Z5>ZZ A HISTORY OF SIMONY IN THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH FROM THE BEGINNING TO THE DEATH OF CHARLEMAGNE (814) DISSERTATION FOB THE DOCTORATE IN THEOLOGY AT THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA / Keverend N. a. WEBER, S.M., S.T.L. BALTIMORE J. H. FURST COMPANY 1909 Nihil obstat : THOMAS J. SHAHAN, D. D., Censor Deputatus Imprimatur : J. CAKD. GIBBONS Archbishop of Baltimore Baltimore, March 1, 1909. COPYEIGHT, 1909, BY N. A. WBBEK ALL RIGHTS RKSEEVED PREFACE It is a well-known fact that in the long course of the history of the Church, there has never been a period when she was free from struggles. Erom the very day of her foundation till the present time she has been obliged to wage relentless war against internal and external foes. Her internal conflicts were brought about either by the failure of certain individuals to receive the complete body of her divine doctrine or by violations of the moral law over which she was appointed guardian. The two great moral evils at one time affecting the clergy were incontinency and simony. Eccle- siastical celibacy and its violations have been frequently and extensively written about; but it may be safely said that, up to the present day, simony has not received from historians the atten- tion which it deserves. Yet its history throws considerable light on the vast problem of the re- lations between Church and State, as well as on the causes of the moral degeneracy of some mem- bers of the clergy. We have thought that perhaps it might not be altogether useless to present in the following pages a history of simony from the beginning of Christianity till the death of Charle- magne. Our first intention was to bring the sub- iv PREFACE ject down to the time of Gregory VII. But the impossibility of handling in a work of this kind the wealth of existing material, became apparent in the course of the study and forced us to limit our scope. We have, therefore, devoted special attention to the period which concludes with the death of Gregory the Great (604), and brought down the history in a more concise form to the end of the reign of Charlemagne. As we go to press there comes into our hands a study of the same character. Unfortunately, however, it deals with a period considerably later than the limits imposed on the present writer.^ It is a pleasing duty for the author to acknowl- edge his indebtedness to the Very Reverend Doctor T. J. Shahan, Pro-Eector of the Catholic Uni- versity of America, without whose aid, valuable suggestions and never-failing kindness, this work would not have been possible. IsTiCHOLAs A. Webee. Washington, D. C, February 2, 1909. * Drehmann, Papst Leo IX und die Simonie. Ein Beitrag zur Untersuchung der Voi'geschichte des Investiturstreites. (Leipzig and Berlin, 1908.) CONTENTS PAGE Pbeface iii Abbeeviations xi Introduction 1-12 CHAPTER I SIMONY FROM THE BEGINNING OF THE CHRISTIAN ERA TO THE EDICT OF MILAN (313) The close connection between the supernatural and the natural order — Simony contrary to the Natu- ral Law — Judas sells Our Lord — Existence and identification of Simon Magus — His work in Sama- ria and his attempt to buy the Apostolic power — The condemnation of simony and its influence on subsequent times — Other causes of the inf requency of simony during this period — Tertullian's com- parison of the venality of the pagan and the integ- grity of the Christian religion — Eusebius' descrip- tion of the state of the Church — Paul of Samo- sata profits by his episcopal position to enrich him- self — The origin of Donatism 13-29 CHAPTER II PREVALENCE OF SIMONY FROM THE YEAR 313 TO 476 Ecclesiastical, judicial and civil power of the bishops — Their election — Simony among the Arians — Simony among Catholics Gregory Nazianzen and Maximus the Cynic — Chrysostom and the accusa- vi CONTENTS tions against Antoninus of Ephesus — A synod of Ephesus and six sinioniacal bishops — Clirysostom deposes Gerontius — Isidore of Pelusium and simony — Flavian of Constantinople and Chrysaphius — Ibas of Edessa accused of simony — Timothy Ailuros at Alexandria — Simony in Gaul ; epis- copal election at Chalon-sur-Saone — Election at Bourges 30-54 CHAPTER III THE ATTITUDE OF CHURCH AND STATE TOWARDS SIMONY FROM 313 TO 476 Pope Siricius and ordinations — Utterances of Greg- ory Nazianzen and Ambrose — Conduct of Hilar- ion — Chrysostom and episcopal elections — Sul- picius Severus, Jerome, Augustine — The forty- eighth canon of Elvira — The councils of Nicaea, Antioch, Sardica — Letter of Basil — Pope Leo I — Some Apostolic Canons — The second canon of Chalcedon — The patriarch Gennadius and simony — Edict of the Eastern emperor Leo I — Similar • edict of the emperor Glycerins 55-77 CHAPTER IV SIMONY IN THE WEST FROM 476 TO 590 I. Rome and Italy: — Conditions at Rome during the period — Intervention of Odoacer in papal election — The election of Pope Symmachus — The designa- tion of Boniface II — Vacancy after his death — Election of Silverius — Pope Vigilius — Pelagius I — Eucaristus and the bishopric of Volterra — Vi- talis of Milan. II. France: — Clovis and his sons and the Church — Quintianus and Apollinaris and the see of Clermont — Gallus and the same see — Cautinus succeeds Gallus — The successor of Cau- CONTENTS vii tinus — The machinations against Aetherius, bishop of Lisieux — The see of Rodez and Transobadus — The bishopric of Uz&s and the civil government — King Guntram and simony — Retrospect. III. Otheb Countries: — The Vandals and the African Church — Gildas on ecclesiastical conditions among the Britons 78-108 CHAPTER V OPPOSITION TO SIMONY IN THE WEST FROM 476 TO 590 I. Opposition at Rome axvd throughout Italy: — Latin translation of the second canon of Chalcedon — The Roman synod of 502 — The " Canonical Letter " and the " Liber Ecclesiasticorum Dog- matum " — Letter of Pope Gelasius I — Enactments of the Roman synod of the year 499 — Letter of Pope Symmachus to Caesarius of Aries — Pope Pelagius I and simony — Anti-simoniacal edict of King Athalaric. — II. Opposition to Simony in France and Spain: — Canons of the council of Or- igans (533) —Council of Clermont (535)— The fifth synod of Orleans — The second council of Tours — Letter of Pope Hormisdas to the Spanish Church — The third synod of Braga 109-129 CHAPTER VI simony and anti-simoniacal legislation in the east FROM 476 to 590 Special character of simony in the East — The question of the succession to Timothy Solofacialus in the see of Alexandria — Theodosius the Cojnobiarch and the emperor Anastasius — John the Recluse and Anastasius — Paul, patriarch of Alexandria — Justin II said to have been guilty of simoniacal dealings — Justinian's legislation against simony — viii CONTENTS Qualifications of the episcopal candidate — Payment of admission fees prohibited — Oath required of episcopal electors — A passage of the Nomocanon of John Scholasticus — Anti-simoniacal legislation in Armenia and Syria 130-145 CHAPTER VII GREGOEY THE GREAT AND SIMONY IN THE WEST (590-604) I. Italy: — State of Italy at Gregory's accession — Testimony of Agnellus relative to the prevalence of simony — Gregory and the archiepiscopal see of Milan — Gregory and Januarius — The former's instructions to Castorius — Council of Rome (595) ; its decree against simony. II. France: — Political division of France at Gregory's accession — Ecclesi- astical conditions — Statements regarding the exist- ence of simony — Gregory's letter to Bishop Ver- gilius of Aries — Other letters of his — He writes to Queen Brunehilde — His letter of 599 to the bishops of Gaul — Convocation of a council urged — Another letter to the queen — Fruitlessness of the pope's efforts — New campaign against the evil — Letters to bishops and kings — Council to be held — Gregory's efforts are again fruitless — Simony in Spain 146-172 CHAPTER VIII GREGORY THE GREAT AND SIMONY IN THE EASTERN EMPIRE I. Asia, Egypt and Eastern Europe: — Ecclesiastical policy of the Eastern emperors — Corruption in the empire — Letters of Gregory to Anastasius of Anti- och and Isaeius of Jerusalem — The church of Alexandria — LTnknown result of Gregory's activity — Eastern Europe — Trial of Anastasius of Cor- CONTENTS ax inth — Instructions to his successor and to the bishops of Epirus — The church of Salona; Gregory's instructions to his representative An- toninus — Honoratus elected bishop of Salona — Honoratus opposed by Maximus — The latter's con- secration — Conflict between Gregory and Maximus — Maximus makes his submission. II. Noeth- WESTEBN Ateica: — Ecclesiastical division of the country — The primatial dignity — Donatism — Catholics allow Donatists to rebaptize them for a bribe — Catholic bishops yield to bribery — Gregory appeals to the civil government for help against the Donatists — He vainly tries to intro- duce a new primatial organization — The cases of Bishops Argentius, Maximus and Paulinus to be investigated at synods — Letters to Bishops Colum- bus and Adeodatus — Council of Carthage — Doubtful Numidian council — Gregory's success in Africa only partial — His influence on Canon Law 173-199 CHAPTER IX SIMONY IN THE WEST FEOM THE DEATH OF GEEGOEY THE GEEAT TO THE DEATH OF CHAELEMAGNE (604-814) I. Peevalence of Simony: — Papal elections and the civil power — Pope Zachary, Boniface and the pal- lium-affair — Charlemagne, Alcuin and simony in Italy — Simony in France — Occurrences at Sois- sons and Clermont — Charles Martel — Ecclesiasti- cal conditions under the Carolingians — Simony in Spain and in England. II. Anti-simoniacal legislation: — The Liber Diurnus in Italy — The Capitulary of Mantua; the council of Rome and that of Forojulium — Councils in France — Regula- lations on special topics — Spanish and Anglo- Saxon legislation 200-223 X CONTENTS CHAPTER X SIMONY IN THE EAST FROM G04 TO 814 John Eleemosynarius and simony — Prohibitions of simony by the council in Trullo — The seventh ecu- menical council and episcopal appointments — Controversy regarding its fifth canon — Admission to monasteries — The patriarch Tarasius and his controversy with the monks of Constantinople — Conclusion 224-241 Bibliography 243-248 Index 249-254 PRINCIPAL ABBREVIATIONS USED IN THE WORK AA. SS. = Acta Sanctorum Bollandiana. Bibl. Rer. Ger. = Bibliotheca Rerum Gernianicarum. Bouquet = Recueil des Hiatoriens des Gaules, edited by Bouquet-Delisle. Gams, Kg. v. Span. = Gams, Kirchengeschiehte von Spanien. Hefele or Hefele Cg. or Concg. = Hefele, Conciliengeschichte, Jaffe or Jaffe Reg. = Regesta Pontificum Romanorum, edited by JafFe-Lowenfeld, etc. Lib. Pont. = Liber Pontificalis. Mansi = Sacrorum Conciliorum Collectio, edited by Mansi. MGH. Auct. Ant. = Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Auc- tores Antiquissimi. MGH. Epp. = Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Epistolae. MGH. SS. = Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Scriptores. PG. = Migne, Patrologia Graeca. PL, = Migne, Patrologia Latina.^ Thiel or Thiel, Epp. = Epistolae Romanorum Pontificum, edited by Thiel. ^In referring to these two collections (PG. and PL.) only Arabic numerals are used; the first number refers to the volume, the second to the column. XI A HISTORY OF SIMONY INTRODUCTION SIMONY AS IT IS UNDERSTOOD TO-DAY; ITS TREATMENT IN THE PRESENT WORK The word simony is of late origin and acquired its present meaning by a gradual process. The first step towards its introduction was taken when the sale of supernatural favors for temporal ad- vantages was considered in relation with the sin of Simon Magus (Acts, viii, 18-2-i). Several of the fathers of the fourth century, as Basil, Am- brose, Chrysostom, Jerome, instituted such a comparison.^ From this assertion of similarity in sin, it was but a step to the use of the adjective " simoniacal," which is found in Pelagius I - and is of such frequent occurrence in the correspond- ence of Gregory the Great. The noun " simony " came into use at a still later date. As to the thing itself for which simony stands, it is found in the very beginning of the Christian religion and, to a considerable extent, even in ^ See below, jjp. 57, 58, 59, 63 and also p. 64, where the thirtieth canon of the Apostles is given. •Lib. Pont. I, 303, ed. Duchesne. 1 2 A HISTORY OF SIMONY pre-Christian times. But before we enter upon any historical discussion, a brief exposition of simony as it is understood to-day seems necessary. In this matter modern writers usually adopt the definition of Thomas Aquinas ; ^ " A deliberate design of selling or buying for a temporal price, such things as are spiritual or annexed unto spirituals." To this definition, however, there are serious objections, already pointed out by Leinz.^ In the first place it speaks only of pur- chase and sale, whereas any contract, any legally binding transaction, in which an exchange of the above-specified objects takes place, suffices to con- stitute the sin of simony. Secondly, the term " spiritual " is too comprehensive to be used here ; for there can be question only of a certain class of spiritual things. The natural knowledge of the human mind is undoubtedly spiritual; yet it has absolutely nothing to do with simony. Only such spiritual objects as are conducive to the eternal happiness of the soul, or in some way connected with it, come under consideration. In general language it is, of course, permissible to use the term spiritual in this restricted sense; but it is " Summa Theol. iida, iidae, Quaest. 100, a. 1. " Studiosa voluntas emendi vel vendendi aliquid spirituale, vel spirituali annexum [pretio temporal!]. " * Die Simonie (Freiburg, 1902), 40-41. Also ArcMv fiir Kath. Kirchenrecht (1897), Lxxvii, 267-72. INTRODUCTION 3 out of place in a definition. The word super- natural should be substituted for the word spiritual; for, although everything supernatural is also spiritual, the reverse is not true. With regard to the extent of the definition, we may for the moment overlook the fact that it does not include that class of simony having its origin in merely ecclesiastical law (simonia juris ecclesi- astici), this being a variable and accidental ampli- fication of the term. From the preceding considerations we are led to define simony : " The intended or real exchange of a supernatural good, or a natural good annexed thereto, for something that is temporal." Three elements may here be distinguished : 1. The super- natural object; 2. The temporal price; 3. The idea of exchange. The existence of a deliberate intention to make an exchange of a supernatural good for a natural suffices for the commission of simony; for this sin, like every other, may be committed merely internally. Its very nature, however, usually leads to an external expression of the intention and so much so that some writers use the word simony only where there has been such an expression. As the Church does not judge of interior dispositions, it is certain that ecclesiastical penalties are incurred only by some outward manifestation. The giving of one thing as the price of another is not an indispensable 4 A HISTOEY OF SIMONY requisite for the existence of simony; it suffices that the determining motive of the action of one party be to obtain compensation from the other. ^ But this should not be taken to mean that simony is committed by one who, in the hope of obtaining through gratitude an ecclesiastical benefice or such like favor, obliges his ecclesiastical superior in a temporal fashion. The temporal price is commonly distinguished, according to Canon Law ^ into the " Munus a manu, munus a lingua and munus ah obsequio." The " 7nunus a manu " comprises not only money, but also all movable or immovable property and all rights appreciable in monetary value. The " Munus a lingua " includes oral commendation, public expressions of approval, moral support in high places; for example, the appointment to a benefice with the understanding that in influential circles the appointee v/ill speak favorably of the person to whom he owes his office. The demon- stration of undue subjection and the rendering of services not due to a person, with the intention of obtaining compensation, are expressed in the " munus ah obsequio." By the supernatural object which is estimated ^ See the condemned proposition of Innocent XI on this point, Denzinger-Bannwai't, Enchiridion, 10th ed. (Frei- burg, 1908), no. 1195. "c. 114, C. 1. q. 1. INTRODUCTION 5 at temporal value, we understand not only sancti- fying grace, but whatever directly procures the eternal welfare of the soul, e. g., the Sacraments, the Sacramentals. Moreover, there are things which, although natural in themselves, are, when considered in the concrete, intimately and insepa- rably connected with the supernatural, such as ecclesiastical benefices and the right of patronage. To sell them is simoniacal. Simony as thus far described is prohibited by natural and positive divine law. The Church in her legislation went beyond these prohibitions, and as a consequence we now have simony of mere ecclesiastical law (simonia juris ecclesiastici). For, according to the more probable theological opinion, the ecclesiastical authority has the right to proscribe as simoniacal, morally indifferent ac- tions, because of the simoniacal danger which they present. In this manner, the exchange of an ob- ject partly supernatural for another of the same nature is simoniacal to-day, as is also any arrange- ment respecting the same things entered into in a way contrary to the canons and intended to impose reciprocal obligations. Thus, to cite only one instance, the exchange of one benefice for another by private authority is simoniacal, although it is a transaction in things of the same character.'^ ' ce. 5 and 7. De Rerum permutatione, iii, 19. 6 A HISTORY OF SIMONY Both natural and ecclesiastical simony may be divided into mental, conventional, and real {simo- nia mentalis, conventionalism et realis). Mental simony is characterized either by the absence of all outward expression or, according to others, by the lack of approval on the part of the person to whom the proposal is made.^ In conventional simony an expressed or tacit agreement is entered upon. It is subdivided into merely conventional, where neither party has fulfilled any of the terms of the agreement, and into mixed conventional, in which one party has at least partly complied with the assumed obligations. To the latter subdivision may be referred what has been aptly termed con- fidential simony (simonia confidentialis) , in which an ecclesiastical benefice is procured for a certain person with the agreement that, later he will either resign in favor of the one who procured him the benefice or divide with him the revenues. When the stipulations of the mutual agreement have been either partly or completely carried out by both parties, we have what is called real simony. If we now inquire into the gravity of the simon- iacal sin, we must carefully distinguish between what is simoniacal by ll^atural Law and what has * G^nicot, Theologiae moralis Institutiones, 5th ed. (Lou- vain, 1905), I, 265; Santi-Leitner, Praelectiones Jims Ca- nonici, 4th ed. (Ratisbon, 1905), Lib. V, 13-14. His treat- ment of simony runs from pp. 10-49, INTRODUCTION 7 become such through ecclesiastical legislation. If the Natural Law and consequently the positive Divine Law has been violated, the sin, objectively considered, is mortal in every instance {mortalis ex toto genere suo). Only the absence of the sub- jective dispositions required for grievous sin can transform the transgression into a venial one. The reason for this is found in the existence of a sacrilegious depreciation of things pertaining to the supernatural order. Laws merely eccles- iastical bearing on this point do not all, and under all circumstances, impose a grave obligation. The presumption is that the church authority did not intend the law to be grievously binding in small details. An ecclesiastical prohibition of simony in vigor during one period may even be completely abolished during another. It is certain that the ecclesiastic may accept an offering for his spiritual ministrations and equally as certain that he cannot accept or exact anything in payment for them. But as far as the minister and even sacred things are concerned, the appearance or the danger of simony may or may not exist under certain given circumstances. The payment of pew-rent cannot at the present day be seriously impugned on the ground that it is simoniacal. Its equivalent, the payment for seats at the church door, is of more objectionable appearance because it resembles the payment of an admission fee. It may not be 8 A HISTORY OF SIMONY irrelevant to note that the exaction of a compul- sory contribution at the church entrance from the faithful who wish to hear Mass on Sundays and Holy days was prohibited by the second ^ and third ^° Plenary Councils of Baltimore (1866, 1884). Among the canonical penalties enacted against simony, the following may be mentioned: — The collation of a benefice is void, if, in obtaining it, the appointee either committed simony himself or, at least tacitly approved of its commission by a third party. ^" Should he have taken possession, he is bound to resign and restore all the revenues he received during his tenure. ^^ Simply reserved excommunication is pronounced in the Constitu- tion " Apostolicae Sedis " (October 12, 1869) : 1. Against persons guilty of real simony in any benefices and against their accomplices; 2. Against any persons, whatsoever their dignity, guilty of confidential simony in any benefices; 3. Against such as are guilty of simony because of their venal admission into a Religious Order; 4. Against all persons inferior to the bishops, who " Decreta Cone. Plenarii Bait. II, no. 397 (Baltimore, 1868). " Decreta Cone. Plenarii Bait. Ill, no. 288 ( Baltimore, 1886). " Extrav. c. 2, v. 1. Inter communes, De Simonia; c. 23, De Simonia, v, 3. ^c. 50. De Elect, i, 6. INTRODUCTION 9 derive gain (quaestum facientes) from indulgences and other spiritual graces; 5. Against those who collecting stipends for Masses, realize a profit on them by having the Masses celebrated in places where smaller stipends are usually given. ^^ The last mentioned provision was supplemented by sub- sequent decrees of the Sacred Congregation of the Council. The decree " Vigilanti," ^^ of the 25th of May, 1893, laid booksellers under the obliga- tion not to accept Mass-stipends, the Masses to be assigned to priests who would receive payment only in books or in subscriptions to periodicals. The decree " Ut Debita," ^^ published on the 11th of May, 1904, prohibited the arrangements sometimes proposed by the guardians of shrines, according to which they agree to apply a part of the offering of the faithful for Masses and the remainder for other pious purposes. The penal- ties incurred by offenders against the latter enact- ments are: a. For persons in Sacred Orders, sus- pension i2)so facto from their functions; h. Ina- bility to receive higher orders for clerics not yet raised to the priesthood ; c. Excommunication of pronounced sentence (latae sententiae) for laymen. In thus outlining the meaning of the word ^^ Apost. Sedis, ii Class, nos. 8-12. " Acta Sanctae Sedis, xxvi, 56-59. ^Acta S. Sedis, xxxvi, 672-76; See also the Letter " Re- eenti Decreto" of the 22d May, 1907, ibid. XL, 344-46. 10 A HISTORY OF SIMONY simony at the present day, it was not the author's intention to lay down a hard and fast rule which should be his sole guide in the selection of the facts and laws to be included in this history. As is evident from what has already been said, there are two distinct elements in simony: one perma- nent, the other variable. Some actions are simoni- acal in themselves, by their very nature; others become so in consequence of ecclesiastical prohi- bitions. The Church can evidently abrogate laws which she has framed in virtue of her own merely ecclesiastical authority. Historical circumstances, social conditions and public opinion may change from one period to another. As a result, certain actions and practices which are prohibited at one epoch as involving a danger or an appearance of simony, may become perfectly lawful with the change in time and environment and the conse- quent modification in legislation. Such variations in the policy of the Church, far from detracting from the holiness of her laws and institutions, are but proofs of her vitality and power of adaptability. In shaping her legislation concerning simony to meet the needs and exigen- cies of the time, she judiciously and securely steered her course between two apparently con- flicting duties devolving upon her: the necessity of safeguarding the high dignity of her super- natural treasures and that of assuring an honest INTRODUCTION 11 livelihood to her ministers. If, therefore, certain practices obtain at the present day which in former times were viewed as simoniacal and hence pro- hibited, it does not necessarily follow that their present existence is open to censure. The recep- tion of a donation by the sacred minister on occasion of the performance of certain ecclesiasti- cal functions was frequently prohibited during the first eight centuries: yet it cannot be claimed that the laws then enacted in this regard should be enforced indiscriminately and universally in our own time. Although it was the law in the early ecclesiastical history of Spain not to accept any emolument at the administration of baptism, it would be unjustifiable to censure the contrary practice at present very generally prevalent. Likewise the enactments prohibiting the accept- ance of money for places of burial, distribution of holy chrism and the drawing up of the charters conferring the pallium seem to have fallen into desuetude. Mention is also made of some events and laws which, at first glance, do not always appear to have been directly connected with simony even during the period covered by the work. To this class may perhaps be referred the payment of a sum of money to the emperors for their confirma- tion of the newly elected pope, and the presentation of gifts to kings for their confirmation of bishops- 12 A HISTORY OF SIMONY elect. But the practices just mentioned certainly involved a danger of simony, and writers con- temporary Avith the events usually speak disap- provingly at least of the offer of presents to kings on the occasion of episcopal appointments. As to legislation, it must be observed that some enact- ments, though not anti-simoniacal in their wording, nevertheless indirectly made for the suppression of simony and were framed with a view to its eradication. Of this sort was, e. g., the law pro- hibiting the alienation of church property. It will easily be perceived how this law operated, if it is remembered that some bishops used the funds of the church treasury to redeem their promises of reward to those who had supported their candidacy. Summing up these remarks re- specting the treatment of the subject, we may say that we have sometimes included in this study what is only remotely connected with simony, but yet facilitates the correct appreciation of persons and things spoken of in the following pages. CHAPTER I SIMONY FROM THE BEGINNING OF THE CHRISTIAN ERA TO THE EDICT OF MILAN (313) The close connection between the supernatural and the natural order — Simony contrary to the Natural Law — Judas sells Our Lord — Existence and identification of Simon ]\Iagus — His work in Samaria and his attempt to buy the Apostolic power — The condemna- tion of simony and its influence on subseqvient times — Other causes of the infrequency of simony during this period — Tertullian's comparison of the venality of the pagan and the integrity of the Christian religion — Eusebius' description of the state of the Church — Paul of Samosata profits by his episcopal position to enrich himself — The origin of Donatism. The close connection existing between the super- natural and the natural order and the consequent difficulty of drawing a line of demarcation be- tween the two, was a cause of great conflicts in every period of Ecclesiastical History. The fail- ure of the state authority in imperial Rome to distinguish between the civil and the ecclesiastical power led to the violent persecutions that mark the beginnings of Christianity. Less bloody but not less bitter conflicts followed. Even after their conversion to the Christian faith, the Roman em- 13 14 A HISTORY OF SIMONY perors, conscious of the great civil power at their command, too frequently insisted with great obsti- nacy upon governing not only the empire, but also the Church. The papal bestowal of the imperial title on Teutonic rulers (800) led eventually to the momentous struggle between the Papacy and the Empire, which opened with the Investiture contest and ended in the ruin of the great House of the Hohenstaufen. Later the consolidation of the French royal power brought with it exorbitant pretensions of the civil authority to supremacy in ecclesiastical affairs. Numerous more recent ex- amples of civil prepotency in this province, it is unnecessary to quote. Under various forms it is the problem ever-recurring and practically ever- unsolved, of the relations between Church and State. These relations constitute but one of the issues involved in the great question of the intimate co-existence of the temporal and the spiritual order. They may be the most universal and im- portant part of the question ; they are not the only one. That difficulties should arise on this point is readily understood; this emperor or that king may have had an exaggerated idea of his exalted temporal dignity and its inherent rights. Such an error, when followed up in practice, would naturally beget disastrous religious consequences. But it is somewhat surprising to behold the Church confronted with interior, domestic diffi- TO THE EDICT OF MILAN 15 culties arising from the very close relation between the two orders — ^the natural and the supernatural, especially when her own sacred ministers are either sole or partial agents. The latter, however, fre- quently either deliberately ignored or unwittingly overlooked the distinction between the material or temporal and the spiritual. That some of the laity quickly followed suit is easily understood. The material traffic in supernatural things, at first isolated, then sporadic in its manifestation in the Christian Church, increased by degrees to such an extent and became so widespread and universal that simony was one of the crying evils, one of the worst abuses that ecclesiastical au- thority had to contend against. Confining our- selves to the ISTew Testament,^ we meet it at the very origin of the Christian religion, and that, in spite of the clearness of the iJTatural Law itself on this point. The sinful character of simony is easily perceived by unaided human reason. It manifests itself, as Thomas Aquinas - has clearly distinguished, whether we consider God, the ob- jects of the transaction, or the transacting parties. The dignity of God is thereby outraged; and, as the Canon Law expresses it,^ man makes the Holy *For the Old Test, see IV Kings, v. 20 seqq. Exodus, XXIII, 8. Numbers, xxii, 7, 17, 37. Mich, in, 11. ^ Summa Theol. ii, iidae, Quaest. 100, Art.l. "c. 21, C. 1. Q. 1. 16 A HISTORY OF SIMONY Spirit his own servant and disposes of Him. A spiritual object, infinitely superior to anything tem- poral, is estimated at a material or at least transi- tory value. It was this reason that the apostle Peter cited in his condemnation of Simon Magus. As to the transacting parties, the seller is not the possessor of the spiritual grace, but merely an administrator, a dispenser, a distributor of trea- sures owned or favors granted by another. Hence he cannot sell these as if they were his own property, and the purchaser cannot acquire them. The Divine Law, as expressed in the ISTew Testa- ment, is but a re-statement, without any addition, of a prohibition wbich can be known by our natural faculties. Human Law, both ecclesiasti- cal and civil, anii^lified and extended the pro- hibition. Through it, some intentions or actions became simoniacal because they were forbidden; while, according to Natural and Divine Law, some intentions or actions were forbidden because they were simoniacal. In several New Testament passages,^ directions are written down for the ministers of Christ, regarding the possession of earthly goods and the reception of temporal re- wards. ISTone of the texts makes any substantial addition to the content of that of Matthew, which reads as follows in the Douay version : " Heal the *Matth. X, 8-10; Mark, vi, 8-11; Luke, ix, 3; x, 4-12; XX, 35; I Cor. IX, 4, 7-14; I Tim. v, 17-18; I Pet. V, 2. TO THE EDICT OF MILAN 17 sick, raise the dead, cleanse the lepers, cast out devils ; freely have you received, freely give. Do not possess gold, nor silver, nor money in your purses; nor scrip for your journey, nor two coats, nor shoes, nor a staff ; for the workman is worthy of his meat." It has been said,^ with some truth, that in the first instance of simony which we meet in the Christian Church, one of its perpetrators was a member of the Apostolic College. Judas ^ sold our Lord Jesus Christ, the Author of the spiritual life. But the crime bore such an exceptional and repulsive character; its consequences were so tragic and appalling, that the apparently simoni- acal feature of the act became secondary in men's minds and rightly received but scant mention in history. The origin and name of the evil in the Church is connected with Simon Magus, a person- age whose history has been greatly obscured. According to the system excogitated by the Tii- bingen School and defended to-day in at least a modified form by P. W. Schmiedel "^ and others,^ Simon Magus was merely a name of reproach applied to the apostle Paul, and the opposition between Peter and Simon only a phase of Petrine ^Leinz, Die Simonie, 1. ^Matth. xxvi, 14-16, 47-51. ' Cheyne and Black, Encycl. Bibl. iv, 4536-60 (London, 1903). * See Hans Waitz, in Realenc. f. prot. Theol. 3d ed. s. v. Simon der Magier. 2 18 A HISTOEY OF SIMONY and Pauline antagonism. The older representa- tives of the School went so far as to deny the historical reality of Simon. A. Hilgenfeld, (who later admitted Simon to be an historical personage different from Paul), claimed the parentage of the startling discovery.^ However, ingenious and bold hypotheses, cannot remove extant historical evidences. That much of the early Christian litera- ture regarding Simon Magus is apocryphal we may admit without conceding that wherever Simon's name occurs, we ought to read that of Paul. Nor does it seem justifiable to identify the Simon mentioned by Josephus ^^ who was a native of Cyprus with his notorious namesake of early Christian literature. Yet this identification was attempted very recently by Mgr. Le Camus. ■'^ The words of Justin Martyr are so emphatic ^^ that they force us to regard Gitton, a town of Samaria, as the birth-place of Simon Magus. Justin, himself a native of Samaria, in the genera- tion that followed Simon's death, must have been well informed and would not have repeatedly ^^ placed such a celebrity before us as one of his own countrymen unless the fact were universally ^ Der Magier Simon, Zeitsch. f. Wiss. Theol. (1868), 357- 396, with references given there. ^" Antiq. xx, vii, 2. ^^ L'Oeuvre des Apotres, i, 152 (Paris, 1905). '^ Apolog. I, c. 26. " Apolog. I, c. 56; Apolog. ii, c. 15. TO THE EDICT OF MILAN I9 admitted. The prevalence of this name among the Jews and the appearance of a large number of magicians at this very time account satisfac- torily for the simultaneous existence of two Simons, both magicians. At all events, reliable ante-l^icene ecclesiastical writers, posterior to Justin, invariably speak of Simon as a Samari- tan.^^ ISTothing trustworthy is known regarding his early life. The Acts of the Apostles give us the first details of his extraordinary public career. We read: ^^ " And Philip going down to the city of Samaria, preached Christ unto them. And the people with one accord were attentive to those things which were said by Philip, hearing, and seeing the miracles which he did. For many of them who had unclean spirits, crying with a loud voice, went out. And many, taken with the palsy, and that were lame, were healed. There was therefore great joy in that city. Now there was a certain man named Simon, who before had been a magician in that city, seducing the people of " For the history of Simon, see Justin, Dial. c. Tryph. n. 120; Irenaeus, Adv. Haereses, Lib. i, c. 23; 11, cc. 9, 31; IV, 6; TertuU. De Anima, c. 34; Origen, Contra Celsum, VI, c. 11; Hippol. Philosophumena, vi, 2; Euseb. Hist. Ecc. n, 3; Hegesipp. in Euseb. I. c. iv, 22. The Clementine Homilies and Recognitions and other apocryphal writings contain frequent references to Simon. See Lipsius, Die Apokr. Apostelgesch. u. Apostellegenden (Brunswick, 1883- 90), in index s. v. Simon Magus. ^Acts, vui, 5-25. 20 A HISTOEY OF SIMONY Samaria, giving out that he was some great one: to whom they all gave ear, from the least to the greatest, saying: This man is the power of God, which is called great. And they were attentive to him, because, for a long time, he had bewitched them with his magical practices. But when they had be- lieved Philip preaching of the kingdom of God, in the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women. Then Simon himself believed also ; and being baptized, he adliered to Philip. And being astonished, wondered to see the signs and exceeding great miracles which were done. Now when the apostles, who were in Jerusalem, had heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John. Wlio, when they were come, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost. For he was not as yet come upon any of them; but they were only baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. Then they laid their hands upon them, and they received the Holy Ghost. And when Simon saw, that by the imposition of the hands of the apostles, the Holy Ghost was given, he offered them money, saying: Give me also this power, that on whomsoever I shall lay my hands, he may receive the Holy Ghost. But Peter said to him: Keep thy money to thyself, to perish with thee, because thou hast thought that the gift of God may be purchased with money. Thou hast no part nor lot in this matter. For thy heart is not right in the sight of God. Do penance therefore for this thy wickedness; and pray to God, that perhaps this thought of thy heart may be forgiven thee. For I see thou art in the TO THE EDICT OF MILAN 21 gall of bitterness, and in the bonds of iniquity. Then Simon answering, said : Pray you for me to the Lord, that none of these things which you have spoken may come upon me." ^® Simon had therefore been displaying his power for some time in Samaria, when the deacon Philip came there to preach the gospel. His magical arts had procured him a numerous following. The miraculous works of Philip, however, com- pletely destroyed his influence over the people. Simon himself was converted and received bap- tism. Whatever may be held of the sincerity of his conversion, it would appear that he was more impressed by exterior signs, present and tangible things, than by the thought of the interior dis- positions which must accompany the true pro- fession of Christianity. For we read that Simon " being astonished, wondered to see the signs and exceeding great miracles which were done." And again the Apostle says : " For thy heart is not right in the sight of God." The magician's answer to Peter : " Pray you for me to the Lord, that none of these things which you have spoken may come upon me," bespeaks fear, not penitence. Simon merely wishes to avoid the punishment "A detailed but now somewhat antiquated discussion of the passage just cited will be found in Ketwieh, De Simonia, 5-29. (Leyden, 1845.) 22 A HISTORY OF SIMONY which he has incurred. Perhaps this lack of in- terior dispositions also accounts for the doubting clause in the words of Peter : " Pray to God, that perhaps this thought of thy heart may be forgiven thee." It was his great appreciation of extra- ordinary powers and of the advantages he might derive from their possession that prompted the magician to offer money for " the gift of God." All this explains why the severe denunciation of Peter overlooks the exterior attempt and speaks only of the intention, " the thought, the heart " : " Because thou hast thought that the gift of God may be purchased with money." This is not the place to discuss the theological system of Simon. Varied indeed has been its exposition by ancient Christian writers. Amid their many conflicting statements one thing is certain, namely, that the magician claimed for himself divine power. He became the founder of the heretical sect of the Simonians which was still flourishing in the second century. Christian antiquity and the Middle Ages looked upon him as the father of heresy ; in the latter period simony was frequently denounced as heresy, among other reasons, as Kranzf elder ^'^ rightly observes, for the purpose of inspiring a horror of this sin. In the days of the emperor Claudius (a. d. 41- " Gregorius des Grossen ausgewdhlte Brief e (Kempten, 1874), 95, note 1. TO THE EDICT OF MILAN 23 54) Simon, according to Justin/^ came to Rome, where divine honors were paid him. A statue was erected to him on the Tiber Island and dedi- cated to the "god Simon" (Simoni deo Sando). The statement regarding Simon's presence in Rome is probably the expression of a tradition current in the Roman community in Justin's time and can therefore hardly be rejected. As to the allegation that a statue Avas raised to Simon, it is probably based on an error. In the year 1574 there was dug up in the very place indicated by Justin as the site of this monument, the base of a statue bearing the inscription : " Semoni Sanco Deo." ^Now Semo Sancus was a Sabine god. While it cannot be proved with absolute certainty that Justin erroneously referred these very words to Simon the Magician, most scholars are inclined to discard his testimony in this matter and to identify the two inscriptions. There is no trace in the earliest writers, such as Hegesippus, Justin and Irenaeus, of the tra- dition that Peter met Simon at Rome and there withstood him. ISTor can any credence be placed in the fabulous accounts which narrate the time, place and other circumstances of Simon's death. ^® " II. CC. " See Lipsius, De Apokryph. Apostelgesch. II, i, 66 seqq. ; ibid. 33 seqq. and passim; Salmon in Diet. Christ. Biog. s. V. Simon Magus; Waitz, in Realenc. f. Prot. Theol. 3d ed. s. V. Simon der Magier. 24 A HISTORY OF SIMONY After Simon, but few instances of simony are recorded in pre-Constantinian times. All of them may not be known to us, owing to the incomplete and fragmentary character of our documents per- taining to this period. But judging from histo- rical circumstances, the evil did not and could not assume large proportions. The attempt of Simon Magus, so clear and unmistakable in its mani- festation and so mercilessly condemned by Peter, made a vivid impression on the succeeding Chris- tian generations. That its restraining influence was of a far-reaching nature, is evident from the great notoriety the incident received. Union be- tween Church and State, at a later date frequently the cause of simoniacal transgressions, did not exist. The relations between the two powers were hardly ever friendly, generally either indifferent or hostile. ]^o civil privileges were connected with ecclesiastical dignities. The hostility of the state frequently manifested itself in physical vio- lence against the Christians, and first and fore- most against the clergy, among whom, owing to their station, the traffic in spiritual things is more apt to take place. Ecclesiastical positions were posts of danger and self-sacrifice rather than of ease and honor. They were little sought after by persons in quest of worldly consideration and lu- crative places. The bishops and the other eccle- siastical ministers had too high a sense of their TO THE EDICT OF MILAN 25 responsibilities, of the exemplary personal sanctity required of them to engage in simoniacal practices. Enormous and oft-repeated were the charges brought against the Christians by both Pagans and Jews. Heretics were prompt in noting and stig- matizing their alleged contraventions to the law of Christ. But never do any of them so much as hint at the sin of simony. Tertullian contrasts the venality of the Pagan religion with the integ- rity of the Christian.-^ The very gods are for sale in heathenism; their worshippers sell them and, in return, no one is admitted to the knowledge of the gods free of charge. " Non licet deos nosse gratis: venales sunt/' A fee is exacted for room in the temple, for the very admittance thereto. Different is the religion of the Christians; we read: " All the Elders, our rulers, are men of demon- strated character, who have obtained that honor not by money but by election. ISTo market-value is set upon anything in our religion. We have indeed boxes for offerings; .... contributions, however, are not compulsory, but spontaneous." ^^ However, ruled by men and dealing with men, the Church had ever the source of simony within herself. Ambition and the love of wealth and ease, are to be met with in every human heart and '^Apologetic, c. xiii. '^ Apolog. e. xxxix. Cfr. also Justin, Apolog. i, e. 67. 26 A HISTORY OF SIMONY are bound to manifest themselves in any great and durable human organization, however lofty its principles and end. We learn from Eusebius that even during the first three centuries of its ex- istence, harmony and disinterestedness were not universally practiced by the Christian community. In speaking of the period immediately preceding the Diocletian persecution, he writes, with some exaggeration, however : " But when on account of the abundant freedom, we fell into laxity and sloth, and envied and reviled each other, and were almost, as it were, taking up arms against one another, rulers assailing rulers, with words like spears, and people forming parties against people, and monstrous hypocrisy and dissimulation rising to the greatest height of wickedness, the divine judgment with forbearance, as is its pleasure, while the multitudes yet continued to assemble, gently and moderately harassed the episcopacy. This persecution began with the brethren in the army. But as if without sensibility, we were not eager to make the Deity favorable and propitious ; and some, like atheists, thought that our affairs were unheeded and ungoverned; and thus we added one wickedness to another. And those esteemed our shepherds casting aside the bond of piety, were excited to conflicts with one another, and did nothing else than heap up strifes and threats and jealousy and enmity and hatred to- TO THE EDICT OF MILAN 27 ward each other, like tyrants eagerly endeavoring to assert their power." ^^ Shortly before the time to which these words refer, a charge of simoniacal dealings was brought against the famous Paul of Samosata, bishop of Antioch (c. 260-72), by the council that pro- nounced his condemnation (c. 268). The passage of the condemnatory encyclical letter which refers to him, is reproduced by Eusebius ^^ and reads as follows : " Whereas he has abandoned the rule of faith, and has turned aside after base and false doctrines, there is no necessity of judging his con- duct, since he is outside the Church. We need not speak of the fact that he who was formerly in poverty and destitution and who had received no wealth from his fathers, nor made anything by trade or business, has now arrived at excessive wealth by his iniquities and sacrileges and his extortions from the brethren; that he deprives the injured of their rights, and promises them assistance for remuneration, yet deceives them and plunders those who, in their trouble, are ready with their gifts so as to obtain reconciliation with ^Hist. Ecc. yui, 1. Griechische Christl. Schriftsteller, Eusebius, II, ii, 738, ed. Schwartz and Mommsen (Leipzig, 1908 ) . The Eng. translation is that of McGifFert in vol. i of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers (2d ser.), ed. by Schaff and Wace (New York, 1904). =^Euseb. H. E., vii, 30. 28 A HISTORY OF SIMONY their oppressors. We shall say nothing of his making merchandise of piety." ^* As is seen, the document does not cite any specific facts, but it gives us clearly to understand that Paul freely and extensively used his spiritual office to enrich himself. Bribery is found at the origin of the Donatist schism. At the death of Mensurius (311), Ce- cilian, his archdeacon, had been elected bishop of Carthage by the majority, but was rejected by the seventy ISTumidian bishops, under the leadership of Secundus of Tigisis.-^ The votes of these same bishops, cast for Majorinus, were bought by the wealthy Lucilla.^® It is said that a well-merited public rebuke, which she had incurred in conse- quence of extravagant veneration for relics of saints, had irritated Lucilla against Cecilian, who had administered the reprimand while still an archdeacon. When he was elected bishop, the choice was not agreeable to her. Using her wealth and influence, she succeeded in having a member of her own household, Majorinus (d. c. 315), elected, paying the bishops 400 " folles " for the ** Allusion to Paul, I Tim. vi, 5. =»Aug. De Unitate Eccl. PL. 43, 426. ^Aug. Ep. 43, 17, Corp. Scrip. Eccl. Lat. xxxiiii, Aug. Epp. II, 98-99, ed. Goldbacher. Cfr. also PL. 43, 443. Optat. of Milev. De Schism. Donat. in Corp. Scrip, etc. XXVI, 21, ed. C. Ziwsa. TO THE EDICT OF MILAN 29 counter-election.^''^ In indicating this sum, Au- gustine gives us the text of the official report of the Zenophilian investigation, which was still ex- tant in his time, but is now partly lost. The short extract of the report, which he transcribes,"^ and the more extensive fragment which has reached us otherwise,^^ mention also the offence of a cer- tain Victor, a fuller, who paid 20 " folles " to Silvanus, bishop of Cirta, for his consecration to the priesthood. It seems to be impossible, in the present state of our knowledge, to state with cer- tainty, the monetary value of these sums of " folles." The word originally meant purse and was later applied also to the contents of the same. The " follis " was used in reckoning gold and silver as well as copper. As in the present in- stance we do not know the nature of the metal of which there is question, the value of the sum itself must remain in doubt. ^° "Aug. Contra Cresc. m, 28, 29. PL. 43, 512-14. ^PL. 43, 514. ^ Qesta ap. Zenophilum, Corp. Scrip, etc. xxvi, 185-97, ed. Ziwsa. "" On the " follis " see Marquardt, Rom. Staatsverwaltung, n, 43 seqq. 2d ed. (Leipzig, 1884). Diet, of Christian Biog. 8. V. Lucilla; Delmar, History of Monetary Systems, 94 seqq. — On the origin of Donatism see Voelter, Der TJr sprung des Donatismus (Freiburg, 1883); Duchesne, Le Dossier du Donatisme (Rome, 1890) ; Harnack, Alt- Christ. Litt. i, 744-51 (Leipzig, 1893). CHAPTER II PREVALENCE OF SIMONY FROM THE YEAR 313 TO 476 Ecclesiastical, judicial and civil power of the bishops — Their election — Simony among the Arians — Simony among Catholics — Gregory Nazianzen and Maximus the Cynic — Chrysostom and the accusations against Anto- ninus of Ephesus — A synod of Ephesus and six si- moniacal bishops — Chrysostom deposes Gerontius — Isidore of Pelusium and simony — Flavian of Con- stantinople and Chrysaphius — Ibas of Edessa accused of simony — Timothy Ailuros at Alexandria — Simony in Gaul ; episcopal election at Chalon-sur-Saone — Election at Bourges. With tlie publication of the edict of Milan (313), a new era opened for the Christian Church. Constantine and Licinius granted freedom to its hitherto persecuted members. The pagan religion, in its turn, soon became an object of repression, while an ever-increasing number of favors was lavished upon the Church of Christ. Its bishops began to exercise not only ecclesiastical, but also considerable civil power in the community; a power which they held for many subsequent centuries. IsTumerous and important conversions were the natural result of the cessation of persecution, and 30 FROM THE YEAR 313 TO 476 31 it is obvious that this meant a proportionate in- crease in the ecclesiastical authority of the bishop. Through the restitution of its property confiscated in the time of persecution, and through frequent and substantial donations, made possible by the civil recognition of the Church as a corporation and her right to inherit and acquire, the Church became eventually very rich. The ecclesiastical revenues were used to support the clergy, to defray the expenses of public worship and to help the needy and poor. The administration of all church possessions was, with little superior control, in the hands of the local bishop. Ecclesiastical con- cerns of a litigious nature could be brought before the bishop's tribunal for adjudication. As early as 397 the third council of Carthage (can. 9) obliged all clerics to submit their grievances to an eccle- siastical court. Other councils took up the same question; and Justinian finally decreed that law- suits between clerics and laymen, as well as mere ecclesiastical cases, were to be settled by church authorities.^ In the West the judicial privileges granted to the clergy by the Erankish Kings were less extensive and conceded with more caution; complete independence of the civil courts, however, was the rule in the later Middle Ages. The civil cases of laymen also were submitted at an early date to the decision of the bishops, whose authority ^Nov. 79; 83; 123, c. 8, 21, 22. 32 A HISTOEY OF SIMONY over such matters was recognized by Constantine the Great in 331; indeed, until the fall of the Roman empire at the end of the fifth century, persons in every walk of life were content to have their disputes settled in this manner. In their relations with the central government, the ancient Roman municipalities, East and West, usually considered the bishops as the best repre- sentatives of their interests. The " defensor civi- tatis " was, indeed, the especially appointed official, upon whom the duty of this representation devolved. He it was who defended local interests in such matters as the imposition of taxes. But the confidence of each city in the ability and in- fluence of its bishop soon increased to such an extent that he became the city's real advocate, while the lay " defensor " was but his lieutenant. Indeed, there was hardly a municipal office which did not, in a certain measure, depend upon the bishop. It is not difficult, therefore, to realize how great was the influence exercised over the whole life of the city by a man who was not only the spiritual guide, but the dispenser of all works of charity, a judge and, in fact, a civil magistrate. Under these circumstances, it is not surprising to find that some aspired to the episcopacy more out of a desire to enjoy the power and honors which it conferred than because of its spiritual advantages. Jerome relates that the consul-elect FROM THE YEAR 313 TO 476 33 Praetextatus used to remark jestingly to Pope Damasus : " Make me bishop of Rome and I will forthwith become a Christian." - And Ammi- anus Marcellinus wi'ites : " The one who is raised to that position enjoys in peace a fortune guaran- teed by the generosity of the matrons; he goes out driving seated in a carriage and dressed in sumptuous garments and in his entertainments sur- passes the profusion of royal banquets.^ The necessity of approbation by the popular electorate was not by any means an insurmount- able obstacle in the way of ambitious episcopal candidates. A movement in their favor would be inaugurated by a lavish distribution of gifts, gen- erous promises, by threats and even vexatious measures. The mode of election by acclamation favored surreptitious methods. There was no re- quirement of a very precise number of votes. The designation made by one person could readily be concurred in by several others and secure the position to an interestedly generous but not very ecclesiastically-minded candidate. The confirma- tion of the bishops by the civil power, which in the seventh and eighth centuries often degen- erated into a nomination, was also, as will be seen, a prolific source of abuse.^ =" Contra Joh. Hier. 8. PL. 23, 361. ^Ammian. Marcell. xxvii, 3, 14, ed. Gardthausen (Leip- zig, 1874-75), II, 100. * On the power of the bishops see De Broglie, L'Eglise 3 34 A HISTORY OF SIMONY Shortly before tbeArian troubles began seriously to disturb the church of Alexandria, a certain Colluthus had already acquired unpleasant noto- riety in the city. The local bishop Alexander, in a letter preserved to us by Theodoret,^ speaks of his " lYPto-Te/LtTTopeta," which Valesius takes to mean the acceptance of money for ordinations.^ This interpretation is probably correct. The Greek word, however, admits of a wider inter- pretation and does not necessarily refer to strictly simoniacal dealings. It merely implies, in a general way, the derivation of temporal advan- tage from spiritual things. ''^ As to Arianism itself, it seems to have owed its success partly to pecuniary influences. 'Not only did it curry favor with the emperors and thus gain adherents; but money is specifically mentioned as a powerful proselytizing factor. Athanasius says of the fol- lowers of Arius : " Where did these flatterers and et I'Empire Romain au IVe si^cle (Paris, 1856-66), passim, esp. VI, 457-62; Diehl, Etudes sur l' administration Byzan- tine (Paris, 1888), 319 seqq.; Loening, Gesch. des deutsch. Kirchenr. i, 103 seqq. 314 seqq. ii, 220 seqq.; Prou, La Gaule Merov. 105-49; Fustel de Coulanges, La MonarcMe Franque, 2d ed. (Paris, 1905), 566 seqq. ^ Hist. Eccl. I, 3, al, 4, PG. 82, 889. ^ Hist. Eccl. Scrip, re-ed. by G. Reading (Cambridge, 1720), III, 9, note 5. 'See Didache, c. 12, ed. Funk (Tubingen, 1887), 40 with note 5. FROM THE YEAR 313 TO 476 35 bribers of the heresy learn these things ? " ^ A little further, he speaks of the support they re- ceived from their friends,^ and in the fifty-third chapter of the same discourse he refers with special emphasis to their love of gain.^*^ In his statements concerning the appointment of Arian bishojDs, his accusations become more definite. In certain instances the episcopal dignity was, so to speak, sold at auction, for some men, who were rather disreputable in character, owed their ap- pointment solely to their wealth and their great influence in the community. ^^ He makes a simi- lar charge against the Meletian bishops, who, through bribery, obtained the episcopal ofiice even before being instructed in the Christian religion. That they should readily pass over to the Arians, is not then surprising.^" In his Apology to Con- stantino,^^ Athanasius even tells us that the Arians considered it of no consequence whether the epis- copal candidate was a pagan or not, as long as he paid for his preferment. True, Athanasius else- where ^"^ contrasts the avaricious Meletians with the merely impious Arians; but this may be ex- ^Orat. I. c. Arian. PG. 26, 28. "Oi KoXaws ko2 dupoSUol TTJs aipiffem.'' See also PG. 25, 769. ^PG. 26, 32, see also PG. 25, 753-56. ^° Ibid. 124, "K4p5oi riji 4>l\oxpvtJ^o.-rlas." ^""Eist. Arian. ad Mon. PG. 25, 781. ^UUd. 788, 789. "/6id. 632. "/6id. 589. 36 A HISTORY OF SIMONY plained thus, with Cardinal Newman: ^^ " There were, as was natural, two classes of men in the heretical party: the fanatical class who began the heresy and were its real life, such as Arius, and afterwards the Anomoeans, in whom misbelief was a ' mania ' ; and the Eusebians, who cared little for a theory of doctrine or consistency of pro- fession, compared with their own aggrandizement. With these must be included members who con- formed to Arianism lest they should suffer temporal loss." Athanasius is not alone in attri- buting the spread of Arianism partly to corruption. Hilary of Poitiers accuses Constantius of resort- ing to this means of arianizing; his exempting certain Christians from taxes is an invitation to a denial of the Catholic faith.^^ Pope Liberius ^"^ speaks to Constantius of those who prefer the favors of the emperor to the glory of God. Gregory ISTazianzen ^^ tells of prominent men who, loving gold more than Christ, ^'<^i\oxpvaoL /xaWov ^' (f)L\oxp^o-TOL" were bought over to Arianism. Kot only among the Arians do we find bishop- rics bought and sold; instances also occur within the Catholic Church. Jerome tells us that in his time there was a goodly number of church digni- "*Sf^. Athanasius (London, 1890), ii, 26. "PL. 10, 581 and 587. " Theod. H. E. PG. 82, 1033. "PG. 35, 1105. FKOM THE YEAR 313 TO 476 37 taries who raised to the clerical state not the more useful persons, but " those whom they loved or whose complaisance had mollified them ; or again those in whose favor any person of influence had submitted a petition ; and, not to speak of anything worse, the applicants, who offered presents to back up their demands." ^° How vehemently certain persons coveted the episcopal dignity, is exemplified by events which took place at Constantinople during the period in which Gregory ISTazianzen was zealously working at the reorganization of the affairs of that church (379-381). Maximus the Cynic made a deter- mined effort to force himself as bishop on the people of the Imperial City. Gregory ISTazianzen originally entertained the highest regard for this crafty and unscrupulous personage. But soon a plot was organized which had for its object the intrusion of Maximus. Gregory himself graphi- cally describes the way in which the Alexandrian party proceeded to secure the important see of Constantinople for one of their o^vn men.^^ He begins by telling us that it is held by some that wine is the great ruling power in this world, by others that it is woman, and again by others that ^'Comment, in Ep. ad Tit. PL. 26, 596-97. See also Jerome, Comm. in Jerem. PL. 24, 766. "^ Carmen de Vita Sua, xv, 830-85. PO. 37, 1086, seqq.; Sozom. H. E. vn, 9. 38 A HISTORY OF SIMONY it is truth that rules supreme; but according to him gold is the universal master. It was with gold that Maximus was enabled to execute his dark designs. A priest from the island of Thasos had arrived in Constantinople carrying a consider- able sum of church money which was destined for the purchase of marble. Maximus used flattery and promises with such skill, that the stranger became his associate and put the money at his disposal. His friends deserted the penniless Gregory and supported his enemy. Some Egyp- tian bishops, with the consent of the archbishop of Alexandria, Peter, came to perform the conse- cration. Without previous notification to bishop, clergy or people, they began the ceremony during the night supported by a number of hired Alexan- drian sailors. At dawn the local clergy discovered the high-handed proceedings. The news of the attempted intrusion spread like wild-fire and aroused the legitimate indignation of the inhabi- tants. Consecrators and candidate were driven from the church before the completion of the ceremony. The house of a flute-player, where the rite was concluded, saw the beginning and end of the episcopate of Maximus: he never occupied the episcopal chair of Constantinople or any other city. It was but a short time after these events that the see which Maximus attempted to usurp was FROM THE YEAR 313 TO 476 39 occupied by John Chrysostom, a prelate distin- guished for his fearlessness in suppressing existing abuses. But persecution is, as a rule, the lot of reformers. Bitter opposition, hardships and exile were Chrysostom's reward for the reformatory zeal which he displayed as archbishop of Constan- tinople. Pastoral visits like the one he made to Ephesus in the cause of ecclesiastical discipline, would, while serving the best interests of the Church, naturally enough increase the number and power of his adversaries. At a council held at ConstantinoiDle, in the spring of the year 400, Eusebius, bishop of Valentinianopolis, had brought seven accusations, most of them grievous, against his metropolitan, Antoninus of Ephesus, who was present. The last of these charges was to the effect that it was a firmly established rule and law with Antoninus to sell the episcopal conse- cration for a sum proportionate to the revenues of the see. " The purchasing and consecrated parties," said Eusebius, " are present here, and I have the proofs at hand." Chrysostom promised redress and asked the accuser to drop the written accusation, as charges that proceed from personal animosity are not always easily proven. This request aroused the ire of Eusebius against Anto- ninus : he maintained the accusation. The media- tion of Paul, bishop of Heraclea, who seemed to be favorably disposed towards Antoninus, was 40 A HISTORY OF SIMONY then tried, but failed to effect a reconciliation between the metropolitan and his suffragan. Euse- bius, in presence of the assembled bishops and people, presented in church with solemn adjura- tions, another list of the same accusations. Chrysostom, seeing his insistence and desirous of avoiding disturbance among the congregation, accepted the bill of indictment. After reading the Scriptural extracts introductory to the holy sacrifice, he requested Pansophius, a bishop of Pisidia (the see is unkno\Am), to continue the service, while he himself withdrew from the church with the other bishops. When the people had been dismissed, the bishops assembled in the baptistery and the accuser was then cited. Chry- sostom again requested him to reconsider his decision before the publication of the charges. Eusebius persisted, and the document was read. The reading concluded, the senior members of the assembly decreed that an investigation should be made regarding the most horrible of the accusa- tions, that of simony, as, according to them, guilt on this point meant guilt on all the others. Anto- ninus and the alleged purchasers were examined and denied the charge. After a rather lengthy interrogatory, the proceedings were postponed owing to the absence of the witnesses. As their summons to Constantinople involved considerable difficulty, Chrysostom offered to go to Asia imme- FROM THE YEAR 313 TO 47G 41 diately. The realization of his plan was frus- trated through the intrigue of the uneasy Anto- ninus, who procured the interference of the court. Chrysostom was advised that, in view of the impending troubles (the revolt of Gainas), his absence from the capital would be untimely. The council appointed as judges in the affair a com- mittee of three other bishops: the metropolitan, Syncletius of Trajanopolis in Greece, and two Asiatic prelates, Hesychius of Parium and Palla- dius of Helenopolis; it also pronounced excom- munication against the party, either accuser or accused, who would not appear within two months at Hypepe in Asia. Of the three bishops, Hesy- chius proved his friendship for Antoninus by being opportunely taken ill ; Syncletius and Palla- dius proceeded to Hypepe. Meanwhile Antoninus and Eusebius settled their differences, a bribe from the metropolitan having persuaded his suffragan to take an oath to withdraw the accusation. Both parties, however, appeared at Hypepe, but without witnesses. The judges signified their willingness to wait, and Eusebius relying on the torrid heat of the season for the dispersal of the judges, promised, in a written statement, to pro- duce the witnesses within 40 days or incur the canonical penalties. Instead of preparing for the trial, he retired to Constantinople where he re- mained in concealment. The judges waited for 42 A HISTORY OF SIMONY the stated time. As Eusebius did not appear they issued a circular letter to the bishops of Asia, announcing his excommunication. Another wait of thirty days was equally fruitless. On their return to Constantinople, they met Eusebius who alleged poor health as an excuse and again promised to produce his testimony. Meanwhile Antoninus died. At his demise, the bishops of Asia and the clergy of Ephesus sent a petition to Chrysostom, adjuring him, in the strongest language, to come and restore order in the church of Ephesus. The troubles there were caused by the Arians and also by avaricious and ambitious Catholics, many of whom were seek- ing to obtain by means of money, possession of the vacant see. In spite of his poor health and the winter season, Chrysostom departed for Asia. He held a council at Ephesus, at which Eusebius of Valentinianopolis appeared asking for read- mission into the church and for permission to introduce the witnesses on the same day. Having first manifested some opposition to his request, the council decided to resume the long-pending trial. A report of the proceedings to date was first read; then the witnesses and the six accused bishops were introduced. The latter began with a denial of the charge. But they had to yield before the testimony of priests, laymen and women, in which the kind, place, time and quantity of the FROM THE YEAR 313 TO 476 43 reward were specified. They finally made the following confession : " We paid and were conse- crated, but imagined that this was customary in order to be freed from the curial offices (municipal charges). We now ask to be left in the service of the Church ; or if not, that our gold be restored to us, as some of us gave away the personal ap- parel of our wives." Chrysostom announced that he hoped the emperor would, at his request, ex- empt them from the curial charges, and asked the council to order the restitution of the sum given in payment. The assembly agreed to this and also pronounced deposition against the cul- prits. They acquiesced in the sentence and re- ceived worthy successors.^^ About the same time, Chrysostom deposed the very popular Gerontius, bishop of ]S[icomedia. Gerontius owed his appointment to persons of in- fluence at the imperial palace, and had been con- secrated by Helladius of Caesarea in Cappadocia, for whose son he had previously obtained an important position at court. ^^ A friend and admirer of Chrysostom and a champion of his memory after his death, furnishes us with considerable information concerning eccle- ** On Chrysostom and these various events, consult Palla- dius, Dial, de Vita Ghrys. PG. 47, 47-52. Soz. H. E. vin, 6, 10. See. H. E. VI, 11. =^ Soz. H. E. vm, 6. 44 A HISTORY OF SIMONY siastical affairs in another section of the Christian world. The numerous letters of Isidore (d. c. 440) priest and abbot of a monastery near Pelu- sium in Egypt, contain, apart from their exegetical and practical moral significance, valuable details regarding the history of his time. ]S[or does Isi- dore content himself with a bare statement of the facts as he knows them. In speaking of abuses, he earnestly pleads for their suppression and the amelioration of conditions. Like Chrysostom, though in a different way, owing to the difference in character and position, he is a great moral reformer. He frequently speaks, in a general way, of the cupidity, the love of money of contempo- rary ecclesiastics.^^ But, as in the case of most moral reformers, allowance must be made for his power of generalization ; his statements concerning the general ecclesiastical degeneracy of his days, and especially those regarding simoniacal prac- tices must be received with reserve. The reported purchase of the episcopal dignity by the Egyptian bishop Leontius forms the subject of one of his letters addressed to John Chrysostom. ^^ The re- port, however, lacked foundation, as Isidore him- self later acknowledged.^^ Erom the document in which he admits his error we see that great abuses """Epp. in, 216, 223; v, 21, 131. ='*Spp. I, 315; pa. 78, 364-5. ^^Epp. Ill, 387, iUd. 1028-9. FROM THE YEAR 313 TO 476 45 prevailed in this connection, abuses which he stig- matizes iu other letters.-^' The ecclesiastical con- ditions of his own diocese, Pelusium, were de- plorable. " Report has it," he says, " that Euse- bius (the bishop of Pelusium) uses the money derived from episcopal elections in building a magnificent church." -^ That Eusebius and Marti- nianus, his " oeconomus," or church steward, were responsible for the prevalence of simony in the Pelusian church at the time, is a statement he makes in a letter to Cyril of Alexandria whom Martinianus, perhaps more surely to ward off suspicion, accused of this vice.^^ Accusations were in circulation that Eusebius sold the " im- position of hands," ^^ a practice against which Isidore warns him.^® That he had ordained the jDriest Zosimus for money was notorious,^ ^ and to this he added the ordination of Maron, another Simon.^^ In almost every one of Isidore's letters to Eusebius, allusion is made to the latter's simoniacal dealings or at least to his cupidity.^^ Similar allusions also figure in some of his letters to Maron and Zosimus.^^ To these names he '^Epp. Ill, 394; V, 357. ""Epp. I, 37; II, 246. "^Epp. II, 127; PG. 78, 565-74. =*I, 26. ^I, 30. "I, 113. =^1, 119. "'I, 151, 177, 185, 215, 341, 425, 492; Cp. also II, 71. *• See PG. 78, Index Eorum ad quos scripsit Isid. s. w. 46 A HISTORY OF SIMONY adds in a letter to Theon,^^ those of Palladius and Eustathius, as clerics to whom Eusebius sold ordi- nation, from which the archdeacon Lucius also derived gain.^^ These facts exhibit the fearless Isidore as one of the first great champions of ecclesiastical integrity. His zeal probably de- ceived him into exaggerated general statements; but it is evident that there was abundant cause for the severity of his language. At the death of Proclus, archbishop of Constan- tinople, Flavian was elected (446 or 447) to fill the vacancy. ^"^ The eunuch Chrysaphius, who was then all powerful with the emperor, displeased at the choice, suggested to Theodosius II, then at Chalcedon, to intimate to the patriarch that he send him (Chrysaphius) the " eulogiae " for his elevation. Flavian forwarded to him what seems to have been a usual present on such occasions, some blessed loaves. Chrysaphius scornfully re- jected these and replied that it was gold that the emperor demanded and not bread. The bishop, according to one version,^^ answered that he had no gold but that of the sacred vessels; according to another,^^ wishing to cover the insolent eunuch ■^11, 121. =«i, 29. ^' Theophanes, Chronog. ad ann. 440, PQ. 108, 256-7; Nicephorus Callisti, Hist. Ecc. xiv, 47, PG. 146, 1222. ^^ Theoph. and Niceph. II. cc. »»Evagrius, Hist. Ecc. ii, 2, PG. 186 bis, 2489-92. FROM THE YEAR 313 TO 476 47 with confusion, he sent him the vessels. However this may be, certain it is that Chrysaphius hence- forward used his influence to destroy Flavian. As soon as Ibas, the Svriac translator of Theo- dore of Mopsuestia, had been raised (c. 435) to the episcopal see of Edessa, the opposition against him declared itself. It was especially his doctri- nal views, tinged with I^estorianism according to some, that gave offence. About 447, four of his clerics, Samuel, Cyrus, Eulogius and Maras presented a bill of indictment against him to Domnus, bishop of Antioch.^*' The case was to be tried in a synod at the latter city (447 or 448). But when the council assembled, two of the accu- sers, Samuel and Cyrus, in order to secure a more favorable hearing, had left for Constantinople in spite of the grievous penalties (excommunication and deposition) which they incurred through their departure. The synod dispersed without taking any decision. The two other accusers soon joined their colleagues at Constantinople, and the result was that the emperor instituted a commission of investigation. Eighteen accusations '*^ against Ibas were laid by the four accusers before this commission, which met at Tyre and Berytus (448 or 449).^- The third charge was that Ibas re- "Liberat. Breviar. x, PL. 68, 992-3. "Mansi, vii, 219-28. *^0n this see Hefele, Conciliengesch. 2d ed. 11, 309-12. New French ed. 11, 490-498. 48 A HISTORY OF SIMONY ceived money for ordinations. The members of the commission, acting more as peace-makers than as judges, proposed a compromise to which both parties consented. ^^ Ibas promised kind treat- ment to his opponents and accepted " oeconomi," or administrators to whom was entrusted the management of the ecclesiastical revenues of his diocese. The clerics, on the other hand, dropped the accusations. The arrangement made no men- tion, either explicitly or implicitly, of Ibas' al- leged simoniacal ordinations. The institution of " oeconomi " had its cause solely in the real or alleged malversations of the bishop. But the truce was a short one; at the robber-synod of Ephesus (449),^^ Ibas was, without a hearing, sentenced to deposition, because his views did not square with those of the Eutychian party. He was reinstated by the oecumenical council of Chalcedon (451).*'''' His alleged guilt in accepting pecuniary compensa- tion for spiritual functions was never proved. Under the administration of the great Cyril (412-44), the patriarchal see of Alexandria had risen to the zenith of its power. So disastrous were the consequences of the tyranny of his imme- *'Man8i, vii, 197 seqq. "Lib. Brev. xiii, PL. 68, 1013; Evag. Eist. Eccl. Lib. i, X, PG. 86 bis, 2448. ^'Mansi, vil, 262 seqq.; Evag. op. cit. Lib. ii, iv, PG. 86 bis, 2509. See Hefele, Concg. 2d ed. Ii, 479-91. FROM THE YEAR 313 TO 47G 49 diate successor, the infamous Dioscorus (444-51), that the great church never recovered from the severe blow which was dealt it. Peace did not come with the decisions of Chalcedon. Discussions continued, particularly in Egypt, although a suc- cessor was elected to the banished Dioscorus in the person of the saintly Proterius (451-57). Timothy x\iluros (the Cat), a monk and priest, refused to recognize the authority of the newly elected bishop and was deposed and banished into Libya. The opposition to Proterius resulted in a serious insurrection during the reign of the em- peror Marcian (450-57), and at the latter's death, the banished Timothy returned to Alexandria and renewed the disturbances. He was in the habit of creeping to the cells of the monks during the night ; then calling them each by name, and pro- claiming himself an angel of God, he ordered them to secede from Proterius and choose Timothy (himself) as bishop.^^ To this practice he possi- bly owed his surname of " xiiluros." The already existing oppositional elements, the ever turbulent spirit of the i\.lexandrian population, and the dis- tribution of money ^'^ enabled him to gather, with- "Theophan. PG. 108, 1, 280-84; Theodor. Lect. PG. 86, 1, 169-72. " Theoph. I. c. 281. For the history of Timothy Ailuros, see also Evagr. Hist. Eccl. 11, chaps. 5, 8-11; Liberatus, Brev. cc. 14-16, PL. 68, 1016-19; Leo Mag. Epp. PL. 54, nos. 1-45, 156-58, 162, 164, 169, 170; Gelas. Brevic. hist. Eutijch. 4-5, ed. Thiel, 514-15. 4 50 A HISTORY OF SIMONY out considerable difficulty, a violent mob, with whose aid he seized the " Caesarean Church." Here he had himself consecrated bishop of Alex- andria during the life-time of Proterius, by two deposed bishops, Eusebius of Pelusium and Peter of Majuma. Shortly afterwards, Proterius was murdered in a baptistery as a result, no doubt, of the disturbances instigated by Timothy. The latter now usurped the succession of Proterius, ejected the lawfully constituted clerics who were loyal to the council of Chalcedon and his prede- cessor, performed new ordinations and diverted to his own partisans church funds destined for the poor. That his opponents would silently and promptly submit to the unscrupulous usurper was not to be expected. Both parties appealed to the emperor Leo I (45Y-T4), to whom his namesake Pope Leo I (440-Gl), also wrote in favor of the council of Chalcedon and against Timothy. The emperor demanded and received from the occu- pants of some of the principal Eastern sees an expression of their opinion on the recent proceed- ings in Egypt.^^ As it was a unanimous condem- nation of the intrusion of Timothy, the usurper ** See the letters of the Egyptian parties and of the emperor and the answer of the bishops consulted, in Mansi, VII, 524 seqq. The bishops of Moesia Secunda answered that Timothy was " to be reckoned as under anathema and among Simoniacs " (op. cit. 546). FROM THE YEAR 313 TO 476 51 was driven from Alexandria and shortly after banished to the Chersonese. ^^ That simony was not unknown in Gaul during this period, we know from the history of Patro- clus, bishop of Aries (412-426), whom his con- temporary Prosper Tiro accuses of selling ecclesiastical oflSces.^" But we are especially in- debted to Sidonius Apollinaris (c. 430-82) for information regarding simoniacal dealings in that country. He gives us a graphic description of the nomination of a successor to Paul II, who died about 470 as bishop of Chalon-sur-Saone. The metropolitan Patiens of Lyons and the bishops of the province assembled at Chalon to fill the vacancy. They found the city torn with faction by three competitors, who fought for the succession and had each his supporters. One party con- sidered mere nobility of birth in its candidate, sufficient qualification for the office; the second faction was composed of parasites, who put for- ward a man whose delicious and palatable feasts they had enjoyed and naturally expected to con- tinue to enjoy ; by tacit agreement, a liberal booty of ecclesiastical revenues had been assured to his supporters by the third seeker after episcopal honors. The determination of Patiens and Eu- *° For the subsequent history of Timothy Ailuros see Neale, Holy East. Church, Alex, ii, 15 seqq. '^PL. 51, 862. 52 A HISTORY OF SIMONY phronius of Aiitiin to secure the triumph of a worthy candidate was not abated by the realization of this deplorable condition of affairs. They resolved to proceed with the appointment of a bishop, regardless of the factions and in spite of them. After consultation with their fellow- bishops and without previous notice to the people, a respectable priest, John, who had neither epis- copal aspirations nor the least suspicion of the intention of the bishops was seized and received consecration. Remarkable for his honesty, hu- mility and meekness, his nomination was hailed with delight by the better element of the inhabi- tants and met with no open opposition from any of the parties. ^^ Some two years later (c. 472) another nomina- tion to a bishopric took place, which throws con- siderable light on the state of ecclesiastical affairs in Gaul at the time. Sidonius himself, who had become bishop of Clermont, was to play the most important role in the proceedings. A vacancy had occurred at Bourges, the metropolitan see of Aquitania Prima. Most of the bishoprics of the province had fallen in 471 into the hands of the Visigoths. But in spite of the troublous times and the absence of the bishops of the province, the inhabitants of Bourges could not agree in the " MGH. Auct. Ant. viii, 76-77. FROM THE YEAR 313 TO 47G 53 choice of a successor. There was no lack of can- didates for the office, some of whom were most willing to purchase the sacred dignity. Indeed so numerous were the applicants for the position that two benches were not sufficient to seat them. Their popularity is summed up by Sidonius Apollinaris in the words that '' they all pleased themselves, but displeased everybody else." The people of the city summoned Sidonius to Bourges for the election. The latter, before taking any decisive step, consulted Agroecius, archbishop of Sens and Euphronius, bishop of Autun. An end Avas ultimately put to the division and rivalry among the inhabitants by a common agreement to abide by the decision of Sidonius. They bound themselves in writing and by oath to accept as bishop whomsoever he would designate. At the conclusion of a discourse, in which he had sworn that he had yielded neither to money nor favor in his choice, he announced his decision in the follow- ing solemn manner: " In the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost, I declare that Simplicius ought to be the metropolitan of cur province and the supreme prelate of your city." The inhabitants abided by the nomination of Sidonius. Simplicius being a layman and the father of a family his elevation to the episcopate was uncanonical. His, however, is only one of 54 A HISTORY OF SIMONY many instances of the time where the canons were ignored in this regard. Sidonius himself was only a layman when he was called to the bishopric of Clermont. ^2 "Sid. Apoll. Epp. VII, 5, 8, 9 ed. Luetjohann in MOH. Auct. Ant. Ylii; Ceillier, Hist, des Auteurs EccUsiast. x, 380-81. CHAPTER III THE ATTITUDE OF CHURCH AND STATE TOWARDS SIMONY FROM 313 TO 476 Pope Sirieius and ordinations — Utterances of Gregory Nazianzen and Ambrose — Conduct of Hilarion — Chry- sostom and episcopal elections — Sulpicius Severus, Jerome, Augustine — The 48th canon of Elvira — The councils of Nicaea, Antioch, Sardica — Letter of Basil — Pope Leo I — Some Apostolic Canons — The 2d canon of Chalcedon — The patriarch Gennadius and simony — Edict of the Eastern emperor Leo I — Similar edict of the emperor Glycerins. The attitude of ecclesiastical authority in face of the spread of simony though discernible to some extent from the foregoing exposition of facts, needs further elucidation. Pope Sirieius (384- 99) insists that favor cannot be a sufficient reason for admission to the episcopal office. As for him- self he has always refused to consider, in spite of the interposition of powerful supporters, the oft- repeated application for episcopal honors of per- sons who were excluded by ecclesiastical discipline. The wrong character of the following practice can hardly be overestimated, viz. that, certain bishops, rather than bear the expense of supporting va- grants who rightly or wrongly style themselves monks, raise them to the diaconate, priesthood or 55 56 A HISTORY OF SIMONY even to the episcopate, and this without even know- ing whether thej were orthodox or baptized. Gregory ITazianzen (d. 389 or 390) deprecates the evil of his time, when, in some instances, not virtue but criminal practices and power led to the episcopal dignity.^ Ambrose (d. 39Y) tells us that " the precept of the Lord and the example of the prophet (Elizaeus), teach the bishop that, as he freely received so he should freely give (Matth. X, 8), that he should not sell his minis- trations, but offer them. The grace of God is not valued at a temporal price and gain is not sought in holy things, but the service of the bishop." ^or does it suffice for the latter, according to the same author, not to seek his own profit ; the mem- bers of his household also should refrain from the acceptance of reward. Episcopal instructions and exhortations should preserve them from sin in this respect. In case of transgression, the memory of the terrible leprosy with which Giezi and his posterity were stricken, will convince the offender that the sale of things sacred constitutes an in- expiable sin, the punishment of which will extend even to his descendants." The passage of Matthew, xxi^ 12, became a favorite weapon, used by eccle- siastical writers in their attacks on venality in ^Pa. 36, 532-3. - Comm. in Lug. in Corptis Script. Eccl. Lat, xxxil, pars. IV, ed. Schenkl (1902), 164-6. FROM THE YEAR 313 TO 476 57 spiritualities. It reads : '' And Jesus went into the temple of God, and cast out all them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the money changers, and the chairs of them that sold doves." Its content does not refer to simony properly so called, but it treats of traffic in the holy place, and suggests, if only remotely, profit derived from the transactions by priestly officials.^ Ambrose, in interpreting the text, takes it to signify the exclusion from the church of God of those who sell the grace of the Holy Ghost at auction ; for they disobey their instructions to give freely as they freely received and incur the con- demnation pronounced by Peter against Simon Magus."* How diligently Hilarion (d. 3T1), the founder of monasticism in Palestine, avoided even the appearance of simony, is evidenced by his conduct towards Orion, a prominent and wealthy citizen of Aila, a city on the coast of the Red Sea. Orion had been possessed by a legion of demons, from which Hilarion had delivered him. Out of grate- fulness, the former shortly afterwards appeared before his benefactor with his wife and children and offered him rich presents. Hilarion refused the spontaneously proferred gifts, citing the pun- ^ See Edersheim, The Life and Times of Jesus, 8th ed. (New York and London, 1896), i, 368 seqq. * Corpus Scrip. Eccl. Lat. xxxii, P. IV, 444-5. 68 A HISTORY OF SIMONY ishment which had been inflicted on Giezi, who had sold the grace of the Holy Ghost, and on Simon Magus, who had attempted to buy it. In spite of Orion's humble but excessive insistence and tears, the hermit declined to accept the presents even for distribution to the poor.^ Chrysostom gives us a sad picture of the episco- pal elections in his time.^ The electors did not look for that qualification which alone they ought to have regarded, the virtue of the soul. One voted for the candidate of noble extraction, another for the one possessed of wealth, a third was swayed by partisan feeling. Friendship, relationship, flattery determined the votes of others. The claims of the worthy candidate were not considered. After this statement of current happenings in this respect, Chrysostom puts on record his disappro- bation of such determining factors in ecclesiastical elections. He sees in the promotion of unworthy candidates to church dignities the cause of the punishments with which God visited his contempo- raries. Speaking in another of his works,'^ of those who covet the episcopal office, he warns them of what befell Simon Magus and asks : " What is the difference, if you do not use money, but "Jerome, Vita Hilar, c. 18, PL. 23, 36-37. 'De Bacerdotio, in, 15, PG. 48, 651-4. Cp. also ill, 9, ihid. 646. ' /// Rom. in Act. App. PG. 60, 40-41. FROM THE YEAR 313 TO 476 59 instead have recourse to flattery, artifice and in- trigue ? It was said to Simon : ' Keep thy money to thyself, to perish with thee, because thou hast thought that the gift of God may be purchased with money.' It will be said to these: 'Your ambition perish with you because you have thought that the gift of God may be purchased with human artifices.' " Sulpicius Severus (c. 363-420) ^ contrasts the great desire for martyrdom in the Christians of pre-Constantinian times with the unholy ardor, with which some in his own day aspired to the episcopate. The introduction of commercialism into the spiritual world means, according to Jerome (d. 420), depreciation of its treasures. He sees in this fact the reason for the condemna- tion of avarice in the oft-quoted passage of the free reception and free distribution of divine favors (Matth. x^ 8).^ The one who seeks earthly gain in religion he considers a thief, who transforms the temple of God into a den of thieves; and the religious teacher who yields to venal motives is, in his eyes, devoid of all dignity.^*' Startling though baseless is Jerome's assertion ^^ that the rich young man mentioned in Matthew * Corpus Script. Eccl. Lat. i, 86, ed. Halm, Chronic. n, 32. 'Comment, in Ev. Matth. 1, x; PL. 26, 62. ^"Ibid. Ill, xxi; PL. 26, 150-2. "PL. 26, 62-3. 60 A HISTORY OF SIMONY (xiX;, 16-23) as receiving the teaching of our Lord with insufficient generosity, walked away sad, be- cause, like Simon Magus, he expected the per- formance of miracles to be a source of revenue. So far as Augustine is concerned,^- it will suffice to note as a detail of Christian symbolism and a more direct application of Matthew (xxi^ 12) to simony, the fact that for him the dove which figures in the traffic in the temple, represents the Holy Ghost. The earliest ecclesiastical legislation concerning simony, so far as we know, comes from Spain. The forty-eighth canon of Elvira, the oldest council (c. 300) of which we have any canons reads as follows: " We decree the abolition of the custom, prevailing among those who receive baptism, of placing a pe- cuniary ofEering in the shell (used to baptize), lest the bishop appear to distribute for a fee what he freely received. Nor are the feet of the newly- baptized to be washed by either bishop or clergy." " Emendari placuit ut hi qui baptizantur, ut fieri solebat, nummos in concha non mittant, ne sacerdos quod gratis accepit pretio distrahere videatur. Ne- que pedes eorum lavandi sunt a sacerdotibus vel clericis." ^^ "Aug. in Psalm. 130, 5; PL. 37, 1706. See also Tract. X in cap. II Joann. PL. 35, 1468-71. "Hefele, Conciliengesch. i, 177, New French ed. i, 249. FROM THE YEAR 313 TO 476 61 This canon reveals the anxious care with which the members of the council protected the good reputation of the clergy. It also discloses a tend- ency towards the introduction of perquisites now beginning to manifest itself. The generosity of the faithful in its initial fervor spontaneously and amply furnished the funds necessary for the support of the clergy and the proper observance of worship. x\s time went on, however, the free contributions did not increase in proportion with the needs of the Church and its ministers. This disproportion was among the reasons which led first to the acceptance, then also to the im- position of a fee on occasion of the performance of certain rites. In the Spanish custom just men- tioned, there is as yet only question of free dona- tions. But it should be noticed that they were already made for the rendering of some specific service, i. e., the administration of baptism. The practice was suppressed for a time, but later gained ground and triumphed. Circumstances and the remembrance of the spiritual maxim, " The workman is worthy of his meat," ^^ were to prove stronger than the zeal of bishops. The prohibition regarding the passing of a bishop, or other members of the clergy from one Mansi, ii, 13-14. The canon has been incorporated in the Corp. Jur. Can. c. 104, C. 1, q. 1. "Matth. X, 10. 62 A HISTORY OF SIMONY diocese to another became, after its promulgation at ISTicaea,^^ a frequent enactment of subsequent councils. The synod of Antioch (341) ^^ renewed the prohibitive measure and the first and second canons of Sardica (most probably 343-344) ^'^ also bear on the subject. The second canon of the latter council seeks to prevent the indirectly simo- niacal promotion from a less to a more important episcopal see. The following translation may be given from its Greek text: " Should any one be found so foolhardy or rash as to put forward the assertion that he received letters from the people (of the more important see), it is manifest that, in that city he may have won over a few through bribery, so as to make them rise in church and demand him as their bishop. I deem it necessary to utterly condemn such fraudulent pro- ceedings and to pronounce such a one, to his very death, unworthy even of lay communion. Pass sen- tence upon this. The synod answered : ' We ap- prove of what has been said.' " ^^ ^Can. 15, Mansi, n, 673-76. ^«Can. 21, Ibid, n, 1317. " The text is given in Hefele, Concg. i, 558-60 ; New French ed. i, 760-62. On the recent discussion regarding the genuineness of the canons of Sardica, see Funk, Die Echtheit der Eanones von Sardica, Hist. Jahrb. der Gor- resges. (1905) xxvi, 1-18, 255-74; reprinted in his Kircheng. Abhandlungen, Vol. in (1907). ^' The canon has been taken over into the Corp. Jur. Can. c. 2, De Electione, i, 6. FROM THE YEAR 313 TO 476 63 A letter of Basil ^^ which is referred to the beginning of his episcopate at Caesarea, SYO-Yl, and addressed to his suffragans, constitutes another legislative and very instructive document of the period. The following is an account of the letter in which we have grouped together what logically belongs together: 1) Basil speaks of the grief caused him by the circulation of a report that some of his suffragans accepted money for ordinations, and states that he does not yet give full credence to the imputation. 2) ITot only were they said to sell ordination, but also to excuse their action on the ground of religion, which implied double guilt; or they wrongly considered themselves innocent because they received payment only after the performance of the ceremony. 3) The arguments Basil uses against simony are: a. To the recipient of a bribe he applies the words addressed by Peter to Simon Magus : " Keep thy money to thyself to perish with thee." ^^ h. He mentions the spiritual loss which the seller sustains, c. He ■shows the base character of the action by which the traffic of the huckster is introduced into things spiritual, d. He goes to the source of the sin, which is covetousness. But covetousness is the fountain-head of all evil and called idolatry, e. ^Ep. 53 (76), PG. 32, 396-9; Pitra, Jur. Ecc. Graec. Hist, et Hon. i, 608-9. "^ Acts, VIII, 20. 64 A HISTORY OF SIMONY He points out the similarity between their action and that of Judas in betraying Christ for a bribe. 4) Basil does not content himself with warning and pleading. As ruler of a metropolitan district, he lays do^vn the penalty to be inflicted for further transgressions on this point. After this letter of his, any offence of this kind will be punished with deposition, for the churches of God have not the custom of buying and selling God's gift. Pope Leo the Great in a letter written January 12, 444, and addressed to Anastasius, bishop of Thessalonica, gives him the following directions: " In the provinces entrusted to you, such should be consecrated bishops of the Lord as are recom- mended only by a virtuous life and by fidelity to their clerical duties. Exclude all influence of per- sonal favor, ambition and purchased votes." "^ In penning the above-mentioned letter, Basil, as already observed by Drey,^^ can hardly have known the following so-called canon of the Apostles : " If any bishop, priest or deacon obtain possession of his dignity with money, he shall be deposed, he and the one who ordained him, and he shall be abso- lutely deprived of communion like Simon Magus ""^Ep. VI, c. 3, PL. 54, 618, also Mansi, v, 1233. See also Ep. CLXViii, c. 1, PL. 54, 1209-10. ^ Neue Untersuchungen iiber die Konstitutionen und Kanones der Apostel (Tubingen, 1832), 355. His account of the letter of Basil is inaccurate. FROM THE YEAR 313 TO 476 65 by me Peter." -^ Chrysostom also fails to make use of the canon or even to mention it, although he had occasion for doing so. Moreover, the advanced stage of development which its wording indicates, and the existence of the circumstances which it implies, point to a rather late origin. Funk -^ places the date of composition at the beginning of the fifth century. He rejects as in- sufficiently proved Drey's opinion, which sees in the canon an extract of the second canon of the council of Chalcedon (451).^^ That the dependency on Chalcedon is far from proved, may be admitted with Funk. It may be well to point out here the error committed by Drey, when in trying to establish his opinion, he tells us that previous to the council of Chalcedon no historical document can be found proving that ordination was con- ferred for money. After the exposition of facts given above, the reader knows what to think of this assertion. On the other hand, however, the position of Funk that a later date than the begin- ning of the fifth century cannot be assigned is not quite convincing. It is known that Dionysius Exiguus found the canon in existence when he ^'Can. 30 (28), Mansi, i, 33; Hefele, Cg. i, 809. See Hefele, New French ed. I, 1203-21; though the text of the canons is not therein given. ^ Die Apostolischen Konstitutionen (Rottenburg, 1891), 187-91. =^Drey, op. cit. 355-56 and 411. 5 66 A HISTORY OF SIMONY made his Latin translation of the Canons of the Apostles, about the year 500. Hence the canon in question may be considered a fifth century pro- duction, without any attempt at a more precise date. Two other Apostolic canons forbid, one, the acquisition of a bishopric through the influence of the secular power, ^^ the other, nepotic eleva- tions to the episcopate.^''^ At a period of greater development of the simoniacal idea and consequent legislation, these two prohibitions would have to be spoken of more at length; here it will suffice to have mentioned them. In the history of the development of anti- simoniacal legislation, the council of Chalcedon (451) occupies an important place. In its canons we find the first great ecclesiastical amplification of the condemnation of simony pronounced by Peter. The accusations against Ibas of Edessa, which were again examined at Chalcedon, if they did not cause the formulation of the prohibition of the council, at least drew the attention of the bishops to the unlawful traffic in sacred objects. The council in its second canon decreed : ^^ ="Can. 31 (29), Mansi, I, 33; Hefele, I. c. "Can. 76 (75), Mansi, i, 45. This canon is also found among the canons of the council of Antioeh held in the year 341. See Hefele, Cg. i, 520, 823-4; New French ed. I, 721. *8 Mansi, vii, 357-60. The canon has been incorporated in the Corpus Jur. Can. c. 8, Causa I, q. 1. FROM THE YEAR 313 TO 47 G 67 " If any bishop should confer the imposition of hands for money and put to sale a grace that cannot be sold; if for money he should ordain a bishop, a chorepiscopus, a priest or deacon or some other cleric; or if, through love of gain, he should for money nominate a steward, advocate or prosmonarios, or any other person on the roll of the Church, he shall, if he be convicted, forfeit his own position and the ordained party shall not profit by this venal ordination or appointment, but be deprived of the dignity or office he obtained for money. Should any one act as intermediary in these shameful and unlawful transactions, he shall, if he be a cleric, lose his own position and if he be a layman or monk, he shall be subject to anathema." As had previously been done more than once, the canon pronounced penalty of deposition against ordainer or ordained who received or gave payment for ordination. But it did not stop there; two new classes of persons were considered: 1) Church officials, who did not receive ordination; and 2) Intermediaries in simoniacal transactions. The penalty pronounced against clergymen was now also enacted against such administrators of church property (stewards), advocates or counsels for the church, or other officials, as obtained their position through bribery: they were to be dis- charged. It cannot be stated with certainty what was the function of the " prosmonarii " or " para- 68 A HISTORY OF SIMONY monarii," who are mentioned with the stewards and advocates. According to some writers, the administration of church property also devolved upon them; according to others, they were a sort of ostiarii or janitors.-^ In the conclusion of the canon, those who conduct the negotiations in the purchase or sale of an ecclesiastical position are dealt with. They are distinguished into two classes, according as they are either clerics or lay persons. The former incur deposition ; the latter are anathematized. As the monks of the time were, with few exceptions, laymen, they were subjected to the same penalty as these. The stipulations of the canon, in spite of their definite character, were violated at an early date. Only a few years after the council of Chalcedon had concluded its work, a synod was held (459 or 460) at Constantinople under the presidency of Gennadius I, then patriarch of the Imperial City (c. 458-471). The cause of the convocation of this synod is not known. We know, however, that the only document we possess of it, the circular letter regarding simony, was issued, as the letter itself states, owing to violations of the law of Chalcedon.^" The following is a summary of the circular : °° See Percival, The Seven Ecum. Councils (New York, 1900), 269. (Vol. XIV of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers. ) ^"Hefele, (Concgesch. ii, 584-85), had some misgivings FROM THE YEAR 313 TO 476 69 Our Lord, when He sent His apostles to teach all nations, gave them the command to freely give as they had freely received, as earthly treasures are no compensation for spiritual gifts. This command was not intended for the apostles alone, but also for those who succeeded them. As they had observed it, so now their successors must observe it and not sophisticate where soph- istry is not admissible. The law is clear : " Freely have you received, freely give." It is as if Christ had said : " You received the sacerdotal dignity from me. If I sold it to you, you also may sell it; but if freely you received, freely also you should give." Woe then to the person, who, for money, acquires or bestows God's gift. Hence the assembled bishops have been led to renew and cite the second canon of the council of Chalcedon, which banishes all satanical invasion of the sjDiritual realm and all diabolical efforts in that line, and excludes the giving or accepting of money both before and after ordination or pro- motion. In spite of such a clear condemnation, violations of the law have been discovered in Galatia. Consequently the renewal of the pro- regarding the genuineness of this writing, but withheld the reasons he had to doubt. It must be confessed that the character of the document seems to indicate a later stage of development, although its authenticity is generally admitted. 70 A HISTORY OF SIMONY visions of Chalcedon is appropriate, so that this impious habit may be eradicated and the grace of the Holy Spirit descend from above on the candi' dates for ordination. It is doubtful vt^hether the latter receive His grace, when the ordination is performed with " tainted hands or whether it is not rather withdrawn." " Be it therefore known to your holiness (the metropolitan) that whosoever will be detected as guilty in this matter, be he a bishop, chorepiscopus, itinerant ecclesiastic, priest, deacon or any person soever on the roll of the Church, or from among the laity, he has been condemned by common decree and common sentence of the bishops, as was already done in the above-mentioned canon of the holy Fathers. For grace must always be grace and money must not intervene (in its acquisition). Therefore pur- chaser and seller of grace, be he cleric or lay, be he convicted of guilt or not, shall be deposed from his ecclesiastical dignity and office and subject to ex- communication. For God and mammon cannot be reconciled and those who serve mammon cannot serve God. The pronouncement of the Lord cannot be contradicted : ' You cannot serve God and mam- mon.' " In conclusion, directions are given to the metro- politans to make the letter knovni to their suffra- gans and other persons, so that with one spirit FROM THE YEAR 313 TO 476 71 and one soul, all may, with God's help, fight the common enemy, avarice. ^^ The clear prohibition of the acceptance of money, either " before or after ordination or promotion " seems to indicate that the important letter of Basil was, with the canons of Chalcedon, used in the deliberations of the synod. The doubt expressed regarding the reception of grace in " an ordination performed with tainted hands," already foreshadows the great controversy that was to agitate subsequent centuries, whether ordination thus received is valid or not.^^ We have a very curious piece of legislation in the wording of these penalties: condemnation is pronounced even against those guilty of simony, but not convicted. This may mean that the judges have certain knowledge, but no legal proofs, of the guilt of the party, and pronounce deposition. Their sentence in such a case will be reasonable, but will hardly commend itself to the public sense of justice. The second interpretation that may be given, is that the simoniacal person incurs deposition and excom- munication by the very commission of simony, though this sin be absolutely unknown to the ecclesiastical authorities and the faithful. In this case the administrative acts of the culprit would "Mansi, vii, 911-20. ^ See on the history of this controversy, Saltet, Les R^ordinations ( Paris, 1907). 72 A HISTORY OF SIMONY be null, but there would be no authority to enforce the penalty. The punishment would fall not only on the culprits but on those over whom they are placed, and, as is easily perceived, would be the source of endless confusion. It is difficult to be- lieve that this second meaning was intended, but there is nothing in the text to exclude it and it is more obvious than the first. The imperial government seconded the efforts of the Church against simony. The emperor of the East, Leo I (457-74), issued in 469 an edict, ad- dressed to the pretorian prefect Armasius or Armatus, which reads : ^^ " If any one is, through the instrumentality of God, raised to the episcopal dignity, either in this imperial city or in other provinces, which extend over the whole world, let his election proceed from men's purity of intention, the electors' clean con- science and the uncorrupted judgment of all. The episcopate must not be obtained through bargaining; but each candidate should be judged according to his deserts and not according to his material means. What place can be secure, what object inviolable, if the hallowed temples of God are captured with money? Wliat wall of integi'ity, what rampart of faith shall we provide, if the cursed greed of gold stealthily invades the sacredness of the sanctuary? '' Corp. Jur. Civ. Cod. Lib. i. Tit. ill, De Episcopo et Clerieis. 30 (31). FROM THE YEAR 313 TO 476 73 What can be out of danger, what secure, if the integrity of sanctity is corrupted? Let the sacri- legious ardor of avarice cease from menacing the altars and let this crime be cast out of the sacred place. In our times then, let a chaste and humble bishop be elected, that, wherever he appears, the purity of his life may be an object-lesson in every respect. Not money but prayers shall characterize his ordination. Ambition must be so far removed from him, that he has to be sought out for the imposition of the office, that he opposes a refusal to the demand and flight to insistence. Let the sole necessity he feels of declining the office be in his favor. For he is utterly unworthy of the episcopate, unless he accept it reluctantly. But if any one is known to have come into possession of this sacred and holy seat of the pontiff, through pecuniary in- fluence, or to have accepted a remuneration for the ordination or election of another, he shall be tried for public crime and lese-majesty and deprived of the episcopal dignity. Nor shall he thenceforward be deprived of the honor only; but we decree that he shall be condemned also to perpetual infamy. Thus a similar penalty will be inflicted on those whom an identical crime has equally dishonored." Only a few years later (473), an edict on this same subject, was issued for the Western Empire by Glycerins. It was addressed to the pretorian prefect of Italy, Himelco, and is so direct and 74 A HISTORY OF SIMONY emphatic that it too deserves to be quoted in its entirety : ^^ " Owing to a warning of the divine majesty, the object that claims our first attention at the beginning of our reign, is the greater reverence which should be displayed towards the most holy mysteries of the Christian religion. For it must not be called into question that the purer the worship which the inno- cence of the sacred ministers offers to the deity, the greater the favors which God, the Creator of the Universe, confers upon the created world. The vices of the clerics have been on the increase for a long time, and when we were yet in private life, we already convinced ourselves that, for the greatest part, the episcopate is not obtained through merit, but bought with money : shameful cupidity had, through custom, already made this practice appear lawful. The zeal for the possession of a good conscience has become extinct; and what was to be hoped for from God, has been placed within the reach of money and exaction. Thus the secular power of the bishops has superseded in the consideration of men the rever- ence due to their ecclesiastical office, and the bishops themselves have a more lively appreciation for civil honors. Thus it happened that, neglecting religion and placing themselves under the protection of men, they gave more attention to things public than divine, and escaped the punishment due to their faults in consequence of the very permanency of their sacred ^PL. 56, 896-98. FROM THE YEAK 313 TO 476 75 office. Thus they were led to appropriate, system- atically and under the semblance of real administra- tion, the revenues of the churches. To disguise the shamefulness of their designs, they called these revenues the riches of the poor, and nevertheless they distributed immediate rewards to some, pledged themselves in writing to others, and sold at a dis- advantage the goods destined for the poor. It is for this reason, we believe, that the offended deity has withdrawn its favors from us, has inflicted upon us so many evils and has visited the Eoman people with the many calamities which have befallen us. For with what mouth or what impudence does he offer his supplications to the Author of the whole world, who has been elected for the offering up of the sacrifice, not through the judgment of the Holy Trinity, but owes his promotion to the favor of men? Or what will such bishops not con- sider venal, who have made a traffic of the sacred mysteries ? " Considering these reasons we have sanctioned by a law to be binding forever, that whosoever has obtained the episcopate with the undue help of other persons, shall possess according to the fashion of the world what he acquired acording to the fashion of the world, i. e., after the lapse of a year he will be deprived of the episcopate. During the year in which he holds the title of bishop, an imperial com- missioner will be in charge of the administration of ecclesiastical revenues. The bishop who consecrated such a man or who knew that money was given or 76 A HISTORY OF SIMONY promised to any one by the candidate for consecra- tion, or who cleverly feigned ignorance regarding the character of the person striving to obtain the episcopal nomination, not by a pure conscience but by despicable payment, shall also be deprived of the episcopate, paying an identical penalty for his rash consecration-act. Not only churchmen, but any member of our religion is entitled to a hearing in proceedings against this secret evil, and those who can substantiate the charge will receive, at our discretion, a reward for their religious accusation. The inhabitants of any city who are actuated in their choice of the candidates, not by personal merits which should be attended to, but by punishable venality, shall incur banishment from their coimtry, which they so ill serve, and forfeit to the public treasury an amount of their fortunes equal to the payment received. " Far, therefore,^^ from the churches such base and sacrilegious auction; let the brokers cease their work in such shameful transactions. It is iniquitous to sell celestial things at auction. The great office of the episcopate, as it has been said, must be solicited not with money but by merit; and accord- ing to the rule of the ancient Fathers, the number and the character of the electors should be taken into consideration, and the life of the bishop-elect examined. For it is worthy of execration, that any one acquiring the episcopal rank through corruption °°Thi8 passage is corrupt; we give what we consider to be the correct meaning. FROM THE YEAR 313 TO 476 77 should, even before he takes possession, exhaust the revenues of the church of vrhich he should be the administrator rather than the possessor. This letter of our Serene Highness will, in our opinion, be re- pressive of the designs of the unrighteous and stir up honest men to greater earnestness in the pursuit of virtue. We cannot help, Himelco, dearest and most loving relative, expecting surer aid from the justice and mercy of God Almighty, when, through bishops of innocent and proved character, we will implore His omnipotent help. Hence your illus- trious and exalted Excellency will, through the whole extent of our empire, effect the announcement and promulgation of this law of Our Serene Highness, which makes for the amendment of the bishops and ministers of our most sacred religion. And with our august hand (we add) : Farewell, Himelco, dearest and most loving relative." CHAPTER IV SIMONY IN THE WEST FROM 476 TO 590 I. Rome and Itaxy: — Conditions at Rome during the period — Intervention of Odoacer in papal election — The election of Pope Symmachus — The designation of Boniface II — Vacancy after his death — Election of Silverius — Pope Vigilius — Pelagius I — Eucaristus and the bishopric of Volterra — Vitalis of Milan — II. France: — Clovis and his sons and the Church — Quintianus and Apollinaria and the see of Clermont — Gallus and the same see — Cautinus succeeds Gallus — The successors of Cautinus — The machinations against Aetherius, bishop of Lisieux — The see of Rodez and Transobadus — The bishopric of Uzfes and the civil government — King Guntram and simony — Retrospect — III. Othee Countries: — The Vandals and the Afri- can Church — Gildas on ecclesiastical conditions among the Britons. I. Rome and Italy One of the causes that led to the direct inter- vention of civil rulers in the designation of successors to the papacy was the contested papal elections. These were not infrequent during the period now under consideration. While Italy was in the hands of the Ostrogoths, there existed at Rome a party favorable to these new rulers, which tried to put its own candidate upon the 78 FROM THE YEAR 476 TO 590 79 papal throne. At the same time the Komans of the old stock were of course little inclined to let such a dignity pass into the hands of persons who were in their eyes little short of barbarian.^ In 418 the emperor Honorius intervened in the disputed election between Boniface I and Eulalius, and finally decided in favor of Boniface. Pope Simplicius (468-83) even looked to the influence of the civil authority for the maintenance of peace in the Church after his death, as appears from the following incident. Upon his demise (March, 483), the Roman clergy and senate met in St. Peter's Church for the election of a suc- cessor. The pretorian prefect, Basilius, appeared at the meeting as the representative of King Odoacer and cited a request which Simplicius had made, while yet alive, to his royal master. The late pontiff had demanded that, in the interest of the peace of the Church, there should be no election for his successor until the civil authority had been consulted.^ As Thiol observes,^ this was not a claim on the part of Odoacer to confirm papal elections on principle ; he merely contended that he had been asked by Simplicius to assure a peace- *See Pfeilschifter, Theoderich der Grosse, 172-73. ' " Si eum ( Simplicium ) de hac luce transire contigerit, non sine nostra consultatione cuiuslibet celebretur electio." Thiel, Epp. 686 seq. "Op. cit. 686, n. 24. 80 A HISTORY OF SIMONY ful election at his demise. It is not recorded that the assembled clergy and senate protested against this action of Odoacer. Felix III (or TI) was elected (March, 483) probably with the consent of the king. The short interval between the death of Simplicius and the election of his successor speaks in favor of harmony between Odoacer and the Romans. The interference of the civil power or of influ- ential laymen in papal elections was, however, destined to turn out disadvantageously in many instances. The Roman senator, Festus, during a visit which he made to Constantinople during the reign of the emperor Anastasius, had agreed with him to obtain the consent of Pope Anasta- sius II to the " Henoticon " of the emperor Zeno. On his arrival in Rome he found the Pope dead (November, 498).^ He immediately saw his opportunity in the forthcoming election and used his influence and wealth to procure the succession for a candidate of his own choice. A double election took place, the followers of Festus setting up Laurentius in opposition to the pope-elect Sym- machus. As peace was impossible between the two contending parties, it led to a new inter- vention of the secular power in papal affairs. «Theodor. Lector, ii, 16, 17, PG. 86, 1, 189 seqq.; Lib. Pont. I, 260 seqq.; Tlieophanes, Chronog. Ad ann. 492, 493. FROM THE YEAR 476 TO 590 81 King Theodoric, probably appealed to by both sides, decided with great fairness in favor of the candidate who had obtained the larger number of votes and had first received consecration. Festus and his candidate were defeated. The success of Symmachus in obtaining a favorable royal de- cision was attributed by the Laurentian party to bribery.^ A divergency of opinion exists among modem writers as to whether there was any actual foundation for the accusation. Duchesne ^ and Grisar '^ assert that it was sheer calumny ; Hart- mann ^ is strongly inclined to admit the truth of the charge ; while Pf eilschif ter ^ unhesitatingly, and it would seem rightly, declares that money played a part in obtaining the royal confirmation at Kavenna. While the author of the Laurentian fragments is untrustworthy, the same cannot be said of Ennodius, who asserts that more than 4000 gold solidi (about $1,250) were distributed among persons of infiuence at court. ^^ Ennodius's bishop, more probably Laurentius of Milan, ^^ advanced the money under guarantee of repayment by the Apostolic See. In spite of the repeated demands of Ennodius, the sum had not been ^Lib. Pont. I, 44. 'Lib. Pont, i, 263, n. 5. ' Gesch. Roms. i, 721. * Gesch. Ital. i, 143. * TJieoderich, 57. "Ennodius, Epp. Ill, 10, MGE. Auct. Ant. vil, 83 ed. Vogel (Berlin, 1885). " Pfeilschiiter, I. c. n. 7. 6 82 A HISTORY OF SIMONY refunded about the year 50Y.^^ The names of the persons who had accepted payment were not unknown to Ennodius ; but he did not deem it safe to mention them in his letter. Whoever they may have been, it is certain that King Theodoric emerged from the affair with clean hands and without having been influenced by any of his subordinates.^^ It may be added also that those who made the distribution hardly considered it objectionable, as appears from the edict of King Athalarich, issued shortly after. ^^ Symmachus, out of consideration for his oppo- nent, appointed Laurentius to the bishopric of ISTuceria. Festus, however, made another attempt to deprive Symmachus of his office by bringing baseless criminal charges against him; this also ended in failure. Pope Felix IV (III) (526-30) owed his final success in obtaining the paj^al dignity to the sup- port of Theodoric. ^^ A few days before his death, he designated, in presence of high civil and ecclesiastical personages, his own successor in the person of the archdeacon Boniface. The reasons for this action were set forth in the papal ^Ennodius, ed, cit. 223, 229, Epp. vi, 16, vi, 33. " Pfeilschifter, op. cit. 57, 58. " Cassiod. Variae, ix, 15. " Cassiod. Variae, Lib. Vlli, Ep. 15, MGH. Auct. Ant. Xll, 246, ed. Mommsen. FROM THE YEAR 476 TO 590 83 edict, which brought the designation to the knowl- edge of the Roman people. The church treasury was empty. It could not bear the expenses of a new electoral campaign, in which the candidates would outbid one another in promises of distri- bution of money or similar engagements ; and it was with ecclesiastical revenues that such promises were usually redeemed. -^^ Very probably political considerations also played a part in this nomina- tion of the first pope of Germanic ancestry. This appears the more likely from the fact that when Boniface II, the candidate designated by Felix, assumed succession, the majority of the clergy and senate elected the Greek deacon Dios- corus in opposition to him. The danger of a schism was averted only by the timely death of Dioscorus shortly after his appointment (October 14, 530).^^ Boniface II, now universally recog- nized, obliged the ecclesiastical partisans of his late rival to sign a decree condemning Dioscorus. It has been asserted by different writers ^® that Dioscorus was anathematized for simony. But this contention cannot be substantiated. The letter of Justinian appealed to in support of the statement does not speak of a simoniacal trans- ^^ See Hartmann, GescJi. Italiens, I, 237. "Lib. Pont. I, 281. " Baronius, Ad an. 530, nos. 2-4; Diet. Christ. Biog. s. V. Boniface, II. 84 A HISTORY OF SIMONY action. ISTor does the official text of the condemna- tion which we now possess make the least mention of simony. ^^ As to the long vacancy which occurred after the death of Boniface II (from October 17, 532, to January 2, 533), it was caused by a heated elec- toral campaign and simoniacal intrigues. The canvassing and bidding for votes was carried on with such activity that the ordinary church funds were exhausted, and sacred vessels were put up for sale in order to cover the expenses of the contest.^*' John II finally secured the succession. To sup- press such abuses as these, the Gothic government issued the prohibitions spoken of elsewhere. After the brief reigns of John II (533-35) and Agapitus (535-36), Silverius (536-37) who was a subdeacon and son of Pope Hormisdas, was elected with the help of King Theodat. Anasta- sius in the Liher Pontificalis tells us that Silverius obtained the office by bribing the king. But this statement should not be admitted without reserve, for Anastasius is the only authority for it. The nomination of a mere subdeacon was against Roman custom and must have aroused opposition. The chronicler of the history of the " Lib. Pont. I, 282, n. 8 ; Duchesne, La Succession du Pape F6lix IV in Melanges de I'Ecole FranQaise de Rome (Rome, 1883). ^Lib. Pont. I, 283, n. 16; Cassiod. Variae, ix, 15. FROM THE YEAR 476 TO 590 85 popes denounces Theodat vehemently, probably in stronger language than was warranted by the facts. Such a proceeding is not unusual among historical writers under similar circumstances. Moreover, it is not the only instance of its kind met with in the Liber Pontificalis. The account which Liberatus ^^ gives of the same event cer- tainly does not show the slightest trace of the great strife which is supposed to have divided Rome at the death of Agapitus. He simply tells us that " when the news of the death of the pope, who died at Constantinople, reached Rome, the city elected the subdeacon Silverius, son of the former pope Hormisdas." We must be cautious then in admitting the charge of simony brought against Silverius. As Duchesne remarks, we here have " one of those accusations so readily put forward by partisan feeling because its veri- fication is most frequently impossible." ^^ At the death of Agapitus, the empress Theo- dora seems to have lost no time in seizing the opportunity to secure the appointment of a pope favorable to Monophysitism. She found her can- didate in Vigilius, a deacon of Agapitus. Vigilius was promised the papacy and seven " centenaria," if he consented to the disapproval of the council of Chalcedon and to the confirmation of the '^Breviar. c. 22, PL. 68, 1039. ''Lib. Pont. I, 293, n. 2, 86 A HISTORY OF SIMONY doctrine of the deposed Monophysite patriarchs, Anthimus (Constantinople), Theodosius (Alex- andria) and Severus (Ephesiis). Vigilius, influ- enced " by the love of the episcopate and of gold," ^^ gladly acceded to the proposition. But on his arrival in Rome from the East he found that Silverius had already been consecrated pope. He asked, nevertheless, for the cooperation of Belisarius in the realization of his plans. The great general, who was then waging war on the Goths in Italy, was promised two " centenaria " of gold,^^ if he would procure him the papal office. The timely death of Pope Silverius (537) per- mitted of an early execution of the scheme. Vigi- lius, who had already been consecrated during the lifetime of Silverius, was now recognized as legitimate pope by the Roman clergy. Once in possession of the coveted position, he did not show himself anxious to fulfil all the engagements he had entered into. He never approved Monophysi- tism. Belisarius, however, was duly rewarded for his services."^ In the controversy of the Three Chapters, it was, according to Eacundus of Her- miane,^*^ venality that prompted Vigilius to issue the Judicatum (April 11, 548). But the author- =»Liberat. Breviar. c. 22, PL. I. c. 1040. ** Liberat. Breviar. c. 22, PL. I. c. ^ Liberat. Breviar. ibid, et seqq. '^ Liber contra Mociarmm, PL. 67, 861. FROM THE YEAR 476 TO 590 87 ity of the passionate Faciindus is not sufficient guarantee for the unqualified admission of the truth of the charge. Yet it will be well to re- member with Duchesne,^'^ that Vigilius " has always been reproached for being fond of money." It was to the civil power that Pope Pelagius I (556-61), whose case will be more appropriately discussed in the chapter on anti-simoniacal legis- lation, owed his elevation to the papacy. The civil authority, on the contrary, was in no way concerned with the election and consecration of his namesake Pelagius II, who brings us down to the year 590. ISTo imperial confirmation was sought for in his case because, as the chronicler explains,^^ Rome was then besieged by the Lombards. The fact that an explanation is offered for the absence of the emperor's confirmation shows how natural and how well-established a custom it already was for the Romans to look for civil approval in all papal elections. Historical records, such as we have them, speak of but few instances of simony in the rest of Italy during the period. At a synod held in 496, Pope Gelasius decided the case between Eucaristus, a ^ Rev. des quest, hist, xxxvi (1884), 402, note. The whole art. " Vigile et P6lage." runs from 369-440. It was answered by Dom F. Chamard, Rev. des quest, hist. xxxvn (1885), 540-78. Duchesne replied, Ibid. 579-93. L6veque, Etude sur le Rape Vigile, (Amiens, 1887). "^Lib. Pont. I, 309. 88 A HISTORY OF SIMONY former pretender to the episcopal see of Volterra, and Faustus a " defensor " of the Roman Church. Eucaristus had paid Faustus 63 solidi to he ex- pended in securing for him the bishopric of Vol- terra, a transaction which Faustus had duly acknowledged by handing over a receipt to the payer. Eucaristus's life and conduct proved an obstacle to the conferring on him of the honor; but he now demanded that his money be refunded. Faustus, while admitting that he had received the money, claimed to have expended it according to the wish of the giver. It was duly established in presence of the " curiales " of Volterra that 31 solidi and 2 tremisses were paid to Faustus specifi- cally for his mission {ad eius delegationem) . Out of this sum 22 solidi and 2 tremisses were used to cover the expenses of the curiales engaged in the case. Eucaristus, however, could not be elected to the see of Volterra ; for he was publicly known to be a parricide and was also, according to his own confession, a forger. The nine re- maining solidi were spent to exonerate Eucaristus from the crime imputed to him. The expenditure of all these funds was, therefore, considered to have been made in the interest of Eucaristus and with his approval. Faustus was declared innocent, and the receipt in Eucaristus's possession was to be immediately returned to him. As long as it was FROM THE YEAR 476 TO 590 89 detained by the sham bishop it would be null and void.^® In the proceedings which gave a certain Vitalis the episcopal see of Milan in 552, there was more imperial favor than any genuine election. The consonance of the candidate's ideas with imperial views on the theological discussions of the time, rather than real merit, raised him to episcopal honors, l^arses acted as the emperor's repre- sentative on that occasion, and his conduct in the matter received the warm approval of Pope Pelagius shortly afterwards. ^° II. Simony in France. The strength of the royal power and the Ger- manic religious ideas forced the Church to leave in the hands of the kings more authority in re- ligious affairs than they were entitled to in virtue of their position. This politico-religious authority in the hands of half-barbarian rulers opened the door to intrigue and bribery; simony was, there- fore, rampant under the Merovingian kings. ITo ^Lowenfeld, Epistolae Pont. Rom. Ineditae, nos. 9, 22 (Leipzig, 1885); Ewald, Die Papstbriefe der Brit. Samm- lung, Neues Archiv, v (1880), nos. 14, 45, 58, 63, 64 and pp. 526-33. °°Jaff6, 1038; PL. 69, 395; Duchesne, Rev. quest, hist. XXXVI (1884), 432. 90 A HISTORY OF SIMONY instance of it is recorded during the reign of Glovis (481-511), the first Christian king of the Franks. But, as has been pointed out by Loe- bell,^^ a ruler who had first embraced the faith himself and then assured its triumph to a great extent among his people, would naturally be most readily listened to by the clergy even in ecclesi- astical affairs. When Bishop Remigius of Rheims, who had converted him, was violently attacked by his fellow-bishops, Heraclius of Paris, Leo of Sens and Theodosius of Auxerre, because of the ordination of an unworthy priest, Claudius, the bishop answered in a letter written about 510, that he had ordained this priest not for reward, but upon the injunction of the most excellent king, the propagator and defender of the Catholic f aith.^^ At the same time, he gave those to whom he addressed his letter to understand that their own nomination had not been entirely free from royal influence. ^^ Shortly before his death, Clovis convoked a council, which met at Orleans on July 10th, 511. It forbade abbots, priests and all clerics and monks to solicit benefices from princes, without previous examination or recommendation by the bishop. The violation of the prohibition was to be punished with deposition and the priva- " Oregor von Tours, 337-8. ^ Bouquet, iv, 52. ^ See Vacandard, Etudes de Critique, 128-29. FROM THE YEAR 476 TO 590 91 tion of communion until such time as satisfactory penance would be performed. ^^ The enactment was not only conducive to the elimination of ap- pointments due to the patronage of the powerful; it also tended to reduce the presentation of gifts en the occasion of nominations to ecclesiastical positions. For according to the received notions of the northern nations, as Lingard ^^ has observed, the inferior blushed to approach the throne of his superior without a present. A mere donation has, of course, nothing to do with simony. But princes at an early date exacted as some sort of a debt what had been at the beginning sponta- neously offered. Ecclesiastical writers of the period usually speak with disapprobation of the presentation of gifts on the occasion of ecclesi- astical appointments. Such action must have awakened in their minds the idea of exchange or at least undue relation between the earthly donation and the spiritual preferment. The power which their father had exercised over religious affairs, the sons of Clovis were not to let slip from their hands when they began to reign over his divided dominions. But his disinter- estedness was not very scrupulously imitated by them. Gregory of Tours, speaking of the period during which they reigned, tells us that it was a »*Can, vii, Maassen, Concilia, i; Hefele, ll, 662-63. '^Anglo-Saxon Antiq. 105. 92 A HISTOEY OF SIMONY time, when " bishoprics were sold by princes and bought by clerics." ^^ Gregory goes to special pains in giving us details of affairs in his native Auvergne. He tells us that on the death of Eufrasius, the bishop of Clermont, in 515, the people elected Quintianus, a native of Africa and former bishop of Rodez, who, driven from his episcopal see by the Goths owing to his friendli- ness to the Franks, had taken refuge in Clermont. But the popular decision was to be modified and the succession to go to Apollinaris, the son of Sidonius Apollinaris. Placidina, the wife of the Apollinaris who was to supplant Quintianus, and Alchima, his sister, called upon the bishop-elect and besought him to abandon the office to their relative. Quintianus, already advanced in years and not very desirous of again throwing himself into the activities of diocesan government, con- sented to step aside in favor of Apollinaris. The two women now despatched the latter to Theo- doric, king of Austrasia and part of Southern France (511-33/34). Apollinaris saw the king, made a generous presentation of gifts and obtained the bishopric. He died, however, three or four months after his appointment. When the news of his demise reached Theodoric, he ordered Quinti- anus to be created bishop of Clermont, remarking : ^Vitae Pair, vi, 3, in MGH. 8S. Rer. Mer. i, 682. FROM THE YEAR 476 TO 590 93 " His love for us has caused this man to be driven from his see." The king's legates convoked the bishops of the province and the people of the city, and Quintianus was made bishop of Cler- mont.^^ The inhabitants saw nothing inappro- priate in this royal action. When they elected a successor to Quintianus in 525, the king altogether ignored their choice. Gregory of Tours tells us that his uncle Gallus, " through the king's favor, filled the vacancy." ^^ Gallus had lived for some time at the court of Theodoric where he was held in great esteem both by the king and the queen. ^^ At the time of Quintianus's death, he happened to be sojourn- ing at Clermont. The inhabitants met at the house of the priest Impetratus and discussed at much length the question of the succession, with- out arriving at any definite conclusion. After their departure, Gallus favored with divine in- spiration according to Gregory, remarked to a cleric, Viventius by name : " To what purpose all this bustle and these discussions. I will be ^^ Hist. Franc, iii, 2, MOH. 88. Rer. Mer. i, 109-10; Vitae Patrum, c. iv, ibid. 674-75. For this and subsequent events see also Hauck, Die Bischofswahlen unter den Merow. and Vacandard, Les Elections Episc. sous les M6rov. in Rev. quest, hist. (1898), Lxni, 321-83, reprinted with modi- fications in the author's Etudes de crit. (Paris, 1906), 123- 87. The case of Apollinaris is treated in the Etudes, 132. ^ Hist. Franc, iv, 5. ^ Vitae Pat. vi, 2. 94 A HISTORY OF SIMONY bishop. As for yourself, when you hear of my return from my visit to the king, meet me with my predecessor's horse prepared for me. Your disregard of my injunction may occasion you much regret in the future." At these words, Viventius flew into such a passion that he dashed Gallus against the bedstead upon which he was reclining and wounded his side. After this rather un- pleasant encounter and the departure of the pugna- cious cleric, Impetratus advised Gallus to journey to the royal court and inform the king of the death of Quintianus and the happenings at Cler- mont. " Divine inspiration," he added, " might prompt him to confer the bishopric on you; if not, it will be a recommendation for you with the appointee." Gallus repaired to the court and during his sojourn there, Aprunculus, bishop of Treves, also died. The clergy of this city applied to Theodoric for Gallus as their bishoj). The king refused on the ground that he destined him for another see; I^icetus was then made bishop of Treves. A deputation from the clergy of Cler- mont who had elected another than Gallus now appeared at court and, with a large number of pres- ents, requested the king to confirm their choice. The king declined, and informed them that Gallus would be their bishop. Being as yet only a deacon, he was ordained to the priesthood and the king gave a public banquet in honor of the FROM THE YEAR 476 TO 590 95 future bishop. Referring to this event, Gallus was later wont to say that the episcopate had only cost him the " treans " which he gave as a gratuity to the cook who had prepared the dinner. The fact that Gallus was received with enthusiasm by the inhabitants of his episcopal city shows that they did not even think of protesting against the action of the king.'*'^ At the death of Gallus in 553, Cato was desig- nated by the popular vote as his successor. The archdeacon Cautinus, whose relations with the newly elected candidate had been of the most harmonious character, offered to obtain for him without remuneration, the final sanction of the king. All he demanded was the enjoyment of the prospective bishop's favor. The latter declining his services, Cautinus proceeded to the court of King Theodobald (548-55), informed him of the death of Gallus and showed no reluctance to accepting a nomination for himself. The king called a meeting of bishops at Metz (of what jDrovince we are not told), and, before the messen- gers of Cato reached the city, Cautinus received episcopal consecration. The failure to take into consideration the expression of the will of the people had disastrous results in this instance. Cautinus proved to be an unworthy bishop, ^Vitae Pat. vi, 3; Vacandard, Etudes de crit. 134. 96 A HISTORY OF SIMONY avaricious, and addicted to drink. The strength of four men, Gregory of Tours tells us, was on several occasions hardly sufficient to carry him from table in a state of intoxication. Cato re- fused to submit to him and had his followers. He intrigued to oust Cautinus and take his place. Profiting by his friendship with Chramnus, the son of the then reigning king Clothaire, he entered into an agreement with him that, if the king were to die, Cautinus should be immediately turned out of his see and Cato put in his place. On another occasion he paid a woman to proclaim in church, as if under divine inspiration, his great- ness and holiness, and to revile Cautinus as guilty of all crimes and unworthy of the episcopate. ^^ But his exertions were of no avail, and by the time that death deprived Cautinus of his see (c. 571), Cato had already succumbed. IsTumerous were those who contended for the vacancy, many were the gifts they offered and substantial the promises they made. Eufrasius, a priest and son of the former senator Euvodius, lacking the merit requisite for the position, tried to obtain it through bribery. Having procured a considerable sum of money from some Jews, he sent it to the king through his kinsman Beregi- silus. He failed, however, to obtain the nomi- "Greg. Hist. Franc. Lib. iv, 5-7, 11-12, 15. FROM THE YEAR 476 TO 590 97 nation. The clergy of Clermont elected the archdeacon Avitus, who had made no promises to his electors, and the king sanctioned their choice. An attempt on the part of the count of Clermont, Firminus, to delay the consecration of the bishop- elect was not successful. The count's friends, who journeyed in his stead to the royal court, offered the king 1000 pieces of gold for one week's delay in the consecration of Avitus. Eufrasius, according to Eoth,"*- was at the bottom of this scheme. The statement is not devoid of all proba- bility, but the passage of Gregory of Tours, cited to substantiate it, does not clearly convey that meaning. At all events, the king declined to with- hold even for a few days his approbation of the selection of Avitus, and the latter was consecrated at Metz.-^^ Our information on ecclesiastical affairs in Gallic dioceses other than Clermont, is frequently scant and incomplete during this period; yet a few more instances may be recorded in which money played a part in the attempted or actual acquisition of spiritual advantages. About 560 a certain Aetherius was bishop of Lisieux in Nor- mandy. According to Gregory of Tours, he was a man more remarkable for his excessive clemency than for his prudence. He had twice intervened *^ Beneficialwesen, 270, n. 103. "Hist. Franc. TV, 35. 7 98 A HISTORY OF SIMONY in favor of a disreputable cleric and saved his life. In return for these services, the cleric com- bined with an archdeacon of the city against the bishop. They formed a plot, the object of vv^hich w^as the assassination of Aetherius and the sub- stitution of the criminal cleric. They canvassed the city offering rewards to their supporters ; but their scheme ended in failure because at the last moment courage deserted the assassin who had been hired to deliver the death-blow. ]!^ot only did he abstain from executing his murderous design, but he even made a full confession to the bishop.'** On the death of Dalmatius, bishop of Rodez (c. 580), there were as usual, writes Gregory of Tours, many competitors for his place. Chief among these was the priest Transobadus. This ecclesi- astic entertained the clergy of the city at dinner, not out of any desire to promote their bodily welfare and social pleasure, but because he wished to dispose them favorably to his own episcopal aspi- rations and thus gain their votes. In spite of these efforts, the office went to the archdeacon of Rodez, Theodosius."*^ The latter's rule was of short duration; he died in 583, and a new opportunity thus presented itself to Transobadus to seek the *^Eist. Franc, vi, 36; Gallia Christ, xi, 763-64; Fisquet, La France Pontificale, M4tropole de Rouen, Bayeux et Lisieux, 223-24. "Hist. Franc, v, 46. FROM THE YEAR 476 TO 590 99 highest ecclesiastical dignity of the city. His exertions, however, met with no greater success than in the previous instance. That he had rivals, and strenuous and unscrupulous ones, there can be no doubt. The scandals and contentions at- tendant upon this election were so great that they were extraordinary even for this age of semi-barbarism. The church of Rodez was stripped of most of its sacred vessels and all its best effects.'*® What use was made of these treasures by the contending parties is not recorded ; that at least part of them became a means of gaining supporters for this or that candidate is, if we take contemporary conditions into account, by no means unlikely. Innocent, count of Ge- vaudan, secured the succession with the help of Queen Brunehilde.'*'^ Confusion reigned in the see of Uzes about 581 owing to the fact that Dinamius, the governor of Provence, tried his skill in episcopal nominations without royal authorization. To this official Albi- nus owed the episcopal dignity, which he held only three months. At his death, the king confirmed one candidate, Jovinus, a former governor of the province, while Dinamius confirmed another, Mar- cellus, a deacon and son of the senator Felix. That a confiict ensued between the two rivals need *^IUd. VI, 37, 38. "lUd. 100 A HISTORY OF SIMONY scarcely be mentioned; Marcellus, by a judicious use of presents, triumphed over his opponent and remained in sole possession of the see.^^ Uzes belonged at the time to the kingdom of Childe- bert II (575-96) ; but from this fact it does not necessarily follow that Childebert received the presents. Intermediaries may have been the reci- pients and, in return, may have exercised their influence with their royal master. The promise of the see of Toulouse, which Sagittarius, bishop of Gap (560-85) received from prince Gundo- valdus was evidently due more to the political support of this unsuccessful pretender's cause than to the discovery in the criminal Sagittarius of episcopal qualifications which he did not possess.^^ As for King Guntramof Burgundy (561-92), he showed no inclination to yield to the persuasive in- fluence of gifts, on the occasion of the nomination of a successor to Bishop Remigius or Remedius of Bourges in 584. To the many applicants present- ing themselves before him with gifts, he is said to have answered : " It is not our custom to sell the episcopal dignity, lest our name be dishonored by such a shameful transaction; but neither should you buy it, lest you be compared to Simon Magus. Sulpicius, according to divine foreknowledge, will *^ Hist. Franc, vi, 7. "Greg, of Tours, Hist. Franc, vii, 28. FROM THE YEAR 476 TO 590 101 be your bishop." ^^ Unfortunately, the irresolute ruler did not always live up to his sound princi- ples. When Gregory of Tours speaks of the king who sold the bishopric of Eauze to a certain Desiderius, he refers, as Hauck has proved,^^ to no other than Guntram. Eauze was the capital of the province of ]!^ovempopulania and disap- peared as an episcopal see in the seventh century. In 585 it lost its bishop by the death of Laban. Though Guntram was opposed to simoniacal ele- vations to the episcopate and had even taken an oath never to raise a layman to that dignity, yet he yielded to bribery and violated his oath by promoting Desiderius to the vacant see. To find terms sufficiently expressive of his indignation at such a proceeding, Gregory falls back upon his classical reminiscences and exclaims with Virgil : ^^ ''' To what extremes does not the accursed thirst for gold force human hearts ? " ^^ It would be contrary to historical truth, however, to conclude from this royal transgression that Guntram was always accessible to simoniacal influence. As Hauck ^* and Vacandard ^^ have observed, the appointment of Desiderius to the see of Eauze is the only case in which guilt of simony can be proved against Guntram. The very year in which '^Hist. Franc. \i, 39. ^^ Bischofswahlen, 34, n, 99. '^Aen. Ill, 56 seq. "'Hist. Franc, vrn, 22. " Op. cit. 34, n. 100. ^Rev. quest, hist. (1898), Lxiii, 353. 102 A HISTORY OF SIMONY this event occurred, the king refused the presents of the deacon Waldo, who sought the confirmation of his election to the see of Bordeaux.^® The facts narrated show the deplorable con- ditions existing in the church of Trance during the period. The kings sold bishoprics or ap- pointed their favorites to them.^''^ Bribery was resorted to not only to obtain their sanc- tion of elections, but also to gain the support of the courtiers or that of the electors of the episcopal city. As to the clergy in whom we would expect a better understanding of spiritual things, we find, at first sight, that they were more ready to buy dignities than the kings were to sell them. We must not forget, however, the great disproportion between the number of clerics and the number of kings ; and, to form a correct judg- ment of the whole situation, we must remember the divided and semi-barbarous state of society. But even keeping these considerations in mind, we cannot but have an unfavorable idea of ecclesi- astical affairs at the time. When Gregory of Tours speaks of the usually numerous competitors for an episcopal see; when he refers to part of the period as a time when bishoprics were sold by kings and bought by clerics ; when Gallus of Cler- mont sarcastically boasts of the small price which ^'Hist. Franc, viil, 22. "See Loebell, Qregor v. Tours, 344-45; Hauck, Bischofs- wahlen, 26-28, 34-35. FROM THE YEAR 476 TO 590 103 the episcopate cost him, we cannot but understand that the traffic in bishoprics was one of the great evils of the time. The one bright page in this history from an ecclesiastical point of view, is the opposition displayed by the zealous bishops taken from the celebrated monastery of Lerins. They were the soul of the movement against simony, and to their efforts is due, to some extent, the restrictive and condemnatory legislation of the period. First and foremost among them ranked the great Casarius, who occupied the see of Aries for forty years (502-542). His activity extended far beyond his diocese and his lifetime, and, in a large measure, affected the moral life of the French Church. III. Simony in Other Counteies. Although simony does not seem to have been very prevalent in I^orthwestern Africa, ecclesi- astical conditions there were far from satisfactory. The country had been invaded and conquered by the Vandals into whose hands Carthage fell in 439. Like most of the German Barbarians, the conquerors were Arians. Under their first king in Africa, Genseric (439-477) they indulged in a kind of persecution of Catholics rather unusual with the Teutonic nations; it took the form of confiscation of churches and church property and suppression of public worship. Genseric im- 104 A HISTOEY OF SIMONY prisoned or banished the Catholic bishops of his dominions and forbade the consecration of new ones. That under such circumstances disorgani- zation reigned, not only during the persecution, but also during the years immediately following, will be readily understood. A year before his death, Genseric had shown himself more just to his Catholic subjects, allowing them to bring back their bishops and clergy from exile and to reopen their churches. His son, Hunneric, who succeeded him and reigned for seven years from 477-484, continued for a time the same lenient policy. But towards the end of his reign he set in motion a cruel persecution against the Catholic Church. Of his banishment of bishops and worse cruelties we have not to speak. More pertinent is the fact recorded by Victor Vitensis ^^ that he contemplated a general law for his dominions, confiscating the property of deceased bishops, and enjoining the payment to the royal treasury of 500 solidi by any successor before he could be consecrated. The suggestion by persons of his immediate surround- ing that the enactment of such a law would lead to reprisals against the Arian bishops in the East- ern empire made the king desist from carrying out his plan. Victor of Tunnunum is authority for the state- ment that Firmus, bishop of Tipasa in ISTumidia "^De Pers. Vand. Lib. II, vii, MOH. Auct. Antiq. in, 18, ed. Halm (Berlin, 1878). FROM THE YEAR 476 TO 590 105 (525-53), assented to the Three-Chapters through corruption. He yielded to the persuasiveness of the gifts of the prince, i, e,, the emperor Justi- nian.^® Unfortunate as was the condition of Catholics under the fierce Vandals, far more deplorable still was that of the British Church. iJ^orth- western Africa groaned principally under the oppression of its rulers. The Britons suffered from woes both external and domestic. To the disasters and misery which followed upon the Saxon invasion, were added moral degeneracy and corruption in high station in the church itself. " The long and unsuccessful wars which they had waged against their fierce invaders, had relaxed the sinews of ecclesiastical discipline ; and the pro- fligate manners of their clergy were become, if we may credit the vehement assertions of Gildas, an insult to the sanctity of their profession." ^^ Speaking specifically of the simony of the clergy, this ancient unsparing chronicler writes: " For what is so wicked and so sinful as after the example of Simon Magus (even if with other faults he had not been defiled before), for any man with earthly price to purchase the office of a bishop or °' Victor Tunn. Ad ann. 552, Auct. Antiq. xi, 202. ""Lingard, Antiquities of the Anglo-Saxon Church, 40-41 (Philadelphia, s. d.). On the testimony of Gildas regarding the state of the British Church, see Cabrol, L'Angleterre Chr4t. avant les Normands (Paris, 1909), 48-52. 106 A HISTORY OF SIMONY priest, which with holiness and righteous life alone ought lawfully to be obtained; but herein they do more wilfully and desperately err, in that they buy their deceitful and unprofitable ecclesiastical degrees, not of the apostles or their successors, but of tyranni- cal princes, and their father the devil; yea, rather they raise this as a certain roof and covering of all offences, over the frame of their former serious life, that being protected under the shadow thereof, no man should lightly hereafter lay to their charge their old or new wickedness; and hereupon they build their desires of covetousness and gluttony, for that being now the rulers of many they may more freely make havoc at their pleasure. For if truly any such offer of purchasing ecclesiastical promotions were made by these impudent sinners (I will not say with St. Peter), but to any holy priest or godly king, they would no doubt receive the same answer which their father Simon Magus had from the mouth of the apostle Peter, saying : ' Thy money be with thee unto thy perdition.' But, alas ! perhaps they who order and advance these ambitious aspirers, yea, they who rather throw them under foot, and for a bless- ing give them a cursing, whilst of sinners they make them not penitents (which were more consonant to reason) but sacrilegious and desperate ofEenders, and in a sort install Judas, that traitor to his Master, in the chair of Peter, and Nicholas, the author of that foul heresy, in the seat of St. Stephen the martyr, it may be, at first obtained their own priesthood by the same means, and therefore do not greatly dislike in their children, but rather respect the course, that FROM THE YEAR 476 TO 590 107 they their fathers did before follow. And also, if finding resistance in obtaining their dioceses at home, and some who severely denounce this chaffering of church-livings, they cannot there attain to such a precious pearl, then it doth not so much loath as delight them (after they have carefully sent their messengers beforehand) to cross the seas, and travel over most large countries, that so, in the end, yea even with the sale of their whole substance, they may win and compass such a pomp, and such an incom- parable glory, or to speak more truly, such a dirty and base deceit and illusion. And afterwards with great show and magnificent ostentation, or rather madness, returning back to their own native soil, they grow from stoutness to stateliness, and from being used to level their looks to the tops of the mountains, they now lift up their drowsy eyes into the air, even to the highest clouds, and as Novatus, that foul hog, and persecutor of our Lord's precious Jewel, did once at Eome, so do these intrude them- selves again into their own country, as creatures of a new mould, or rather as instruments of the devil, being even ready in this state and fashion to stretch out violently their hands (not so worthy of the holy altars as of the avenging flames of hell) upon Christ's most holy sacrifices." ^^ ^ De Excidio Britanniae, ed. Mommsen in MGH. Auct. Antiq. xili, Chronica Minora, Pt. I, 62-64 (Berlin, 1894). We have reproduced the translation of J. A. Giles, Six Old English Chronicles, parag. 66, 67, pp. 343-46 (London, 1848) in Bohn's Antiquarian Library. The rendering of the Latin " seelestae " by the word " serious," which we have italicized in the text is obviously due to an oversight or a misprint. 108 A HISTORY OF SIMONY Only a citation in full of this passage could give the reader a correct view, as far as this is possible under the circumstances, of British ecclesiastical conditions, as Gildas saw them. Corruption must have been very prevalent, if we are to believe the distressing generalities of this carping chroni- cler, who never spends much time in the enu- meration of definite facts and does not quote so much as one in this particular instance. In Spain Isidore of Seville and John of Biclaro are unanimous in relating that about 580, numerous Catholics abandoned their religious faith and adopted Arianism. They add that bri- bery was at the bottom of these defections.®^ Apart from these indications, no specific case of simony can be cited in Spain. It is evident, how- ever, from the Spanish legislative enactments of the period that the traffic in sacred things was not by any means unknown. In the appointment to bishoprics it may have prevailed to a less extent than in the Merovingian kingdoms ; but in the ad- ministration of the sacraments it was probably more prevalent. In no ecclesiastical law framed among the Franks do we find such insistence on the free administration of baptism as appears in Spanish legislation. '^'Isid. Hist. Goth. c. 50, MGH. Auct. Antiq. xi, 288, ed. Mommsen; Johan. Biclar. Chronic. Ad ann. 580, ibid. 216; see Gams, Kirchengesch. von Span. II, i, 490. CHAPTER V OPPOSITION TO SIMONY IN THE WEST FROM 476 TO 590 I. Opposition at Rome and throughout Italy: — Latin translation of the second canon of Chalcedon — The Roman synod of 502 — The " Canonical Letter " and the " Liber Ecclesiasticorum Dogmatum " — Letter of Pope Gelasius I — Enactments of the Roman synod of the year 499 — Letter of Pope Symmachus to Csesarius of Aries — Pope Pelagius I and simony — Anti-simoni- acal edict of King Athalaric — II. Opposition to simony in France and Spain: — Canons of the council of Origans (533) — Council of Clermont (535)— The fifth synod of Orleans — The second council of Tours — Letter of Pope Hormisdas to the Spanish Church — The third synod of Braga. I. Opposition to Simony at Rome and THKOUGHOUT ItALY The second canon of the council of Chalcedon, which has been discussed and which contains such a strong condemnation of simony, was perhaps almost immediately made accessible to the West in a Latin translation. Certain it is that in March, 453,^ Pope Leo I requested Bishop Julian of Cos, who had been one of the Roman repre- ^Jaff6, 489. 109 110 A HISTORY OF SIMONY sentatives at the council of Chalcedon, to make a translation of its Acts. Quesnel considers this a sufficient reason to at- tribute to Julian the Prisca or Antiqua, the oldest Latin version, which we have of the synod,^ an attribution which is rejected by Baluze.^ As we have no positive proof that Julian complied with the request of his friend, he can, at the very best, be looked upon only as a probable author of the translation. The first certain trace of the exist- ence of the Acts in Latin is found in the writings of Facundus of Hermiane. In his " Defense of the Three-Chapters," a work which he composed about 546, Facundus used the version known as the Prisca^ The Roman ecclesiastic Rusticus undertook a revision of the same translation in 549 or 550.^ It had, therefore, a wide circulation in the middle of the sixth century. The funds and property of the Church were frequently used by papal and episcopal candidates after their election, to redeem the promises of temporal reward which they had previously made to further their appointment. Some atten- tion, therefore, ought to be given here to the pro- ^ See Maassen, Gesch. der Quell, des Kan. Rechts. 139-46. ' See Mansi, vii, 654 seqq. *Lib. Ill, c. 5, PL. 67, 598 seqq. " See the Latin version of the canon in PL. 56, 537, and in Maassen, op. cit. 945. FROM THE YEAR 476 TO 590 HI hibitions regarding the alienation or disposition of ecclesiastical property, since they were, to a large extent, anti-simoniacal measures. From the documents of the Roman synod of 502, it is clearly apparent that King Odoacer framed a law (483), which prohibited papal ali- enation of ecclesiastical property or ornaments, declared any future alienation of this sort invalid, and pronounced anathema against the parties to any such transaction. The bishops of this synod, at which the decree was read by the deacon Hor- misdas, vigorously protested against the usurpa- tion of such power by a layman, with regard both to the legislation on ecclesiastical property and the imposition of anathema. Pope Symmachus (498- 514), the president of the synod, disapproved the action of Odoacer, but looked with favor upon the measure itself. The synod approved his pro- posal to have the prohibition maintained in a different form for the Roman church alone, and extended its application to the priests and other members of that church. Even the usufruct of landed estates was to be transferred to none but clerics, captives or strangers. An exception to these rules was made for city houses, which neces- sitated considerable expense for their maintenance, also for gold, silver and some other movable goods. Loss of dignity was decreed against persons ali- enating the property and anathema pronounced 112 A HISTORY OF SIMONY against those acquiring it, or signing, as witnesses, the contract of such a transfer. Moreover, ecclesi- astics were empowered to demand the restitution of the alienated property with its products.^ A fifth century document, which goes under the name of " Canonical Letter " "^ and appears only in Italian collections, forbids priests, deacons or other clerics to sell ecclesiastical estates or to donate them to relatives. Violation of this pro- vision entails restitution of the property or ejection of the offender. Married clergymen are enjoined not to appropriate sacred vestments for the use of their wives and daughters,^ as they had been accused of doing. To the second half of the fifth century belongs the " Liber Ecclesiasticorum Dogmatum," at- tributed to Gennadius of Marseilles. It is a summary of Catholic doctrine and prescriptions. Among those to be debarred from ordination it mentions the one who is led by ambition to offer money for it in imitation of the example of Simon Magus. ^ 'Thiel, Epp. i, 686-92; Hefele, ii, 643-45. TL. 56, 892. ^PL. 56, 893. ' De Ecclesiasticis Dogmatibus, c. 72 in PL. 58, 997; C. H. Turner. The Liber Ecclesiasticorum Dogmatum attributed to Gennadius in Jour. Theol. Studies (1905), VII, 78-99. In Turner's text the pertinent passage is found on p. 96, c. XXXVIII. FROM THE YEAR 476 TO 590 113 In the year 494 Pope Gelasiiis addressed an important letter relative to simony to all the bishops of Liicania, Brutium and Sicily, which was probably also sent to other churches according to the general custom. ^° It stipulates that no compensation be asked from the faithful for the administration of baptism and confirmation, because such a request might deter some from receiving the sacraments, either on account of poverty or out of indignation. The violation of this prohibition carried with it the loss of the offender's position. ^^ Every purchaser of a sacred dignity was likewise to be deposed, it being meet that such an impious transaction should not go unpunished. The condemnation of Simon related in Holy Writ, applies to both the purchaser and the seller. ^- Owing to the division and strife attending the electionof Pope Symmachus, 498, the latter, imme- diately after his accession, summoned a council which was held at Rome in 499. The holding of the synod, in spite of the winter season, was due, as the pope himself explained to the assembled members, to the necessity of laying down a firm rule for the creation of the Roman bishops, so that the contention and popular tumults which took "Thiel, Epp. 31, no. 5. "f/pp. 14, c. 5, Thiel, 364. "/6td. c. 24, Thiel, 375. 8 114 A HISTORY OF SIMONY place at his own election, might not be repeated. The papal notary, Emilian, then read to the council the statutes, which we here substantially reproduce : 1. Owing to the disturbances that have occurred in the past and to prevent a recurrence thereof in the future, the holy synod decrees, that should any priest, deacon or cleric during the lifetime of the pope and without his foreknowledge, give for the future election a signature, promise a voting ticket, pledge himself under oath, promise a vote, or should any one of these same clerics attend private meetings for deliberating and taking decisions on this matter, he shall be deprived of his dignity and of communion. — The synod ac- claimed this decision. 2. The same penalties shall be incurred by every one who shall be convicted of having sought the succession during the pope's lifetime, or of having made any attempts to secure it. When the pope asked whether the statute met with the approval of the whole synod, all the members answered in the affirmative. 3. Should the death of the pope occur so un- expectedly (which may God avert) as to prevent him from taking any measures for the election of a successor, the candidate unanimously elected by the clergy shall be consecrated; but if, as is usual, there be division and contention, the opinion FROM THE YEAR 476 TO 590 II5 of the majority shall triumph. The elector who, boimd by promise, casts his vote with bias ^^ shall be deprived of his ecclesiastical office. (Renewed approval by the synod.) 4. If anyone bring to the notice of the eccle- siastical authority the designs of those who violate these enactments and prove the guilt of the parti- cipants, he shall, if himself implicated, not only go unpunished, but be duly rewarded. The synod manifested by acclamation its approval of these decisions.^* The mention of measures taken by the pope re- garding the succession, which occurs in this synod, can evidently not mean that he appointed his successor ; he merely suggested the name of a per- son whom he thought fit for the papacy. ^^ In the month of October, 513, Csesarius, bishop of Aries, ^^ addressed a petition to Pope Sym- machus (498-514), in which he requested him to put a stop to ambitious intrigues for the acquisition of the episcopal dignity. Acting on Caesarius's letter, the pope directed (Kovember 6, 513) that ambition should not give access to the episcopate; for, although the inordinate acts which spring from " " Non recto judicio." ^*MGH. Auct. Ant. xii, 402-5. Thiel, Epist, 1, 645 seqq.; Hefele, Concilieng. 11, 626-7. ^° See Mausi, viii, 238, note g; and Baronius, Ad ann. 499, n. 8. ^« Thiel, Epp. i, 727-28; MOH. Epp. m, 40. 116 A HISTORY OF SIMONY it are committed in the lay state, subsequent oppro- brium falls to a certain extent on persons who are religious and serve God. Hence the episcopal candidate should not secure through money the intervention of influential parties in his behalf, nor should he obtain the suffrage of the clergy or of citizens by intimidating them or offering them rewards. No authoritative report regarding the result of an election shall be written in the absence of the official representative of the ecclesiastical authority (" visitor ") who may testify to the unanimity of clergy and citizens. These instruc- tions, the pope adds, are for all bishops; and by this expression he intended to include not only all the suffragan bishops of Csesarius, but the uni- versal episcopate. ^'^ It was probably with a view to obtaining the papacy from the emperor Justinian that Pelagius I (556-61) promptly condemned the Three Chapters, which he had till then vigor- ously defended. This change combined with other reasons aroused such opposition to him in Italy that he could not find the three bishops re- quired by the canons for the consecration. The ceremony was performed by only two, — those of Perugia and Ferentino, — while the ordinary con- secrator, the bishop of Ostia, was represented by "Thiel, op. cit. 726; MGH. Vol. cit. 37-39. FROM THE YEAR 476 TO 590 117 the priest Andrew. Pelagius skillfully overcame the resistance to his nomination. A public pro- cession was organized in which the commander of the imperial troops, ISTarses, with his general staff and the civil authorities, marched in great pomp by the pope's side from the church of St. Pancra- tius to the basilica of St. Peter. Here Pelagius ascended the ambo in the presence of a great con- course of people, and pronounced a solemn justifi- cation of his conduct while the Cross and the Book of the Gospels were held above his head. He then asked the audience to confirm the follow- ing enactment : " No ecclesiastical promotion from the ofiice of door-keeper to that of bishop shall be due either to gold or (pecuniary) promises; for you all know that this is simony. But the candidate ought to be learned in the ways of God, of good character, and ought to attain the highest office not through his gifts, but his good life." ^^ This prohibition, concurred in by the people, had only a local character, as is evident from the attendant circumstances ; it applied only to Rome. To the honor of Pelagius it must be said that, in spite of his act of inconsistency which probably raised him to the pontifical throne, he faithfully observed his own prohibition of simony. We read in his epitaph that he performed many "Lib. Pont. I, 303; see PL. 69, 399; Duchesne in Rev. quest, hist. (1884), xxxvi, 424-40. 118 A HISTORY OF SIMONY ordinations of sacred ministers (bishops, priests and deacons), but never derived any benefit from them.^® The special mention of this practice of his implies that it was somewhat unusual not to accept payment for ordinations. To these ecclesiastical regulations must be added the senatus-consultum of the year 530 and the important edict of King Athalaric issued in 533 in the form of a letter to Pope John II (533-35). The senatus-consultum was a repetition of the syn- odal decree of the year 499. It severely prohib- ited negotiations regarding the papal succession during the lifetime of a pope, as well as the giving and receiving of bribes in connection with the same matter.^^ As to King Athalaric's edict, the follow- ing abstract of it is given by T. Hodgkin,^^ an eminent authority on this period of Italian history : " The Defensor of the Eoman Church hath in- formed us in his tearful petition that lately, when a President was sought for the papal chair, so much were the usual largesses to the poor augmented by ^ Lib. Pont. I, 304; Duchesne, Rev. quest, hist. I. c. 440. " Sacravit multos divina lege ministros Nil pretio faciens immaculata manus." ""Lib. Pont. I, 282, n. 4. '^Letters of Cassiodorus, 398-99. The original text of the document is found in Cassiod. Variae, rx, 15, MOH. Auct. Antiq. xii, 279-81, See also Baronius, Ad ann. 533, nos. 32-41. FROM THE YEAR 476 TO 590 119 the promises which had been extorted from the can- didate, that;, shameful to say, even the sacred vessels were exposed to sale in order to provide the necessary money. " Therefore let your Holiness know that by this present decree, which relates also to all the Patri- archs and Metropolitan Churches [the five Metro- politan Churches in Eome, and such sees as Milan, Aquileia, Eavenna], we confirm the wise law passed by the Senate in the time of the most holy Pope Boniface [predecessor of John II]. By it any con- tract or promise made by any person in order to obtain a bishopric is declared void. " Anyone refusing to refund money so received is to be declared guilty of sacrilege, and restitution is to be enforced by the judge. " Should a contention arise as to an election to the Apostolic See, and the matter be brought to our palace for decision, we direct that the maximum fee to be paid, on the completion of the necessary docu- ments ( ?), shall be 3,000 solidi (£1,800) ; but this is only to be exacted from persons of sufficient ability to pay it. " Patriarchs [Archbishops of the other great Italian Sees] under similar circumstances are to pay not more than 2,000 solidi (£1,200). " No one is to give (on his consecration) more than 500 solidi (£300) to the poor. " Anyone professing to obtain for money the suffrage of any one of our servants on behalf of a candidate for Papacy or Patriarchate, shaU be forced to refund the money. If it cannot be recovered 120 A HISTORY OP SIMONY from him, it may be from his heirs. He himself shall be branded with infamy. " Should the giver of the money have been bound by such oaths, that, without imperilling his soul, he cannot disclose the transaction, anyone else may in- form, and on establishing the truth of his accusation, receive a third part of the money so corruptly paid, the rest to go to the churches themselves, for the repair of the fabric or for the daily ministry. Ee- member the fate of Simon Magus. We have ordered that this decree be made known to the Senate and people by the Praefect of the City." The king's letter to the prefect of Rome, Sal- ventius, " rehearses the motives of the previous edict, and directs that both it and the Senatus Con- sulta having reference to the same subject [and framed tvs^o years previously], be engraved on marble tablets, and fixed up in a conspicuous place, before the Atrium of St. Peter the Apostle." 22 The promises of money to the poor made by the papal and episcopal candidates, although appar- ently harmless in themselves, led to serious abuses. As the people took part in the election to eccles- iastical oflSces, these promises of more or less con- siderable distributions of money became a means of gaining supporters and a cause of impoverish- '"Hodgkin, op. cit. 400; Cassiod. Yariae, ix, 16. FROM THE YEAR 476 TO 590 121 ment of churclies. Rules governing such distri- butions had, therefore, to be issued, as was done in the above-quoted edict. The same royal docu- ment also stipulated the maximum amount that could be received by civil officials for their deci- sion of contested elections. This was evidently not an attempt to suppress all pecuniary compen- sation, but rather a sanction of a definite sum. Speaking of this regulation, Hartmann writes: " It was the course which was then time and again followed in public life. Deep-rooted abuses were not abolished, but, as far as possible, regularized and reduced to a system." ^^ 11. Opposition to Simony in France and Spain The prohibitions issued by Pope Symmachus at the request of Caesar ius of Aries have already been recorded. The example set by the pope was fol- lowed by the councils of the period. One of these assembled at Orleans in 533. It had been con- voked, as we are told in the short preface to its canons, by the Merovingian kings to treat of the observance of Catholic legislation. It was the second to be held at Orleans; the kings, at whose bidding it met, were the three sons of Clovis: " Geschichte Italiens, i, 239. 122 A HISTORY OF SIMONY Childebert I, king of Paris (511-58), Theodoric, king of Austrasia (511-34) and Clothaire, king of Soissons (511-61). The city of Orleans formed part of Childebert's dominions, but numerous bish- ops from the other two kingdoms attended the synod, which may thus be regarded as a national council. The canons relating to our subject are the third, fourth and fifth. The third runs as follows : " No bishop shall for any reason whatever accept anything for the ordination of bishops or other clerics ; for it is sinful for a bishop to yield, through cupidity, to corruption." The fourth canon reads : " Should any one, by his execrable ambition, have sought to procure the episcopacy through money, he shall be dis- carded as unworthy (reprobus) ; for, according to Apostolic pronouncement, God's gifts are not to be exchanged for money." To this the fifth canon adds that "a bishop, who goes to bury a colleague, is not to demand, apart from the necessary ex- penses, any remuneration for his services." ^^ A little more than two years later, on November 8, 535, a synod was held at Clermont with the approbation of King Theodebert I, of Austrasia (534-48). Its president was Bishop Honoratus of Bourges, who had already presided at the second council of Orleans just referred to. The synod ="Maassen, Concilia, I, 62; Mansi, vin, 836; Hefele, n, 755 seqq. FROM THE YEAR 476 TO 590 123 entered into some details regarding promotion to the episcopate: " No one shall seek the sacred honor of the episco- pate through promises, but through merit, nor owe this divine office to his possessions but to his sound morals. Nor shall any one be raised to the apex of the most eminent dignity through the favor of a few, but by the election of all. Extraordinary care shall be exercised in the selection of bishops; for, irre- proachable should be the conduct of him who is placed over men needful of correction. Let each person carefully consider the price of the Lord's flock, so as to realize that its pastors should be created through merit. The candidate to the epis- copate shall, therefore, obtain the dignity by the election of clerics and citizens, with the consent of the metropolitan of the province; he shall not have recourse to the protection of the powerful, nor by secret machinations win over some by reward and compel others through fear, to secure a decision in his own favor. Should any one be guilty in this respect, he shall be deprived of the communion of the Church, in which he wished to become an un- worthy ruler." ^° On October 28, 549, seven archbishops, forty- three bishops and twentj-one episcopal represen- '"Maassen, Concilia, can. 2, 66-67; Mansi, vni, 860; Hefele, ll, 761 seqq. 124 A HISTORY OF SIMONY tatives signed the decrees of the fifth synod of Orleans which had been convoked by King Childe- bert I, of Paris. The subject of episcopal elections had again been considered and the following enactment was promulgated : " IsTo one shall obtain the episcopate through reward or purchase; but, with the consent of the king and after the elec- tion by the clergy and people, the candidate is, according to the ancient canons, to be consecrated by the metropolitan or his substitute in con- junction with the provincial bishops. Should any one violate this decree and purchase the dignity, he shall be deposed." ^® This canon is remarkable for the clear and practical way in which it sought to settle the vexed question of the nomination of bishops. The attempt to banish simony from such nominations was nothing new ; nor is the evil more forcibly condemned here than in previous legis- lation. The point of special interest is the con- cession made to the civil authority in the selection of bishops. Things had come to such a pass that it was impossible to exclude the royal power from all influence over ecclesiastical affairs; on the other hand the king's custom of appointing bishops just like state officials could not be tolerated. The synod chose a prudent middle course; it granted the civil ruler the right of confirming or rejecting "Maassen, Concilia, can. 10, 103-104; Mansi, ix, 131; Hefele, iii, 1 seqq. FROM THE YEAR 476 TO 590 125 the person chosen by clergy and people. The solu- tion was the best obtainable at the time, and it afforded the bishops an opportunity of insisting on the necessity of popular election and of thus indirectly disapproving the royal tendency of appointing the bishops without the people. Ac- cording to Mansi ^^ and Hefele,^^ this canon was renewed by the second council of Clermont, which, they think, met in the same year, shortly after that of Orleans. But Maassen ^® has denied, with good reason, it would seem, the existence of this second council of Clermont; for 1. The decisions of the two synods are identical, and 2. The titles of their Acts in which mention is made of this alleged council of Clermont, tell us at the same time that the council was convoked by King Childe- bert in the city of Orleans. The name council of Clermont is consequently false and probably attributable to the error of some copyist. The second council of Tours, held in 567, logically decreed punishment not only against the giver, but also against the recipient of money for spiritual things. Its twenty-eighth canon (accord- ing to another numbering, the twenty-seventh) runs as follows : " ISTo bishop shall demand remunera- tion for the ordination of clerics: for such action ' IX, 642 seqq. » Cg. m, 5-6. ' Concilia, 100. 126 A HISTORY OF SIMONY is not only sacrilegious, but heretical. As it is stated in the book ' De Dogmatibus Ecclesiasticis,' that cleric is not to be ordained, who following the example of Simon Magus, offers through ambition money to a bishop. It is said more- over : ' Freely have you received, freely give.' ^^ And as he who harbors the thought of buying the gift of God and he who sells it are both alike, both will be excluded from the Church until the next synod. For the exclusion from office of the one liable to transgress is a prudent measure of safety to prevent evil." ^^ We have referred above to the earnestness of the Spanish bishops in proscribing the least sem- blance of simony from their church. Though a credit to their zeal, the radical measures adopted do not seem to have been effective. At the begin- ning of the sixth century. Bishop John of Tarra- gona,^^ addressed a petition to Pope Hormisdas (514-23) in which he requested him to issue re- formatory decrees for all the churches of Spain. The petition itself has not come down to our times ; but from the pope's answer we may gather with certainty that abuses of a simoniacal nature had crept into the church of Spain. The papal letter, which was written April 2, 517, reveals, moreover, »'' Matth. X, 8. "Maassen, op. cit. 135; Mansi, ix, 805; Hefele, in, 27. °^ See Gams, Kg. von Spam. II, l, 436. FROM THE YEAR 476 TO 590 127 the fact that Spain was suffering from the other evil which afflicted the Frankish church, viz., the elevation of laymen to the episcopate. With re- gard to simony, in particular, the pope censures the purchase of episcopal consecration. The reasons which he puts forward against such action are: 1. The punishment which the apostles in- flicted upon Simon the Magician, who sought to buy the Holy Ghost; 2. The little reverence which we entertain for anything we can procure by purchase. In episcopal elections, which should be faithfully adhered to, he sees a means of pre- serving the honor of the episcopate. In an affair of such importance, popular judgment may be looked upon as the judgment of God; for where there is simple and unsophisticated agreement, there God is. The case in which a person is free from simony himself, but connives either volun- tarily or through necessity at the receiving of some pecuniary remuneration by another, also claims the attention and solicitude of the Supreme Pontiff. A person who has acted in such a manner should not consider himself without guilt, for his cooperation is sinful. The violation of the com- mandments consists not only in committing per- sonal sin, but also in consenting to the sin of another. The following means are recommended as remedies in the case: adhesion to the privileges attributed by the ancient Fathers to the metro- 128 A HISTORY OF SIMONY politans on the one hand, and conscientious observance of his own duties by the metropolitan on the other. The exclusion of venality from the temple, the pope concludes, will bring with it the disappearance of discord, and charity will reign supreme.^^ Inferior in authority, though hardly less im- portant in this matter, were the decisions of the third (properly speaking the second) synod of Braga. At this, the first and only national council of the Sueves, held in 572,^^ simony formed one of the principal subjects of discussion. The second canon, which forbids bishops on their pastoral visitation to exact more than two solidi from the several churches, does not necessarily relate to simony. The third canon is very explicit : "Bishops shall not receive any presents for the ordination of clerics, but, as it is written, what they have received gratuitously from God, they shall give gratuitously. The grace of God and the imposition of hands shall not be sold at any price; for the ancient decrees of the Fathers have stated this re- specting ecclesiastical ordinations, saying: Anathema to the giver and to the recipient. Hence, as some guilty of numerous crimes and ministering un- worthily at the sacred altar, obtain this office not through the testimonials of a good conduct, but by 8'Thiel, I, 788-93. "Stutz, Beneficialwesen, i, 96. FROM THE YEAR 476 TO 590 129 a profusion of presents, it must be recalled that clerical ordination should be due not to the influence of gifts, but should be conferred only after a diligent examination and the favorable testimony of numerous witnesses." To these regulations, the council added pro- hibitions of practices that were either simoniacal or could easily lead to simony. Several had de- manded " tremisses " for the small portion of the blessed chrism, which the bishops were wont to send to their churches ; thenceforth nothing should be asked. The bishop shall not exact anything from the founder of a church who has asked him to consecrate it. If the latter makes a spontaneous offering, he may, however, accept it (can. v). Every bishop shall instruct his clergy that they may accept what is freely offered for the baptism of infants ; but they shall use no violence to extort a gift from the poor. For many poor people, dreading such violence, postpone the baptism of their children. The deaths without baptism which occur during such delays, are necessarily chargeable to the rapacious authors of the course adopted by the parents (canon vii).^^ ^Mansi, ix, 838 seqq.; Hefele, ni, 29-30; Gams, Eg. von Span. II, I, 462-64. 9 CHAPTER VI SIMONY AND ANTI-SIMONIACAL LEGISLATION IN THE EAST FROM 476 TO 590 Special character of simony in the East — The question of the succession to Timothy Solofacialus in the see of Alexandria — Theodosius the Coenobiarch and the emperor Anastasius — John the Recluse and Anasta- sius — Paul, patriarch of Alexandria — Justin II said to have been guilty of simoniacal dealings — Justinian's legislation against simony — Qualifications of the epis- copal candidate — Payment of admission fees prohibited — Oath required of episcopal electors — A passage of the Nomocanon of John Scholasticus — Anti-simoniacal legislation in Armenia and Syria. From a very early period in its history the East had been agitated by doctrinal discussions. To such an excess were they indulged in that they soon became, as is well known, the bane of that section of the Christian world. One of the most injurious factors in this matter was the pressure which the civil authority repeatedly brought to bear upon its subjects to force certain tenets upon them. Force, bribery, threats and blandishments were resorted to in order to assure the triumph of this or that doctrinal cause. Liberal pecuniary donations or promises of sub- stantial advantages were made to supplement the insufficiency of internal persuasion. 130 " FROM THE YEAR 476 TO 590 131 On the death of Timothy Solofacialus, the orthodox patriarch of Alexandria, in 482, the Monophjsite party gave him a successor in the person of Peter Mongns, who had already been deposed from the see of Alexandria by the em- peror Zeno (474-91). As the same emperor and Acacius, the patriarch of Constantinople, now favored Peter, the intervention first of Pope Sim- plicius and then of Pope Felix III (II), followed. Felix, the very year of his accession (483) sent two legates to Constantinople, Misenus, bishop of Cumae and Vitalis, bishop of Truentum in Southern Italy. They were bearers of letters to Zeno and Acacius, in which emperor and patri- arch were urged to abandon Peter Mongus and defend the doctrine of Chalcedon. Acacius was, moreover, cited to appear at Rome to answer certain charges brought against him. On their way to Constantinople the two papal legates were seized at Abydos, on the Hellespont, by order of the emperor, deprived of their papers and summoned, under threats, to hold communion with Peter Mongus and Acacius. But the violent proceed- ings did not effect any change in their dispositions. Measures from certain points of view more profitable to both parties were resorted to. The legates were offered money for a change of policy and showed themselves accessible to its persuasive influences; they yielded and believed 132 A HISTORY OF SIMONY and worshipped with Acacius and Peter Mon- gus.^ The pope was kept informed of the doings of his legates at Constantinople hj the Acoemetae and especially by their abbot Cyril. Misenus and Vitalis, on their return to Rome (484), were judged by a Roman council which deposed and excommunicated them, the penalty to last until Alexandria should again re- ceive a Catholic bishop.^ Vitalis died before the expiration of the penalty ; ^ Misenus was pardoned by Pope Gelasius. The same Roman council also condemned Acacius. Letters informing the em- peror, the clergy and monks of Constantinople of the sentence were entrusted by Pope Felix to Tutus, a defensor of the Roman church. Tutus, like his predecessors Misenus and Vitalis, yielded to bribery, and like them was excommunicated.* But the document condemnatory of Acacius, of which he was the bearer, reached its destination through the Acoemetae into whose possession it had fallen. They promulgated it by fastening it to the pontifical robe of Acacius when he was about ^Lib. Pont. I, 252; Felix III, Epp. Thiel i, 245; Theoph. Chronog. Ad ann. 480, PG. 108, 324; see also on these events, Jaffe, Regest. 599-604; Thiel, i, 243-59, 518; Evag. Hist. Ecc. Ill, 20, 21, PG. 86 bis, 2637-41; Liberatus, Breviar. cc. 17, 18, PL. 68, 1022 seqq. ''Thiel, I, 441. Ubid. 446. *Jaff6, Reg. 608; Thiel, i, 258; see Marin, Moines de Constantinople, 231 seq. FROM THE YEAR 476 TO 590 133 to officiate in church. Though conscious of the proceeding, the patriarch continued the service without paying the least attention to the docu- ment, not even attempting to remove it ; but during the course of the service he ordered the name of Felix III to be erased from the diptychs. Theodosius the Coenobiarch (d. c. 529), one of the principal organizers of monastic life in Palestine, was one of the great champions of the council of Chalcedon at the time of the emperor Anastasius I (491-518). The latter did all in his power to win him over to the cause of Mono- physitism. Theodore, a biographer of the Coeno- biarch, relates that the emperor offered Theodosius 30 pounds of gold to induce him to support Monophysitism. The offer was tendered under the guise of a donation towards the benefit of the sick and the poor. The manner in which Theodosius met the attempt at bribery is highly commended by his biogi'apher. He accepted the donation and thus deprived the emperor of his money. At the same time he made no change in his doctrinal views, but continued to uphold the definitions of Chalcedon.^ The accuracy of this narrative of Theodore is not universally admitted to-day. A sum of money about equal to the amount said to have been given 'Usener, Der hi. Theodosios (Leipzig, 1890), 55 seqq, AA. S8. Jan. i, 694. 134 A HISTORY OF SIMONY to Theodosius, was donated by the emperor Anasta- sius to Sabas, another representative of Pales- tinian monasticism. The gift was bestowed on Sabas while he was sojourning at Constanti- nople (winter, 511-512), about the same time that Theodosius is said to have been bribed. The donation, by no means in the nature of a bribe, was intended for all the monasteries of Palestine, and part of it was distributed among those of Theodosius. These circumstances have led Use- ner ^ to the conclusion that there is a confusion in Theodore's narrative, that only one donation was made, viz., to Sabas, and that the em- peror never attempted to buy over Theodosius to his side. It must be admitted with Zeck '^ that the explanation is not devoid of all probability. The name of the same emperor also figures in another incident, but in an entirely different manner. According to Theophanes,^ John II, the Recluse or Niciota, Monophysite patriarch of Alexandria from 507 to 517, offered the emperor Anastasius 200 pounds of gold on condition that he would procure the complete abrogation of the decrees of Chalcedon. The offer was un- seemly and, as is evident from what has been related above, unnecessary, for Anastasius was 'Op. cit. 156, 55, 1. ' Kirchenlex. s. v. Theodosius, ^Chronog. Ad ann. 502, PG. 108, 1, 357. FROM THE YEAR 476 TO 590 135 already working for the destruction of the ecu- menical enactments. Paul, also a patriarch of Alexandria (c. 538- 42), owed his elevation to that see to the emperor Justinian. As he seemed to have been implicated in the murder of the Alexandrian deacon Psoilus, the council of Gaza (c. 542) decreed his depo- sition.'' He tried to obtain his restoration by offering a sum of money to his imperial master, and would probably have succeeded in his attempt, had not Pope Vigilius refused his consent to the reappointment. ^ ^ At the beginning of the sixth century, from about 510 to 518, Bishop Peter, a man of the stamp of Paul of Samosata, occupied the metro- politan see of Apamea in Syria Secunda. In this position he committed excesses of such a revolting nature that the clergy and monks under his juris- diction drew up a list of accusations against him. The clergy insisted especially on the immoral conduct of the bishop; but they also accused him of performing venal ordinations and made special mention in this regard of the ordination of the perfumer Antiochus.^^ The first formal com- plaint was lodged with Count Eutychianus, governor of the province, and shortly after in ' On the council of Gaza, see Hefele, Cg. il, 785-86, ^° Procop. Caesar. Hist. Arcan. c. 27. "Mansi, vui, 1106. 136 A HISTORY OF SIMONY 518 the accusations were brought before the council of Constantinople. The charge of re- ceiving payment for ordination was not especially considered at the synod; but a sentence of depo- sition was pronounced against Peter. A later attempt made by him to regain ecclesiastical in- fluence and position was not successful: another council of Constantinople (536) confirmed his condemnation.^^ While the personal piety and orthodoxy of the emperor Justin II (565-578) are generally com- mended by the writers of his time, his ecclesiastical policy is revealed to us in a very unfavorable light in the writings of Evagrius. This historian (whose statements ought to be accepted with the greatest reserve ),^^ tells us that Justin, previous to his accession to the imperial throne, demanded money of Anastasius, patriarch of Antioch, proba- bly for his elevation to the episcopal dignity. The patriarch's refusal to comply with the request produced such intense and prolonged resentment in Justin that it partly accounts for the later deposition of Anastasius (570).^^ During Justin's reign, according to the same writer, any- thing could be obtained from the emperor with "Mansi, viii, 1139-1142. "See Groh, Gesch. des ostrom. Kaisers Justin II (Leip- zig, 1889), 8-9. "Evag. Hist. Ecc. Lib. v, c, 5, PG. 86 bis, 2801-2804. FROM THE YEAR 476 TO 590 137 money. Things ecclesiastical were no exception. Bishoprics were publicly put up for sale and auctioned off to the first comer. ^^ These proceedings were directly contrary to the laws of Justin's immediate predecessor and im- perial uncle, Justinian the Great. Justinian (527'-65), who displayed a pronounced tendency to legislate in religious as well as in civil matters/*^ had issued stringent and extensive regulations in the interest of ecclesiastical in- tegrity. In 528 he renewed the provisions of the council of Chalcedon and those of the syno- dical letter of Gennadius, decreeing deposition against any simoniacal church official, cleric or lay.^'^ Among the episcopal qualifications enu- merated in his " ISTovels " the absence of venality figures as an element. ^^ ISTot content with this general statement, the lawgiver speaks more in detail on the matter. The candidate, he tells us,^^ should not buy his elevation with money nor receive it for any gift, but obtain it gratuitously. Should proof be brought forward that he bought the episcopate with money or other valuable objects, even though he possessed all the other "Evag. op. cit. V, 1, PG. 86 bis, 2789. " See Bury, Hist, of the Later Roman Empire (London and N. Y. 1889), II, 1 seqq. "Cod. L. I. Tit. Ill, XLi. " Nov. VI, c. I, 5. " Ibid. 9. 138 A HISTORY OF SIMONY qualifications, both he and his consecrator shall lose their dignity. Thus, on the one hand, the hopes of the candidate will not be fulfilled, and, on the other, the recipient of the reward, if he be a bishop or other cleric, will also lose his dignity and forfeit the sum received in payment. The price will revert to the Church which suffered by the transaction. Should a layman have ac- cepted money or any other object for his support in the election, divine punishment, it is true, will be meted out to him; but, in addition, he shall forfeit the remuneration he received and pay double the amount to the Church,^*^ and if he be a government ofiicial, he shall lose his position and incur perpetual banishment. The one who, being a deacon or priest, obtains the episcopate through bribery, shall be deposed, not only as bishop, but also as deacon or priest respectively. These enactments are to be brought to the knowl- edge of the candidates in presence of the people. An edict addressed by Justinian to Mennas, the patriarch of Constantinople (536-52),^^ reveals the clergy of the East in a rather unfavorable light. The emperor himself tells us why he issued the letter. The clerics of various churches, but not those of Constantinople, had frequently com- " On this see also Nov. CXXIII, c. ii, where the state- ment regarding restitution is more detailed. ^Nov. LVI. FROM THE YEAR 476 TO 590 139 plained to him of the arbitrary admission fee levied on them by the clergy belonging to the diocese or parish, in which they sought to obtain positions. The practice seems to have been pretty general, as we may safely assume that not all those who were required to pay the tax com- plained, and yet the complaints received by Justi- nian were numerous. As a remedy, the emperor decreed that in every church except that of Con- stantinople, where the former practice might con- tinue in existence, it should be prohibited for any cleric to accept a price of admission. If any one should violate this provision, he was to be deposed and the applicant for admission to be installed in his place. This regulation was to apply also to the church advocates of Constantinople, upon whom a fine of ten pounds would be imposed if negligence in this line could be proved against them. The stipulations of the letter to Mennas did not extend to the bishops. These were allowed to give presents of enthronement. Justinian -^ de- termined that the sum that could be lawfully given should be proportionate to the revenues of the respective churches. Only the bishops of very poor churches were forbidden to give presents of this kind. ^iTov. CXXIII, c. in. 140 A HISTORY OF SIMONY In another passage of the same [N^ovel ^^ Justi- nian again treats of these two points : the episcopal election and the admission tax. He repeats what he had already decreed,-^ viz., that this legislation applied to the presidents of all charitable insti- tutions (as the xenodochos, ptochotrophos, nosoco- mos) and to any ecclesiastical official whatsoever. The statutory penalties would also be incurred by persons acting as intermediaries in the trans- actions. Proceeding still further and wishing to exclude all undue influence from the electors of the bishop, Justinian ^^ ordained that the clergy and the principal men of the city {tov<; K\r}pLKOv^ KaC roifi •jrp(i)Tov