A Key to the Knowledge of Church History Part 14

[Sidenote: Interference of the King of France in papal affairs.]

Boniface was a thoroughly bad and unscrupulous man, and at last died in a fit of disappointed rage at being taken prisoner by the troops of his equally unscrupulous enemy, Philip IV. of France, who had refused to acknowledge the {108} authority of the papal legate. Philip caused the death of Benedict XI. (A.D. 1303-A.D. 1304), whose honest goodness he feared, and then used his influence to procure the election of Clement V. (A.D. 1303-A.D. 1314), on condition of his pledging himself to aid in the French king's schemes to plunder and oppress the Church.

Clement, having thus sold himself, was not allowed to leave France, and the papal court was fixed at Avignon. The Pope was now completely at the mercy of Philip, who robbed the Church at his will, and plundered and murdered the Knights Templars with the connivance of Clement.

[Sidenote: The Popes at Avignon.] The sojourn of the Popes at Avignon (A.D. 1305-A.D. 1376) was a great blow to the temporal power of the papacy, and was often called by the Italians the Seventy Years'

Captivity. Meanwhile the Popes were again plunged into contests with the German emperors: Louis of Bavaria was excommunicated, and his empire laid under an interdict, on account of his refusal to accept his dominions from John XXII. (A.D. 1316-A.D. 1334). The papal authority in Italy had become almost nominal except in Rome itself, and even there it was much weakened by the rebellion under Rienzi, A.D. 1352.

Pope Innocent VI. (A.D. 1333-A.D. 1362), soon after his election, sent a legate to Rome, with orders to reduce not only the city itself to obedience, but all that was then included in the States of the Church; and this having been successfully accomplished, the Popes began to think of returning to Rome. [Sidenote: The return to Rome.] The court at Avignon had become fearfully corrupt, and some of those who composed it, and loved its evils, were ready to oppose any change; but Urban V.

(A.D. 1362-A.D. 1370), a really upright man, spent some of his episcopate at Rome, and his {109} successor, Gregory XI. (A.D.

1370-A.D. 1378) removed thither with his court two years before his death. The Cardinals however still clung to Avignon, and though, in compliance with the earnest wishes of the Roman people, they elected an Italian to be Pope under the name of Urban VI. (A.D. 1378-A.D. 1389), yet they were so offended at his zealous but indiscreet endeavours to reform the evils around him, that they declared him deposed, and set up an anti-Pope at Avignon. [Sidenote: The consequent schism.] The schism thus begun lasted nearly forty years (A.D. 1378-A.D. 1417), England, Germany, North Italy, Poland, and the Scandinavian kingdoms siding with the true Popes, while France, Scotland, Spain, and South Italy held with the anti-Popes. [Sidenote: Its results.] The troubles and corruptions of the Church now multiplied, Popes and anti-Popes alike made the acquisition of power and revenue their great object, and wickedness was left unrebuked both in Clergy and laity. A great impulse was given to the sale of indulgences or pardons, an evil practice which brought in large sums of money to the papal exchequer, and at the same time led to such abuses as probably to become a princ.i.p.al proximate cause of the Reformation.

[Sidenote: Council of Pisa.]

At length there was an universal longing for the cessation of the great schism in the Western Church, and a Council was held at Pisa, A.D.

1409, where it was agreed by the Cardinals belonging to the two parties to depose both Pope and anti-Pope, and to elect another who took the name of Alexander V., with an understanding that he was at once to reform and pacify the Church. But neither Pope nor anti-Pope would resign, so that there were three claimants instead of two, and very soon after his {110} election Alexander V. died. John XXIII. (A.D.

1410-A.D. 1415) was elected in his place, but he proved to be thoroughly devoid of principle, and the Council of Pisa having proved unsuccessful in promoting unity or reformation, another was convoked at Constance, A.D. 1414, under the presidency of the Emperor Sigismund I.

[Sidenote: Council of Constance.] This Council was attended by the representatives of all the monarchs of the West, as well as by a very large number of Bishops and Clergy, and it was decreed that the three claimants to the papal throne should be deposed. John XXIII. was thrown into prison, and, after considerable delay, Martin V. (A.D.

1417-A.D. 1431) was chosen to succeed him. The Council shortly after broke up, without having done any thing towards the much desired reformation of the Church, although the English, French, and German deputies had been very earnest in their endeavours to advance some scheme of reform. [Sidenote: Council of Basle.] Another Council met at Basle, A.D. 1431, whence it was transferred by Pope Eugenius IV. (A.D.

1431-A.D. 1447) first to Ferrara, and afterwards (A.D. 1439) to Florence. This opportunity was also lost in a dispute between the Council and the Pope, and there seemed to be nothing more to hope for from Councils as a means of reformation.

[Sidenote: State of the papacy at the end of the fifteen century.]

Nor were the personal characters of the Popes who filled the see of Rome during the remainder of the century, such as to encourage any expectation that their influence would be employed to revive religion, or to encourage holy living. Worldliness and ambition, revenge and immorality, cast a deep shadow over the records of the papacy at this time, until the century closes with the reign of Alexander VI., or {111} Roderigo Borgia (A.D. 1492-A.D. 1503), who was elected by bribery, and whose shameless vice and cruelty brought greater scandals upon the Church than any of his predecessors had done.

Section 3. _The Monastic Orders._

Monastic orders, though not by any means an invention of the Middle Ages, may yet fairly be said to have attained their height, both of prosperity and of usefulness, during this period of Church History.

[Sidenote: Early rise of monasticism.] We may trace the origin of Christian monastic life to very early times, when persecution drove many Christians to a life of loneliness and privation in desert places.

The mode of life thus begun from necessity was afterwards continued from choice, and in the hope of more complete self-devotion to G.o.d's service; and the solitary hermits and anchorites of primitive ages became the forerunners of an elaborate system of religious communities of men and women.

[Sidenote: Later influences brought to bear on it.]

St. Basil, in the fourth century, brought monasticism into a more definite form, and St. Athanasius during the same century introduced it into Europe from the East. In the West the religious life spread and flourished under the fostering care of such men as St. Augustine and St. Gregory the Great, whilst by St. Benedict in the sixth century it was developed into the famous Benedictine rule, to which, with few exceptions, all the European monasteries conformed, and which was the parent of various minor orders or subdivisions[1].

{112}

[Sidenote: Beneficial results of monasticism.]

It is not easy to estimate the vast amount of good which the labours of the Benedictine monks conferred on the Church of the Middle Ages, good which has left many traces to the present day. Not only did they provide in a vast number of instances for the spiritual wants of the parishes in and near which they lived, as well as for the education of the young, both rich and poor, but they were also the philosophers, the authors, the artists, and the physicians, nay, even the farmers and the mechanics of Mediaeval times. They built cathedrals and churches, made roads and bridges, copied books when writing stood in the place of printing, and were in general the props and pioneers of civilization.

Amongst the very large number of men who embraced the monastic life, it is no marvel that some were not all they professed to be, or that occasional causes for scandal arose, but the popular idea of the universal corruption of the inhabitants of the monasteries is unsupported by facts, and much of what helped to give rise to this false notion is traceable to the doings of the mendicant or preaching friars. These begging orders were offshoots from the regulars, and were but too often very unworthy representatives of the parent stock[2].

Section 4. _The Crusades._

Amongst the events which stand out most distinctly in the history of the Church in the Middle Ages, the long series of warlike expeditions known as the {113} Crusades bear a prominent part, stretching out as they do from the end of the eleventh to nearly the end of the thirteenth centuries.

The empire of the Arabs had died out, but they had been succeeded in their schemes of conquest as well as in their adherence to the false faith of Mahomet, by the savage Turks, whose ferocity and hatred of Christianity were especially displayed in the ill-treatment of those Christians whose piety led them to visit the scenes of our Blessed Lord's Life and Death. [Sidenote: Cause of the Crusades.] The indignation excited in Europe by the stories of outrage and desecration which were from time to time brought back by pilgrims to the Holy Land, at length found an outlet and expression in the First Crusade, which was preached, A.D. 1095, by Peter the Hermit, with the sanction both of the Pope and the Patriarch of Constantinople. This expedition resulted in the taking of the Holy City by the armies of the Cross (A.D. 1099), and the establishment in it of a Christian sovereignty.

[Sidenote: Their transient results.]

The First Crusade was the only one which had any real success, and even this was a transient one, for less than ninety years afterwards (A.D.

1187) Jerusalem was again taken by the Saracens, and has never since been a Christian power. But though the deliverance of the Holy Land from the yoke of the infidels was not accomplished by the Crusades, and though they caused much misery and bloodshed, and were stained by much lawlessness and plunder, yet the advance of the barbarous and anti-Christian influences of Mahometanism was checked, the Churches of Europe were saved from the soul-destroying apostasy which had over-run so large a portion of Asia, and the Crescent waned before the Cross.

{114}

[Sidenote: Reasons for their ill-success.]

Much of the ill success with which the Crusaders met during several of these expeditions, may be traced to jealousies and heart-burnings between the different princes and n.o.bles who took part in them, whilst disagreements on a larger scale were amongst the evil fruits of the unhappy division between Eastern and Western Christendom. Latin Christians appear in too many instances to have made use of the opportunities afforded them to injure and oppress their weaker brethren of the Greek Church, even whilst marching against the common foe of both, and the Fourth Crusade (A.D. 1203) was actually diverted from its legitimate purpose in order to conquer Constantinople, and establish a Latin Emperor, as well as a Latin Patriarch within its walls.

[Sidenote: Good directly brought about by them.]

Still, whatever may have been the want of single-mindedness on the part of many of the professed soldiers of the Cross, whatever the amount of failure with regard to the immediate objects of the Crusades, it is clear that much good was brought about through them by G.o.d's Providence, not only in the check given to the encroachments of the unbelievers, but also more indirectly in the quenching of rising heresies, in the greater purity of life which in many cases accompanied the taking of the Cross, the weakening of the feudal system, the impulse given to learning and civilization. Earnestness and self-devotion such as were shown by G.o.dfrey de Bouillon, St. Louis of France, and no doubt by many more amongst the Crusaders, were rewarded and blessed, though not in what might have seemed at first sight the only way of success.

{115}

Section 5. _State of Religions Relief and Practice during the Middle Ages._

[Sidenote: Popular idea of the Middle Ages,]

There is a wide-spread notion that the Middle Ages were also "Dark Ages," full of ignorance and superst.i.tion, with hardly a ray of knowledge or true religion to enlighten the gloom, and also that the Church was the great encourager of this state of things; indeed, that it was mainly due to the influence of the monks and of the Clergy generally.

[Sidenote: not founded in history.]

This belief is however quite unhistorical. No doubt there was abundance of ignorance as well as of superst.i.tion, its natural consequence, but there are ample means of accounting for both in the political condition of Europe at that time, nor is it needful to blame the Church for what was in fact due to the sins and errors of the world.

[Sidenote: Real causes of ignorance and vice in the Middle Ages.]

The confusion incident to the breaking up of the old Roman empire, and the occupation of its different provinces by less highly-civilized nations, had been followed by other disorders after the death of Charlemagne and the part.i.tion of his dominions; and the constant state of warfare and aggression in which most of the princes of that time lived, was not calculated to leave their subjects much leisure for intellectual culture. Besides this, we must take into account the crushing influence of the feudal system, which gave the n.o.bles almost absolute power over their serfs or dependants, thus encouraging lawlessness on the one hand, and causing degradation on the other. The scarcity and costliness of books before the invention of printing was another {116} formidable obstacle to any universal spread of education, all which causes tended to bring learning into contempt amongst the restless barons and their followers, restricting it chiefly to the Clergy and the monks. Thus not only theology, but secular knowledge besides, found a home in the Church, which was at once the guardian and the channel of literature.

[Sidenote: No scarcity of the means of grace in Mediaeval times.]

There are also good grounds for believing that the provision made by the Church for the spiritual necessities of the people was not, at any rate, less abundant than is the case at the present day. Indeed, there is no doubt that both Churches and Clergy, and consequently opportunities for worship and instruction, were far more in proportion to the number and needs of the population than they can be said to be now in our own country, even after the persevering and liberal efforts of late years. [Sidenote: Difficulties respecting Services and Bibles on the vernacular,] If it is objected that the want of free access to the Holy Scriptures, and the use of the Latin tongue in the public services of the Church, were calculated largely to outweigh any advantages which the people of those days might possess, we may remember that those comparatively few who could read were just those who would have access to the necessarily rare copies then existing of the Word of G.o.d, and that to them also the Latin version would be more comprehensible than any other. Again, with regard to Latin services, it would have been difficult, if not impossible, to translate the devotions of the Church into any of the slowly-forming dialects of the different European nations; whilst Latin was more universally spoken and understood than French is now, and was probably intelligible to a larger number of men and women during a {117} considerable portion of the Middle Ages than any one of the other languages used.

[Sidenote: but the wish for them not wholly disregarded.]

As the various languages of Europe became gradually developed, a desire naturally arose amongst those who spoke them for services in the vernacular; and this desire was not left altogether ungratified even long before the Reformation. Thus, in England, the Epistles and Gospels and the Litany were translated into the native language in the Services of the Church, and interlinear translations were made of many portions of the Mediaeval Prayer Books[3]. Neither must we imagine that the translations of Holy Scripture put forth by the Reformers, or even that earlier version to which Wickliffe gave his name, were by any means the first efforts made to produce the Holy Bible in the vernacular. From Anglo-Saxon times downwards, we have traces of Bibles translated for the use of those who preferred such versions; and to the truth of this statement may be quoted the testimony of John Foxe, the "martyrologist," who says, "If histories be well examined, we shall find, both before the Conquest and after, as well before John Wickliffe was born as since, the whole body of the Scriptures by sundry men translated into this our country tongue[4]."

[Sidenote: State of learning in the Middle Ages.]

The Mediaeval Church was, in reality, a great supporter of learning.

Our two great Universities of Oxford and Cambridge were not less flourishing during the Middle Ages than at present; and nearly all of the colleges and halls at both Universities were founded in those days {118} of supposed darkness. Nor was this care for literature confined to the Church in England; Universities of equal note were to be found abroad at Paris, Pavia, Bologna, Salamanca, and other places, whilst the Schoolmen, or professors, who taught in these seats of learning, and who numbered amongst themselves the most acute thinkers and reasoners of the time, such as St. Anselm, Peter Lombard, Albertus Magnus, and St. Thomas Aquinas, were all attached to some Religious Order. Enough of the results of their labours have come down to our days to show us that it is neither wise nor just to despise the mental work which they accomplished, even though their conclusions may not always be in accordance with our own.

It is not meant by what has been said above to infer that the Mediaeval Church was altogether free from blemishes, or to deny that these blemishes did, as time went on, increase to an extent which rendered reformation not only expedient but necessary. [Sidenote: The effects of Roman influence.] We have already seen that the supremacy claimed by the Popes over the whole Church was productive of great, though, by G.o.d's good Providence, not unmitigated, evil in a political point of view; and much of the error in faith or practice on the part of Christians of those days, seems traceable to the tendency on the part of Rome to crystallize opinions into dogmas, and then to impose those dogmas on the Church. Thus the "Romish doctrine concerning purgatory,"

and the mechanism of "pardons," or indulgences, grew out of the floating belief held by such holy men as St. Augustine, that the souls of the faithful would undergo some more perfect purification after death than is attainable in this world; while the elaborate system of invocations of, and devotions to, the Blessed {119} Virgin Mary and the saints, were built up out of a not only harmless but justifiable faith in the intercessions of the Saints for the Church on earth, and the wish to obtain a share in their prayers. So again, the denial of the cup to the laity, which was justly felt by many to be such a grievous privation, was the natural consequence of the over-refinements of the Roman Church respecting the doctrine of the Holy Eucharist[5].

[Sidenote: The right spirit in which to regard the Mediaeval Church.]

But whatever imperfections may have clung to the Visible Church in the Middle Ages, whether owing to external hindrances, or to the human frailties of her members, we have no right to doubt that she was still the one great instrument in G.o.d's Hands for the salvation of souls.

Neither should we dwell so exclusively on what is often an exaggerated estimate of the extent and duration of these blemishes, as to ignore the zeal and self-devotion which grudged neither expense nor labour in the service of G.o.d and the adornment of His House and Worship, the charity which truly "cared for the poor," the faith and holiness which shone forth in the public and private lives of such men as St.

Ferdinand of Spain, St. Louis of France, and Rudolf of Hapsburg, Emperor of Germany, and were, doubtless, not wanting in the case of countless numbers of their fellow-Christians, whose names, little known and soon forgotten on earth, are for ever written in G.o.d's Book of Remembrance.