Part 3 (1/2)
The political was in complete harmony with the religious state of the country. Parcelled out among petty kings and chiefs, who seemed only to subsist by devouring each other, and, in the crush and tumult of their feuds, stood so thick on the ground, as hardly to have elbow room, the whole island presented one untiring round of treacheries, ma.s.sacres, conflagrations and plunderings, wholesale and retail, such as is without example elsewhere in history, with no other hope, so long as left to itself, of anything but an aggravation of the evil--if that were possible. That Adrian, with such a state of things before his eyes, should readily give his sanction to a project which, however liable to be clogged by human imperfection, could not at any rate make things worse, but haply might make them better, was surely a proceeding quite consistent with the character of a wise and zealous pope; of a pope too, who lived and thought when the crusades were at their height, and who may, therefore, be very well supposed to have viewed the condition of Ireland,--once the island of saints, but now the scene of worse than pagan abominations,--as not less calculated for the efforts of holy chivalry, than Palestine.
If then it can appear that Adrian might have acted, in his brief to Henry, just as well out of motives of religious duty, as out of those of court policy, it is a perverse thing to award him the latter rather than the former; because to do so is to make him not less absurdly than wickedly inconsistent with his previous and subsequent career:--which was marked by one unswerving purpose to defend the Church against the encroachments of secular power, to maintain her doctrines intact, and to extend her boundaries to the utmost. Besides, it should not be forgotten, that his brief was confirmed by his ill.u.s.trious successor, Alexander III., who thus gave his testimony to the uprightness of intention which originated it, as well as to its proper adaptation in the spirit of that age, to the emergency which elicited it; an emergency which, from the terms used by Alexander in conveying his confirmation, would seem by no means to have diminished, but rather to have increased in the mean time. In short, it is nothing better than a logical solecism, to wish to maintain that two such popes as Adrian IV. and Alexander III., educated in the school of the sublime Hildebrand, and ranking among the very foremost of his disciples, by the intelligent and dauntless manner in which they withstood the storm of imperial usurpation, which threatened to shatter the Church under their pontificates, should deviate from their glorious career, to belie their principles,--the one, by granting out of national prejudice and court sycophancy a license of spoliation to a king of England,--and the other, by confirming it out of reasons just as unworthy.
As it was, Providence did not see fit to allow the views either of Adrian or Henry, to be carried out as originally intended. For the expedition of the king against Ireland, was put off, on account of various obstacles, for fourteen years, during which term, the papal brief was consigned to the royal archives, and there forgotten. Nor was it till six years after the actual invasion of Ireland by Strongbow, that its existence was remembered by Henry; who, anxious to consolidate his new conquest, had the authority of Adrian's brief renewed, by procuring another in confirmation of it from Alexander, and then caused both doc.u.ments to be read up before the Irish bishops, a.s.sembled in synod at Waterford; by whom his sovereignty had already, without any reference to papal commands, been acknowledged.
That the English sway turned out so unjust and disastrous to Ireland, reflects no blame on Adrian, than whom no one would have more deplored the evil, and striven against its true causes, than he. Rather ought he, from the spirit of his brief,--the only fair test to apply to him,--to be regarded as the head of that small, unfortunately so very small, band of Englishmen, who have ever meant well to the sister isle; and who, to speak the sober truth, if their views might prevail, would alone be likely to promote her true prosperity, by s.h.i.+elding her not only against her outward, but her inward foes; to which latter,--consisting in those elements of social discord so profusely, so deeply rooted, as it would seem, in the nature of her people,---she owes by far the worst portion of her calamities. No doubt Pope Adrian, a man of the most shrewd practical intellect, and from the circ.u.mstances of his life, of the deepest experience in human nature, saw clearly enough then,--what continues to be seen so clearly by men of his stamp now,--that Ireland could never truly prosper, so long as left to her own management, by reason of the incurable defect mentioned above; and that, therefore, to sanction her sisterly, not her slavish connection, with a nation like the English, so eminent for those very qualities of order and self maintenance, in which she is so wanting, would be a work of as great charity in itself, as of mutual advantage to the parties concerned. For the rest, it should not be forgotten, that, however much the English occupation of Ireland may, through a series of causes, not to be foreseen in Adrian's time, have turned out a curse; yet the occupation in question had the immediate effect of producing the reform of those religious abuses, which const.i.tuted the worst misfortunes of the country, and which, till Henry had actually arrived thither, continued in all their hideous deformity. This happy result took place, under the auspices of Henry, at the synod of Cashel, summoned by him at the beginning of the year 1172, and attended by all the heads of the Irish clergy.
Besides the brief in question, Adrian gave to John of Salisbury, as the latter relates in the last chapter of his Metalogicus, a gold ring set with a fine emerald, for the king his master, in token of investment with the Lords.h.i.+p of Ireland; which important jewel, whose rare virtues, John of Salisbury adds, were he to describe, would require a volume to enumerate, was also deposited in the royal archives.
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 emba.s.sy, 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 pa.s.s 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 pa.s.s 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 a.s.suredly 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 t.i.thes 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 t.i.thes on the possessions of the order of St. John no doubt const.i.tuted, 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 Ma.s.s, 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 t.i.thes 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 pa.s.sion, 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 princ.i.p.al 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 pa.s.sed his whole life in ama.s.sing 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 n.o.bles a.s.serted 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 G.o.d, to abolish the detestable custom which has. .h.i.therto 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.