« הקודםהמשך »
prerogatives of the emperors and other sovereign princes were much diminished. It was particularly under the administration of Gregory, that the emperors were deprived of the privilege of ratifying, by their consent, the election of the Roman pontiff; a privilege of no small importance, and which as yet they have never recovered.
xi. The zeal and activity which Gregory employed in extending the jurisdiction of the Roman see, and enriching the patrimony of St. Peter, met nowhere with such remarkable success as in Italy. His intimate familiarity with Mathilda, the daughter of Boniface, duke of Tuscany, and the most powerful and opulent princess in that country, who found by experience that neither ambition por grace had extinguished the tender passions in the heart Gregory, contributed much to this success; for he engaged that princess after the death of her husband, Godfrey, duke of Lorraine, and her mother Beatrix, which happened in the years 1076, and 1077, to settle all her possessions in Italy and elsewhere upon the church of Rome, and thus to appoint St. Peter and his pretended vicar the heirs of her immense treasures. This rich donation was indeed considerably invalidated by the second marriage which Mathilda contracted, in the year 1089, with Welph or Guelph, son of the duke of Bavaria, and that with the consent of the Roman pontiff, Urban II. She however renewed it in a solemn manner in the year 1102, about seven years after her separation from her second husband, by which she became again sole mistress of her vast possessions." But notwithstanding this new act, the Roman pontiffs did not remain in the peaceful possession of this splendid inheritance. It was warmly and powerfully disputed, first by the emperor, Henry V. and after
n The life and exploits of this heroic princess, who was one of the strongest bulwarks of the Roman church against the power of the emperors, and the most tender and obedient of all the spiritual daughters of Gregory VII. has been written by Bened. Lu. chinus, Domin. Mellinus, Felix Contelorius Julius de Puteo, but more amply by Francis Maria Florent, in his records concerning the countess Mathilda, written in Italian, and Bened. Bachinius, in his Historia Monasterii Podalironensis. The famous Leibnitz, in his Scriptores Brunsvic, tom. i. p. 629, and Lud. Ant. Muratori, in his Scriptores rerum Italic. tom. v. p. 335, have published, with annotations, the ancient histories of the life of Mathilda, composed by Donizo, and another writer whose name is unknown, together with the copy of the second act of cession by which that princess confirmed her former grant to the church of Rome. We may add bere, that nothing relating to this extraordinary woman is more worthy of perusal than the accounts that we find of ber, and her second husband, in the Origines Ġuelphicæ, tom. i. lib. jii. cap. v. p. 444, et tom. ii. lib. vi. p. 303.
ward by several other princes ; nor were the pontiffs so successful in this contest as to preserve the whole inheritance, though after various struggles and efforts, they remained in the possession of a considerable part of it, which they still enjoy."
XII. The plan that Gregory had formed for raising the church above all human authority, to a state of the decrees of perfect supremacy and independence, had
many kinds of opposition to encounter, but none more insurmountable than that which arose from the two reigning vices of concubinage and simony, that had infected the whole body of the European clergy. The Roman pontiffs, from the time of Stephen IX. had combated with zeal and vehemence these monstrous vices, but without suc
o Many learned men conclude from the very act by which this donation was confirmed to the see of Rome, that Mathilda comprehended in this donation only her allodial possessions, and not the territories which she held as fiefs of the empire, such as the marquisate of Tuscany, and the dutchy of Spoleto. For the words of the act run tbus; Ego Mathildis...dedi et obtuli ecclesiæ S. Petri... omnia mea bona jure proprietario, tam quæ tunc habueram, quam ea, quæ in antea acquisitura eram, sive juris successionis, sive alio quocunque jure ad me pertineant.” See the Origines Guelphica, tom, i. lib. iii. p. 448. But it is much to be questioned, whether this distinction is so evident as is pretended. For the words jure proprietario, from which it is inferred that Mathilda disposed of her allodial possessions in favour of St. Peter, do not, in my opinion, relate to the possessions of the testatrix, but to the nature of the gift, and must be interpreted in conjunction with the preceding verbs, " dedi et obtuli.” For the princess does not say “ dedi/omnia bona quæ jure proprietario possideo et habeo," i. e.
I have granted that part of my property which I hold by a supreme and independent right,” in which case the opinion of the learned men above mentioned would be well founded, but she says, “dedi omnia bona mea ecclesiæ jure proprietario," i. e. my will is, that the church shall possess as its own property the inheritance I have left it." Beside, the following words manifestly show, that the opinion of these learned men is destitute of all foundation; since Mathilda could not possibly add, "sive jure successionis, sive alio quocunque jure ad me pertineant," i. e. “ I grant all my possessions, under whatever title I enjoy them, whether by right of succession, or by any other right," &c. had she designed to confine her donation to her allodial possessions. Certain it is, that in this ample grant she excepts no particular part of her property, but evidently comprehends in it her whole substance. If it be objected to this, that the Roman pontiffs never affirmed that the fiefs of the empire, which Mathilda possessed, were comprehended in this grant to their church, and that they only claimed her allodial and independent possessions ; I answer by questioning the fact, since many circumstances concur to prove, that these pontiffs claimed the whole substance of Matbilda, all her possessions without exception, as their undoubted right. But suppose for a moment that the case was otherwise, and that the Roman church had never made such a universal claim, this would by no means invalidate the opinion I here maintain ; since the ques. tion under consideration, is not how far the Roman pontiffs may have moderated their pretensions to the territories of Mathilda, but what is the genuine sense of the words in which her donation is expressed.
p Monstrous vices we may justly call them. For though it be true, that in the methods Gregory took to extirpate these vices, he violated not only the laws of religion, but also the dictates of natural equity and justice, and' under the mask of a pious zeal, committed the most crying and abominable enormities, yet it is certain on the other hand, that these vices produced the most unhappy effects both in church and state, and that the suppression of them was now becone absolutely necessary. There were indeed among the clergy several men of piety and virtue, who lived in the bonds of wedlock, and these Gregory ought to have spared. But there was also a prodigious number of ecclesiastics throughout Earope, not only of priests and canons, but also of
cess, as they were become too inveterate and too universal to be extirpated without the greatest difficulty and the most extraordinary efforts. Accordingly
. Gregory, in the year 1074, which was the second of his pontificate, exerted himself with much more vigour than his predecessors had done in opposition to the vices already mentioned. For this purpose he assembled a council at Rome, in which all the laws of the former pontiffs against simony were renewed and confirmed, and the buying or selling ecclesiastical benefices prohibited in the strictest and severest manner. It was also decreed in the same council, that the sacerdotal orders should abstain from marriage, and that such of them as had already wives, or concubines, should immediately dismiss them, or quit the priestly office. These decrees were accompanied with circular letters wrote by the pontiff to all the European bishops, enjoining the strictest obedience to the decisions of this solemn council, under the severest penalties. Gregory did not stop here, but sent ambassadors into Germany to Henry IV. king of the Romans, in order to engage that prince to summon a coun
monks, who lived in the bonds of a criminal love, kept, under the title of wires, mistresses which they dismissed at pleasure, to enjoy the sweets of a licentious variety, and who not only spent, in the most profuse and scandalous manner, the revenues and treasures of the churches and convents to which they belonged, but even distributed a great part of them among their bastards. As to the vice of simony, its universal extent and its pernicious fruits appear evidently from those records, which the Benedictine monks have published in several places of their Gallia Christiana, not to mention a multitude of other ancient papers to the same purpose. One or two examples will be sufficient to give the reader an idea of this matter. We find in the first volume of the admirable work now mentioned, in the Append. Document. p. 5, a public act, by which Bernard, a viscount, and Froterius, bishop of Alby, grant, or rather sell openly to Bernard Aimard and his son the bishopric of Alby, reserving to themselves a considerable part of its revenues. This act is followed by another, in which count Pontius bequeaths to his wife the same bishopric of Alby in the following terms. “Ego Pontius dono tibe dilectæ sponsæ meæ episcopatem Albiensem ; cum ipsa ecclesia et cum omnia adjacentia sua ; et medietatem de episcopatu Nemauso ; et medietatem de abbatia Sti. Ægidii ; post obitum tuum remaneat ipsius alodis ad infantes qui de me erunt creati.” In the second volume of the same learned work, in the Append. Document. p. 173, there is a letter of the clergy of Limoges, beseeching William, count of Aquitain, not to sell the bishopric, but to give them a pastor, and not a devourer of the flock. Rogamus tuam pietatem, ne propter mundiale lucrum vendas Sti. Stephani locum, quia si tu vendis episcopalia, ipse nostra, manducabit communia. Mitte nobis ovium custodem, non devoratorem. Ademar, viscount of Limoges, laments, tom. ii. p. 179, that "he himself had formerly made traffic of the cure of souls by selling benefices to simoniacal abbots.” The bare faced impudence of the sacerdotal orders, in buying and selling benefices, exceeded all measure, and almost all credibility. And they carried matters so far as to justify that abominable traffic, as may be seen in a remarkable passage in the Apologeticum of Abbo, which is added by Pithou to the Codex Can. Ecclesiæ Romanæ ; this passage, which deserves to be quoted, is as follows; “Nihil pene ad ecclesiam pertinere videtur, quod ad pretium non largiatur, scilicet episcopatus, presbyteratus, diaconatus, et aliqui minores gradus, archidia conatus quoque, decania, præpositura, thesauri custodia, baptisterium ; et hujusmodi negociatores subdola responsione solent astruere, non se emere benedic tionem, qua percipitur, gratia spiritus sancti, sed res ecclesiarum vel possessiones episcopi." An acute distinction truly!
cil for the trial and punishment of such ecclesiastics as had been hitherto guilty of simoniacal practices.
xul. These decrees, which were in part equitable and just, and which were, in every respect, conform the severe proable with the notions of religion that prevailed in combine the this age, were looked upon by the people as pocuci mech highly salutary, since they rendered a free elec- trouble. tion, and not a mercenary purchase, the way to ecclesiastical promotion, and obliged the priests to abstain from marriage, which was absurdly considered as inconsistent with the sanctity of their office. Yet both these decrees were attended with the most deplorable tumults and dissensions, and were fruitful, in their consequences, of innumerable calamities. No sooner was the law concerning the celibacy of the clergy published, than the priests, in the several provinces of Europe, who lived in the bonds of marriage with lawful wives, or of lasciviousness with bired concubines, complained loudly of the severity of this council, and excited the most dreadful tumults in the greatest part of the European provinces. Many of these ecclesiastics, especially the Milanese priests, chose rather to abandon their spiritual dignities, than their sensual pleasures, and to quit their benefices that they might cleave to their wives. They went still farther; for they separated themselves entirely from the church of Rome, and branded with the infamous name of paterini,' i. e. Manichæans,
9 All the historians who give any account of this century, mention the tumults excited by such priests as were resolved to continue with their wives or concubines. For an account of the seditions which arose in Germany upon this occasion, see Sigo. nius De regno Italiæ, lib. ix. p. 557, tom. ii, as also Tengnagel's Collectio Veter. Monument. p. 45, 47, 54. Those that the priests excited in England are mentioned by M. Paris, in his Histor. Major, lib. i. p. 7. The tumults occasioned by the same reason in the Belgic and Gallic provinces, are described in the Epistola Clericorum Cameracensium ad Remenses pro uxoribus suis, published in Mabillon's Annal. Benedictin. tom. v. p. 634, and in the Epistola Noviomensium Clericorum ad Cameracenses, published in Mabillon's Muscum Italicum, tom. i. p. 128. Great was the flame which the laws of Gregory excited in Italy, and particularly in the province of Milan, of which we have an ample relation given by Arnulph and Landulph, two Milanese bistorians, whose works are published with annotations, by Muratori, in his Scriptores rerum Italicarum, tom. iv. p. 36. Both these historians maintain, against Gregory and his successors, the cause of the injured priests, and the lawfulness of their marriages.
r Paterinus is one of the names by which the Paulicians or Manichæans, who came during this century from Bulgaria into Italy, and were also known by the title of cathari or pure, were distinguished among the Italians. But in process of time the term paterinus became a common name for all kinds of heretics, as we might show by many examples taken from the writers of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. There are vaa rious opruions concerning the origin of this word, the most probable of which is that which supposes it derived from a certain place called Pataria, in which the heretics held their assemblies; and it is well known that a part of the city of Milan is, to this very day, called Pataria, or Contrada de Patarri. See Annotuit, ad Arnulphum Mediolenensis in Muratori's Scriptores rerum Italicar. tom. iv. p. 39, see also Saxius ad Sigonium
the pontiff and his adherents, who condemned so unjustly the conduct of such priests as entered into the bonds of a lawful and virtuous wedlock. The proceedings of Gregory appeared to the wiser part, even of those who approved of the celibacy of the clergy, unjust and criminal in two respects; first, in that his severity fell indiscriminately and with equal fury upon the virtuous husband and the licentious rake; that he dissolved, with a merciless hand, the chastest bonds of wedlock, and thus involved husbands and wives, with their tender offspring, in disgrace, perplexity, anguish, and want. The second thing criminal in the measures taken by this pontiff was, that instead of chastising the married priests with wisdom and moderation, and according to the laws of ecclesiastical discipline, whose nature is wholly spiritual, he gave them over to the civil magistrate, to be punished as disobedient and unworthy subjects, with the loss of their substance, and with the most shocking marks of undeserved infamy and disgrace.'
de Regno Italia, lib. ix. p. 536, tom. ii, opp. Sigonii. An opinion, of which, if I am not mistaken, Sigonius was the author, prevailed, that the name in question was given to the Milanese priests, who separated from the church of Rome, and retained their wives in opposition to the laws of the pontiffs. But this opinion is without foundation; and it appears evidently from the testimony of Arnulph and other historinas, that it was not the married priests, but the faction of the pontiffs, who condemned their conjugal bonds, that were branded with the opprobrious name of paterini. See Arnulph, lib. iii. c. x. Anton. Pagi Crit. in Ann. Bar. t. iij. ad A, 1057, iii. Lud. Ant. Muratori Antiq. Ital. medii ævi, tom, v. p. 82, who have demonstrated this in the most ample, learned, and satisfactory manner. Nor need we indeed look any where else for the origin of this word. It is abundantly known that the Manichæans, and their brethren the Paulicians, were extremely averse to marriage, which they looked upon as an institution invented by the evil principle; they, of consequence, who considered the marriages of the clergy as lawful, employed the ignominious name of palerini, to show that the pontiffs, who prohibited these marriages, were followers of the odious doctrine of the Manichæans.
s We must always remember that the priests, to whom their wires or mistresses were much dearer than the laws of the pontiffs, were not all of the same character ; nor were such of them as might be justiy esteemed criminal, all criminal in the same degree. The better sort of these ecclesiastics, among which we may count the Belgic and Milanese clergy, desired nothing more than to live after the manner of the Greeks, maintaining that it was lawful for a priest, before his consecration, to marry one virgin, though a plurality of wives was justly prohibited ; and they grounded this their opinion. upon the authority of St. Ambrose. See Jo. Petri Puricelli Dissertatio utrum S. Ambrosius clero suo Mediolam. permiserit, ut virgini semel nubere possent, republished by Muratori, in his Scriptores Italic, tom. iv. p. 123. Gregory and his successors ought to have dealt more gently with this kind of ecclesiastics, as the warmest admirers of the pontiffs acknowledge, than with those priests, who were either the patrons of concubinage, or who pretended to justify their espousing a plurality of wives. It was also unjust to treat, in the same manner, the monks, who, by the nature of their profession and vows, were necese sarily excluded from the nuptial state ; and the priests who could not bear the thoughts of being torn from the chaste partners of their bed, whom they had espoused with vir tuous sentiments and upright intentions, gor from the tender offspring which were the fruit of virtuous love.
t Theodoricus, Verdun. Epistola ad Gregorium VII. in Martene Thesauro Anecdolor rum, tom. I. p. 218. “Faciem meam in eo vel maxime confusione perfundunt, quod iegem de Clericorun incontinentia per Laicorum Insanias cobibenda unquam susceper