the other at Mentz, in which the papal decree against the marriage of priests was made known. But in both, tumults were excited; and the adherents of the pope were in jeopardy of their lives, especially the abp. of Mentz and the papal legate the bp. of Chur. The German clergy said, "they would rather lose their priesthood than part with their wives. Let him who despises men see whence he can procure angels for the churches." See Trithemius in Chron. Hirsaug. and Lambert of Aschaffenb. ad. ann. 1074.-The clergy of Passau when the papal prohibition was published said to their bp. Altmann, "That they neither could nor would abandon the custom which it was clear they had followed from ancient times under all preceding bishops." The French also declared in an assembly at Paris, that they would not suffer the pope's insupportable yoke to be laid upon them. See Mansi, Suppl. Concil. tom. ii. p 5.- Schl.] Of the commotions in England William or Paris treats, Hist. Major, lib. i. p. 7. For those in the Netherlands and France, see the epistles of the clergy of Cambray to those of Bremen in behalf of their wives, in Mabillon's Annal. Benedict. tom. v. p. 634. and the epistle of the clergy of Noyon to those of Cam CHAP. II.] CHURCH OFFICERS AND GOVERNMENT. especially in the Italian province of Milan, not correct the married clergy with mode- bray, in Mabillon's Museum Italicum, tom. 1. p. 128. How great a commotion this thing produced in Italy, and especially among the Milanese, is fully stated by Arnulph senior and Landulf, historians of Milan; extant with notes, in Muratori, Script. Rerum Italic. tom. iv. p. 36, &c. Each of these historians favours the marriage of priests, in opposition to Gregory and the pontiffs. 1 Paterini was one of the names by which the Paulicians or Manichæans were designated in Italy (who are well known to have migrated from Bulgaria to Italy in this age), and who were the same as were also called Cathari. In process of time this became the common appellation of all heretics; as might easily be shown by many examples from writers of the twelfth and Respecting the origin of the thirteenth centuries. name there are many opinions, the most probable of which is that which derives it from a certain place called Pataria, where the heretics held their meetings. And a part of the city of Milan is still vulgarly called Pattaria, or Contrada de' Pattari. See the notes on Arnulphus Mediolan. in Muratori, Script. Rer. Italicar. Saxius ad Sigonium, De Regno Italia, tom. iv. p. 39. lib. ix. Opp. Sigon. tom. ii. p. 536. An opinion has prevailed, perhaps originating from Sigonius, that this name was given at Milan to those priests who retained their wives contrary to the decrees of the pontiffs, and who seceded from the Romish church. But it appears from Arnulph and other ancient writers, that it was not the married priests who were called Paterini, but that these priests gave that appellation, by way of reproach, to such friends of the pontiffs as disapproved of the marriage of clergymen. See Arnulph, lib. iii. cap. x.; and the copious and learned proofs of this fact by Pagi, Critica in Annal. Baron. tom. iv. ad ann. 1058, sec. iii.; and Muratori, Antiq. Ital. Medi Evi, tom. v. p. 82. Nor need we look farther for the origin of this term of reproach. For the Manichæans and their brothers, the Paulicians, were opposed to marriage. which they considered as an institution of the evil demon; and therefore such as held the marriage of priests to be lawful and right, by applying the designation Paterini to the pontiffs and their adherents who prohibited such marriages, would represent them as following the opinions of the Manichæans. And 2 For there was a vast difference among those priests concubinage. The case of the monks also, whose vows 3 Theodoric of Verdun, Epistola ad Gregorium VII. We have numerous histories, both ancient and was so calamitous to a large part of Europe, and which modern, of this famous contest about investitures, which being commenced by Gregory VII. was carried on by him and the succeeding pontiffs on the one part, and by the emperors Henry IV. and V. on the other. Yet few if any of these histories are entirely impartial. For all the writers espouse the cause either of the popes or of the emperors; and they decide the controversy, not (as in my opinion they should do) by the laws then in force and according to the principles then universally admitted, but according to a supposed system of laws and the opinions of the present age. Those who defend The principal ancient writers on the side of Gregory are collected by the noted Jesuit Gretzer, in his Apologia pro Gregorio VII. which was published separately, and also in his Opp. tom. vi. contra Gret serum, et Apologia pro Henrico IV. Hanov. Of the moderns, besides the Centuriatores 1611, 4to. Henry IV. are collected by Goldastus in his Replicatio Magdeburgenses, Baronius, the writers of Germanic and Italian history, and the biographers of Matilda, the reader may consult Schilterus, De Libertate Eccleside Germanica, lib. iv. p. 481, &c.; Thomasius, Historia Contentionis inter Imperium et Sacerdotium; Meibomius, De Jure Investiture Episcopalis, in the Scrip. Rer. Germanicarum, tom. iii.; Dithmar, Hist. 8vo, and others. Superior to all these in learning is Belli inter Imperium et Sacerdotium, Francf. 1714, Noris, in his Istoria delle Investiture della Dignita Ecclesiastiche, which was published after the death of this great man, Mantua, 1741, fol. It is a very learned work, but unfinished and defective; and, what is not surprising in a friend of the pontiffs or a cardinal, not With advantage may be also consulted candid towards the adversaries of the pontiffs or the emperors. Mascov's Commentarii de Rebus Imperii German, sub Henrico IV. et V. Lips. 1749, 4to. simony. But neither he nor the German bishops would grant leave to the legates to assemble a council in Germany, for the purpose of trying those who were guilty of simony. The next year therefore, A.D. 1075, in a new council at Rome, Gregory proceeded still further; for in the first place he excommunicated some of the favourites of king Henry, whose advice and assistance he was said to have used in the sale of benefices, and also certain bishops of Germany and Italy; and in the next place, he decreed that "whoever should confer a bishopric or abbacy or should receive an investiture from the hands of any layman should be excommunicated." For it had long been customary with the emperors and kings and princes of Europe to confer the larger benefices and the government of monasteries by the delivery of a ring and a staff And as this formal inauguration of the bishops and abbots was the main support, both of the power claimed by kings and emperors to create whom they chose bishops and abbots, and also of the licentious sale of sacred offices to the highest bidders, or of simony, the pontiff judged that the custom ought to be wholly extirpated and abolished. See Pagi, Critica in Baronium, tom. iv. ad ann. 1075; Noris, Istoria delle Investiture, p. 39, &c. Lupus, Scholia et Diss. ad Concilia, Opp. tom. vi. p. 39, &c. 44, &c. 15. But Henry was not dismayed at the says: "The secular authority favoured the ambitious ...... which horrid abomination has become so well estab lished that it is accounted the only canonical way, and out of the records of the tenth century. For this rea and ring, immediately after the decease of a bishop, to be transmitted to them. For according to ecclesiastical law, official power is conveyed by delivering the staff and ring; so that these being carried away, if the clergy should elect any one for their bishop, he could not be consecrated in due form. And every election, till it had been ratified by consecration, could be set aside without violation of ecclesiastical law; nor could * I must be allowed here to go into an investigation a bishop elect perform any episcopal function till he respecting the rite of inaugurating bishops and abbots was consecrated. As soon therefore as any one of the with the ring and staff, because it is misunderstood higher officers in the church died, the magistrate of by many and not very intelligibly explained by others. the city where he lived or the governor of the province Among these last I may place the name of Henry seized upon his staff and ring, and transmitted them Noris, the author of the Istoria delle Investiture; for to court. Ebbo, in his life of Otto of Bamberg (who in chap. iii. p. 56, where he treats of the motives which lived in the court of Henry IV.) lib. i. sec. 8, 9 (in induced Gregory to prohibit investitures, though he the Acta Sanctor. Mensis Julii, tom. i. p. 426), says: states many things well and better than other writers" Soon after, the ring and the pastoral staff of the do, yet he does not see through the whole thing, and bishop of Bremen were brought to the royal court. he omits some circumstances important to be known. For at that period the church had not free elections, The investiture itself of bishops and abbots undoubtedly ...... but when any bishop was about to go the way commenced at the time when the emperors, kings, of all the earth, presently the commandants of his and princes of Europe conferred on them the possession city transmitted his ring and pastoral staff to the and use of territories, forests, fields, and castles. For palace; and thus by royal authority after consulting according to the laws of those times (and they have with his courtiers ...... he placed a suitable prelate not yet ceased to operate), persons holding territories, over the bereaved people....... After a few days again &c. by favour of the emperors and sovereigns, were the ring and pastoral staff of the bishop of Bamberg not considered to be in legal possession of them until were transmitted to our lord the emperor. Which they had repaired to the court, sworn fealty to the being told abroad many nobles ...... flocked to the sovereign, and received from his hand the token of the royal court, who endeavoured to obtain one of these transfer and dominion of the property. But the mode either by price or by petition."...... The emperor or of inaugurating or investing bishops and abbots with king then delivered the ring and staff to whom he the ring and the staff or crozier (which are the in- pleased; after which the person thus inaugurated and signia of the sacred office) was of later date, and appointed bishop repaired to the metropolitan to whom introduced at the time when the emperors and kings, it belonged to perform the consecration, and delivered subverting the free elections which the ecclesiastical over to him the staff and ring received from the emlaws required, assumed to themselves the power not peror, that he might again receive these insignia of his only of conferring but also of selling sacerdotal and power from the hands of the metropolitan. Thus the abbatical offices at their pleasure. At first, the em- new bishops and abbots received the ring and staff perors and kings handed over to men of the sacred twice; first from the hand of the king or emperor, orders the same tokens of transferred use and posses- and then from the metropolitan by whom they were sion as they did to soldiers, knights, counts, and consecrated. Humbert, Contra Simoniacos, lib. iii. cap. others who approached the throne as vassals, namely, vi. in Martene, Thesaur. Anecdot. tom. v. p. 779. written instruments, green twigs, and other things. "Being thus consecrated" (j.e. invested by the empeHumbert, a cardinal of the Romish church, who wrote ror), "the intruder comes upon the clergy, the people, before the contest about investitures was moved by the sacred order, as their master, before he is known Gregory VII. in his lib. iii. Adversus Simoniacos, cap. by them, sought after, or asked for. And he goes to xi. (in Martene, Thesaur. Anecdotor. tom. v. 787), the metropolitan, not to be judged by him, but to judge CHAP. II.] CHURCH CFFICERS AND GOVERNMENT. ment; but he could by no means be induced to give up the power of appointing bishops and abbots, and the investiture so closely connected with that power. Gre him....... For what does it signify or profit to give up the staff and ring which he brings with him? Is it because they were given to him by a layman? Why is that given up which is already held, unless it be either that the ecclesiastical benefice may be again sold under this form of enjoining or giving, or that the former sale may be confirmed by being subscribed to by the metropolitan and his suffrages; or at least that the appearance of a lay-ordination may be concealed under some cloak and colour of a clerical proceeding ?" What king or emperor first introduced this custom of appointing prelates by delivery of the staff and ring is uncertain. According to Adamus Bremensis (Hist. Ec. lib. i. cap. xxxii. p. 10, and cap. xxxix. p. 12, in Lindenbrog's Script. Septentrion.) as early as the ninth century, Lewis the Meek conferred on new bishops the right of enjoying the revenues of the churches they ruled, by delivery of a staff or shepherd's crook. But I suspect that Adam described the events of the former age, which was the eleventh century. For in the ninth century most emperors and kings allowed bishops to be 'See created by the suffrages of the clergy and people; so that such an inauguration was then unnecessary. the remarks of Papebroch against Adam. Brem. in the Acta Sanctor. Febr. tom. i. p. 557. Humbert states (lib. iii. Contra Simoniac. cap. vii. p. 780, and cap. xi. p. 787) that this custom commenced in the age of Otho the Great, and I am much inclined to that opinion. At least the learned men who have treated explicitly on the origin of investitures have adduced nothing which dissuades me from receiving this opinion. See Thomassin, Discip. Ecclesiæ circa Benef. tom. ii. lib. ii. p. 434; and Natal. Alexander, Hist. Eccles. sæcul. xi. xii. diss. iv. p. 725. The same Humbert relates (ubi supra, cap. vii. p. 780) that the emperor Henry, the son of Conrad (ie. Henry III. surnamed Niger) wished to abrogate these investitures, but was prevented by various circumstances; but that Henry I. the king of France, threw everything into confusion, and was exCossively addicted to simony, against whom therefore Humbert inveighs most vehemently. centuries in accordance with the customs of his own In this method of inaugurating bishops and abbots by delivery of the ring and staff, there were two things especially which displeased the Roman pontiffs. First, that by it the ancient privilege of electing bishops and abbots was entirely subverted, and the power of creating prelates was placed wholly in the hands of the kings and emperors. This objection appeared a fair one, and perfectly accordant with the religious principles of that age. Secondly, it was extremely offensive to them that the insignia of spiritual power-namely, the staff and ring-should be conveyed by the hands of laymen, i.e. of profane persons, which seemed to them very like to sacrilege. Humbert, who wrote, as already stated, anterior to the contest between Gregory and Henry, has a long complaint on this subject, Contra Simoniac. lib. iii. cap. vi. p. 779, 795. I will subjoin some of his language:"What business have laymen to distribute the ecclesiastical sacraments and episcopal or pastoral grace; that is, the curved staffs and rings by which episcopal consecration is especially performed and becomes valid, and on which it wholly depends? For the curved staff denotes the pastoral care which is committed to them; and the ring is emblematical of the celestial mysteries, admonishing preachers that they should exhibit the wisdom of God in a mystery with the apostle. Whoever therefore presume to initiate any one with these two, undoubtedly claim for themselves, by this presumption, the whole pastoral authority." And this reasoning was certainly good, if not according to our views, at least according to the opinions of that age; for the staff and the ring were viewed as the emblems of spiritual things, and whoever conferred these emblems was supposed to confer along with them spiritual authority and power. From these considerations it will be easy to perceive what it was that induced Gregory VII. to oppose so resolutely the inauguration of bishops by means of the gory therefore, well knowing that many of The council of Worms was composed of a "very 2 Gregory's excommunication of Henry is drawn up |