POOR MEN OF CHRIST: Name assumed by the followers of Norbert (see PREMONSTRATENSIANS) and by the Waldenses (q.v.)
POOR MEN OF LYONS. See WALDENSES.
126 |
POOR RELIEF. See SOCIAL SERVICE OF THE CHURCH.
POPE, PAPACY, PAPAL SYSTEM.
Pope (Gk., pappas, " father ") designates the bishop of Rome in his position as supreme head of the Roman Catholic Church. According to the doctrine of that church, when Christ founded the Church as a visible institution, he assigned to the Apostle Peter the precedency over the other apostles-making Peter his vicar, and constituting him center of the Church in that he conveyed to him alike the supreme priestly authority (see KEYS, POWER OF THE), the supreme doctrinal authority, and the supreme direction of the Church (Matt. xvi. 18, 19; Luke xxii. 32; John xxi. 15-17). But since the Church is a perpetual institution, Peter must needs have a successor, and the ecclesiastical succession is to be secured in that position for all futurity. On account of Peter's connection with the bishopric of Rome, which he is held to have established, this succession, with its derivative rights and titular primacy, is permanently attached to the Roman see; though not, perforce, to its local site in the city of Rome. The succession devolves upon the actual bishop of Rome; and so Peter as vicar of Christ lives on in the Roman bishops, the popes. The doctrines thus outlined are dogmas of the Roman Catholic Church; and therefore they become immutable and fundamental principles of its formal constitution.
But in the light of objective historical contemplation, the pope's primacy appears to be solely the product of evolutionary centuries. It is not to be denied that even from the second century and in the third century the Roman congregation and the Roman episcopal see enjoyed a significant and positive esteem in the West. The Roman church not only stood accepted as founded by the Apostle Peter, but was also the sole church in the West which could boast of apostolic establishment, let alone the fact that its site was the pivot of the ancient world, and thus facilitated a vast range of communication with the other churches and congregations. Yet though even so early as in the third century the peculiar distinction and the precedency of the Roman church were based in Rome upon succession to the rights of Peter; nevertheless, not even the Council of Nicæa knows of a Roman primacy over the whole Church. But what really proved of decisive influence in winning legal prerogatives for the Roman bishop were the issues of the dogmatic controversies that agitated the Church from the fourth century forward; since in these controversies the position of the bishop of Rome was of determining weight for the very reason of the high respect enjoyed by his church, because Rome supported the due maintenance of orthodox doctrine. The Synod of Sardica (343) permitted a bishop who had been deposed by the metropolitan synod to appeal to the bishop of Rome. Just as this implied a right of supreme jurisdiction on the part of that dignitary to uphold which appeal could soon be made to the Council of Nicma, because the decrees of Sardica became consolidated with the canons of that council, so did Innocent I. (404) lay claim to a supreme right of adjudication in all "the more grave and momentous cases"; and about the same time, he claimed the right of issuing obligatory regulations for the several districts of the Church. At the outset, however, these were mere assumptions; nor could the bishops of Rome bring them to practical effect beyond Italy or in such countries as Illyria and southern Gaul, where the local situation happened to be favorable, and where there happened to be voluntary overtures in behalf of close connection with Rome. As a matter of fact, in the year 445, Leo I. obtained of Valentinian III. by an imperial law (Novellæ Valentiniani, iii.. tit. 16), recognition of primacy, in particular that of the supreme judicial and legislative right of the Roman see. However, this law was binding only on the West; and it involved neither a renunciation of the emperor's right of exercising the imperial prerogative to legislate in ecclesiastical affairs, nor any abolishment of the rights of councils convened under imperial authority. It was not by legislation, but principally by interfering in this or that special, important concern that, both before and after this law, the Roman bishop was able to substantiate his assumed supreme control of the Church, and even in the fifth century to play a deciding hand in affairs of the Fast. Still more significant becomes the status of the Roman bishop from the close of that century, when the Germans found separate kingdoms in Italy. But, at the same time, his local sphere of power became narrowed by the establishment of the Germans in Gaul, Spain, and England; a condition that arrested the progress of the centralizing process already started in those countries.
Especially in the most notable of these new states, in Merovingian "France," the direct control of ecclesiastical affairs through the Roman bishop was legally debarred. Anything of that kind could come about only subject to royal approbation, and though the pope was acknowledged to be the first bishop in Christendom, and the preservation of communion in the faith with him was accounted in dispensable. But the king alone possessed the deciding authority respecting the law of the Church, jointly with the royal or national synod by him convened, the decrees of which could become bind ing on the state only by the king's approbation. A change in this respect did not set in till in course of the eighth century; when the Carolingian major-
127 |
But the dissolution of the Carolingian empire and the resulting confusion which involved even Italy, together with the comparative decline of the papacy, soon hindered the prosecution of that policy. To raise the papacy out of its degradation, there needed nothing less than to the renovation of the German empire under Otto I. Indeed, the empire, even as late as the eleventh century, did wield its own sovereignty over the pope and the Church, and at the same time endeavored to reform the Church internally, being supported in this by the bishops whom it had independently invested, who were therefore subservient to the imperial will. The dynasty of Otto did not, indeed, reassert the maxim of the Carolingian civil code, that the supreme authority or power in ecclesiastical matters, especially in legislation, belonged exclusively to the emperor. On the contrary, the house of Otto took practical cognizance of the theory then already established, that just as the universal State had its apex in the German emperor, so the universal Church had its center in the pope. In fine, the emperors disposed of momentous measures in Church administration, such as the creation of new. bishoprics, the revival of earlier canon laws, and the execution of reforms in accord with the pope, largely through synods that were held with the pope conjointly. By this policy the emperors cooperated in speeding the way to the general recognition of the pope's primacy in the Church, and to that course of events -which began to prevail shortly after the middle of the eleventh century.
About that time there loomed up in Rome the domination of a party in the Church which sought to free it from the influence hitherto exercised by the temporal power; not only to place the guidance of the Church in the and hands of the pope, but also to subject the temporal rulers, above all, the German emperor, to the papacy as being the directive secular force, the definitive world power. This party's principal exponent, Hildebrand (see GREGORY VII.), assumed as a privilege of the pope to be subject to no judge, and even claimed the right to depose emperors, to bear the imperial insignia, to decree new laws, to hold general councils, to erect new bishoprics, to divide and combine the same, to depose bishops, translate them, consecrate clerics of all churches, receive appeals in all cases, and to have sole decision in all weighty matters of every Church. Under Gregory's leadership of the Curia, and his subsequent pontificate, the influence of the Roman nobility and people upon the papal election became debarred; the imperial right of nomination, with attendant right of confirmation, was abolished; while ecclesiastical, reform was accomplished through successive synods convened by the pope alone, and composed of his own loyal supporters. These synods acted as a papal senate, and did away with the imperial synods. Gregory also repeatedly decreed the deposition of bishops, and ultimately annulled the emperor's antecedent right of appointment or investiture to the episcopal sees, over which the conflict issued between the German empire and the papacy (See INVESTITURE), and this terminated in the emancipation of the papacy from the imperial overlordahip. So the papacy became the court of last resort in the concerns of the Church, and also strove to win authoritative and leading power in the contemporary civil fabric of Europe. This was achieved under Innocent III.; though at the same time and by the same process the independence or autonomy of the local church tribunals, in particular the episcopal, was broken. Yet the bishops themselves had, for the most part, promoted the policy inaugurated by the Curia in the middle of the eleventh century, although with the undermining of the imperial and princely power they forfeited the essential support of their own freedom in relation to the papacy. The pope, who thereafter was regarded as the vicar of God, or of Christ, and from the time of Innocent III. designates himself as Such, laid claim to the supreme sovereignty over the Church and the world alike, though the temporal rule is committed for practical execu-
128 |
The present canon law doctrine distinguishes the pope's rights under two heads,"primacy of jurisdiction" and "primacy of hoor." In virtue of the primacy of jurisdiction, there acrues to him the supreme power over the Church in government and leadership; and in the execution of his charge he is bound only by dogma and the divine right. As touching any other law that has force in the Church, he is to respect the same so long as it exists. The most important rights in volved in the primacy arc the supreme right of legislation; the supreme direction and final decision of matters affecting ecclesiastical offices; the supreme judicial competency in cases of dispute, correction, discipline; regulation of the various religious institutions, particularly the orders and congregations; the supreme control of the ecclesiastical exchequer and assets of property; the right to uphold unity in the liturgy, as also in the administration of the sacraments and use of sacramentals; to direct the festivals in the Church at large; the right of beatification and canonization; the right of according indulgences and regulating fasts; and that of reserving for himself the absolution from sins pertaining to the sphere of conscience. Fur thermore, the primacy carries with it the supreme doctrinal authority. And when the pope voices his decisions in this respect, speaking or publishing ex cathedra; when in virtue of his apostolic authority as pastor and teacher of all Christians he defines a proposition affecting faith or morals in the interests of the whole Church, his pronouncements are then informed with infallibility by reason of divine assistance, without need of any further assent on the part of the Church, as in a general council (in the Constitutio Vaticana of July 18, 1870, the bull Pastor æternus, iv.). It is in virtue of this doctrinal authority that he can issue, spiritual decrees in the cause of enlarging the dogma, and of defining questionable dogmatic subjects; that he can condemn errors of doctrine, institute and direct missions, found educational establishments, and watch over the instruction therein dispensed. According to this " Vatican Constitution " the pope is not only empowered to exercise all these rights which his primacy conveys, in the manner of a supreme court, but he is also, by virtue of the same primacy, the universal bishop in all the Church. That is, he has an immediate, complete and cknonical episcopal power over all churches, dioceses, and believers. For although it is an exaggerated statement to say, as do the Old Catholics, that under this Vatican dogma the bishops have become legally dwarfed into mere vicars or attorneys of the pope, yet the Ultramontanists may deny that any change whatever has been brought about in the status of the bishops by force of the Vaticanum. While the Vatican Council by no means put aside the episcopal office as a distinct, or "independent" office, yet the bishops are in fact reduced to the same position as the vicars dependent on the pope directly. Owing to his supreme directive authority over the Church, the pope also represents the Church abroad, particularly in relation to civil governments, and this with a standing recognized in international law. But this is not to imply that, even in the states where Roman Catholics are in the majority, he enjoys a sovereignty over Roman Catholic citizens on like terms with the civil power; nor that his position in respect to civil governments is to be deemed equivalent to that between two independent sovereigns and states.
The pope's " primacy of honor " finds expression as follows: (1) In certain specified designations, titles, and forms of address appertaining to him alone: such as papa, pontifex maximus, or 129
his position as leader of all the Church, the pope is coincidently bishop of Rome, also archbishop of the church province of Rome, primate of Italy, and patriarch of the West. Finally, the pope was also temporal sovereign of the Papal States (q.v.), while they existed, and as such he occupied, in view of international law, the highest rank among Roman Catholic princes.
In early times the bishop of Rome, like the diocesan of any other see, was chosen by the local clergy and people, assisted by neighboring bishops. Later the Roman emperors and the Ostrogothic kings exercised an influence, particularly in deciding disputed elections. After the fall of the Ostrogothic kingsdom in Italy, vacancy of the see of Rome was formally announced to the exarch at Ravenna, and a new pope was elected, usually on the third day after the burial of the former pontiff, by the clergy, the nobles, and the people of Rome. The exarch, after receiving the official report of the election, secured the approbation of the emperor, whereupon the newly elected pope was duly consecrated. During the decline of Lombard power in Italy, secular rulers exercised no supervision over papal elections, and at the Lateran synod of 769 the laity were restricted to mere acclamation of an election made by the clergy and to confirming-the protocol. While the story that Adrian I. conferred on Charlemagne the privilege of filling the papal throne is now acknowledged to be untrue, it is still a moot question whether the Frankish kings and emperors were merely informed by a new pontiff of his election and consecration, or could confirm the election and require an oath of fealty. It is certain, however, that after 824 a new pope was usually consecrated only after taking the oath of allegiance to the emperor, while the Roman council of 898 enacted that a pontiff should be consecrated only in the presence of imperial envoys.
With the restoration of the Holy Roman Empire (q.v.) by Otto I. the Romans were obliged to promise that no pope should be elected or consecrated without the approval of himself or his son, thus giving the emperors an influence on papal elections which was hitherto unprecedented. Though the old forms were preserved, the election became a mere form of choosing the candidate designated by the emperor, this power being held, despite all efforts of the Roman nobility, until the death of Henry III. in 1056. At the Roman Synod of 1059, however, Nicholas II. issued a decree which placed the election in the hands of the cardinal bishops, aided by the other cardinals, while the remaining clergy and the laity were allowed only the privilege of acclamation. The king, on the other hand, received from Nicholas the right of confirming subsequent elections, or at least of vetoing undesirable candidates before election. This arrangement proved impracticable, however, and at the third Lateran council, in 1179, Alexander III., tacitly presupposing in the abrogation of imperial prerogatives the absence of any share of clergy and laity in papal elections, enacted that the vote of two-thirds of all the college of cardinals was necessary for the lawful election of a pope. This forms the basis of the present laws governing papal elections, the principal supplements and modifications being enactments of the second council of Lyons (1274) and Clement V. (1311?), and the constitutions of Clement VI. (1351), Julius II. (1505), Pius IV. (1562), Gregory XV. (Æterni patris of 1621, and the Cæremoniale in electione Romani pontificis obseruandum of the same year), Urban VIII. (1626), and Clement XII. (1732).
Until the most recent regulations under Pius X. (q.v.), after the pope's death, the next ten days are devoted to preparations for the funeral ceremony and to preliminaries of the election; especially to the institution of the conclave. This interim serves at the same time to enable cardinals at a distance to reach Rome for participation in the election. The conclave, an apartment in which the cardinals must proceed with the election guarded and excluded from the outer world (which they are not allowed to leave before the election is completed), is made ready in the Vatican, and comprises a chapel (for the elective transaction), together with a suite of halls in which cells are fitted up for the cardinals' and the conclavists' lodgings. The conclavists are persons who have to attend the cardinals in the conclave; such as their servants, two physicians, a sacrist, two masons and carpenters, and others. The cardinals and conclavists occupy this apartment on the eleventh day, after a solemn high office. Hereupon the constitutions on papal election are read forth, and sworn to by the cardinals, and the conclavists are sworn in. At evening, all unauthorized persons must leave the conclave; and now the entrances are all walled shut except one, through which food for the persons in the conclave is daily introduced; and this one entrance is strictly guarded.
For participation in the election, only those cardinals are of qualified authority who have received consecration to the diaconate. Neither is such a one debarred by excommunication, suspension, or interdict. Absentees can deliver their vote neither by letter nor by substitute. Theoretically every Catholic male Christian, even a layman, who has not lapsed into heresy, is eligible. But since Urban VI. (1378-89), previously archbishop of Bari, none but a cardinal has been elected (cf. G. Berthelet, Muss der Papst ein Italiener sein? Leipsic, 1894). The states of Austria, France, and Spain have the right, for each state as affecting one candidate, of declaring a cardinal passively ineligible; but the election of an " excluded " candidate can not be challenged. In regard to the election itself, it is forbidden, under penalty of forfeited vote, to engage in " electioneering." Every cardinal present is bound, under pain of excommunication, to take part in the business of election,, which is in order twice a day, forenoon and afternoon, till the result be achieved. Where voters are sick and unable to leave their cells, their vote is of necessity sent for, and this by the hand of cardinals expressly selected for the purpose by lot. The only admissible kinds of election are (a), the electio quasi per inspirationem, election by ac-
130 |
Pius X., who was elected in consequence of employment of the exclusiva (see EXCLUSION, RIGHT OF), through the constitution Commissum nobis of Jan. 20, 1904, prohibited the cardinals, under penalty of excommunication, to allow in the future the veto of any government, even though expressed merely in the form of a wish. Thus the exclusiva is abolished. It is not yet known what attitude the affected states will take in the matter. Through the constitution Vacante sede, apostolica of Dec. 25, 1904, this pope regulated the entire course of papal election and at the same time introduced the following innovations: the funeral rites for a deceased pope are to last nine days, after which the cardinals shall enter the conclave. But on the day after the death of the pope the first session of the Holy College is to be held, the rules for papal election in the conclave are to be read, and the oath of the cardinals and conclavists is taken. If the balloting leads to no result, there takes place no accessory meeting, but a second balloting, under the came conditions as the first. Simony no longer nullifies election. Directions concerning the feeding of conclavists are wanting, hence the rule of Leo XIII. concerning the erection of kitchens within the conclave chambers remains unchanged. Secrecy after the end of the conclave in respect to official affairs is specially enjoined.
The elected candidate, upon confirmation of the result of the election, is solemnly asked by the subdean whether he accepts the election. With the acceptance, he receives the papal office. At the same time, and in accordance with a custom constantly in effect since the eleventh century, he an anounces what name he will bear as pope. Thereupon the elected candidate is robed with the papal vestments, and now begins their first adoration on the part of the cardinals. Meanwhile the sealing of the conclave has been canceled, and the first cardinal deacon forthwith proclaims to the people the proper name and papal name of the new pope. In the afternoon of the same day there ensues first in the Sistine Chapel and then in Saint Peter's the second and third adoration on the cardinals' part, this time in public. If the pope elect is not as yet dignified with the episcopal consecration, but only with one of the lower grades of consecration, he receives the orders which are still owing to him inclusive of the priestly consecration, by the office of one of the cardinal bishops. The episcopal consecration, which in former times was performed coincidently with the coronation, is now usually appointed on a Sunday or festival preceding. It is consummated by the dean of the college of cardinals. If the pope elect was of episcopal rank already, then a benediction takes the place of consecration. After the consecration or benediction, there follows the coronation by the dean of the cardinal deacons with the triple crown in Saint Peter's, and on some subsequent day the formal occupancy of the Vatican. Incumbency of the papal chair by any other process than that of election by the cardinals is not recognized by the present positive canon of the Roman Catholic Church; and in particular it is held to be unlawful for the ruling pope to appoint his own successor; although attempts of that kind repeatedly came about in former centuries, and although the competency of the pope to alter the prevalent law in this respect can hardly be doubted.
According to the claim of the Roman Catholic Church the Apostle Peter was the first pope and reigned from 41 to 67.
131
? 157-187 ............ Anicetus
? 188-178............. Soter
? 177-189............. Eleutherus
?190-202.............. Victor I.
202-217................ Zephyrinus
218-222................ Calixtus or Callistus I. (Hippolytus, Antipope)
? 222-230............. Urbanus I.
? 230-235............. Pontianus (resigned in exile)
235-238................ Anterus
238-250................ Fabianus, Martyr
? 251-252............. Cornelius (in exile)
? 251................... (Novatianus, Antipope)
252-253................ Lucius I.
? 253-257............. Stephen I.
? 257-258............. Sixtus II.
259-289................ Dionysius
289-274................ Felix I.
275-283................ Eutychianus
283-298................ Caius
298-304................ Marcellinus
307-309................ Marcellus
? 309................... Eusebius, d. Sept. 28 (?). 309
310-314................ Miltiades (Melchiades)
314-335................ Silvester I.
338...................... Marcus
337-352................ Julius I.
352-355................ Liberius
355-366................ Felix II, Antipope
366...................... Ursinus. Antipope
366-384................ Damasus
384-398................ Siricius
398-402................ Anastasius
402-417................ Innocent I.
417-118................ Zosimus
418, Dec. 27......... [Eulalius, Antipope]
418-422................ Boniface I.,
422-432................ Celestine I.
432-440................ Sixtus III.
440-461................ Leo I.
461-468................ Hilary
468-483................ Simplicius
483-492................ Felix III.
492-496................ Gelasius I.
496-498................ Ansatasius II.
498-514................ Symmachus
498, Nov............... Laurentius, Antipope
514-523................ Hormisdas
523-526................ John I.
526-530................ Felix IV.
530-532................ Boniface II.
530, Sept. 17........ Dioscorus. Antipope
532-535................ John II. Mercurius
535-538................ Agapetus I.
538-538................ Silverius (exiled)
537-555................ Vigilius
555-560................ Pelagius I.
560-573................ John III.
574-578................ Benedict I.
578-590................ Pelegius II.
590-604................ St. Gregory I. (the Great)
604-606................ Sabinianus
607..................... Boniface III.
608-615................ Boniface IV.
615 618................ Deusdedit
619-625............... Boniface V.
625-638................ Honorius I.
640...................... Severinus
640-642................ John IV.
642-649................ Theodorus I.
649-655................ St. Martin I. (exiled in 654)
654-657............... Eugenius I.
657-672................ Vitalianus
672-678................ Adeodatus
676-678................ Donus or Dommus I.
678-681................ Agatho
682-683................ Leo II.
684-685............... Benedict II.
685-686................ John V.
686-687................ Conon
687-692................ Paschal, Antipope
687...................... Theodorus, Antipope
687-701................ Sergius I.
701-705................ John VI.
705-707................ John VII.
708...................... Sisinnius
708-715................ Constantine I.
715-731................ Gregory II.
731-741................ Gregory III.
741-752................ Zacharias
752 (3 days) ........ Stephen II.
752-757................ Stephen III.
757-767................ Paul I.
767-788................ Constantine II.
768-772................ Stephen IV.
772-795 ............... Adrian I.
795-816................ Leo III.
816-817................ Stephen V.
817-824................ Paschal I.
824-827................ Eugenius II.
827 (40 days) ....... Valentinus
827-844................ Gregory IV.
844-847................ Sergius II.
847-855................ Leo IV.
855-858................ Benedict Ill.
855...................... Anastasius
858-867................ Nicholas I.
867-872................ Adrian II.
872-882................ John VIII.
882-884................ Marinus
884-885................ Adrian III.
885-891................ Stephen VI.
891-896................ Formosus
896 (15 days)........ Boniface VI.
896--897............... Stephen VII.
897 (4 months)...... Romanus
897...................... Theodorus II.
898-900................ John IX.
900-903................ Benedict IV
903 (1 month)........ Leo V.
903-904................ Christopher
904-911................ Sergius III.
911-913................ Anastasius III.
913-May, 914........ Lando
914-929................ John X.
928-929................ Leo VI.
929-931................ Stephen VIII.
931-936................ John XI.
936-939................ Leo VII.
939-942................ Stephen IX.
942-946................ Marinus II.
946-955................ Agapetus
955-964................ John XII t
963-965................ Leo VIII.
964-965................ Benedict V.
965-972................ John XIII.
973-974................ Benedict VI.
974-983................ Benedict VII.
983-984................ John XIV.
984-985................ Boniface VII.
985-996................ John XV.
996-999................ Gregory V.
997-998................ John XVI.
999-1003.............. Silvester II.
1003.................... John XVII.
1003-1009............ John XVIII.
1009-1012............ Sergius IV.
1012-1024............ Benedict VIII.
1012.................... Gregory VI., Antipope
1024-1033............ John XIX.
1033-1045............ Benedict IX. (deposed)
1045-1046............ Silvester III.
1044-1046............ Gregory VI.
1046-1047............ Clement II.
1048.................... Damasus II.
1049-1054............ Leo IX.
1055-1057............ Victor II.
1057-1058............ Stephen X. (deposed)
1058-1059............ Benedict X.
1059-1081............ Nicholas II.
1061-1073............ Alexander II.
1061................... Cadalus (Honorius II), Antipope
1073-1085............Gregory VII. (Hildebrand)
1080-1100............Wibertus (Clement Ill.)
1086-1087............Victor III.
* d. in prison after supersession
t removed 983.
132
1088-1099............. Urban II.
1099-1118............. Paschal II.
1100..................... Theodoricus, Antipope
1102..................... Albertus, Antipope
1105-1111............. Silvester IV., Antipope
1118-1119............. Gelasius II.
1118-1121............. Gregory VIll., Antipope
1119-1124............. Calistus II.
1124..................... Theobaldus Buccapecus (Celestine), Antipope
1124-1130.............. Honorius II.
1130-1143.............. Innocent II.
1130-1138.............. Anacletus II.
1138...................... Victor IV., Antipope
1143-1144.............. Celestine II.
1144-1145.............. Lucius II.
1145-1153.............. Eugeniua III.
1153-1154.............. Anastasius IV.
1154-1159.............. Adrian IV.
1159-1181.............. Alexander III
1159-1184.............. Victor IV.. Antipope
1164-1188.............. Paschal III. Antipope
1188-1178.............. Calixtus III., Antipope
1178-1150.............. Innocent III., Antipope
1181-1185.............. Lucius III.
1185-1187.............. Urban III.
1187-1191.............. Gregory VIII.
1187...................... Clement III.
1191-1198.............. Celestine III.
1198-1218.............. Innocent III.
1218-1227.............. Honorius III.
1227-1241.............. Gregory IX.
1241...................... Celestine IV.
1243-1254.............. Innocent IV.
1254-1281.............. Alexander IV.
1281-1284.............. Urban IV.
1285-1288.............. Clement IV.
1271-1278.............. Gregory X.
1278...................... Innocent V.
1278...................... Adrian V.
1278-1277.............. John XXI.
1277-1280.............. Nicholas III.
1281-1285.............. Martin IV.
1285-1287.............. Honorius IV.
1288-1292.............. Nicholas IV.
1294...................... St. Celistine V. (abdicated)
1294-1303.............. Boniface VIII.
1303-1304.............. Benedict XI.
1305-1314.............. Clement V.1
1318-1334.............. John XXII.Clement VII.
1334-1342.............. Benedict XII.
1342-1352.............. Clement VI.
1352-1382.............. Innocent VI.
1382-1370.............. Urban V.
1370-1378.............. Gregory XI.
1378-1389.............. Urban VI.
1378-1394.............. Clement VII.
1389-1404.............. Boniface LX.
1394-1423.............. Benedict XIII. deposed 1409)
1404-1406.............. Innocent VII.
1406-1415.............. Gregory XII. (deposed 1409)
1409-1410.............. Alexander V.
1410-1415.............. John XXIII. (deposed)
1417-1431.............. Martin V.
1417...................... Clement VIII
1431-1447.............. Eugene IV.
1439-1449.............. Felix V.
1447-1455.............. Nicholas V.
1455-1458.............. Calixtus III.
1458-1484.............. Pius II.
1484-1471.............. Paul II.
1471-1484.............. Sixtus IV.
1484-1492.............. Innocent VIII.
1492-1503.............. Alexander VI.
1503...................... Pius III.
1b03-1513.............. Julius II.
1513-1521.............. Leo X.
1522-1523.............. Adrian VI.
1534-1532 ............. Clement VII
1534-1549.............. Paul III.
1550-1555.............. Julius III.
1555..................... Marcelus II.
1555-1559.............. Paul IV.
1559-1565.............. Pius IV.
1566-1572.............. Pius V.
1572-1585.............. Gregory XIII.
1585-1590.............. Sixtus V.
1590...................... Urban VII.
1590-1591.............. Gregory XIV.
1591...................... Innocent IX.
1592-1605.............. Clement VIII.
1605...................... Leo XI.
1605-1621.............. Paul V.
1621-1623.............. Gregory XV.
1623-1644.............. Urban VIII.
1644-1655.............. Innocent X.
1655-1687.............. Alexander VII.
1687-1689.............. Clement IX.
1670-1678.............. Clement X.
1678-1689.............. Innocent XI.
1689-1691.............. Alexander VIII.
1691-1700.............. Innocent XII.
1700-1721.............. Clement XI.
1721-1724.............. Innocent XIII.
1724-1730.............. Benedict XIII.
1730-1740.............. Clement XII.
1740-1758.............. Benedict XIV.
1758-1789.............. Clement XIII.
1789-1774.............. Clement XIV.
1775-1799.............. Pius VI.
1823-1829.............. Pius VII.
1800-1823.............. Leo XII.
1829-1830.............. Pius VIII.
1831-1848.............. Gregory XVI.
1848-1878.............. Pius IX. (longest reign)
1878-1903.............. Leo XIII.
1903 ..................... Pius X.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: For the details of the development of the papacy as for a mass of literature the reader is referred to the articles on the various popes and the bibliographies attached. The chief sources are indicated, as well as the leading treatises, in vol. i., pp xxii.-xxiii, of this work, where are noted the histories of the popes by Mann, Pastor, Creighton, Von Ranks, Nielsen, Gregorovius, Bower, Milman, and Mirbt: not to be overlooked is the literature under such articles as INFALLIBILITY; INVESTITURE; TRENT, COUNCIL OF; and ULTRAMONTANISM. The sources are in the Liber pontificalia;
Jaffé, Regesta;
J. M. Watterich Romanorum pontifcum vitæ:, 2 vols., Leipsic. 1882;
A. Potthast, Regesta pontificum Romanorum. Parts i.-xii.,Berlin, 1873-75;
Regesta Pontihcum romanwrum, ed. P, F. Kehr, vols., i.-iv., Berlin, 1908-09; and the various collections of bulls, briefs, and the like. A fine lot of original documents is massed in
Reich Documents, pp, 127, 245, and others are scattered in other parts of the work; translations of many of these are found in
Thatcher and McNeal, Source Book, pp. 83_258, 309-340; also, in
Hendeison, Documents pp, 287 sqq.; and in
F. A. Ogg, Source Book of Medieval History, pp, 78 sqq., 281 sqq., 380 sqq. For the history of the papacy in its various relations consult:
F. Maasaen, Der Primat des Biachofs von Rom and die alten Patriarchalkirchen, Bonn, 1853;
T. Greenwood. Cathedra Petri: a Political History of the great Latin Patriarchate, 8 vols, London 1858-72;
A. Westermayer, Das Papstthum in den ersten 500 Jahren, Schaffhausen, 1887-89; A, von Reumont, Geschichte der Stadt Rom, 3 vols., Berlin, 1887-70;
R. Baxmann, Die Polatik der Papste, 2 vols., Elberfeld, 1588-89;
E. Dumont, La Popaute, les premiers empereurs chritiens et les premiers conciles generaux, Paris, 1877;
P. Lanfrey. Hist. politique des papes. new ed.. Paris 1850;
B. Jungmann, Diasertstiones selectas, 5 vols.. Regensburg, 1880-85;
A. R. Pennington. Epochs of >the Papacy, London. 1881; F. Roequain, La Papaute au moyen age, Paris. 1881;
W. von Gieselbreeht, Geschichte der deutschen Kaiserzeit, 8 vols., Brunswick 1881 sqq.;
J. Langen, Geschichte der romischen Kirche, 4 vols., Bonn 1881-93;
F. Gregonpvius, Geschichte den Stadt Rom im Mittelalter, 8 vols., Stuttgart, 1888-98, Eng transl.. London 1895-1902;
M, Souchon, Die PsPatwahlea von Bon%faz VIII. bin Urban VI ., Brunswick, 1858;
H. Doplfel. Kaisertum and Papstwechsel unter den Karolvngern, Freiburg, 1889;
R. F. Littledale, The Petrine Claims, London, 1889;
J. J. I, von Döllinger.
133
Das Papstthum, new ed., Munich, 1892;
H. Wilfrid, Die Geschichte der Päpste, Basel, 1894;
G. Goyau, Le Vatican, les papes et la civilisation, Brussels, 1895;
W. Bright, The Roman See in the Early Church, and Other Studies, London, 1896;
C. Locke, Age of the Great Western Schism, New York, 1896;
M. R. Vincent, The Age of Hildebrand, New York, 1896;
L. Duchesne, Lea Premiers Temps de l'état pontifical, 764-1076, Paris, 1898; Eng. transl., The Beginnings of the Temporal Sovereignty of the Popes, 754-1075, London, 1908;
L. Rivington, The Roman Primacy, A.D. 430-451, London, 1899;
T. F. Tout, The Empire and the Papacy, 918-1273, London, 1899, new ed., ib. 1901;
F. Fournier, Le Papauté devant l'histoire, 2 vols,
Paris, 1899-1900;
F. Nippold, Papacy in the 18th Century, New York, 1900;
F. W. Pullen, The Primitive Saints and the See of Rome, London, 1900;
K. D. Beste, The Victoriesof Rome and the Temporal Monarchy of the Church, London, 1901;
H. Bouvier, Le Government de l'église de Rome
de la fin du premièrs siècle jusqu'au milieu du troisème, Montébeliard, 1901;
W. Miller, Mediæval Rome, 1078-1600, London, 1901;
F. von Bach, Geschichte der Papste vom Beginne . . . bis zu Gregor XVI, Bamberg, 1902;
W. Barry, The Papal Monarchy from Gregory the Great to
Boniface VIII., 690-1306, London. 1902;
A. D. Greenwood, Empire and Papacy in the Middle Ages, London, 1902;
J. Maitre, Les Papes et la papautb d'apris la prophdie attribu4e a Saint Malaehie, Paris, 1902; Cambridge
Modern History, vol. 1, vi. 536 sqq., Cambridge 1902-09;
W. Norden, Das Papsttum and Byzans, Berlin, 1903;
F. von Thudiehum, Papsttum and Reformation im Mittelalter,
1143-1617, Leipsic, 1903;
B. Labanca, Il Papato. Sua origine, sue lotte a vicende, suo avvenire, Turin, 1905;
G. Krüger, Das Papsttum. Seine Idee and ihre Träger, Tübingen, 1907, Eng. transl., The Papacy, London, 1909;
J. Turmel, Histoire du dogma de la papauté des origines a la fin
du quatrièma siécle, Paris, 1908;
J. J. Walsh The Popes and Science; the History of the Papal Relations to Science during the Middle Ages and down to our Time, New York, 1908;
G. Bartoli, The Primitive Church and the Primacy of Rome. London, 1909;
T. S.. Dolan, The Papacy and the First Councils of the Church, St. Louis, 1910;
A. C. Jennings, The Mediaval Church and the Papacy, London, 1909;
W. J. Simpson, Papal Infallibility and its Roman Catholic Opponents, London, 1909;
G. F. Young, The Medici, 2 vols., New York, 1910;
W. E. Beet, The Rise of the Papacy, A.D. 386-461, London, 1910; ,
H. Koch, Cyprian and der römische Primat, Leipsic, 1910;
J. Schnitzer, Hat Jesus das Papsttum gastiftei, Augsburg
1910;
J. S. Vaughan, The Purpose of the Papacy London,
1910; and the works on church history, e.g., Schaff, Chrislian Church, ii. 154 sqq., iii. 299 sqq., iv. 203 sqq., v. passim, vi. 252 sqq.
On elections consult: W. C. Cartwright, On Papal Conclaves, Edinburgh, 1868;
R. Mpffell, Die Papstwahlen und die mit ihnen im n&aunl;chsten Zusammenhange stehenden Ceremonien in ihrer Entwickelung, Göttingen, 1872;
O. Lorenz, Papetwahl and Kaiserthum, Berlin, 1874;
M. Heimbucher, Die Papstwahlen unter den Karoiingern, Augsburg, 1889;
A. R. Pennington, The Papal Conclaves, London, 1897;
H. J. Wurm, Die Papstwahl. lhre Geschichte and Gebräuche, Cologne, 1902:
G. Berthelet, Conclavi pontefici e cardinali nel secolo, Turin, 1903;
P. Here, Papsttum und Papstwahle im Zeitalter Philipps II., Leipsic, 1907 (important).
1 *Clement V, moved the papal see to Avignon in 1309; and his successors continued to reside there for seventy years, till Gregory XI. After that date arose a forty-years' schism between the Roman popes and the Avignon popes.
Calvin College. Last modified on 06/03/04. Contact the CCEL. |