OCR Text |
Show ! DARK AGES I j views of a Critic Holds the Church Re-f Re-f sponsible for the Illiteracy and Ignpr-r Ignpr-r ; ance of the Middle Ages Assigns No : Reason No Attempt to Refute but His 5 Own Ipse Dixit Refutes Himself by Referring to the Quarrels Between Henry Hen-ry IV. of Germany and Philip the Fair of France,-and Gregory VII. and Boni-I Boni-I face VIII. :: f To ih' L'ditor of the lntormountain Catholic: 1 do not think that the charge of bigotry and ' unfairness brought by your correspondent F. D., in f your hist week's issue, against Mr. Carl A. Eck, is I altogether just. Mr. Kck. in his letter to the Salt j Like Tribune, charged, by implication, the Church i I Home for being responsible for the illiteracy and icnoiiivn o of Europe during the middle ages. Berlin Be-rlin middle ages are meant, according to Harris 1 .iHiury of the Limits and Extent of the Middle j Apw i iho interval between the fall of the two em- pircs. t he western or Latin in the fifth century, the c.'t-tcni or Grecian in the fifteenth making a space if marly one thousand years. X scholar now refers to these years as the "Park Ages." That objectionable epithet was be-tfi'Hcu be-tfi'Hcu in the heat of political and religious contro-! contro-! wr-y. when men were more concerned for the triumph tri-umph of their principles than for the perpetuity of inuli. The Roman Church ruled supreme during tk-e ages, and when F. I), writes that she ought not ; m be held to an accountability for the lawlessness i iiini national crimes of these time, he is staining ; rlio lips of truth. ! Again, when he contends' that the Roman Pon- l v:A never acted in a dictatorial and arbitrary- fa shim, sh-im, when dealing -with kings and emperors, he has v. romi history aright. i What would he term the severity .of Gregory ; MI. the "Ilildebrand" of hi1ory. when dealing with ' 7enr.v IV of Germany, or the autocratic bearing of Umiifaee VIII towards Philip the Fair, grandson of St. L'uis of France To put a whole nation under ; an interdict as did Gregory VII. because of his quarrel with the emperor was. I claim, a tyrannical '.voroi-e of supreme power. An interdict in those days paralyzed thr industries of the country, deprived de-prived The people of their religious rights and led to wial and commercial stagnation. I am not going . to discuss these ages controversially, but in all fhiiri'y I do think that, in many instances which I migiii cite, some of the popes in the exercise of thrir immense power acted tvrannicallv. if not un-i un-i fairly. JAMES E. KEYES. Salt Lake City. Feb. 2, 1908. We give space to the above letter which, though ("urtc.u- and respectful, contains false' deductions i!'ni historical events occurring at the period to which ho refers. Mr. Keyes seems inclined to treat thr- question of the Dark Ages with candor and a i '-main amount of fairness. He claims to be actn-i actn-i ated solely by a love of trulh, but his conclusions, rw.mjr on false premises, do not prove his thesis. On the contrary, they prove the reverse. Us contention is that because of the immense wer wielded by the church and centered in the Jyunan Poniiffs, as exemplified in Ilildebrand and JHiii.icc VIII. "that the church is responsible for 5 had a- well as the good, for the vices as well i the virtues and for the downward tendency to j "'.-.rhdrisni during that period of history. This is , iinpoMi.g a burden which no Catholic need shoul-i shoul-i '!': 1f" 'nurch has two sides, the human and the 'i.vme. I.vents occurring from a secular point of v;''v aiid emanating from the human side, no Cath- : 1 omd to defend. But those occurring from & i"otr;.:-!, point of view and emanating from the "'le-ia ...cens the teaching church she is re-"ii-J . ami has successfully defended in every h Mr. Keyes will view the historical events - e. ti.f P: ik Ages under these two views, separating i !)!'( hiima;, from the divine element, as he would I "." 11 l'r' -' 'iting the constitution and legislation of ':" ! J States as distinct from and independent j "! ti'- !. h s actions of some of its citizens, his ( ''''UpKk, :, of holding the church responsible for ' : : morna occurring during that -period, !V'n' ' : r-veiseL The two rases adduced by Mr. i u u ; this, viz: That he secular power vwas I f,",iMli '' rvi'-iit to that of the Roman Pontiffs, or I w "Th- church ruled supreme all through the i !'k A.. Ilildebrand (Gregor VII) died in ex-i ex-i ' ' ''"'"'i-e be loved liberty and defended the pre- r"U.:ii -. ,:j tjH, papa(.y ajrainst the usurpation and j Y''!f i;i elaims of Henry IV to the right of investure "."'j1 '''. the bcstowaJ of benefices andepisco-i andepisco-i on bis ow subjects. This privilege, ;.'"'n ;V'"'IV exercised, led to many abuses and 'I 'S'i'-arnie?:. and fostered simony. Henry's hos-j hos-j '" independence of the church in spirit- j""' ''-yu her authority and right to manage 5 tiiir f''Ul .'!,i,'ls' "P t(t tne l"flrrel which cul-t cul-t a,,."' 1 '!'s rx,'oinmunication and his pilgrim- 1 j" 1'; ( 'H!ioss;i to be reconciled with the Pope.' ; v- tue saintly pontiff could not do than refuse j irie .t.,-Caesar which belonged to God." The 2 : PrV"',WP0" Bonifaee VI II and Philip the j 'U'" umvr,rthy descendant of St. Louis. f.( j tl" -exersr of what our correspondent .-rro-I Hy y ''""'iides from that chapter of history. j,,' fiof"'cl the authority of Boniface. Whyi I lli'ij' V' "' r.v favor with his arowel enemies. I ''utiouii, lawless and semi-barbarous Italian I (Continued on page 5.) m 1 i - DARK AGES. (Continued from page 1.) noblemen, who assumed that he (Boniface) was encroaching en-croaching on their civil rights. Our critic makes the same assumption, notwithstanding the well-known well-known fact that Boniface absolutely and unreservedly unreserv-edly disclaimed the power and authority which he was wrongfully accused of claiming, namely, "the right of bestowing or taking away crowns at their sweet will." Philip provoked the quarrel by claiming claim-ing for the crown jurisdiction and the right of disposal dis-posal of all ecclesiastical pi-operty in his kingdom, as Napoleon subsequently attempted to carry out, and as the present government has actually put in practice. Philip's pretensions, that he was defending defend-ing the rights of the state and its independence, meant the slavery of the spiritual to the temporal authority. That Boniface could do less than Pius X has done in the present quarrel, namely, to defend de-fend the rights of the church, could not be expected, expect-ed, and in resisting St. Louis' grandson's arbitrary and predatory claims he' was simply defending the rightful authority of the successors of St. Peter in spiritual matters. If the Pope was all powerful, arbitrary and despotic, how could it happen that Philip the Fair, Napoleon, and all along down the line, from Gambetti to Falliere, could insult, imprison im-prison and persecute the church and its Supremo Head? Or would Mr. Keyes justify these robber rulers in sacrilegiously confiscating justly and legally le-gally acquired property, as was and is being done today? The right to hold honestly and justly acquired ac-quired property is a natural right, and is prior to civil society. Then it is the duty of the state to .protect the rightful owner in his possessions. But, the state, under Henry IV, Philip the Fair, and down to the present ruling French regime, under the plea of the state's independence in temporals, deprives the church of its natural rights and confiscates con-fiscates its property, thrreby undermining f.ll rights. On which side is the encroachment ? The temporal extends' its jurisdiction over the spiritual by depriving it of its sacred rights. What the individual in-dividual owns he has a right to dispose of according accord-ing to his good will, and in the disposition the state should protect him, as it does in this country, unless un-less it be for immoral purposes. If one wills and bequeathes that his property go to some charitable cause or be used for some religious purpose, is it not the duty of the state to see that the testator's will is sacredly carried out? Such is and has been the recognized principle of law in the Wtittd States. But in Europe and today in Fraim; the states turn churches and homes of religious-institutions into barracks or whatever suits their purpose. pur-pose. Now follows the answer to our critic. "What would he term the severity of Gregory VI f, 'the Hildebrand of history,' when dealimr with HeiiTy IV of Germany, or of the autocratic bearing of .Boniface VIII towards Philip vthe Fair, grandson of St. Louis of France ? To put a whole nation under un-der an interdict as did Gregory VII, because of his quarrel with the emperor, was, I claim, a tyrannical exercise of supreme power." Both Henry IV and Thilip the Fair encroached on the rights of the spiritual by forming a union between the temporal and . the spiritual, making the temporal supreme, and the spiritual subject to it. Henry IV did Ihis . by claiming the right of investiture. Philip the i Fair would not allow the church to nuinagi- her on temporalities. After Henry IV made his peace with Gregory VII and his empire was restored, lu exiled that great Pontiff, whose dying word-; will ever reverberate in history, "I have loved justic" :i:id hated iniquity therefore I die in exile.' .The same is true of Boniface VIII. He was made a prisoner at Angani, and under the cruel and h;ir.-'n treatment of Philip the Fair's lieutenant. Nogaret. he ditd of grief. On which side was "the seven;,"," and "autocratic bearing?" As to the interdict, it was used as a last resource to save the kingdom from going to pieces, and the horrors of civil war. So mucl '.h Hallam and Lecky, who arc by no means partial to the Catholic church, admit. Tlivir admission ad-mission and that of other Protestant writers, should settle the matter to the satisfaction of our critic F. I). |