INVESTITURE STRUGGLE

The conflict in which the Church, during the second half of the 11th and the first decades of the 12th century, opposed the power of lay feudal lords. It was settled in principle by the Concordat of worms (1122), but the long struggle between the papacy and the holy roman em pire down to the middle of the 13th century was in fact its continuation.

The Issue. The investiture struggle originated in the dispute occasioned by the manner in which bishops were granted possession of ecclesiastical property by their overlords (see feudalism). Being a feudal lord himself, the bishop received his temporal property by investiture, but the symbols used for this investiture, the crosier and ring, were equivocal. They could be understood to represent also the prelate's power of jurisdiction. While it was legitimate for the overlord to confer the temporalities (the fief) upon his vassal, the bishop, the Church could not admit the lord's pretensions to confer ecclesiastical power, the potestas jurisdictionis. A clear distinction between the two powers and an exact interpretation of the meaning of the symbols should have sufficed to avert any difficulties. In France ivo of chartres had contributed to a calmer climate by just such precise distinctions and interpretations; but in the Empire juridical controversy was the pretext for a political conflict of the gravest sort.

During the first half of the 11th century, princes and fedual lords had, in fact, laid hands upon bishoprics, abbeys, local churches, and ecclesiastical revenues. By appropriating to themselves the revenues derived from land and tithes and by the appointment of bishops and pastors, they had become the masters of the Church. The 10th-century papacy (john x) had tolerated such lay pretensions, and at the beginning of the 11th century thiet mar of merseburg justified royal interference by pointing out that the sovereign was God's representative on earth (Chron. 1:26). At about the same time, however, the cluniac reformers were planning to free the Church from the tutelage of the laity, and their ideas were adopted in Rome after the middle of the 11th century. The Roman See itself had been freed from lay ascendancy as a result of the Election decree of 1059, and the papacy under gregory vii (1073–85) reacted vigorously. The Roman synod of February 1075 forbade clerics to receive investiture from the hands of a layman. This head-on counterthrust against practices that were abuses unleashed the struggle, which would vary in intensity according to country.

The conflict assumed little importance in Italy, except insofar as some bishops involved themselves in the struggle between pope and emperor. In England and Germany, it was of immediate interest to the ruling houses, which, having generously endowed their bishoprics, had every intention of continuing to control the recruiting of the episcopate. In France also, the king was engaged in the struggle, but the problem was of equal concern for many feudal lords having bishops as vassals.

The Policy of Gregory VII. The Gregorian reformers had denounced lay investiture as a usurpation. For humbert of silva candida (Adversus simoniacos 1057 or 1058; Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Libelli de lite 1), it was the "episcopal function" that was conferred by ring and staff, and such an investiture could not possibly be performed by laymen. It seemed also that the reform of the clergy, the struggle against simony and clerical immorality begun in the middle of the 11th century, could succeed in reaching its goal only if the recruiting of the clergy were removed from the control of the laity. nicho las ii, in the Roman synod of April 1059, had forbidden "any cleric to receive in any way a church from the hands of laymen" (can. 6). This was, indeed, an early condemnation of lay investiture, but it was couched in very general terms, and no sanctions were attached. In the first years of his pontificate (1073–74), Gregory VII attacked only simony and clerical marriage (Nicolaitism). He put no bar on lay investitures either in France or in the Empire. But when his measures against clerical incontinence proved ineffective, Gregory VII proceeded in the Council of Rome of February 1075 to condemn lay investiture. The exact wording of the 1075 Decree is not known. The text advanced by Hugh of Flavigny (Monumenta Germaniae Historica: Scriptores 8:412) is too similar to that of the decree on investiture promulgated at the Council of 1080 to warrant much credence (Histoire de l'église depuis les origines jusqu'à nos jours, ed. A. Fliche and V. Martin). A letter of the pope to hugh of die (May 12, 1077) alluded to the 1075 decree: the intention was to repeat and render more precise canon 6 of the Lateran Synod of 1059 and to forbid bishops to receive their charges from the hands of laymen. But this text is also vague. Although it forbade laymen to presume to grant episcopal jurisdiction, it is questionable whether the pope did not tolerate the conferring by the lay feudal lord of the temporalities of the bishopric [on the immediacy with which this text was published, cf. G. B. Borino, Studi gregoriani 6 (1959–61) 329–348]. The ban on lay investiture in these general and therefore imprecise terms was renewed at the Roman synods of Nov. 19, 1078, and the spring of 1080. But the pope remained ready for compromise. The essential thing for him was to have higher clergy of quality. Wherever the prince was selecting good bishops, as in England and Normandy, the pope did not interfere. Consequently, there was no investiture struggle, properly speaking, either in England or in Spain.

In France, the decree, published after some hesitation and delay, was not strictly applied. Gregory was especially desirous of ending the traffic in bishoprics by which philip i was giving a scandalous example. Hugh of Die, the papal legate, was ruthless with simonists, but tolerated lay intervention when it favored neither simony nor clerical marriage.

In the Empire, bishoprics were in the hands of henry iv. The king's appointment of an archbishop for Milan, followed by his selection of mediocre candidates for Bamberg, Fermo, Spoleto, and Cologne (1075), provoked an explosion. But, in condemning the lay investiture of bishops, Gregory VII, as the successor of Peter, included a claim to a general supervision of the rule of princes. "In Germany, the investiture struggle was to be nothing more than one aspect of the struggle between the Sacerdotium and the Imperium " (Fliche). In an assembly held at Worms (Jan. 14, 1076), the German episcopate backed Henry, attacked Gregory VII, and refused any longer to consider him Pope. Gregory's reply was Henry's excommunication (Feb. 14, 1076). Abandoned by a part of the episcopate and threatened with condemnation by an assembly convoked at Augsburg, at which the pope was to preside on Feb. 2, 1077, Henry submitted at Canossa (Jan. 25–28, 1077). But the conflict soon broke out again. Henry was once more excommunicated at the council of March 7, 1080; his subjects were absolved from their oath of fidelity; and Gregory recognized Rudolph of Swabia as king. Henry convened an assembly at Brixen (June 25, 1080) that in turn deposed Gregory and elected in his stead Abp. guibert of ravenna who took the name of Clement III. The antipope, however, was not recognized by any country in Christendom, and Henry tried to impose him upon Rome by force of arms. Gregory VII was expelled from Rome, went into exile (1084), and died May 25, 1085.

Doctrinal Approaches. Doctrinal controversies concerning investiture were not, at the time of Gregory VII, as prominent as the political struggle itself. Rare in deed were the authors who would grapple with the problem, whether to support the king (letter of wenrich of trier, November 1080; the anonymous De investitura regali collectanea ), or expound the papal thesis [Liber ad Gebehardum, of manegold of lautenbach (1084); Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Libelli de lite 1]. A compromise had to be found. It was outlined, from a doctrinal point of view, by Guido of Ferrara [De scismate Hildebrando (1086); Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Libelli de lite 1], who distinguished between the spiritual and the secular functions of the bishop. As a man of God, the bishop is the subject of the pope, but as the tenant of temporal goods, he is subject to lay power. Guido granted further that the prince might nominate the bishop. Forgeries of almost contemporary date were used to back up this claim. Thus the distinction between the two aspects of a bishop had not as yet provided an acceptable solution of the conflict. It was, nevertheless, the formula that, 30 years later, would make it possible to resolve the dilemma.

Under Urban II. After the pontificate of victor iii, urban ii (1088–99) did not become master of Rome until 1094. The antipope Clement III returned to Ravenna and no longer challenged the authority of the legitimate pope. Urban's policy was flexible, and he sought to reestablish peace through indulgence and by making use of the theory of dispensation from the canons that the contemporary bernold of constance was developing in his De excommunicatis vitandis. Such conciliatory policy ran counter to the theories expounded by Cardinal Deusdedit (see deusdedit, collection of), who was most anxious to root out lay investiture. His doctrinal position as well as the excesses of such rulers as william ii of england and Philip I in France led the Pope to assert anew the Gregorian doctrine [Councils of Piacenza and Clermont (1095), Nimes (1096), Bari (1098)]. Not only was lay investiture forbidden (Clermont can. 15–16), but so also was—and this was something new—any oath of loyalty by a bishop to a layman (ibid. can. 17). With the stiffening of the papal stand, concomitant though it was with the first attempts of Ivo of Chartres to find a solution of the conflict, the investiture struggle erupted more violently than ever. In France and England, however, a way to peace was to be found by Ivo and Hugh of Fleury, each taking a slightly different approach, but both operating via a more exact analysis of investiture and a sharp and clear distinction between the grant of ecclesiastical jurisdiction and the concession of temporal holdings. Hugh likewise permitted "investiture with things secular" by the lay lord, but even though a protagonist of the royal prerogative, he reserved to the archbishop the granting of ring and crosier.

The English Settlement. In England, lanfranc of canterbury and the anonymous of york (at least in the De Romano pontifice, c. 1104) likewise limited lay investiture to the granting "of power over the people and of the ownership of things temporal." Shortly after, negotiations were initiated between henry i and anselm of canterbury. They led to an accord (1107) that eliminated lay investiture with ring and staff but admitted that the bishop owed the oath of vassalage to his suzerain in return for his fiefs. This meant sanctioning the theories of Hugh of Fleury; and the pope, who had been party to this compromise, showed himself less intransigent than the Councils of Clermont (1095) or Rome (1099) that had formally forbidden bishops to take the feudal oath. Consequently, there were scarcely any difficulties between the Holy See and Henry I (1100–35).

The French Solution. In France, the difficulties created by the designation of Stephen of Garland to Beauvais (1100) envenomed still further the conflict between Philip I and the papacy caused by the king's illicit relations with Bertrada de Montfort. However, in 1104, the sovereign was absolved from his excommunication, and the Beauvais affair was ably settled by the intervention of Ivo of Chartres. paschal ii, who had hoped for an accord with France, negotiated a settlement of the investiture question in 1107. Unfortunately, neither the form that the settlement took nor its precise terms are known. Canon 1 of the Council of Troyes (May 1107) formally forbade the investiture of a bishop, and during the reign of louis vi, bishops were not invested by the King, although they did swear fealty to him. Here again, without benefit of an actual concordat, the ideas of Ivo of Chartres triumphed.

Germany in the Early 12th Century. Only in Germany, under Henry IV (d. 1106) and his successor henryv, who was determined to safeguard his right of investiture, did the struggle become violent. Veritable war ensued, with the king proceeding to the appointment of bishops and the pope again forbidding lay investure (Lateran Council, 1100). The opposing themes were the object of two important treatises: the Tractatus de investitura episcoporum (1109; Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Libelli de lite 2), written by a cleric of Liège at the request of Henry V, and the Liber de anulo et baculo by Rangerius of Lucca (1100; ibid. ). However, a radical solution was suggested by the legates of Paschal II, who, in order to outlaw lay investiture, declared that the pope was ready to abandon in the name of the bishops all their temporal holdings. This solution was the Concordate of Sutri (1111; Monumenta Germaniae Historica: Constitutiones 1:140). But Henry V made its implementation contingent upon ratification by the German Episcopate. As was expected, the bishops, whom the concordate exposed to the risk of losing their fortune, refused to ratify. But Paschal II, prisoner of Henry V and as such, subjected to grave pressure, was constrained to grant the king the investiture of bishops and abbots, provided their election had not been simoniacal (April 1111). His promise (Monumenta Germaniae Historica: Constitutiones 1:144), extorted by violence, was not considered binding by the Italian and French clergy. A Council held in the Lateran (March 1112) annulled the privilegium extorted by Henry V and restored the Gregorian principles. Without submitting to the urgings of those prelates who were pressing him to break with Henry V and to excommunicate him, Paschal II reaffirmed the condemnation of lay investiture during the last years of his pontificate. At his death (1118), Henry V set up the antipope Gregory VIII to oppose gelasius ii, chosen by the cardinals and the Roman clergy. The conflict broke out again. Gelasius excommunicated the Emperor and his antipope. But the pope wanted peace and knew that it would come only through arbitration. He hoped, perhaps, that Louis VI would provide mediation, but Gelasius died at Cluny (Jan. 29, 1119) on his way to meet the king at Vézelay. His successor, Guy of Vienne, who took the name callis tus ii, showed himself an intransigent adversary of lay investiture, even though he was a relative of the emperor. But he wanted peace and sought the path of compromise in the doctrines of Chartres whose success he assured. He thus showed himself more moderate than his former partner in intransigence, geoffrey of vendÔme, who in 1118–19 published his Tractatus de ordinatione episcoporum et de investitura laicorum. Geoffrey held investiture to be a "sacrament" and declared that receiving it from lay hands meant "casting that which is holy to the dogs."

Concordat of Worms. In 1119, Callistus II commissioned the abbot of Cluny and william of champeaux, Bishop of Chalons, two Frenchmen who were familiar with the compromise solution that had been adopted in France, to explain its advantages to Henry V (Strasbourg colloquy). After fruitless negotiation at Mouzon (October 1119), an accord was reached that was articulated in two declarations comprising the Concordat of worms (Sept. 23, 1122; Monumenta Germaniae Historica: Constitutiones 1:159). The emperor renounced investiture with ring and staff and guaranteed freedom of elections. The pope consented to elections held "in the presence of the emperor" and to his granting the regalia to the newly elected prelate by investiture with the scepter. Thus the Chartres distinction between the spiritual and the temporal in the bishopric, complemented by the distinction of dual investiture, by ring and staff for the spiritual, and by scepter for the temporal—a distinction clearly made by an anonymous French treatise, the Defensio Paschalis papae, c. 1122, (Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Libelli de lite )—finally triumphed in the Empire as it had 15 years previously in England and France.

Bibliography: e. bernheim, Quellen zur Geschichte des Investiturstreites, 2 v. (Leipzig 1913). z. n. brooke, The English Church and the Papacy from the Conquest to the Reign of John (Cambridge 1931); Lay Investiture and Its Relation to the Conflict of Empire and Papacy (London 1940). g. tellenbach, Church, State, and Christian Society at the Time of the Investiture Contest, tr. r. f. bennett (Oxford 1959). a. fliche, La Querelle des Investitures (Paris 1946); "Grégoire VII à Canossa, a-t-il réintégré Henri IV dans sa fonction royale?" Studi gregoriani (1947) 373–386. a. brackmann, "Gregor VII und die kirchliche Reformbewegung in Deutschland," ibid. 2 (1947) 7–30. a. gwynn, "Gregory VII and the Irish Church," ibid. 3 (1948) 105–128. h. l. mikoletzky, "Bemerkungen zu einer Vorgeschichte des Investiturstreites," ibid. 3 (1948) 233–285. g. b. borino, "L'investitura laica dal decreto di Nicolò II al decreto di Gregorio VII," ibid. 5 (1956) 345–359. h. x. arquilliÈre," Le Sens juridique de l'absolution de Canossa," Actes du Congrès de droit canonique (Paris 1950) 157–164. a. becker, Studien zum Investiturproblem in Frankreich (Saarbrücken 1955). n. f. cantor, Church, Kingship, and Lay Investiture in England, 1089–1135 (Princeton 1958). h. hoffmann, "Ivo von Chartres und die Lösung des Investiturproblems," Deutsches Archiv für Erforschung des Mittelalters 15 (1959) 393–440. h. g. krause, Das Papstwahldekret von 1059 und seine Rolle im Investiturstreit (Studi gregoriani 7; 1960). a. hofmeister, Das Wormser Konkordat. Zum Streit um seine Bedeutung, mit einer textkritischen Beilage, new edition with foreword by r. schmidt (Darmstadt 1962). t. schieffer, "Cluny et la querelle des Investitures," Revue historique 225 (1961) 47–72. r. sprandel, Ivo von Chartres (Stuttgart 1962). j. fleckenstein, ed., Investiturstreit und Reichsverfassung (Sigmaringen 1973). r. schieffer, Die Entstehung des päpstlichen Investiturverbots für den deutschen König, (Stuttgart 1981). u.-r. blumenthal, The Investiture Controversy: Church and Monarchy from the Ninth to the Twelfth Century (Philadelphia 1988). h. e. j. cowdrey, Pope Gregory VII, 1073–1085 (Oxford 1998).

[j. gaudemet]