Posted at 12.19.2018
The issue between cathedral and talk about has been an historical concern that has plagued Europe for a lot of its history. Ever since the introduction of Christianity in the Roman Empire during the fourth-century, there's been a constant have difficulties between temporal and spiritual government bodies for ecclesiastico-political primacy. That have difficulty involved both Church and their state using religion as a way to help expand their respective passions. By analyzing the next two major documents: 'The Edict of Milan' and 'The Program of Gregory VII', I'll claim that both documents show you a historical theme: Religious beliefs being used as a means for the advancement of ecclesiastico-political interests. Inside the first doc 'The Edict of Milan' the Emperors Constantine and Licinius granted an edict that promulgated religious toleration for all religions including Christianity. While Constantine might have been sincere in his desire to protect spiritual minorities, he was mainly determined by his desire to ensure the security and safety of the Empire (research). He was all too aware of the destructive effects that sectarian pressure could pose to the Empire. Furthermore to his edict being politically motivated, it can be argued that his very change to Christianity was at least partially motivated by politics interests. In the second document being examined, 'The Program of Gregory VII, ' the Pope was not only wanting to institute cathedral reforms when it comes to morality, but he also wanted to secure temporal guideline for the Roman cathedral while eradicating the affect of the Emperor in religious affairs. He was in a protracted confrontation with King Henry IV and his dictates were part of his attempt to coalesce ecclesiastical electricity with temporal ability. Both documents expose a standard theme of religion being used to further political goals.
In the 'Edict of Milan' granted by co-emperors Constantine and Licinius in 313, it was decreed that there would be spiritual toleration for many religious minorities. While a cursory reading of the document might lead someone to conclude that the Emperors were operating out of altruism and that they were motivated by devotion to the Cathedral, a thorough knowledge of the historical context reveals the Emperors' major motivations were political. Constantine used Christianity to provide his political needs and even the sincerity and genuineness of his conversion to Christianity has been helped bring into question by various historians. Historian Daniel Shubin stated that Constantine "required a utilitarian religious beliefs with a superficial charm to the senses in order to combine the loyalties of [his] themes" (33). He essentially argued that Constantine's transformation was politically motivated. Even historian Edward Gibbon in his groundbreaking work "The Decrease and Semester of the Roman Empire" drew the conclusion that Constantine was simply "an opportunist politician" and he viewed Constantine's change as a "piece of politics expediency. " Still another historian has argued that his transformation to Christianity "was only a cynical, callous political move, dictated by overweening ambition motivated by political interests. " (JSTOR-Jordon).
Another aspect that needs to be taken into consideration when examining the 'Edict of Milan' is the fact that Constantine was well alert to the prospect of religious divisions to develop into civil disruptions and do disrupt steadiness. It was Constantine himself who arbitrated within the Donatist controversy which erupted inside a few months of him becoming only emperor of the Western world. Inside the Edict of Milan, Constantine and Licinius make it clear they are acting generally in the interest of condition stableness for in the beginning sentence Constantine explained that he and Licinius achieved in Milan and were "conferring about everything which concern the advantage and security of the state". (reference). Historian Francis Betton opined that Licinius only acquiesced to issuing the decree out of deference to Constantine rather than because he was truly committed to spiritual toleration. Licinius continued to be a pagan throughout his life and even extended the persecution of the Christians later in his reign. (jstoredictofmilan)
There are numerous instances throughout the 'Edict of Milan' that provide to demonstrate that the Emperors were utilizing the guise of religious toleration as a means to ensure the stableness of the Empire. In the Edict, the Emperors demand the come back of confiscated chapel property saying:
Moreover in regard to the legal position of the Christians we've thought fit to ordain this also, that if any may actually have bought, whether from the exchequer or from any others, the places of which these were used formally to assemble, concerning which definite requests have been given before, and that by way of a letter released to your office - that the same be restored to the Christians (ref)
The Emperors decreed that confiscated cathedral property should be returned to the Christians but they were careful never to prolong that demand to the restitution of private property that was confiscated from the Christians by the pagans. Christians regularly had their private property looted as a result of the pagans during their persecution, and requiring restitution of that private property would be a severe financial setback to the pagans and it got the potential to lead to major civil disturbances (jstoedictofmilancatholicreview)). Because steadiness and security of the empire was of key importance to the Emperors, they remained extremely cautious in their look at at reconciliation between the Christians and the pagans and hesitated to demand the come back of confiscated private property.
Another point worth emphasis is that throughout his life, Constantine never acted in a fashion that could be interpreted as subordinate to the church. In fact, Constantine had taken a lead role in the affairs of the church. Within a time of Constantine's triumph at Milvian Bridge, he was faced with the Donatist controversy. He presided over the entire affair and it was Constantine himself who ultimately noticed to it that the problem was settled. A lot more significant than presiding over the Donatist controversy was the role Constantine took in the Council of Nicaea in 325. The issue accessible was one of fundamental importance as it worried the Divinity of Christ. Constantine not only summoned the Council but presided over it. It really is interesting to notice that Constantine thought the issue of the divinity of Christ was frivolous and this no answer would have to be given, aside from the question being asked to begin with. The reason why allowed the problem to be debated and settled was because he was afraid that religious dissimilarities could lead to civil disorder or even warfare. Constantine was more concerned with spiritual unity than with religious truth (text). It For the reason that context we can better know how the 'Edict of Milan' was used to move forward Constantine's political passions.
The second record entitled "THIS PROGRAM of Gregory VII" is a set of twenty-seven dictates that construct the privileges and privileges of the Pope and the Roman church. The document was written at a time when the Roman church was having serious reform, both within the cathedral and in respect to the church's position regarding temporal power. It is important to note that doc was written in the eleventh-century and consequently the historical framework surrounding this file varies significantly from the prior file, 'The Edict of Milan'. Even though the historical framework is different, the common theme of religion being used as a means of advancing one's ecclesiastico-political hobbies remains a central aspect of "The Program of Gregory. "
Under the Ottonian System set up in the tenth-century under the Emperor Otto, the Emperor consolidated his control over both secular and religious realms by controlling both the appointment of bishops and abbots for the cathedral, and by also appointing them as his imperial vassals (text). When Pope Gregory ascended to the Papacy, he recognized that for him to determine papal supremacy he would first need to put a finish to the Ottonian System. While using Emperor enjoying such enormous clout over cathedral clergy, the clergy would likely remain faithful to the imperial office and owe their allegiance to the Emperor (text267). It was under this context that the Pope given his twenty-seven prerogatives which would subsequently lead to a substantial confrontation between Pope Gregory VII and King Henry IV of Germany encompassing the issue of lay investiture.
The investiture controversy was arguably one of many confrontations between cathedral and condition. The Pope wanted sole expert not only in appointing bishops but also in deposing of emperors. The Pope dictated: "That he exclusively can depose or reinstate bishops" and "That it may be permitted to him to depose emperors. " Pope Gregory VII wanted to end the influence of the Emperor in selecting church clergy. With his decree against lay down investiture, Pope Gregory wanted to establish papal supremacy at the expense of Ruler Henry VI. Historian Brian Tierney argued that "the prohibition of lay investiture was the fact of Gregory's program, and it was a demand that no ruler of that time would have accepted. "(googlebook) In case the prohibition of lay down investiture was the fact of the Pope Gregory's program, it can dually be said that the continuation of lay investiture was the essence of the Ottonian System. When the Emperor lost control of the Church he'd almost together lose control of the entire Empire. (text 267)
The Pope's reforms aiming for the eradication of the practice of simony and place investiture were more than simply moral initiatives, they included the key confrontation between church and condition and their individual spheres of power. As has already been mentioned, under the Ottonian system, the Emperor performed the authority of anointing and deposing bishops. The dictates of the Pope plainly illustrate his ambition to wrestle temporal power away from the emperor. He had written that the Pope could not be judged by anyone. Within a couple of years of supposing the Papacy, Pope Gregory VII got clearly organized his thoughts and opinions that temporal ability should rest with the Roman Chapel and that the Roman Chapel reined supreme. The Pope even went as far as to state that the "Roman Church has never erred; nor does it err to all or any eternity. " It is clearly visible that the Program of Gregory was written with and vision towards ecclesiastico-politcal interests on the part of the Pope and functions as further substantiation that the author used religion to help expand his political interests.
Through the evaluation of the documents "The Edict of Milan" and "The Program of Gregory VII" and with a thorough understanding of the framework that lay down behind the writing of both documents, it becomes apparent that both writers used religion a means to improve their own pursuits. Constantine wrote the "Edict of Milan" at the same time of serious inside strife in the empire that was scheduled primarily to faith. Christians were being persecuted and their property and belongings were being confiscated by the pagan barbarians. Not only was there conflict between Christians and non-Christians, there was also issue within the Chapel itself. Both the Donatist controversy and the Arian controversy potentially threatened the steadiness of the Empire. Constantine used religious beliefs primarily as a way of bringing stableness and unity to a fragmented empire and increase his own expert. Very much like Constantine, Pope Gregory also used faith to bolster his own statements for supremacy. He was a company believer in papal supremacy and was straight responsible for one of many confrontations between chapel and talk about. After creating papal supremacy within the cathedral hierarchy, he placed his places on papal power in the secular realm as well. He effectively used the guise of moral reform to battle the State for power in both the religious and secular realms. As the context surrounding both documents varies significantly, the motivating factors behind the writing of the documents shares a single, common feature: The usage of religion to move forward political hobbies.