Page:Cambridge Medieval History Volume 3.pdf/496

This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
Claims of Nicholas I
453

Hincmar, by various subterfuges, evaded compliance, but in January 865, the Pope decided on bringing the matter to an issue, and the tone adopted by him in announcing the reinstatement of the bishop is that of a master who will tolerate no discussion of his orders. In trenchant language he censures the conduct of Hincmar, publicly reprobates his bad faith, prescribes to him submission pure and simple under pain of excommunication, and since Hincmar has declared that no appeal lay to Rome in Rothad's case, Nicholas does not hesitate to assert that even had the bishop lodged no appeal he could not have been deposed except by the Pope or with his consent. For in all grave matters, and notably those in which Bishops are concerned, the Pope is the sole and sovereign judge: "that which the Pope has decided is to be observed by all."

These general principles which were thus transforming the Church into a vast highly centralised body wholly in the hands of the Pope, were to be unceasingly proclaimed and defined by Nicholas: Every grade of the ecclesiastical hierarchy must yield to the pontifical authority; Archbishops owe their existence to the Pope in virtue of the pallium conferred on them by him; Bishops cannot be judged except by him or in virtue of the authority delegated by him; councils derive their force and their validity from the power and the sanction of the Holy See. Nicholas I thus takes up the position of the False Decretals[1], at the same time setting up, in place of the system of Christendom united around the Emperor, that of Christendom united around the Pope.

But hardly was Nicholas I dead (867) than his ideas seemed as obsolete as those of Charles the Great, and the Papacy found itself obliged to abandon the ideal, which Nicholas himself had only very partially realised, of a confederation of princes exclusively occupied in carrying out his will.

In the first place, the Popes, being themselves temporal princes throughout the Patrimony of Peter, were obliged, from the time of Hadrian II's pontificate (867-872), to provide for the defence of the States of the Church against the terrible risks to which they were exposed by the Saracen invasions. This care, secular in its nature, soon became by force of circumstances their chief preoccupation. The pontificate of John VIII (872-882), though he also was an energetic Pope, consists to a large extent of a series of desperate attempts to organise the defence against the invader, while he makes every possible endeavour to set up an Emperor capable of undertaking the leadership

  1. It is, however, a much-disputed question to what extent the papal doctrine was influenced by this famous collection. In "Étude sur les Fausses Décrétales," Revue d'histoire ecclésiastique, tome VIII. 1907, pp. 18 et sqq., M. Paul Fournier estimates their influence at practically nothing. His arguments appear to prove his case. It is certain that the papal theory had been formulated in its main outlines before Nicholas had cognizance of the False Decretals.