Chapter 5

Not only Henry II. of England, but Louis VII. of France, a year or two later, solicited Adrian's approbation of a scheme of foreign conquest, which, in this case was intended to be carried out in Spain, where the French monarch pretended he wanted to serve the Church, by expelling the Saracens. But the pope treated the application of Louis, very differently to that of Henry. For in his brief of reply [5] after awarding all praise to the religious zeal alleged by the French king as his motive, he points out the flagrant wrong which Louis would commit in gratuitously interfering in the affairs of an independent nation like Spain,--the consent of whose princes could alone justify such a step: so that until such consent should be obtained, he, Adrian, could do nothing else than totally condemn and warn, him against his project.

Adrian's conduct in this instance, was not less consistent than in the other. For as over Ireland in its character of an island, he believed himself to possess, through the supposed testament of Constantine, certain rights, and thought proper to exercise them; so over Spain, being ignorant of any such rights, he arrogated none, but acted as became him on the general principles of Christian justice.

[1] Baronius, Annus, 1154

[2] Baronius, Annus 1159; rectified by Pagi to 1155.

[3] Topograp. Hiber. Distinc. tertia cap. 14.

[4] De vita Malachiae Episcopi, cap. viii.

[5] Bouquet's Receuil, &c. t. 15. P. 690.

VII.

It was most likely on occasion of this embassy, that John of Salisbury,--although he mentions other visits paid by him to Adrian,--held the interesting conversation with the English pope, which he reports at length, in his Polycraticus. [1] In that work, he says, he well remembers how, during a sojourn at the papal court in Beneventum, he was treated on the most familiar footing by his Holiness; whose habit it was to gather round him a few select friends, with whom he would freely discuss a variety of topics; and how, among others, he once asked John to state candidly what he knew of the people's opinion, touching the Roman Church and her head. Whereupon, the envoy of Henry, using the liberty of the spirit, told without disguise, all that he had heard in various parts on the subject. For example: that the Roman Church, the mother of all others, showed herself according to many not so much a mother as a step-mother to her daughters. That scribes and pharisees sat in her, who loaded other mens' shoulders with burdens, which they would not touch even with their fingers. That these said scribes and pharisees played the tyrant over the clergy, and bore no palpable resemblance to such shepherds as tread the true path of life; but that they heaped up rich furniture, ornamented their tables with gold and silver plate, distracted the Church with controversies and by setting the pastors and the people by the ears. That they, in no manner, commiserated the sorrows of the unfortunate; but made merry over the plunder of churches, and administered justice, not according to the truth, but the price. Then, that other people said the Roman Pontiff himself was a tyrant; and that, while the churches, which their ancestors had built, were falling to ruin, and the altars stood desolate, he appeared abroad arrayed in gold and purple. But that the divine wrath would eventually overtake such priests as lived in pride and luxury, and levied taxes on the provinces like men, who meant to equal the wealth of Croesus: "for the Lord had said, that as they measured out to others, so would he measure out to them: and the Ancient of Days could not lie." Upon hearing this, and much more to the same effect, the pope asked John of Salisbury what he himself thought? Who replied, that the question very much perplexed him, as, on the one hand, he feared to pass for a flatterer, if he went contrary to public opinion, and on the other, to give offence, if he spoke the truth. Nevertheless, as cardinal Guido Clement had bore witness in favour of the people, he, John of Salisbury, dared not contradict him. For the cardinal had said that the Church of Rome contained a world of avarice and deceit, from which every evil sprung. This he had not said in a corner, but before all his brethren, in presence of Pope Eugenius; and yet he, John of Salisbury, would not hesitate to declare that, as far as his experience went, he had never seen anywhere clergymen of greater virtue, or more opposed to avarice, than those of Rome. Such was the gravity and modesty of many of them, that in those respects they equalled Fabricius, while, in possessing the true faith, they had the advantage over him. Then, with regard to the pope himself,--as his Holiness insisted on being plainly spoken to,--he would say, that, inasmuch as the Holy Ghost could not err, so whatever his Holiness might teach, must be followed; though, what his Holiness might do, was not always to be imitated. His Holiness was styled Father and Lord of all: but why, if he was the Father, did he require presents from his children? and why, if he was the Lord, did he not strike awe into the Romans, curb their insolence, and reclaim them to their duty? At all this the pope laughed heartily, and expressed himself well pleased at having found a man so honest and plain spoken; adding, that if ever he should hear anything further to the same purpose, by no means to omit reporting it. Adrian then proceeded to pass his own conduct in review, said many things for and against himself, and made reflections on the arduousness of the papal office, affirming that no other was so full of cares, and that no man was more wretched than a Roman Pontiff: "for his throne was set with thorns, his mantle pierced with sharp points, and so heavy as to weigh the strongest shoulders to the ground." Much sooner would he prefer never to have left his native English soil, or to have remained for ever hidden in his cell at St. Rums, than to have entered such straits; but the divine dispensation had called him, and he dared not disobey. He further said, that it had always been the Lord's pleasure, that he should grow between the hammer and the anvil; that now he prayed the Lord would be pleased to put his hand under the burden, as it was become insupportable. The pope then concluded his observations, by relating to the company, the fable of the Belly and the Members,--which the charges laid at his door suggested to him, and which John of Salisbury gives at length in Adrian's words; a fable, by the way, which assuredly has lost none of its point since those times, but remains as pregnant with wisdom for the nineteenth, as for the twelfth century.

Pope Anastasius IV. had conferred on the Knights Hospitallers of Jerusalem the privilege of exemption from tithes on their property, in consideration of its exclusive destination to the relief of pilgrims and of the poor. This privilege soon gave rise to a quarrel between the knights and the clergy of Jerusalem,---who naturally took it ill, that so important a source of revenue, as the tithes on the possessions of the order of St. John no doubt constituted, should thus be stopped. The patriarch reproached the grand master with abusing his privilege, and, at last, grew so embittered, that he drew up a charge against him, of acts of aggression on the rights of the oriental church,--for example: "That the Hospitallers allowed all such persons to attend their church as were excommunicated by the bishops, and did not even refuse such outcasts the holy sacrament and extreme unction when dying, as well as Christian burial when dead; that when, for some great crime, silence was imposed on the churches of a town or district, the knights were always the first to ring their bells, and call the people, on whom the interdict was laid, to Mass, for no other purpose, than to get the offerings and fees, which otherwise would accrue to the parish church; that the priests of St. John did not, on their ordination, present themselves, according to ancient custom, before the bishop of the diocese, to ask his permission to do duty therein; that the bishop was never advised of the lawful or unlawful suspension of a priest; lastly, that the knights of St. John absolutely refused to pay tithes on their property." From these general charges the patriarch next descended to particular ones of affronts to himself,--for instance: "That, as the hospital of St. John stood opposite the church of the Holy Sepulchre, the knights had erected their buildings on a scale of magnificence superior to the latter church, purely out of a feeling to insult the patriarch; moreover, that, when the patriarch ascended according to traditional usage, the place of our Saviour's passion, to absolve the people from their sins and preach to them, the Hospitallers invariably set all their bells a-ringing with such violence, as plainly proved that they meant to drown his voice and interrupt him in the performance of his duty; that when he had often complained to the citizens of this misconduct, and these had expostulated with the perpetrators, the latter only replied, that they would yet play him worse turns; that they had, in fact, kept their word; for they had shot arrows at him in the church itself, while celebrating there the divine offices. These arrows he (the patriarch) had caused to be picked up, and exposed in a bundle on Mount Calvary as a memorial." [2]

With these charges the patriarch, attended by other oriental prelates, set out for Italy, to lay his case before the pope. After running many perils by reason of the war, then going on between the pope and the king of Sicily, the party at last reached Beneventum. The trial that took place lasted several days; when the result of the pleadings for and against was, that Adrian became convinced of the hollowness of the accusations, laid by the patriarch against the knights of St. John, and, therefore, refused to grant the redress sought for,--namely, to annul the patent of privileges conferred by Anastasius. William of Tyre,--who describes the transaction as a partisan of the patriarch,--plainly says that the pope took bribes to decide as he did. But Pagi [3] denies this flatly, and affirms that Adrian proceeded in this, as well as in every other act of his authority, conscientiously and disinterestedly. Indeed, it is rather unfortunate for William of Tyre, that of the three cardinals, whom he alone excepts from the charge of bribery, two, namely, Octavian, and John of St. Martin,--afterwards figured as principal actors in the scandalous schism which rent the Church after Adrian's death: the first as Frederic Barbarossa's anti-pope, under the name of Victor IV. in opposition to Alexander III. the lawful pope; the second as Victor's legate, and as chief supporter, after his death, of Anacletus III., whom the emperor next started against Alexander. Peter of Blois, too, in his letter [4] to cardinal Papiensis, describes Octavian as having passed his whole life in amassing riches wherewith to disturb the Church, and as having been but too successful in corrupting a powerful party in the Roman curia to his views.

It had always been a leading concern of the popes to heal the schism between Constantinople and Rome. Adrian did his part, though fruitlessly, towards so great a work. Shortly after his accession, he sent to the Emperor Constantine legates on the subject, who also carried a letter from the pope to Basilius, bishop of Thessalonica,--one of the most influential and well disposed prelates, at that day, in the east. This letter was to request his co-operation in bringing about the re-union of the severed Churches. Basilius made answer, that unity might easily be restored, as no essential difference of belief existed between the two communions; in both of which one and the same doctrine was taught, and one and the same Lamb, namely Christ, offered up for the sins of the world; though without doubt, some minor discrepancies existed between the two, whose removal however belonged wholly to the pope: who, as he had the will had also the power, no less than our Saviour himself, to unite into _one_ what stood now so widely separated. Basilius would thus seem, to have been of opinion that he was in no wise cut off from the Catholic Church, notwithstanding the oriental might differ in certain rites from the western Church. [5]

It was an old and gross abuse of the age, that the nobles asserted the right to seize the effects of a bishop on his death. This abuse did not escape severe censure, from several synods. But Pope Adrian, it was, who condemned it the most effectually, by his bull to Berengarius, archbishop of Narbonne, (A. D. 1156,) on occasion of Ermengarda, Viscountess of Narbonne, renouncing the abuse in favour of that prelate, which renunciation, the papal bull was issued to confirm. In the year 1150, Raymond, count of Barcelona, made a similar renunciation by charter, when about to go on a distant and perilous journey. In it he says: "I hereby promise to God, to abolish the detestable custom which has hitherto prevailed in my states,--to wit, the custom whereby my bailiffs plundered the goods of a bishop when he died:--a proceeding which I own to be contrary to divine and human laws; wherefore, I renounce the said custom, and order that for the future, if any thing be found in the house or grounds of a bishop deceased, it shall be reserved for his successor." [6]

[1] Polycraticus, &c. lib. 6, cap, 24, and lib. 8, cap. 23.

[2] William of Tyre, lib. 18. cap. 3 & 7.

[3] Brev. Pontif. Rom. Annus 1154.

[4] No. 48.

[5] Pagi, ibid.

[6] Fleury, Livre 76.

VIII.

The peace, which Adrian had concluded with the king of Sicily, was soon seized by Frederic Barbarossa as the pretext for a new quarrel with the Church. The grounds on which the German despot professed to be aggrieved were as follow: a predecessor of his, Lothair II., had in his Italian war, in the foregoing century, obliged the king of Sicily to own the feudal superiority of Germany over Apulia. Pope Innocent II., who protested against this proceeding as a violation of his rights, could only so far induce Lothair to respect them, as to agree to let their lawful owner for the future jointly exercise them with their lawless usurper. So that, when the Sicilian King, as Duke of Apulia, should be presented, at the ceremony of his installation, with a flag, the Pope was to hold the pole with one hand, and the Emperor with the other.

Frederic Barbarossa renewed this right of joint lordship over Apulia by a concordat with Eugenius III., in which he expressly stipulated not to make any treaty with the king of Sicily, without the previous consent of the Pope, who, however, was not required to enter into any such obligation towards the German monarch.

And yet Frederic now put on the face of an injured man, declaring that what had not been stipulated, had yet always been taken for granted; and that Adrian, by making peace with King William, unknown to the emperor, had flagrantly violated the concordat. In the height of his ill-will, an incident fell out which gave free vent to his animosity against the pope.

To settle his power in Burgundy, he summoned a Diet of the Empire to meet at Besancon, in October, 1157. This Diet was numerously and splendidly attended, not only by German but by foreign princes and ambassadors from all parts of Europe; among the rest, by two cardinals, namely, Roland and Bernard, as legates from the pope. The emperor received their credentials in his oratory, where he gave them a special audience; at which they also presented him a letter from Adrian, who complained in it of the impunity with which Frederic had allowed certain marauding knights to detain and plunder Eskill, Archbishop of Lund, while travelling through Burgundy to his diocese. In chiding him for so faithless a discharge of his duty, as sworn champion of the Roman Church, the pope reminded the emperor of the favours he owed that Church, especially mentioning among them his imperial crown: "not that she repented of having so far obliged him, on the contrary, she would rejoice if she could confer on him still greater benefits."

As Frederic listened to this letter, which his chancellor Raynald read up to him, he reddened with anger at that part of it which spoke of his crown as a gift of the Church; but at the word "benefits" he could not control himself, for, by this word he insisted, in the blindness of passion, that the pope meant to assert that the empire was a feoff of the Holy See.

The fact was, the original word _beneficium_ did signify, in the corrupt Latin of the middle ages, a feoff as well as a benefit in general; and this was enough for the emperor's humour, who would listen to no explanation from the legates, that the word was used, not in its technical, but its classical sense. In the heat of the dispute which ensued, Cardinal Roland,--afterwards Pope Alexander III.--exclaimed: "From whom then hath the Emperor his dignity, if not from the Pope?" Whereupon, the Count Palatine, Otho of Bavaria, one of the courtiers present, seized by a fit of fury, drew his sword, and rushed towards the cardinal; but was checked in his purpose by Frederic, who threw himself between the two; and then closed the audience by ordering the legates to be escorted back to Rome, with injunctions not to deviate from the directest line of route, nor to tarry in any ecclesiastical domain through which they might pass.

Historians are agreed that Adrian had no intention, in the present case, of practically asserting,--as Frederic in his politic wrath said he did,--the feudal superiority in question. The English pope, however, was not the less a stickler for that superiority in theory, as well as Cardinal Roland and the rest of the hierarchy;--a superiority which Pope Gregory VII. supported by the feelings and convictions of Christendom at his day, taught as follows: that the Pope, as Vicar on earth of our Lord in heaven, ought to stand superior over every human power; and sought to realize it as the only means of reforming the frightful disorders of that age.

Frederic Barbarossa, on the other hand, took, as was natural to a man like him, bent on crushing the spiritual beneath the temporal power, the opposite side of the question;--a side which was just as repugnant to the feeling of the overwhelming majority of Christendom then, as it was a century before; nay, which was at variance with his own conscience, if one may judge from his conduct at a later period, when, abandoned by fortune, and his pride humbled in the dust, he was driven to hearken to its voice. For the present, he proclaimed the only doctrine which his pride could brook, namely,--that he held his crown from God alone, to whose Servant, the Pope, it simply belonged to perform the ceremony of coronation. This doctrine of his imperial dignity he caused to be stated in a circular, which he addressed to all the provinces of Germany in vindication of his behaviour towards the papal legates:--a measure rendered imperative by the religious temper of the age. In this circular, [1] he denounces all, who differ from its views, as enemies of the doctrine of our Lord and His Apostles, as, in short, their slanderers; and, among other extravagancies of his virulence, declares that one cause, among the rest, why he so unceremoniously dismissed the legates, was the discovery which he had made of blank papers in their possession, ready signed and sealed; which they could fill up at pleasure, and which were meant to empower them to dismantle the altars, plunder the sacred vessels, and deface the crucifixes in the German churches. He further informs the bishops of Germany, that _he_, and _he_ alone, it is who really strives to protect their liberties against the Roman See, whose yoke they groaned under.

Those, however, to whom this consoling piece of news was sent, knew but too well what a mockery the word liberty was in the mouth of a man who like Frederic had long ago trampled on the Concordat of Worms, and who disposed of the benefices of the Church after the arbitrary manner of Henry IV., to subserve his political ends.

As companion-piece to his circular, Frederic published an edict forbidding, in future, all correspondence between his clergy and Rome.

The account which the cardinals Roland and Bernard gave, on their arrival at Rome, of the way in which they had been treated by Frederic, created a lively sensation at the papal court. The imperial party in the conclave sought to exculpate their patron in the face of the reproaches heaped upon him, by ascribing all the blame to the ignorance and mismanagement of the legates. In the midst of the conflicting opinions of his clergy, Pope Adrian deeply felt the indignity which he had suffered in the persons of his representatives, but did not allow himself to be betrayed into any violent manifestation of displeasure; on the contrary, after the first excitement of his feelings was over, he wisely resolved to do all in his power to conciliate the emperor, without derogating from his own dignity. To this end he wrote a brief, of which the substance is as follows, to all the archbishops and bishops of Germany: