LIBERTY UNIVERSITY
The Defense of
Rome and the Rise of the Papacy
A RESEARCH PAPER SUBMITTED TO DR. WILLIAM D. BRYANT
PROFESSOR
LIBERTY UNIVERSITY ONLINE, SCHOOL OF RELIGION
IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR
CHURCH HISTORY 301
LIBERTY UNIVERSITY ONLINE
BY
PAUL E. EMERY
MAGNOLIA, TX
19 SEPTEMBER 2013
Until Constantine moved the capital of
the Roman Empire to Constantinople, Rome had been a city of prestige and
power. However, as the focus of the
Roman Empire moved to the eastern portion, the city of Rome began to encounter
great challenges. These challenges
eventually played a major role in more than just the Roman Empire as a whole,
but also on the Church at large in the Roman Empire. A couple of the challenges included
immigration without assimilation and attacks from various outside forces will
be discussed briefly as they played a part in the rise of power to the
papacy. The majority of this paper will
examine some individuals whose leadership and involvement made sizable
contribution to the increase in the power of the papacy. These aspects lead to great power falling
upon the Roman bishop who after a period of several hundred years began to be
known as the Pope.
Rome
experienced a significant increase in immigrants who sought the comfort and
peace of Rome. Often however, these immigrants might have sought citizenship,
but they brought with them challenges to the Church in theological positions
that were once thought resolved.[1] Many of these immigrants came from locations
in which Christianity had spread, but who held to the Arian beliefs that had
mostly resolved in the Roman portion of the Empire. Since the time of
Constantine, various emperors had banished church leaders and bishops who did
not hold to their position on the Arian conflict, and so the people sought
clarification and direction not from the Emperor, but from the Church
leadership.
Beginning in the fifth century, Rome
began to find itself attacked by various forces, and often without the support
to the Empire. Rome was attacked by the
Lombards and Goths, and then in A.D. 452 when the Huns set out to “Conquer
Constantinople” they were diverted to Italy.[2] Leo the Great set out to meet “The Scourge of
God” and either through negotiations, or through some miracle, Attila decided
not to attack Rome.[3]
The constant attacks by the various groups, and the lack or limited response of
Constantinople were major contributing factors in the pope gaining great power
in Rome for, as Gonzalez states: “they had to take measures for their own
defense.” There were two typical
approaches to the defense of Rome, either a posturing of strength, or paying
off the attacking force, as was practiced by Pope Pelagius II.[4]
The immigration into Rome and the
various attacks against Rome itself played a role in the rise of the Pope. However, these actions alone would not of
brought about the authority and power of the Papacy had it not been connected
to some individuals who took these events and used them for the benefit of
Rome. This paper will now turn to
examine some major players whose actions in the midst of great challenges lead
to the rise of the Papacy; Gregory the Great, Pope Leo II, Pepin the Short, and
his son Charlemagne.
After Pelagius II, one of the most respected
popes came on to the scene, Gregory the Great.
This paper will now take a moment to look at Gregory and his impact on
the growth of the Power of the Pope. In his Institutio
Christianae religionis John Calvin “regarded Gregory I as the last
legitimate claimant to the “cura aliarum ecclesiarium” exercised by the bishops
of Rome.”[5]
Pope Gregory did not see himself as an all perfect leader, but instead servant,
and he conducted himself as such.
Gregory was born into a time of
great chaos in Italy, and in the city of Rome.
Not only was Rome subjected to various attacks from, but the city of
Rome was suffering various times of famine and plaque. Amongst this chaos Pope after Pope sent
request to Constantinople requesting assistance and protection. As history would have it, Gregory was one of
the envoys sent to Constantinople around 580 A.D. by Pope Pelagius II.[6] For seven years Gregory was in
Constantinople, and although he did not complete his primary objective, to
bring a response from Constantinople to address the challenges of Rome, John
Norwich argues that Gregory’s time was still successful: “he earned the respect
of two successive emperors, and returned in 585 with firsthand knowledge of the
Byzantine court and its ways.”[7]
Gregory was elected as Pope in 590
AD after Pelagius II fell to the plague that was affecting Rome at the
time. Most historians agree on is that
Gregory never desired the office of the Pope, and in fact on his return from
Constantinople he had placed himself again into a monastic life.[8] Upon his election to the papacy Gregory wrote
to the emperor and requested that his election be overruled.[9] In spite of his hesitation, Homes-Dudden
described how Gregory, in a letter to a bishop, indicated that he was willing
to hold the role as it was the will of God.[10]
Gregory the Great impacted three areas
which also lead to the rise of the power of the papacy. First, Pope Gregory had to not only exercise
authority in the religious aspect of Rome, but was also forced to take on much
of the civilian authority as well. This
civilian authority of Gregory was not performed out of a desire to hold this
type of authority but a reason of need of leadership. Dr. David Hipshon argues in an article he
wrote for Journal of Ecclesiastical
History that Gregory lived with a theology that secular authority also
played a role in salvation.[11] Unfortunately for Gregory, the exarch of
Revenna, Romanus, was either unwilling to deal with the crisis of the
Lombardian attacks due to helplessness[12],
or simply unwilling to “lift a finger” due to jealousy[13]. As such, Gregory’s “time was taken up secular
business”.[14] These challenges of the civilian authority
eventually lead to Gregory securing peace with the Lombards.[15]
This was demonstrated when Gregory took on the role of defense of Rome when
Romanus enticed King Agilulf to attack Rome.[16] Neill and Schmandt explain how in A.D. 599
Gregory again brought about peace with the Lombards and his power then began to
outshine the power of Romanus.[17]
The second increase of power to the
papacy that was impacted by Gregory was his desire to expand Christendom. With his desire to spread Christianity,
Norwich explains how the north seemed “more promising”.[18]
“At the beginning of Gregory’s pontificate the principal regions to be taken in
hand seemed to be Visigoth Spain, Frankish Gaul, and Anglo-Saxon Britain.”[19] Neill and Schmandt give great praise to the
work of Pope Gregory the Great:
He seconded St.
Leander’s work in converting the Visigoths, urged the Lombards to accept
Christianity, and dispatched St. Augustine of Canterbury to England to bring
the Angles and Saxons into the Church. Benedictine monasticism owed its first
expansion to him and much of its fame from his biography of St. Benedict.[20]
With
this growth in the Church it is no surprise how in almost 200 years after
Gregory, the Church is going to find allies amongst these groups evangelized
that will only further expand the rise of the Papacy in Rome as will shortly be
addressed.
The third and final rise of the
Papacy that will be discussed as it relates to Gregory is in something that
came about with unintended consequences.
As someone who had denied his great wealth in order to serve the LORD in
the monastery prior to his becoming Pope, Gregory had a great concern and care
for those who were poor. As was
mentioned earlier in the paper, the attacks of Rome were only a portion of the
great challenges that faced this once great city. Poverty, plague, and famine brought about
many dire consequences upon the city.
The care for the poor had been a major concern for various Popes, and in
fact was the direct reason that Pelagius II came into contact with the plaque
that lead to his life coming to an end.
As Pelagius had shown great care for the poor and distressed of the
city, so Gregory in many ways exceeded that of his mentor.
During the greatness of the Roman
Empire the many lords and landowners bestowed charity among the poor of Rome,
yet after the move of the Capital of the Empire, and the lack of protection
offered by the Empire Homes-Dudden points out: “Most of them had removed to
Constantinople, some had died out. As
things were, the Pope was almost the only wealthy man remaining in the city”.[21]
How was the Pope able to help those who were poor? The answer is the “Patrimony
of St. Peter, the vast estates belonging to the Church scattered throughout
Italy, Sicily, and the north.”[22]
It was in his use and reorganization
of the Patrimony of St. Peter which lead to one of Gregory’s biggest and
unintended rise of the power of the papacy. Earlier in his life Gregory had
served as one of the Perfects of Rome[23],
and as such was probably fairly familiar with how the Patrimony was run. As was
mentioned previously, Norwich indicated how the knowledge of the Byzantine
Court was organized was something that Gregory benefitted from while in
Constantinople.[24] With the vast administrative experience that
Gregory had over his various positions, Gregory used that to his advantage to
organize the Patrimony of St. Peter for the sake of the poor. Norwich explains
how this was accomplished:
It (the
Patrimony of St. Peter) was effectively in the hands of nineteen deacons, seven
of whom had charge of the seven regions of the city. Gregory not only increases their numbers
several times over but swelled them further with newly created ranks of
subdeacons, notaries, treasurers, and senior executive officers, together
forming a civil service unparalleled in Europe outside Constantinople itself.[25]
Gregory was the first to attempt to reorganize the Patrimony of St. Peter. Norwich explains the resulting consequence of this organization: “he unknowingly laid the foundations of what was later to be the Papal State, ensuring the temporal power of his successors which was to endure for the next thirteen centuries.”[26]
After the death of Gregory, Neill and
Schmandt speak about how Italy enjoyed a mostly stabilized Italy during the
seventh century.[27]
However, during this time there was only a further alienation between the Pope
of Rome and the Byzantine Emperor in Constantinople. Emperor Leo III’s constant involvement in
ecclesiastical business only intensified this great separation.[28]
The continued straining of relationship
between Rome and Constantinople was the final piece of the equation in relation
to the rise of the power of the Papacy.
Of all the parts this was substantial because although Emperor Leo III
and Emperors that followed continued to try to fight for control in theological
issues, they refused to stand up in defense of Rome from the continuing attacks
of the Lombards. Pope Stephens sent an
envoy to Constantinople to request aid from Emperor Leo III, unfortunately
Emperor Leo refused to assist, and instead advised Stephen to “seek alliances
from another Germanic tribe”.[29] Finally, after attempts to gain support from
the Byzantine empire failed, Pope Stephen went up the Franks and there found
support from Frankish ruler Pepin the Short.
Pepin’s loyalty to the papacy was in
relation to a debt he owed when Pope Zachary crowned him as King over the
Merovingian kingdom.[30] This was a debt that Stephens was willing to
call upon and further in debt Pepin and his family in the defense of Rome. When Rome was under siege of King Aistulf,
and the new Pope, Stephens, knew that he was in desperate need of the
protection from the continual onslaught of Aistulf. Pope Stephens traveled up to see Pepin, and
in 764 Stephen crowned Pepin and his sons the “Patrician of the Romans”.[31] In essence Stephens only increased the debt of
Pepin and his sons in the hands of the Pope.
Pepin the Short honored his debt to the
Pope, and was indeed an able defender of Rome.
In 754 and 756, Pepin fought against the forces of King Aistulf and in
756 King Aistulf was disposed from the throne and a steward of Pepin’s was put
in his stead.[32] In addition, Pepin committed the land that
had been claimed by the Lombards as the property and under the absolute
authority of the pope.[33] In his obligations to the Pope, Pepin removed
the sovereignty of these areas from the hands of Constantinople who had failed
to defend it, and from the hands of the invading forces thus making a step of
removing the authority of the state from the head of the Church.
After Pepin’s death, Charles and
Carloman took over the rule of the kingdom.
However, within three years Carloman died, and instead of his sons being
given their portions of the kingdom as was custom Charles declared himself sole
ruler.[34] Charles proved as faithful as his father in
the defense of Rome and on Easter of 774 Charles came before the new Pope,
Hadrian. At that time he not only
reiterated his father’s donation, but added to it greatly. Charles also
affirmed his intention of bringing all Churches in his dominion into unity with
the Pope and the Church of Rome.[35] Possibly unintentionally, Charles did
something on this Easter which again added to the power of the Pope. As a king of a vast domain, Charles knelt
before Pope Hadrian showing not that the Pope was subject to the secular
authority, but that the secular authority was inferior to the authority of the
Pope.
It is reasonable that Charles did
not realize the significance of this concession, which was demonstrated in his
reaction to Pope Hadrian and the issue of iconoclasm.[36] Pope Hadrian had sent a delegation to
Constantinople at the request of Empress Irene who had called for an Ecumenical
Council. For many years the issues of
images used in worship had been a major bone of contention between the Roman
Church and the Orthodox Church. This had
all the appearances of Constantinople making an attempt to reunify an empire
that had been separated unofficially.
Charles was furious about this development as he, and his father before
him, had been the protectors of Rome not only secularly, but also theologically.[37] Charles thought it only right that he should
have been allowed to send a delegation to Nicea, and this lead to some tension
between Pope and King. However, the
relationship was restored, and after Hadrian’s death a strong relationship
still remained between Charles and the Pope.
The final player and action that
lead to the rise of the power of the Papacy, as discussed in this paper,
occurred between Pope Leo III and Charles around December A.D.800. Pope Leo had come to the office of Pontiff not
in celebration and excitement but in doubt and suspicion. Upon his ascension around A.D. 797 Leo faced
challenges from Pope Hadrian’s family.
In late A.D. 800 some charges were brought up against Leo and Charles
went to Rome to see how best to support Leo.
The question was did Charles or anyone have the right or authority to
cast judgment upon the Pope?[38]
Pope Leo III did not appear before any authority, but instead made an oath that
the charges were false. Two days later,
Charles knelt before Leo, and Pope Leo III crowned Charles the “Emperor of the
West”.[39] The final piece had fallen into place. With the actions of Leo III, not only did the
Pope rise in power, but in action placed upon the Pontiff absolute authority
beyond and above any secular authority.
For the next thousand plus years the Pontiff had the ability to appoint
the Emperor of Rome.[40]
In conclusion, there were several
events and situations which lead to the rise of the power of the papacy. Immigration without assimilation had to be
addressed outside of secular authority, and theological positions had to come
not from the emperor, but from the Church.
With all the various outside forces attacking Rome, and with the
unwillingness or inability of Constantinople to defend, the Pope took on
himself the role of defense both militarily and theologically. More than just militarily, the poor and the
sick had also to be cared for and provided, and with the riches falling not
upon the citizens, but the Church, the Pope had to use the resources available
to answer the challenges of famine and pestilence.
All of these events played a role in
the rise of the papacy, but what was the biggest contributing factor were not
the events, but the players on the scene.
Gregory the Great rose above Romanus in the defense of Rome and in the
care of the people. Gregory the Great
expanded Christendom beyond Rome, and through his actions brought about the
evangelism of the Franks, which lead to the close union of the Franks and the
Pope hundreds of years after his death.
Through careful restructuring of the “Patrimony of St. Peter” Gregory
laid the foundation for the organizational structure that is seen today. Popes Stephen, Hadrian, and Leo through
careful practice and blatant claims laid the foundation of rising the Pope from
one subject to secular authority to being the supreme authority, even with the
ability to name and crown emperors.
Pepin the Short, and his son Charles, through their contributions to the
Pope in areas of authority, and in actions of submission lead to the Pope as
supreme authority over Rome. All these factors and people gave rise to the
power of the papacy.
Works
Cited
Dudden, F. Holmes. Gregory the
Great: His Place in History and Thought (2 Volume Set). 1905. 2 vols.
Reprint, Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock Publishers, 2004.
Gonzalez, Justo L. The Story of
Christianity. 2nd ed. Vol. 1 of the Story of Christianity. New York:
HarperOne, 2010.
HIPSHON, DAVID. "Gregory the
Great's ‘Political Thought’." The Journal of Ecclesiastical History
53, no. 03 (July 2002). doi:10.1017/S0022046902004219 (accessed September 19, 2013).
McEniery, Peter. "Pope Gregory
the Great and Infallibility." Journal of Ecumenical Studies 11, no.
2 (Spring 1974): 263-80. ATLASerials, Religion Collection, EBSCOhost.
Neill, Thomas, and Raymond Schmandt.
History of the Catholic Church. 2nd ed. Milwaukee, WI: The Bruce
Publishing Company, 1965.
Norwich, John Julius. Absolute
Monarchs: a History of the Papacy. 1st U.S. ed. New York: Random House,
2011.
[1] Justo L. Gonzalez, the Story of
Christianity., 2nd ed., vol. 1 of the Story of Christianity. (New
York: HarperOne, 2010),
270.
[4] Gonzalez, 285.
[5] Peter McEniery, “Pope Gregory the Great and Infallibility,” Journal of Ecumenical Studies 11, no. 2 (Spring 1974): 263-80,
ATLASerials, Religion Collection, EBSCOhost
(accessed September 19, 2013).
[6] John Julius Norwich, Absolute
Monarchs: a History of the Papacy, 1st U.S. ed. (New York: Random House,
2011), 41.
[7] Norwich, 42.
[8] Norwich, 42.
[9] Gonzalez, 287.
[10] F. Homes-Dudden, Gregory
the Great: His Place in History and Thought (1905; repr., Eugene, OR: Wipf and
Stock Publishers, 2004), 1:228.
[11] David Hipshon, “Gregory the Great's ‘Political Thought’,” The Journal of Ecclesiastical
History 53, no. 03 (July
2002): page nr., doi:10.1017/S0022046902004219 (accessed September 19, 2013).
[12] Thomas P. Neill and Raymond Schmandt, History
of the Catholic Church, 2nd ed. (Milwaukee, WI: The Bruce Publishing
Company, 1965), 123.
[17] Neill and
Schmandt, 123.
[19] Norwich, 45.
[21] Homes-Dudden, 1:247.
[23] Homes-Dudden, 1:105.
[24] Norwich, 42.
[25] Norwich, 43.
[26] Norwich, 48.
[30] Norwich, 53.
[31] Norwich, 53.
[32] Norwich, 54.
[33] Norwich, 54.
[34] Norwich, 54.
[35] Norwich, 55.
[37]
Norwich, 55.
[38]
Norwich, 56-57.
[39]
Gonzalez, 289.
[40]
Norwich, 57.
