menu_book Chapter 60

Section 60 of History of Rome and the Popes in the Middle Ages, Volume 3, by Hartman Grisar. This LibriVox recording is in the public domain. Chapter 7, Part 1. The Roman Sea and the Franks. Though among the Franks, ecclesiastical life had small freedom, the weak episcopate being controlled by the Merovingian kings, and the church practically reduced to a national institution,

Yet there are many things which make it clear that the Frankish church considered herself one of the daughters of the great family presided over by the bishop of Rome, the custodian of unity. Bishops such as Caesarius of Arles and Evitas of Vienne, who excelled their own period and expressed so well the bond which unites all churches in Rome, were no longer to be met

in the Frankish states, now riven asunder by ceaseless feuds. There everything had become petty, for the maladministration, the avarice and ambition of the princely families, while stimulating intrigues and servility, discouraged all real progress. The memory of the many famous leaders of the early Church of Gaul was, however, still cherished, and in the midst of all the oppression and the fratricidal wars, the protection and

wholesome influence of the Mother Church of Rome was never forgotten. Among the Frankish councils, which expressed in words their devotion to Rome. The Second Council of Tours in 567 holds a prominent place. The assembled bishops declared that they were only following the traditions of past times in obeying the papal decrees for what priests would dare gainsay the enactments of the Apostolic See. The councils of Aurelianum or Orlan in 538, 541, and 549 either express in words

their submission to the Roman See, or else clearly imply their submission. The ninth canon of the Council of Agatha or Agde in 506 and the preamble of the second Council of Arausio or Orange in 529 might also be quoted in this connection. The Metropolitan of the Province of Ludognesus II, Leo of Senones, or Sens, lodged an appeal to be heard either by the Pope of Rome or by a council against a certain unheard-of encroachment by King Childebert I on the Church's rights.

Bishop Anacarius of Anticiodorum speaks of Rome as a city revered by the whole world, where the direction of all churches is concentrated. The bishops of Arles, owing to the facility their metropolitancy afforded for intercourse between Rome and the Frankish countries, were usually appointed by the popes, vicars of the apostolic see, for Gaul. Strictly speaking, they were vicars only for that part of Gaul, to which Arles, amidst the incessant political changes, happened to be

long. For there only could the apostolic vicar exercise in practice his plenary powers, though both in Rome and at Arles itself the feeling prevailed that the sea of Arles should convey to the whole of Gaul the influence of the head of the church for the benefit both of unity and discipline. In 545, as previously stated, Pope Vigilius raised Oxanius to the dignity of a vicar, and in 546 did the same for his successor Aurelian. Pelagius I in 557 likewise promoted

Sapaudus to the Vicariate, and Gregory I in 595 Virgilius. The first three were to be vicars throughout the kingdom of Childebert I, the fourth throughout that of Childebert II. According to the usual letter of authority sent by Rome to these apostolic vicars on their nomination, they were expected to watch over the course of ecclesiastical affairs and to report on it to the Holy See. All councils were to be held under their presidency, and they were to settle

in the name of the apostolic see, the disputes which might arise among the bishops. Important matters, however, particularly such as related to the faith, and which could not be decided in Gaul were to be referred to Rome. Bishops were not at liberty to refuse attending such synods as were convened by the apostolic vicar, and if unavoidably detained, had at least to send a priest or deacon who might report the decisions arrived at by the vicar in the Pope's

name, to all of which unconditional obedience was due. With the aid of the position and activity of the papal vicar at Arles, as Pelagius I wrote to his own vicar, Sapaudus, the popes trusted that the eternal stability of the everlasting rock, Peter, the foundation stone of the church, would remain manifest in the authority of the successors of the apostle and their vicars. The Holy Fathers, he says, willed that matters should be so arranged, and our forefathers

transmitted the necessary powers to yours. Thus, through God's grace, was the holy universal Church of God governed by our predecessors, who bestowed a portion of their cares on others. Few notices exist among the sparse records preserved of the measures taken by the popes through their vicars in the Frankish lands, or of the vicars' intervention in church affairs. in all likelihood, their interference was not often called for. We do hear, nevertheless,

that in 545, Pope Vigilius commissioned his vicar, Oxanius, to hold judgment over Praetect status, bishop of Covellio, or Covellon, and to see that among the Franks, orders were bestowed canonically. Further, that Sapaudis the vicar gave Pope Pelagius I due notice of a certain outrage committed against the church, upon which Pelagius requested him to send fuller information. Finally, that Pelagius lodged a formal complaint against the conduct of King Childebert in having,

in a case in which Sapaudis, the archbishop and vicar, was concerned, summoned him to take his trial and with his chief suffragan bishop as his judge. In another case, we learn that Pelagius addressed a strongly worded circular letter to Sapaudis and other bishops on account of the continuance of gross abuses in the country. Especially did he reprove the premature bestowal of episcopal consecration among the Franks and lax toleration of superstitious remnants of

idolatry. The Pope states that it had there become possible for a layman to be in a single day, ordained cleric, acolith, subdeacon, deacon, presbyter, and even bishop. The complaint was not unfounded, but this abuse, and others likewise prevalent in Gaul, arose through appointing to bishoprics men who were totally unqualified for the post, and who owed their advancement solely to the court or to powerful factions. Of two bishops whose habits betrayed the barbarity of

Gaul during these ages, an account has been left by the historian of the Franks in a narrative which bears the stamp of truth. Their story, which we are not at liberty to pass over in silence, also has a bearing on the relations of the Roman primacy with the Frankish lands. In the Battle of Mustay-Calmes, writes Gregory of Tours, there were two brothers, Salunius and Sagittarius, both bishops, the former of Ebradunum, the latter of Vapingum.

Their weapon was not, however, the heavenly cross, but they bore secular arms, helmets, and breastplates, and what is more, with their own hands. They were reported to have slain many. There was also much murmuring against them. When they reached their own bishoprics, and could now again do as they willed. They began a mad course of robbery, bloodshed, murder, adultery, and other crimes. On one occasion, with a troop armed with swords and darts,

they attacked Victor, the Bishop of Tricastra, who was then engaged in celebrating the anniversary of his elevation. Bursting in, they stripped him of his clothing, thrashed the servants, and made off with the plate and all that had been prepared for the feast, leaving the unfortunate bishop in a sad state of vexation. On hearing of this, King Guntram directed the holding of a council in the city of Lugdunum. Gregory further narrates how the council, held under the presidency of

Nicatius, found both of them guilty and deposed them. The culprits complained, however, to the king, who was still well disposed towards them, and begged his permission to go to the pope. This petition the king granted, and even gave them letters to take with them, Coming to Pope John III, they told how they had been ousted from office, though the charges against them were of a most trivial character. Upon this, the Pope sent letters to the king, commanding him to reinstate the suppliants, which the king also did without further ado, first administering due rebuke.

The bishops were, however, past redemption. Every day they entangled themselves more and more in sin. They raged against their burghers, and in their fury, even flogged people till they bled. On new complaints being carried to the king, he again summoned them to appear before him. Our authority proceeds to recount how they were condemned to solitary confinement in a monastery,

particularly because Sagittarius had indulged in imprudent and insulting remarks regarding Guntram's illegitimate offspring. They were not released till long afterwards, and then only for a special reason. The eldest son of the king fell sick, and the partisans of the condemned men persuaded the king that it was a judgment from heaven, because he had condemned innocent bishops to do penance in monasteries. Sagittarius and Salonius, for a while after their release,

behaved themselves a little better and made some show of zeal, but they soon relapsed into their evil ways, passing their days in revelry and in the company of women with whom they misconducted themselves. By the king's order, a synod was at last held in 579 at Kabulanum, or Shalon sur Sun, which again deposed the episcopal pair and sent them to prison. Both, however, contrived to escape and began wandering about the country till they met with the reward of their misconduct.

Sagittarius was killed when on a warlike excursion. The account by Gregory of Tours, which we have just given, with its grimness unimpaired, shows a peculiarity of those times, namely, the part taken by the king in episcopal trials, in councils, and in the execution of ecclesiastical sentences. The bishops themselves, out of courtly habit, were wont to seek the king's assistance for their own affairs. Even worthy pontiffs, amidst the savage lawlessness that

prevailed everywhere, felt unequal to their task without the support of the secular power. The popes were helpless face to face with such a sad state of affairs, and it may even be that their knowledge of these disorders was of the slightest, for the wars prevailing also in Italy created a chasm and interfered with all intercourse. The Romans see accordingly, as a rule, left the settlement of ecclesiastical disputes to the bishops and the rulers of the land,

as Pope John III may well have done in the case narrated, where he may have set aside, merely temporarily, the sentence against the two deposed bishops, leaving the matter to be tried and judgment given at a synod held in the country itself. Moreover, in many cases, the intervention of the Holy See must have been hampered by disagreements among the bishops and by the jealousy, ambition, and weakness rife among them. As regards the vicariate of Arles in particular,

it is certain that it never quite fulfilled the expectations of the popes, the causes responsible for its failure being the incapacity of the vicars, the political chaos existing in the country, and the character of the authorities, secular and ecclesiastic. It is, however, wrong to state, as certain authors do, that the rights of the Archbishop of Barlez were never once acknowledged, even at the greater councils in which, by virtue of his vicariate, he was entitled to preside.

On the contrary, no single council took place in his presence at which he did not preside. In those councils, in which he does not appear as president, he had reasons for being absent, and being under no obligation to attend, sent no representative. Among the Franks of that day, the popes not only tacitly tolerated an extension of the king's authority to church matters, but actually promoted it, whenever they fancied it would

prove profitable to the commonwealth. It would have been difficult to find other means of repressing the lawlessness prevailing among the subjects, and frequently, the goodwill of the monarch could be secured for the religious welfare of the people only at the cost of such concessions. Pelagius I, for instance, tells the piously disposed King Childebert I, upon whom he set great hopes, that God willed that your majesty should assume in this period the defense of the

church's peace against her enemies. And on another occasion, he reminds him that God has confided the churches to his protection. He takes care, however, to impress upon him that he must not venture to deal with church affairs as he pleases, but must rather strive to see that the church's ancient rules are duly carried out. In the case mentioned above, of the dispute with Sapaudis the vicar, Pelagius does not scruple to reprimand the sovereign for having infringed the church's

laws, nor may such an infringement be allowed to pass without a protest, lest it should become a precedent and lead to confusion in the churches. Whilst fully acknowledging the praiseworthy manner in which the king takes to heart the care of the church. It is nevertheless his duty to ensure that no further steps be taken to the detriment of the church's precepts. If Childebert wishes to be accounted truly pious, he must observe the ordinances of the Holy Fathers. The popes,

when appointing the archbishops of Arles to the vicariate and bestowing on them the pallium, in the accompanying letter, wisely laid weight on the fact that this distinction was given at the king's request. There was a certain advantage in waiting until both the king and the archbishop had approached the Holy See with a petition for the nomination, for in this way the danger was averted of any representative being appointed to whom the king might have taken exception.

In one such case, Pope Vigilius took this diplomatic step, not only at the court of Childebert, the Frankish king, but also at the court of Byzantium, and refused to create Oxania's vicar, and bestow on him the pallium, until the matter had been referred to the emperor Justinian. Such hesitation was, however, an entirely new phenomenon in the history of the Western church. It is true, so he remarks, he might have settled the matter without the emperor's

consent, but he prefers thus to demonstrate his respect. Such a policy of deference was peculiar to Vigilius and is perhaps explained by the character of this unhappy pope and by the relations in which he stood to Byzantium. Of the other popes, only one, namely Gregory the Great, to a certain extent, followed the example of Vigilius in seeking the emperor's advice before investing a Frankish bishop with the Pallium. He too seems, however, to have done so only in view

of the strained relations existing between Rome and the suspicious Byzantine court. The dealings of the papacy with the newborn Western states, now occupying the ancient provinces of the empire, were watched in the East with ill-disguised jealousy and suspicion. Byzantium, with its rigid conception of legitimacy, found it difficult to relinquish the idea that the emperor had a certain paramount authority over those countries.

Many in the West, who were still Roman at heart, and among them the popes, felt more over that, in the right order of things, the new nations should not only be on friendly terms, but also show their respect to the great emperor of the Christian world. The Franks themselves too, now that they had been converted and had learned to appreciate Roman civilization, were technically no longer mere barbarians, or barbare nationes and guentes.

who, according to the theory in vogue, should by right be subjugated to the Roman Empire. Conformably with the prevalent views, approved also by the Church, they were fitted to become honored allies of the Roman state, to which, however, the highest rank was always due. This is what Pope Pelagius I means when he calls the Roman Emperor the father of the Frankish kings, and this in an official document addressed to the kings themselves, with no fear of wounding,

their susceptibilities. Pope Vigilius also admonishes them concerning the duty, which to them is an advantage, of maintaining intact the friendship and alliance with the empire. The imperial theory of the later Middle Ages is closely connected with this view taken by the popes of the authority of the Roman Empire. The state of the church among the Franks was as yet far removed from what it was when Charles the Great was raised to the Roman Empire

as the Greek emperors were far from being supreme rulers or heads of a confederation of all nations in East and West. The Franks, as we have seen, acknowledged the Roman primacy and belonged to the Church Catholic, yet we cannot help noticing that the ties uniting the country to the popes were now less intimate than when Gaul still formed an integral part of the Roman Empire. The frequent and intimate intercourse of early times with the Apostolic See was no longer evident,

and what Pope Seresius, Innocent I, Zosimus, Leo, Hillary, Anastasius II, and others had done for the Gallican Church could not easily be repeated under the Merovingians. In this, we can perceive the disadvantage due to the breaking away of these countries from the Christian Empire. It was in consequence of this separation that the disunion of the sovereigns, their selfish aims, and a certain national exclusiveness raise difficulties against even the most kindly meant influences coming from abroad. Under Gregory the Great, we shall find intercourse growing more frequent between the Franks and the Holy See, but later, in the 7th century, our authorities mentioned but few communications as having taken place.

During this period, acknowledgement of the primacy was shown principally by attachment to the Church's unity. Anyone acquainted with the organization of the Church is, however, aware that the primacy of the Popes need not be incessantly manifested by the exercise of their authority, for the very fact of belonging to the Catholic Church involves, in all who do, submission to the visible, divinely appointed head of the Church.

When we confess one only Church of God, writes Pelagius II to the Frankish bishop on Aquarius, we mean that we are all established upon the one rock on which Christ has founded the Catholic faith. End of section 60