When Otho I was crowned at Rome in 962, he w-as in a position which permitted, and almost necessitated, the revival of the imperial pretensions, which had long been dormant, while that supreme dignity was squabbled over by Burgimdian or other princes. There was occasion for the coercion of a strong hand, external to Rome and free from jiapal affiliations. For three quar- ters of a century the papacy had been the spoil of fac- tions, and had been held by the nominees, tools, or sci- ons of turbulent nobles and depraved women. It was
ROMAN EMPIRE, THE HOLY 95 ROMAN EMPIRE, THE HOLY
the age of Alberic and Jlarozia. and of that late fiction papissa Joanna. The interposition of some foreign con- trol was imperatively required. The treachery of John VIII necessitated the assumption by Otlio of the right to regulate papal elections, and the imposition of an oath upon the cardinals and the Koman people to admit the imperial supremacy. This was manifestly a usurpation by the secular authority, but the state of affairs demand- ed it. Naturalh', as good order increased in the Church and the sense of spiritual duties and responsibilities re- vived, this subordination was impatiently borne ; and a steady effort, ultimately successful under Gregory VII, was made to render the Church independent of the em- pire, and superior to it in dignity as in sanctity. Here, then, was a wager of battle, not likely to be forgotten or neglected by either party, which led to the humiliation of Henry IV at Canossa, and to the exile of Gregory VII.
While Henry was yet a child, and after Ilildebrand had acquired predotninance in the Koman curia, though not yet pope, Alexander II had been induced to issue a decree against the lay investiture of clerical benefici- aries. The decree was renewed by Ilildebrand as pope, and became the chief ground of controversy with the empire after Gregory's death. The quarrel was not closed in Germany till the Diet of Worms in 112"2, and in England till after the assassination of Thomas a Becket. It broke out afresh between Germany and the pope, but was merged in other contentions. The principles in- volved in the question merited the zeal and energy dis- played on either side, but did not jiistifj' the spiritual or secular pretensions advanced or the procedures employ- ed. Ambition, jealousy, and passion soon dominated over the war of parties.
The question, simply stated, was whether the Church or the empire — the ecclesiastical or the secular authori- ty— should have the right of conferring ecclesiastical benefices. It would require an extended exposition of the political, social, and religious constitution of those times to furnish any satisfactory exhibition of the sig- nificance and bearings of this dispute. Such knowledge must be sought in the pontifical and imperial histories; the leading topics alone can be indicated here. The feudal system was in full vigor. Even the Church was feudalized. Society was moulded into a regular hie- rarchy of gradations from the lowest vassal to emperor and pope. The political and the ecclesiastical organiza- tions were arranged on parallel lines. The political and the social system would be broken and rendered impo- tent by permitting the interference of an extrinsic pow- er, in the bestowal of dignities, honors, and commands. If these were conferred by the pope or by his deputies, the occupants would be withdrawn from their allegiance to their temporal head and from their obligations to the State. But the experience of the age proved that if these appointments were received from the empire or secular government, they would be granted and sought for worldly motives and selfish considerations; W"ould be lavished upon feudal nobles and their relatives; would be used for private feuds and temporal purposes; and would be severed from the due services of religion. Archbishoprics and bishoprics, abbacies and canonries, with their rich domains, would be grasped by warlike, rapacious, corrupt, and truculent barons who would scorn their religious vocation and the cure of souls. This is proved by the aspect of the Church in every countrv, and even in Rome, under the later Carlovingians and the earlier Germanic emperors. Neither of the co-ordinate powers could yield the point in issue without grave peril to itself and graver peril to society. The basis of set- tlement, which afforded a temporary or apparent solu- tion of the problem, was very jilausible, but could not be satisfactory in practice to either contestant. The settlement was that ecclesiastical dignities and offices should be conferred bj^ the Church by delivery of the ring and crosier, and that the temporalities attached thereto should be bestowed by the sovereign /»«?• sctp- trum. That this arrangement coula not secure peace
is demonstrated by the quarrel between Henry II and Thomas :i Becket.
The vast importance of the dispute will appear more manifest if it be presented in its most abstract form : Should the clergy be dependent upon the State V In the condition of society at that time— still semi-pagan and more than semi-barbarous— morality, religion, civiliza- tion, and Christianity would have been ruined by being sacrificed to the worldly atipetencies of princes and sub- jects ; the reign of violence anil blood would have been unchecked; the heathen invaders of the empire had been with patient eflbrt brought into subjection to a higher law than force; the work of centuries would have been undone by the subjugation of the spiritual authority which alone enforced moral restraints. Should Church dignitaries be released from all subordination to the State and depend solely upon the head of the Church? Then would ensue chronic discord between the supreme regulators of society ; utter impotence of the secular authority for the protection of the nations or for the maintenance of order; the most unrestrained license in the high places of the Church ; neglect of Christian sentiment, precepts, duties; luxury, sensuali- ty, and rottenness; with arrogant tyranny over thought and feeling on the part of the ruling caste ; and with the abject servility of superstition and ignorance on the part of the laity, who would be lewd in every sense of the word. The question, in its ultimate tendency, was whether Christendom should be subjected to the tyran- ny of the sword or to the tyranny of the crosier. This was the dilemma. Its character is illustrated by the whole history of Europe from the 9th century to the 15th. See Investituuks.