INVESTITURES
INVESTITURES
As symbols of ecclesiastical installation, the ring and
staff were suggested; the sceptre served as the symbol
of investiture with the temporalities of the see. The
chronological order of the formalities raised a new
difficulty; on the imperial side it was demanded that
investiture with the temporalities should precede con-
secration, while the papal representatives naturally
claimed that consecration should precede investiture.
If the investiture were to precede, the emperor by
refusing the temporalities could prevent consecration;
in the other case, investiture was merely a confirma-
tion of the appointment. By 1119 the articles of
peace were agreed upon at Mouzon and were to be
ratified by the Synod of Reims. At the last moment,
however, negotiations were broken off, and the pope
renewed the excommimication of the emperor. But
the German princes succeeded in reopening the pro-
ceedings, and peace was finally arranged between the
legates of the pope, the emperor, and the princes on 23
September, 1122. This peace is usually known as the
Concordat of Worms, or the " Pactum Cali.xtinum ".
In the document of peace, Henry yields up "to God and his Holy Apostles Peter and Paul and to the Holy Catholic Church all investitures with ring and staff, and allows in all Churches of his kingdom and empire ecclesiastical election and free consecration '". On the other hand, the pope grants to "his beloved son Henry, by the Grace of God Roman Emperor, that the election of bishops and abbots in the German Empire in so far as they belong to the Kingdom of Germany, shall take place in his presence, without simony or the employ- ment of any constraint. Should any discord arise between the parties, the emperor shall, after hearing the advice and verdict of the metropolitans and other bishops of the province, lend his approval and support to the better side. The elected candidate shall re- ceive from him the temporalities (regalia) with the sceptre, and shall discharge all obligations entailed by such reception. In other portions of the empire, the consecrated candidate shall within six months receive the regalia by means of the sceptre, and shall fulfil towards him the obligations implied by this ceremony. From these arrangements is excepted all that belongs to the Roman Church " (i. e. the Papal States). The different parts of the empire were therefore differently treated; in Germany the investiture was to precede the consecration, while in Italy and Burgundy it fol- lowed the consecration and within the succeeding six months. The king was deprived of his unrestricted power in the appointment of bishops, but the Church also failed to secure the full exclusion of every alien influence from canonical elections. The Concordat of Worms was a compromise, in which each party made concessions. Important for the king were the tolera- tion of his presence at the election (pnesentia regis), which lent him a possible influence over the electors, and of investiture before consecration, whereby the elevation of an obnoxious candidate was rendered difficult or even impossible. The extreme ecclesiasti- cal partyj who condemned investitures and secular influence m elections under any form, were dissatisfied with these concessions from the very outset and would have been highly pleased, if Callistus had refused to confirm the ('oncordat.
In appraising the significance of this agreement it remains to be seen whether it was intended as a tem- porary truce or an enduring peace. Doubts might very well be (and indeed have been) entertained on this matter, since formally the document is drawn up only for Henry V. But a close examination of our sources of information and of contemporary docu- ments hasslidwii that it is erroneous to maintain that the Conciinlat enjoyed but a passing rec(if;niti(in and was of small importance. Not only by the contracting parties, l)ut also by their contemporaries, the compact was regarded as an enduring fundamental law. It was solemnly recognized not only as an imperial
statute, but as a law of the Church by the Lateran
CRcumenical Council of 1123. We also know from
Gerhoh of Reichersberg, who was present at the coun-
cil, that in addition to the imperial document, which it
has been held was alone read, that of the pope was also
read and sanctioned. As Gerhoh was one of the chief
opponents of the Concordat, his evidence in favour of
an unpleasant truth cannot be doubted. That the
agreement was to possess perpetual binding power,
neither party, of course, intended — and the Concordat
was very far from securing such continued recognition,
since it reveals at most the anxiety of the Church for
peace, under the pressure of certain circumstances.
By new legislative act the provisions were modified.
Under King Lothair (1125-37) and at the beginning of
the reign of Conrad III (1138-52) the Concordat was
still unchallenged and was observed in its entirety.
In 1139, however. Innocent II, in the twenty-eighth
canon of the Council of Rome, confined the privilege of
electing the bishop to the cathedral chapter and the
representatives of the regular clergy, and made no
mention of lay participation in the election. The
ecclesiastical party assumed that this provision an-
nulled the king's participation in elections and his
right to decide in the case of an equally divided vote of
the electors. If their opinion was correct, the Church
alone had withdrawn on this point from the compact,
and the kings had no need to take cognizance of the
fact. In truth the latter retained their right in this
respect, though they used it sparingly, and frequently
waived it. They had ample opportunity to make
their influence felt in other ways. Frederick I (1 152-
90) was again complete master of the Church in Ger-
many, and was generally able to secure the election of
the candidate he favoured. In case of disagreement
he took a bold stand and compelled the recognition of
his candidate. Innocent III (1198-121G) was the
first to succeed in introducing free and canonical elec-
tion into the German Church. Royal investiture
after his time was an empty survival, a ceremony
without meaning.
Such was the course and the consequence of the investiture conflict in the German Empire. In Eng- land and France, the strife never assumed the same proportions nor the same bitterness. It was owing to the importance of the German Empire and the imperial power that they had in the first instance to bear the bruntof the fight. Had they suffered defeat, the others could never have engaged in the con test with the Church.
The Conflict in England. — In England the conflict is part of the history of Anselm of Canterbury (q. v.). As primate of England (1093-1109), he fought almost singlehanded for the canon law against king, nobility, and clergy. William the Conqueror (1066-87) had constituted himself sovereign lord of the Church in England; he ratified the decisions of the synods, appointed bishops and abbots, determined how far the pope should be recognized, and forbade all intercourse without his permission. The Church in England was therefore practically a national Church, in spite of its nominal dependence on Rome. Anselm's contest with William II (1087-1100) was concerned with other matters, but during his resi- dence in France anel Italy he was one of the sup- porters of ecclesiastical reform, and, being required on his return to take the oath of fealty to the new king (Henry I, 1100-35) and receive the bishopric from his hands, he refused to comply. This led to the outbreak of the investiture quarrel. The king despatched suc- cessive embassies to the pope to uphold his right to investiture, but without success. In his replies to the king and in his letters to Anselm, Paschal strictly forbade both the oath of fealty and all investitures by laymen. Henry then forbade Anselm, who was visit- ing Rome, to return to England, and seized his rev- enues, wlicrcnpon, in 1105, the pope excommunicated the councillors of the king and all prelates who re-
