The Lay Investiture: Pope vs King - Research Paper Example

?THE LAY INVESTITURE: POPE VS. KING Insert of of the supervisor THE LAY INVESTITURE: POPE VS KING Lay investiture controversy was the most profound conflict between state in medieval Europe and the church. Several popes opposed the powers of European kings over control of investitures of church officials such as abbots and bishops. The major conflict began in 1075 between Henry IV, a holy roman emperor, and Pope Gregory VII. An important struggle over the control of investitures occurred between 1103-1107 between Pope Paschal II and Henry I of England (Wilhelm 1990, 37). In Western Europe and during the Middle Ages, religious and secular authorities were intertwined. Kings had taken some duties and trappings entitled to priests while some priests and bishops governed as feudal lords. The church lacked the governing power because the pope did not have coercive power to implement ecclesiastical policies. As such, it was necessary to employ the secular arm that was willing to implement the will of papacy. The monarchies saw the new action of papacy as usurping their power and as a result, conflicts emerged (De-La-Noy 1993, 72). During the time when Norman rule was established in England, there was a great need for change in the relationship between secular and church authorities. Gregorian reforms, which favored a central authority of Rome when dealing with local churches in Europe, were not fully accepted by Western Europe’s kings and monarchies. There was an increase in the effectiveness and scale of papal influence in local churches. At the same time, the powerful government established by Norman monarchy in England often opposed the influence and intervention of the pope in the affairs of local churches. As such, papal intervention and interference by the monarchy in the affairs of local churches led to investiture conflicts. Primarily at stake was the scope of papal influence at a time when both royal power and papal authority were growing. Although the Norman kings were not anti-papal, they were weary of the pope’s jurisdiction and power (Wilhelm 1990, 42). Although Gregory VII had prohibited the practice of lay investiture in 1075, the knowledge about the ban took a relatively long time to reach England. In fact, the decree was discovered by Archbishop Anselm in 1099 when he was in exile during William Rufus rule. After the death of William in 1100, Anselm returned to England after being invited by a newly installed King Henry 1. Anselm supported Henry’s rise to the throne against a protracted conflict with his brother, Robert. However, due to respect for papal decree, Anselm declined to support Henry’s demand to honor him and obey his commands. In addition, Anselm rejected to consecrate bishops that the king wanted. Henry did not want to quarrel with him while at the same time, he did not want to compromise the monarchy’s rights to homage and investiture (De-La-Noy 1993, 74). Despite mutual respect between Henry and Anselm, there was a direct conflict between them. Henry, who was not as violent as his predecessor Rufus, was resolute. He summoned Anselm and insisted that he pay homage by consecrating the bishop and priests that he had proposed, or he would leave the country. Anselm did not take any of the two options offered by Henry because he had deep conviction that he had to respect the pope, and it was his personal decision to either accept or decline the king’s demands. The conflict compelled the two to send emissaries to Rome in order to negotiate ways of solving their conflict. Pope Pascal II answered back by praising the king’s faithfulness on the matter but maintained his predecessor’s stand that forbade investiture and homage (Wilhelm 1990, 44). After a series of negotiations conducted by the king’s emissaries and the pope, there was some compromise in which Henry was allowed to invest in some bishop, but the 1102 letter by Pope Paschal II did not touch on homage but criticized investiture fervently. The Roman Council, which was attended by Anselm, affirmed the pope’s previous verdict although it tried to make peace with Henry by sending him flattering letters and doing away with clauses that supported excommunication of priests and bishops who were invested by laymen. Actually, Pope Paschal began to soften the conservative stance taken by his predecessor and started to compromise with some issues that raised controversies between the church and monarchies (Wilhelm 1990, 47). Placed in a difficult situation and unable to go back to England, Anselm wrote a letter to Henry and informed him that he was not ready topay homage to him as he had been doing to his predecessors. As a reaction to Anselm’s defiance, King Henry confiscated the revenues of the See of Canterbury and placed them in trust. Anselm initiated the proceedings that were aimed at Henry’s excommunication (De-La-Noy 1993, 90). There were complex negotiations between King Henry and Pope Paschal II, which were intended to find a solution to the protracted conflicts. In 1106, Anselm was informed of the negotiations and so he returned to England. An agreement was reached by bishops in London and the Council of King in 1107.The pope allowed the issue of homage while the king renounced investiture by laymen. Anselm declared that an elected bishop should not be denied consecration because he had paid homage to the king. The arrangement allowed delegates of the diocese to conduct Episcopal elections in the royal chapel so as to give the monarchy an opportunity to consult with the church (Wilhelm 1990, 37). The settlement between King Henry I of England and Pope Paschal II stirred the Concordant of Worms in 1122. In this pact, Henry V of Germany surrendered the right to investiture while Pope Calixtus II honored the concordant by allowing bishops and priests to be consecrated in the presence of kings or his representative. It is widely believed that the concordant was built from the agreement between Henry I of England and Pope Paschal II. After the concordant, the First Lateran Council recognized the pope’s supremacy in universal episcopacy and the church. In addition, the council accepted reluctantly the concessions made to Germany King Henry V (De-La-Noy 1993, 94). The agreement between King Henry I of England and Pope Paschal II and the Concordant of Worms marked the turning point where the church started to operate as a separate hierarchical entity that was capable of developing its own laws. However, this was not the case in England where laws that led to the establishment of the Church of England were formed, approved and implemented by secular power. Even today, the Church of England diocesans are chosen by the cathedral chapter after being appointed by the monarchy that is advised by the prime minister (Wilhelm 1990, 56). The disagreement in England over lay investiture was instrumental in the turmoil that gripped the country for seven years. The disagreement was between King Henry I who believed and was convinced that he had the traditional authority, rights, and privileges for homage and investiture and an archbishop who was convinced that he had an obligation of obeying decrees made by popes, and so he stood by the decree that forbade investiture and homage. The hectic negotiations showed that both the monarchy and the church demonstrated that their dispute was important and serious and each party had to struggle to ensure that its interests were catered for. The conflict between Henry I and Anselm was not only about their personal stand in relation to investiture and homage but broader issues that involved the boundary between the church and secular authorities, the interplay of power and authority between monarchy and papacy, and the control of Episcopal appointment. As a result of the resolution, the British monarchy retained the substance of its powers whereas the autonomy of the church was enhanced and respected. References De-La-Noy, Michael. 1993. The Church of England: a portrait. London: Simon and Schuster. Wilhelm, Frank. 1990. A history of the mediaeval church. London: SCM. Read More