The Papacy During the Middle Ages, guest post by Jeb Smith
For this first post of 2025, I am pleased to introduce this guest post by Jeb Smith. Jeb Smith has authored four books. His most recent is Missing Monarchy: Correcting Misconceptions About The Middle Ages, Medieval Kingship, Democracy, And Liberty. Previously he published The Road Goes Ever On and On: A New Perspective on J. R. R. Tolkien and Middle-earth. Smith has authored dozens of articles in various publications, including History is Now Magazine, Medieval History, The Postil Magazine, Medieval Magazine and Fellowship & Fairydust. He has also been featured on several podcasts including The Lepanto Institute. If you wish to contact him please email him at jackson18611096@gmail.com.
We might find it in the Catholic Church if we look for centralization in the Middle Ages; however, the Church was, in fact, very localized. The Pope or Rome did not influence the typical peasant; the local priests and perhaps bishops governed almost entirely ecclesiastically autonomous areas. A Catholic derived his beliefs and practices from his local parish, priest, and community. Outside of general guidelines, entire countries were “isolated” from Papal influence. And within these decentralized realms, Edward Lewes Cutts wrote, “Great freedom of thought was permitted.” As a result, medieval Catholicism contained many variations in its practices and beliefs compared to its modern counterpart.
The peasantry had even more diverse opinions than the local parishes and bishops. Historian Marc Bloch wrote, “it would be wrong to ascribe to these believers a rigid uniform creed. Catholicism was still very far from having completely defined its dogmatic system, so that the strictest orthodoxy was then much more flexible.” The medieval Church of Rome seemed more accepting of diverse forms of worship; Pope Gregory said to the missionary Augustine “You know, my brother, only the customs of the Roman Church in which you were raised. But if you found anything more acceptable to God in any church – Roman, French, or any other- it would make me happy if you made use of it.”
Medieval Popes, bishops, and priests taught and believed things contrary to modern Catholicism or did not believe certain teachings later declared dogma by the Church. They are still considered Catholics, even saints because Catholicism does not require one to believe dogmas unless first officially declared by the Church. So, modern Catholic apologists would say as faithful Catholics, they would have accepted the newer dogma when declared by the Church.
While it also applies to many Catholics today, from a non-Catholic Christian perspective, the medieval Church seems much more focused on Jesus, the Bible, defending the faith, and evangelism than its modern form. Church leaders across Medieval Catholic Europe were Bible-quoting, Jesus-loving evangelicals with deep knowledge and passion for God’s word.
Further, modern Catholicism had not “developed” or declared dogmatically many of the tenets it holds infallible teaching today, including much of what the Reformers objected to. Professor and Church historian Justo L. Gonzales wrote that the Catholic Church Martin Luther protested during the 16th century was not “the same as the medieval church.” Other historians argue the modern Catholic Church began in 1414 at the Council of Constance, where in order to end the Western Schism, the church morphed into its modern form. This transformation, they say, directly led to the later Reformation. Since Judas, corruption has always affected the Church, yet the corruption reformers objected to became noteworthy only during the 14th century. In 1372 some monasteries in Germany refused to pay a papal tithe, writing, “the Apostolic See has fallen into such contempt that the Catholic Faith in these parts seems to be seriously imperilled. The Laity speak slightingly of the Church, because, departing from the customs of former days, she hardly ever sends forth preachers or reformers, but rather ostentatious men, cunning, selfish, and greedy.”
In the early Church, Constantinople, Antioch, Alexandria, Rome, and Jerusalem were the pillar Patriarchies carrying the most authority, though Rome claimed supremacy. By the Middle Ages, the Pope was the head of the Church, but he was more of a feudal king. The bishops were the local aristocratic lords who retained most of the ecclesiastical power. The Bishop of Rome was one Bishop among many and the symbolic “head” of the Church. Scholar Thomas Asbridge described the Pope’s authority during the 11th century as “pale” and “pathetic,” writing “far from being recognized as the leader of the Christian faith on earth, the Pope struggled to manage the spiritual affairs of central Italy.” Historians Oliver J. Thatcher and Edgar Holmes McNeal said before the late 11th century, “the bishop of Rome actually exercised ecclesiastical authority in a decisive way only in his own diocese.” The Church, wrote Asbridge, was controlled by local bishops who were “unresponsive, even resistant, to any shift towards centralization and conformity.” Historian Christopher Tyerman described Medieval Latin Christendom as “theoretically centered on the papacy in Rome but really driven by the twin forces of local, aristocracy-led churches and a network of monasteries… concealed within them in infinite local variety.” Local saints and influential preachers had more impact on the people than a distant Pope.
According to historian Will Durant, the medieval church of Spain “usually ignored the Popes, and ruled Spanish Christianity as a well-nigh independent Church.” The German Church was only “loosely attached to the papacy,” and the archbishops “paid only lip service to the Popes.” The Church in Ireland was completely isolated from Rome. Monasteries recognized the Pope as the head of the Catholic Church. Nonetheless, they operated as isolated and autonomous habitations with codes and laws very distinct from standard ecclesiastical procedures.
During the 13th century, the Pope and the king of France sought to impose a permanent crusade tax on the clergy; many bishops said they would sooner be excommunicated than become “slaves rather than sons.” In 1076 the Holy Roman Emperor Henry IV condemned the Pope for attempting to get between Catholics and their bishops, who were their “rightful rulers.” He complained “You have declared that the bishops know nothing and that you know everything.” In 991, a synod of French clergy gathered, and during it, Bishop Arnulf of Orléans said due to its history, and in memory of Saint Peter, he held honor and respect for Rome and its glory as the “first of the Churches of God,” but he said the current situation of Popes was not glory but a shadow. He referred to the Roman Church clergy as “monsters” who lacked the knowledge of clergy outside of Rome. Arnulf said the church had been morally corrupted and lacked the divine knowledge of the rest of the European clergy. Therefore, how could it be the authority? Due to their knowledge of theology and philosophy, during the 13th century, the faculty of Paris believed it was they, and not Rome, who held the “keys” of Christendom. At various times kings held synods with clergy from their countries, announcing the current Pope was illegitimate. Some believed the king, not the Pope, was the rightful ruler of the church. The centralization of the Catholic Church did not come about until the 15th century and only fully developed around WWI.
Bibliography
Asbridge, Thomas. 2005. The First Crusade: A New History. N.p.: Oxford University Press. Bede. 1910. Ecclesiastical History of the English Nation. Translated by L. C. Jane’s. London; New York: E.P. Dutton J.M Dent. Bloch, Marc. 2014. Feudal Society. London and NY: Routledge Classics. Campbell, Phillip. 2021. The Church and the Dark Ages (430-1027): St. Benedict, Charlemagne, and the Rise of Christendom. Edited by Mike Aquilina. N.p.: Ave Maria Press. Canty, Kristin, dir. 2011. Farmageddon. Carroll, Warren H. 1993. The Glory of Christendom. N.p.: Christendom Press. Cutts D.D, Rev. Edward L. 1898. Parish Priests and Their People in the Middle Ages in England. NORTHUMBERLAND AVENUE, W.C. 43, QUEEN VICTORIA STREET, E.C. BRIGHTON: 129, NORTH STREET. New York: E & J. B. YOUNG AND CO.: PUBLISHED UNDER THE DIRECTION OE THE TRACT COMMITTEE. LONDON: SOCIETY FOR PROMOTING CHRISTIAN KNOWLEDGE. Durant, Will. 1950. The Age Of Faith A History of Medieval Civilization- Christian, Islamic, and judaic- from Constantine to Dante; A.D. 325-1300. New York: Simon and Schuster. Falco, Giorgio. 1964. The Holy Roman Republic: A Historical Profile of the Middle Ages. Translated by K. V. Kent. London, Ruskin House Museum Street: George Allen and Unwin LTD. Gonzalez, Justo L. 2014. The Story of Christianity: Volume 1: The Early Church to the Dawn of the Reformation. N.p.: HarperCollins. Jones, Andrew W. 2017. Before Church and State: A Study of Social Order in the Sacramental Kingdom of St. Louis IX. N.p.: Emmaus Academic. Kantorowicz, Ernst H. 2016. The King’s Two Bodies: A Study in Medieval Political Theology. N.p.: Princeton University Press. OGG, A.M, FREDERIC. A., ed. 1907. A SOURCE BOOK OF MEDIÆVAL HISTORY DOCUMENTS ILLUSTRATIVE OF EUROPEAN LIFE AND INSTITUTIONS FROM THE GERMAN INVASIONS TO THE RENAISSANCE. NEW YORK · : · CINCINNATI · : · CHICAGO: AMERICAN BOOK COMPANY. Storey, Richard, and Frank van Dun. 2017. The ‘Reactionary’ Libertarianism of Frank van Dun – Free Life. https://libertarianism.uk/2017/08/31/the-reactionary-libertarianism-of-frank-van-dun/. THATCHER, OLIVER J., and CHARLES SCRIBNER’S. n.d. “The Project Gutenberg EBook of A Source Book for Mediæval History.” Project Gutenberg. Accessed October 23, 2022. https://www.gutenberg.org/files/42707/42707-h/42707-h.htm. Tyerman, Christopher. 2006. God’s War A new History of the Crusades. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. Wickham, Chris. 2016. Medieval Europe From The Breakup Of The Western Roman Empire To The Reformation. New haven and London: Yale University Press.
Comments