father in his train, he halted at Compiegne, and sum- moned a council of his prelates to accomplish the work from which his savage nobles shrunk. With unfalter- ing willingness they undertook the odious task, declar- ing their competency through the power to bind and to loose conferred upon their order as the vicars of Christ and the turnkeys of heaven. They held the wretched prisoner accountable for all the evils which the empire had suffered since the death of Charlemagne, and sum- moned him at least to save his soul by prompt confes- sion and penitence, now that his earthly dignity was lost beyond redemption. . . . With that overflowing hyp- ocritical unction which is the most disgusting exhibition of clerical craft, the bishops labored with him for his own salvation, until, overcome by their eloquent exhor- tations, he threw himself at their feet, begged the par- don of his sons, and implored their prayers in his be- half, and eagerly demanded the imposition of such pen- ance as would merit absolution. The request was not denied. In the church of St. Mary, before the tombs of the holy St. Medard and St. Sebastian, the discrowned monarch was brought into the presence of his son. and surrounded by a gaping crowd. Tliere he threw him- self upon a sackcloth, and four times confessed his sins with abundant tears, accusing himself of offending God, scandalizing the Church, and bringing destruction upon his people, for the expiation of which he demanded penance and absolution by the imposition of those holy hands to which had been confided the power to bind and to loose. Then, handing his written confession to the bishops, he took off sword and belt, and laid them at the foot of the altar, where his confession had already been placed. Throwing off his secidar garments, he put on the white robe of the penitent, and accepted from his ghostly advisers a penance which shoifld in- hibit him during life from again bearing arms. The world, however, was not as yet quite prepared for this spectacle of priestly arrogance and royal degradation. The disgust which it excited hastened a counter-revo- lution ; and when Louis was restored to the throne, Ebbo of Rheims and St. Agobard of Lyons, the leaders in the solemn pantomime, were promptly punished and de- graded. Yet the piety of Louis held that the very sentence for the imposition of which they incurred the penalty was valid until abrogated by equal authority, and accordingly he caused himself to be formally rec- onciled to the Church before the altar of St. Denis, and abstained from resuming his sword until it was again belted on him by the hand of a bishop" (Lea, Studies in Ch. Hist. p. 319-321). " These melancholy scenes," says MUman {FAit. Christianity, bk. v, ch. ii), '"concern Chris- tian history no further than as displaying the growing power of the clergj', the religion of Louis graduaUy quailing into abject superstition, the strange fusion and incorporation of civil and ecclesiastical affairs." For six years more Louis the Pious swaj-ed the sceptre of the Carlovingian empire, but he did it without power — a tool in the hands of contending factions, which at his death took up arms in open warfare, and continued their contest until Lothaire had been defeated on the field of Fontcnay, and peace restored by the division of the empire at Verdun. But what is most eventful about these transactions in the life and reign of Louis the Pious, and leads us to assign them such prominence here, is the part which the clergy played in arranging, conducting, and accomplishing them, and thus bring- ing them under the sanction of religion. This cir- cumstance alone is enough to show how the power of the Church was growing. But there was another and more important circumstance that still more clearly in- dicates it. Stephen IV had died, and a successor had been chosen who assumed the responsibility of the papal chair as I'aschal I. Instead of waiting for his confirma- tion by Louis, he took immediate ])OSsession of the high dignity conferred upon him by the Church, and thus inaugurated the principle of independence of the pope from the emperor. It is true a deprecatory epistle was
LOUIS VI
525
LOUIS XIV
prndently dispatched from Rome, but the same liberty was taken by his successor Eugeuius II, who contented himself with sending a legate to apjirise the emperor of his accession, instead of awaiting the imperial sanc- tion to the election; and though the Romans were af- terwards obhged to bind themselves by oath never to consent to the installation of a pope elect until the sanc- tion of the emperor had reached Rome, the eftbrt was unavailing. Events were hurrying on destined to ren- der all such measures futile, and to accomplish the revo- lution of European institutions, resulting in the power of tlie priesthood and the irresponsible autocracy of the pope (comp. Lea, Studies in Ch. Hist. p. 38-42).
In the ipiestion of image-worship alone, perhaps, it can be sai(l that Louis played an independent part. It was under his commission that Claudius of Turin la- bored in the interests of iconoclasm, and it was by his influence, also, that Eugenius II was forced to amity to- wards the Eastern advocates of iconoclasm. Compare Milman, Latin Christianity, bk. v, chap, ii, A.D. 839, and the articles Claudius ; Clemens ; Iconoclasm.