ST. FRANCIS XAVIER COLLEGE SEMINARY

CATALUNAN GRANDE, DAVAO CITY

SECULARIZATION IN THE MEDIEVAL PERIOD

A Research Paper of the Subject in

Contemporary Religious Questions (CRQ)

Submitted By:

Sem. Jessie Joseph Canonigo

Sem. Jay Daclan

Sem. Lord Cedric Lumacad

Sem. Roland Cris Montecalbo

Sem. Randy S. Osiba

Sem. Angelito O. Ugot

Submitted to:

Rev. Fr. Calexto Peligrino, SDV

Professor

Davao City, Philippines

September 18, 2013

1

Table of Contents

Frontispiece

Table of Contents………………………………………………………………….1

Chapter I – Historical Framework .......................................................................2

Chapter II –Philosophical Tenets .........................................................................5

A. On Political Philosophy …………………………………………………6

a. 1. Gales of Rome ……………………………………………….. 6

a. 2. William of Ockham ……………………………………………7

b. 3. Francisco Suarez ……………………………………………...10

B. On the Secularization of the Church……………………………………12

b. 1. Byzantium …………………………………………………….12

b. 2. The West ……………………………………………………...12

b. 3. The Carolingians ……………………………………………...13

b. 4. Post – Carolingians …………………………………………...14

b. 5. Late Middle Ages …………………………………………….15

Chapter III – Conclusion ………………………………………………………16

Bibliography…………………………………………………………………….18

2

SECULARIZATION IN THE MEDIEVAL PERIOD

Chapter I: Historical Framework

―Medieval‖ comes from the Latin words 'med' (meaning middle) and 'eval' (meaning

age)‖. It refers primarily to Europe (the term being applied to other cultures by analogy).

Medieval philosophy includes the ―pre-scholastic‖, ―scholastic‖ and ―late scholastic‖ periods.

―Scholasticism‖ refers to the intellectual culture characteristic of the medieval schools in

the twelfth century. ―Late scholasticism‖ conventionally begins with the fourteenth century and

overlaps with the early modern period. The people we think of as the early modern philosophers

were trained in the universities (or, in Descartes' case, in a Jesuit school), but they wrote mostly

outside the universities and mostly in vernacular languages. The ―pre-scholastic‖ medieval

period includes Abelard and Anselm and the writers of the Carolingian age, but it is difficult to

say how far back this period should be traced. Perhaps it should include Boethius and Augustine,

who were deeply influential in Europe from their own time until the end of the middle ages (and

beyond), though they might also be regarded as belonging to late Antiquity.‖1

―The medieval period, or middle ages, arguably lasted from about the time of the fall of

the Western half of the Roman Empire in 476 CE until the late 1400s. Some consider the

invention of the printing press in 1450 to be one of the markers of the succeeding Renaissance.

Although some historians might argue the period lasted for a millennium (rounding off to 500-

1500 CE to get the thousand years), the assignment of beginning and ending dates of the period

are often in many ways arbitrary.‖2

The rise of secularization in this period started at Europe around the time of Pope

Boniface VII in accordance to the will of King Phillip IV. ―The state of medieval Europe around

the time of Pope Boniface VIII represents a tumultuous time in history with dramatic struggles

1 Cf. http://www.shadowedrealm.com/medieval-articles/exclusive/medieval_period_important_points on Aug. 3,

2004. 2http://www.shadowedrealm.com/medieval-articles/exclusive/medieval_period_important_points on Aug. 3, 2004

3

occurring between the secular ideas of a growing number of individuals, groups, and leaders

against the once-dominant influence of the Catholic Church.

―The politics was dictated by the authority of the Pope. In doing so, following the

beginning of the paradigm shift that favored the localities and nations over the supreme rule of

the divine as expressed through the Popes, medieval Europe was making a permanent break with

centuries of political and social tradition.‖3

In this way, the shift to secularization is slowly creeping. ―This shift was due to a

growing number of advantages the secular authorities possessed—advantages that would

eventually topple the supreme authority of the Catholic Church, which ushered in a period of

secular change. Furthermore, as cities and towns began to flourish and more artisans and skilled

tradesman changed the nature of economics, among other elements in medieval culture,

institutions of higher learning that emphasized philosophy and thought began to grow. These

produced an ever-increasing din of new voices that were calling into questionwhat it meant to be

a subject, and more importantly, what power was most correct to be subject to.‖4

―The increasing of assertions by monarchies that political power should rest in the hands

of the state and not the Church was one of the greatest sources that signaled a dawn of growing

movement toward secularism in the medieval period. In this situation, the Catholic Church led by

Pope Boniface VII responded this aggressive grab of historically undisturbed position of power

through the issuance of a decree that in order to find peace and salvation in heaven, all citizens

had to obey and become subjects of the Pope. Thus, this was become something of an ill-timed

and overly aggressive statement at a point when states were consolidating power.‖5

―Monarchs such as King Philip IV of France reacted with the most resistance and took

broad moves to institute policies of secularism. This sparked a war of policy initiatives between

Boniface VII and Philip IV with each taking bold moves to retain authority. For instance, Philip

abolished all church personnel and clergymen from his government and no longer granted a tax

exemption to the clergy, who were a broad class of men with more wealth than one, might

3 Cf. http://www.articlemyriad.com/rise-secularism-medieval-europe-historical-circumstances-advantages on Jan.

17, 2012. 4 Ibid.

5 Ibid.

4

associate as appropriate in our modern times. In reaction, a serious of ―wars‖ between the two

men; Philip through his refusal to grant money to Rome, and papal bulls declaring god as the

supreme ruler over the state culminated in Boniface’s designation as a heretic and Philip’s

excommunication. In short, this was the end between any friendly relationship between France

and Rome—a severance that would has a significant impacton more than just politics, but would

influence society and culture at large.‖6

Secularism in the medieval period is more or less money oriented. ―The advantage of the

nation/state and secularism lie in one clear area in particular–money. Taxes accounted for an

enormous portion of Rome’s coffers and through their control of the purse strings and the tax

changes Philip made; papal authority lost its bite. Without the direct funds from one of the

richest nations in Europe, as well as the significant loss of Rome’s political power that occurred

when Philip IV eradicated all traces of theology from his political leadership, there were few

options the Catholic Church had to restore their once unquestionable power. There is something

so implicitly oppositional about this war between the papal and secular that occurred in France—

Philip was fighting with tangible power (his influence over tax money and political positions of

power) whereas Boniface was fighting with words, bulls and degrees based on concepts which

were intangible (statements about God’s supreme power over the state and excommunication).

Furthermore, unlike any other monarch in history, Philip IV had several legal professionals at his

counsel who aided him in putting policies in action whereas the dwindling papal authority had

only the same structure that had guided it for years that could rely on upon threat of

excommunication—something that meant very little to the rationality-minded secular king.

Another more general but equally important change was occurring throughout medieval

Europe as many new cities began to rise in prominence. Older cities experienced an economic

boom and became thriving centers of commerce where distinct class systems began to emerge,

which was a rather new event following the ravages of the Crusades and Black Death. With the

rise in these localities, all of which had their own developing class systems based on municipal

government-like structures that were emerging, came aspects related to open trade of goods and

services. People became skilled artisans and laborers, which led to a more even economic system

6http://www.articlemyriad.com/rise-secularism-medieval-europe-historical-circumstances-advantages on Jan. 17,

2012.

5

(although certainly still rigidly structured class-wise). This spawned the development of

universities and institutions of learning where the arts and sciences began to flourish and add

even more fuel to the fire of increasingly bold secular questions about the nature of power and

authority. In short, this period produced a new balance power and this rather more egalitarian (in

a very cautious, relative sense) balance permitted another main advantage the secular movement

had—more numbers overall.‖7

―The advantages for the secular movement, which began in earnest with the massive

political backlash by Philip IV against the increasingly desperate actions and bulls issued by

Boniface VII, were two-fold. First, by depriving the Catholic Church of its funds gained through

a system of extreme taxation, as well as by removing the members of the clergy from political

appointments, Philip XI was able to singlehandedly take the first steps to secure an advantage

over Rome. Without the valuable funds provided through the taxes of the French people and

without any political authority left to reverse this, Rome was left defenseless. While it attempted

to excommunicate and provide other ―supreme‖ condemnations, the rational and legal-team-led

authority of Philip had secured a perfect advantage. This newly secularized state in official

terms, coupled with a period of population growth and other advantages that would be addressed

if granted more space, allowed for a rise in the population of cities and towns where distinct

classes functioned to further the economy in general and allow for institutions of higher learning

to develop and disseminate ideas. This new state of learning versus religious doctrine created a

world that we recognize now more far different than the one that existed prior to Philip’s

succession to the throne and changed the course of Western history forever.‖8

Chapter II: Philosophical Tenets

The Philosophical Views on secularization in the medieval period is not so much a

prevalent issue because secularism is apparent only from a limited scope such as on politics and

the church. In fact, there were no comprehensive studies that focus only on secularism or

secularization done by the medieval philosophers, theologians and other researchers.

7http://www.articlemyriad.com/rise-secularism-medieval-europe-historical-circumstances-advantages on Jan. 17,

2012. 8 Ibid.

6

Perhaps, the interest of the philosophers, theologians and eloquent researchers is the

existence of God rather than secularization. However, there were few who in their own little way

talked about secularization minimally in their respective study like St. Thomas Aquinas, Giles of

Rome, William of Ockham, Francisco Suarez and other medieval writers who in their own little

way discussed a little on secularism. They discussed something on politics which is called

political philosophy and the secularization of the church and its property. What make these two

scopes philosophical are the ideas, approaches and principles applied and emphasized.

On Political Philosophy

In the political philosophy, St. Thomas Aquinas gave emphasis about power. He spoke on

Secular and Spiritual Power. The relationship between secular and spiritual power is discussed

briefly at the end of his early work Scripta super librossententiarum. (For translation, see

Thomas Aquinas [1978], pp. 106–7.).

―St. Thomas asks, When two authorities conflict, how should we decide which to obey?

He answers that if one authority originates totally from the other (as, he says, the authority of a

bishop derives from the Pope), greater obedience in all matters is due to the originating authority.

If, however, both powers originate from a higher authority, the higher authority will determine

which of them takes precedence on which occasion. Spiritual and secular power, he says, both

come from God, so we should obey the spiritual over the secular only in matters which God has

specified, namely matters concerning the salvation of the soul, and in civic matters we should

obey the secular power—―unless spiritual and secular power are joined in one person, as they are

in the Pope, who by God's arrangement holds the apex of both spiritual and secular powers‖. In

other words, the Pope has supreme authority in both secular and spiritual matters.‖9

Giles of Rome

Giles of Rome talked about the clash between Pope Boniface and King Phillip IV.

According to him, ―Philip IV, King of France 1285–1314, was one of the most ruthless of

medieval rulers. He came into conflict with Pope Boniface VIII, one of the most arrogant of

medieval Popes, and with Pope Clement V, one of the most timid. Clement acquiesced in Philip's

attack on the Templar Order and other outrages to evade the king's pressure to condemn his

9http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2009/entries/giles/.

7

predecessor, Boniface, as a heretic. These conflicts gave rise to a body of writings of great

interest to the history of political thought.‖10

―Giles argues that the Pope's fullness of power extends to political matters, so that the

Pope is the supreme ruler of the world, God's deputy on earth, who delegates power to

governments and supervises their activities. Giles's term for governmental power is dominium,

which was also a term for property; Giles assimilates the two kinds of dominium, so that he holds

that the Pope is also the supreme owner. He supports his position with many arguments, of which

(1) He appeals to the idea that the universe is a single unity with a hierarchical ordering in which

the Pope is the supreme hierarch among mankind: there are two swords, but the temporal sword

must be subject to the spiritual, i.e., secular rulers must be subject to the Pope. (2) He applies

Augustine's discussion of the question whether the Romans had a true republic (see §4.1) to

argue that no one who does not submit to Christ's dominium, and therefore to the dominium of

the Pope as Christ's vicar, can have any just dominium himself. As Augustine said, property is

possessed by the laws of emperors and kings (§4.3), which presupposes the authority of a

community: so, Giles argues, since people who fail to honor the true God cannot belong to a

community, only members of the community of the faithful can have any right to political power

or property.‖11

William of Ockham

―When his authorship of Defensorpacis was discovered, Marsilius hastily left Paris and

took refuge at the court of Ludwig of Bavaria in Munich. Not long afterwards a number of

dissident Franciscans also took refuge in Munich, among them William of Ockham. From about

1332 until his death in 1347 Ockham wrote a series of books and pamphlets, now usually called

his political writings, arguing that Pope John XXII and his successor Benedict XII ought to be

deposed.‖12

10

http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2009/entries/giles/. 11

Ibid. 12

Ibid.

.

8

―In the first of these, the Work of Ninety Days, Ockham defended against Pope John XXII

the Franciscan claim that the highest form of religious poverty is to live without property or any

other right enforceable by a human court. John had argued that no one can justly consume

something without owning it. Marsilius and others had answered that we can justly consume

things we don't own if we have the owner's permission. It was objected that permission confers a

right, and permission to consume transfers ownership. Ockham answers by means of a

distinction between natural rights and legal rights. In the state of innocence ownership would

have been contrary to natural law because everyone had a natural right to use any thing. But after

the fall natural law gave (or God gave) to human communities the right to enact human law

assigning property, i.e. assigning to individuals or groups the right to exclude others from using

certain things. This law binds morally, since we must respect agreements. Thus the institution of

property morally ―ties‖ or impedes the natural right to use things, so that in ordinary

circumstances we cannot justly use another's things. However, the original natural right is not

altogether abolished; on some occasions we can still exercise it.‖13

―For example, if an object is inappropriate, we can use it without asserting property rights

over it. In circumstances of extreme need, we can use another's property to sustain life. Even

outside a situation of necessity, we can use another's property with the owner's permission, not

only to preserve life but for any legitimate purpose. Permission sometimes confers a legal right,

but sometimes the person giving permission, or the person accepting it, does not intend to give,

or accept, any right enforceable in a human court; in such a case, if the permission is withdrawn,

for good reason or not, the person who previously had permission has no legal remedy. Such

permission to use property does not confer ownership or any other legal right, or any new right

of any kind, but merely ―unties‖ the natural right to use. The natural right is enough to make use,

even consumption, just. The Franciscans can therefore justly use and consume things that belong

to others without having any legal rights, relying on the natural right to use untied by the owner's

permission.‖14

―Soon Ockham began to write about the conflict between John and the Roman Empire,

and, like Marsilius, he saw the papal claim to fullness of power as the root of many evils.Unlike

13

http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2009/entries/giles/. 14

Ibid.

9

Marsilius, however, he did not reject the idea of papal fullness of power in every sense. Against

Marsilius (whom he quotes extensively on this topic), Ockham defended the traditional belief

that Christ appointed Peter as head of the Church, and he held that the Pope, as Peter's successor,

has supreme power in the Church. Not only must the Pope respect the moral law and the

teachings of the Church, but he must also respect rights based on human law and compact, and

he must respect the Gospel liberty of Christians. A Pope who oversteps these bounds may be

deposed; indeed, if his action involves heresy, he is deposed ipso facto—and according to

Ockham, Popes John and Benedict were heretics.‖15

―Besides disagreeing with Marsilius over the status of Peter and the extent of the Pope's

power, Ockham rejected his thesis that a community cannot be well governed unless all coercive

power is concentrated in one sovereign authority. Ockham argues that, on the contrary, such

concentration is dangerous and incompatible with freedom. Just as he had argued that the

extreme version of the doctrine of papal fullness of power would make Christians the Pope's

slaves, contrary to the gospel liberty, so he argues that the corresponding doctrine of fullness of

power for the Emperor would be incompatible with the best form of government, in which

subjects are free persons and not slaves.‖16

―According to the canon ―Iuscivile‖ (Decretum, dist. 1, c.8), ―Civil law is the law proper

to itself that each people or city establishes, for divine and human reason‖. Ockham took this as a

statement of a natural right belonging to each ―free‖ community, i.e. one not already under

government, to establish its own law and its own government. A particular community exercises

the power to establish government by choosing a ruler and a form of government; the ruler's

power therefore comes from God, but also ―from the people‖, i.e. from the community. But

although power comes to the ruler by the community's agreement, disagreement is not enough to

remove it: the ruler has a right to the power the community has conferred as long as he exercises

it properly, and he cannot normally be corrected or removed. But in exceptional circumstances, if

the ruler becomes a tyrant, or if there is some other pressing reason in terms of the common

good, the community can depose its ruler or change its form of government. This is true also of

the Church. Although Christ gave headship in the Church to Peter and his successors, each

15

http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2009/entries/giles/. 16

Ibid.

10

Christian community has power by Natural Law to elect its own head. The Christian community

can depose a wicked pope and could perhaps even change the constitution of the Church, at least

temporarily, from the papal monarchy Christ established to some other form.‖17

―Ockham discusses heresy and heretics, arguing that for someone to be a heretic it is not

enough that something that person believes is heresy, he or she must also believe it

―pertinaciously‖, and to discover pertinacity it is often necessary to enter into discussion to find

whether the person is ready to abandon the error when it is shown to be such. For example, a

layperson who believes dogmatically a doctrine that is in fact heresy, until it has been shown to

be heresy in a way adapted to that person's understanding, may maintain it ―a thousand times‖,

even in the face of contradiction by bishop or Pope, without being a heretic. On the other hand, a

Pope who tries to impose a false doctrine on others is known to be pertinacious precisely from

the fact that he is trying to impose false doctrine on others, and a Pope who becomes a heretic

automatically ceases to be Pope. Thus ordinary Christians (or a Pope arguing as a theologian and

not purporting to exercise papal authority) can argue for a heresy as long as they are open to

evidence and make no attempt to impose their belief on others, whereas a Pope who tries to

impose a heresy immediately ceases to be Pope and loses all authority. Christians must defend

dissidents who are upholding a position that may possibly be the truth against a possibly

heretical Pope, until the uncertainty is resolved by discussion. This is an argument for freedom of

discussion within the Church (though not for toleration in general).‖18

Francisco Suárez

Another Spanish philosopher-theologian of the late scholastic period who wrote about

political questions was Francisco Suárez (1548–1619). In his De legibus (1612) he defended a

version of Thomas Aquinas's philosophy of law.

―Suárez agrees that there are acts wrong in themselves, apart from anyone's will, but

argues that a provident God must command rational creatures not to do such acts. Since we can

know by natural reason that God exists and is provident, we can know by natural reason that

morality is commanded by God, and as such it is Natural Law. This seems to be a ―double

17

http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2009/entries/giles/. 18

Ibid.

11

obligation‖ theory of morality: some things are wrong intrinsically but are, in addition, contrary

to Natural Law because they are forbidden by God.‖19

―Suárez follows Aristotle in holding that human beings are naturally social. Human life

requires association in communities, first in the family, then in cities, then perhaps in kingdoms

(but not in a world empire). The family is not self-sufficient, so membership in some wider

community is a necessity. Every community wider than the family needs a government with

political power, including power to make laws. Directive government would have been necessary

even if the Fall had never occurred (cf. Thomas Aquinas, §9 above), but after the Fall

government needs power to coerce those who will not voluntarily obey its laws. Since

community living and government power are natural necessities, political power comes from

God as the author of nature.‖20

―In choosing to form a particular community, people thereby establish political power,

since government is necessary to the ongoing existence of any community: it would be

inconsistent to will to form a community but not to have a government. A community is formed

by the consent of those who join it, but an additional act of will is not needed to create

governmental power. Such power is therefore bestowed on the community immediately by God

as the author of nature. However, although they cannot choose to have no government, the

members of the community do choose the form of their government (rule by one, by a few or by

many, or by the community as a body); they can even choose to be ruled by someone outside

their community (just as an individual can voluntarily become a slave). A king or other ruler has

power not immediately from God but from the community that consents to his rule, but once the

community has bestowed ruler ship, the ruler is the vicar of God and must be obeyed. He has

acquired a right to his power and cannot be deprived, unless he lapses into tyranny; if he does,

the community has a ―right of war‖ against him.‖21

19

http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2009/entries/giles/. 20

Ibid. 21

Ibid.

12

On the Secularization of the Church

―The first extensive secularizations of the Church property by the state occurred almost

simultaneously in the Eastern and Western Churches in the 18th

century.‖22

“Byzantium. In the Byzantine Empire, the controversy over Iconoclasm, precipitated by the

banning of images in the Churches by Emperor Leo III in 727, included an attack upon the

extensive land holdings of the Greek monasteries. The reign of Leo’s successor, Constantine V,

Copronymous (741-775), was marked by open persecution of the monks, the suppressions of

many monasteries and the confiscation of their properties. The monasteries were great centers of

images worship, and the strong iconoclastic convictions of the Isaurian emperors partially

explained these persecutions and suppressions. But the emperors were attempting also to

reorganize and strengthen the byzantine state and army. Monastic wealth, for them as for many

later rulers, offered a rich and easily appropriated resources for the fulfillment of their

policies.‖23

“The West.In the Latin west, Charles Martel, the great Frankish mayor of the palace, initiated

a similar policy of secularization in the interest of military reorganization. Threatened by the

Arabs from beyond the Pyrenees, apparently engaged in changing the basis of the Frankish army

from foot soldiers to Calvary, and needing estates to support the mounted fighters, Charles found

the land of the Churches essential for his task. Much obscurity surrounds this earliest Western

example of extensive state secularization. No contemporary writer refers to it. The oldest

reference and even this is doubtful-dates from shortly after Charles’s death, is in interpolation

preserved in the letters of St. Boniface and probably attributable to the English Bishop Egbert of

York. Charles reputation as a secularizer was not really established until the publication by

Hinscar of Reims in 858 of the ―Dream of Saints Eucherius.‖ Eucherius, Bishop of Orleans,

reputedly saw in a vision Charles’s body devoured by a dragon because he had dispersed the

lands of the Churches.‖24

22

D.Herlihy.New Catholic Encyclopedia (USA: The Catholic University of America, 1967),p. 40. 23

Ibid. 24

Ibid.

13

―With few and late sources, it is difficult to fi the responsibility of Charles Martel in

initiating or pursuing these secularizations. But there is no doubt that both Charles and his

successors in the Carolingian line pursued fiscal policies that resulted in the whole or partial

secularization of Church property. Their motivation was, to be sure, exclusively financial. There

is no suggestion, as in later attacks upon the Church property, of opposition to ecclesiastical

wealth on moral or doctrinal grounds.‖25

“The Carolingians. Secularization took three principal forms under the Carolingian

rulers. The crudest was the appointing of the laymen as administrators over vacant dioceses or as

lay abbot over monasteries. This recourse enabled the Frankish mayors and kings to support their

retainers without technically secularizing the ecclesiastical endowment. So widespread did this

practice become that by early 9th

century Churches and monasteries had to set aside special

portion of their revenues called mensae, for the support of the clergy and monks, the Frankish

rulers also forced bishops or abbots to grant land under favorable terms to laymen. His befice(

precarium)‖ by order of king‖ precariumverboregis) again diverted ecclesiastical revenues to the

support of lay ministers of fighters, without technically secularizing Church lands, finally, the

Carolingians imposed heavy military levies and taxes upon ecclesiastical and particularly upon

monastic estates. Even the ―Immunities‖ that the Frankish rulers granted liberally to Churches

and monasteries involved no true exemption from fiscal burdens, but only the privileges of

themselves arranging for tax collations and recruitment.‖26

Carolingians policy toward Church in managing the large estates with royal favor,

Church property seems even to have grown considerably after Charles Martel, constituting about

a third of the cultivated land under his grandson Charlemagne. But the Carolingians did divert a

substantial portion of the ecclesiastical revenues to the support of their army, while usually

leaving to the land and even the administrative responsibly for the Churches. This shrewd

exploitation of ecclesiastical wealth utilizing the skills was well as the lands of Churches,

undoubtedly helped make possible military success.‖27

25

D. Herlihy. New Catholic Encyclopedia,p. 40. 26

Ibid. 27

Ibid.,p. 41.

14

“Post- Carolingian period. In the late 10th

century, the renewed invasions by Northern,

Saracens, and Magyars and incessant internal strife led to the disintegration of the Carolingian

state. The prevailing chaos also made possible a massive attack upon the ecclesiastical

endowment that one historian called ―the great secularization‖ the chief culprits were initially the

feudal magnates. Lord such as Arnulf of Bavaria seized the monastic lands for the support of

their knights, and all over Europe the need and greed of the undisciplined petty nobility took a

tall from the largely undefended Churches. The emergence in Germany of a more effective state

under the Saxon (919-1024) and Salion (1024-1125) kings and emperors helped curtail the more

flagrant robberies. But the revived Empire itself, as the Carolingians state before it, still relied

greatly upon the income from Church lands for the support of its administration and

administration and army.‖28

This pillaging of the ecclesiastical endowment and diversion of ecclesiastical revenues to

secular ends directly contributed to the spread of moral and spiritual abuses in the 10th

century

Church deprived of adequate means of support, clerics were sorely tempted to use their spiritual

powers for material profit, Simony, rather than representing an occasional moral failing among

the 10th

century clergy, seems to have served for many of them as an essential means of support.

Understandably, the Gregorian reform of the 11th

century sought with the same success to

reconstitute the ecclesiastical endowment, and councils and popes from that time on tried

energetically to defend it from all further encroachment. Thus, in 1123 the first Lateran Council,

first of the economical councils to be held in the west, reiterated the traditional condemnation of

alienations and prohibited all lay control of ecclesiastical appointments. In 1139 the second

Lateran councils forbade lay ownership of Churches altars, or tithes. In a strong reaffirmation of

the Church’s claim to a tax immunity, the third Lateran council in 1179 permitted taxation of

Church property only with the consent of bishop and clergy. In 1274 at Lyons, Pope Gregory IX

required papal approval for alienations and in 1296 in the Bull ClericisLaicus Boniface VIII

allowed taxation of the clergy only with papal approval.‖29

28

D. Herlihy. New Catholic Encyclopedia, p. 41 29

Ibid.

15

“Later Middle Ages. From the 12th

century to the end of the middle ages, the Church

remained strong enough to protect its endowment against major losses. However the name period

was marked also by the appearance of the first extensive attacks upon the Church’s right to hold

property. In the 12th

century, the Albigenses, Waldenses, and other heretics violently condemned

ecclesiastical wealth and called for a return to the apostolic poverty of the first Christians at the

same time, satirists such as GeraldesCambrersis and Walter Map were ridiculing the alleged

avarice and high monks and the fiscal machinations of the 13th

century by the Curia. The chorus

of criticism was swelled in the 13th

century by the protracted debate concerning the Franciscan

rule and the degree of poverty imposed by it, radical segments of the Franciscan community, the

Zelanti and the Franciscan, spirituals, castigated propertied monks and friars and declared

absolute poverty to be the sine qua non of true spiritual living.‖30

―In the 14th

century, three great rebels against the medieval ecclesiastical order- William

of Ockham, Marsilius of Padua, and John Wyclif- gave these criticisms their most systematic and

forceful expression. Starting from quite different premises, all three agreed in conceding to the

state supreme dimension over Church property. In his DefensorPocis (1324), Marsilius declared

that Church property not needed for worship, for the support of the clergy, or for the common

welfare and defense John Wyclif was considerably more radical. Advancing the theory that grace

alone converged rights of dominion and of ownership, Wyclif categorically denied to the papacy,

monks, friars, and other sects, as he called them, any claim to power or property. The lay

magistrate was God’s vicegerent and alone could exercise true dominion. Moreover, the lay

magistrate had the positive responsibility of supervising the Church, assuming control over its

endowment, and correcting the terrible abuses that the sects were perpetrating. Some few efforts

were made in the late Middle Ages to realize these proposals. In 1371 the English parliament

heard with some sympathy the proposition that the Church’s property could be legitimately used

for the defense of the kingdom, but it avoided direct secularizations. In 1376 the commune of

Florence, then at war with the papacy, actually set about confiscating and selling Church

property to finance the war, but with the restoration of peace they abandoned the policy. There

were also little suppression of poor or decayed religious houses, and the transference of their

endowment to other, stronger houses or to new establishments such as university colleges. Such

30

D. Herlihy. New Catholic Encyclopedia, p. 41.

16

suppressions were permitted by Canon law, and fragrant violations were avoided. The relative

stability of the ecclesiastical endowment in the later middle Ages stand in surprising contrast to

the frequent and extreme theoretical attacks upon it. Virtually all the criticisms, policies, and

proposals that the protestant reformers advanced in regard to Church property had been

anticipated by the rebellious thinker of the closing Middle Ages.‖31

Chapter III: Conclusion

What exactly the secularization in the medieval period particularly in Europe means is an

attempt to topple down the supreme authority of the Catholic Church. On the other hand, it is

somehow a deprivation of the Catholic Church of its funds gained through a system of extreme

taxation and removing clergy men from political appointments. Its aim is to secularize the whole

Europe where humanism was their focused. Humanism somehow defined as where the people

are interested in purely human culture and political achievements and fulfillment rather than

spiritual growth because they perceived religion as superstitious. They want to deduce the power

and authority of the Pope in their office.

On the other hand, secularization in the medieval period is a collision on several issues

and matters between the church and state. Wherein, the state with the leadership of the King

must have supremacy over the church lead by Pope Boniface VII. King Phillip IV had several

legal professionals at his counsel who aided him in putting policies in action whereas the

dwindling papal authority had only the same structure that had guided it for years that could rely

on upon threat of excommunication—something that meant very little to the rationality-minded

secular king.

The development of secularization anywhere tends to challenge the view of Christian on

politics and religion. In the context of political philosophy, secularization could tolerate

politicians that will probably be carried away with their personal interest over their positions that

they can still do the things for the common-good and welfare of their constituents whether

secularist or religious people.

31

D. Herlihy. New Catholic Encyclopedia, p. 42.

17

In the context of the Church, while it is true that religious dogma is not legislation for the

civil order still it is its principles to operate, and must operate, beyond the confines of dogma and

authority appropriate within the point of significant integration and inclusion of church from

public life and the state. We must deem that religious beliefs of the church are significant in our

society today. It has something to do in resolving social and political issues confronting state. It

is in the church institution that we can obtain fair judgment and true justice whenever there are

issues that have to be addressed in the community of such state.

18

Bibliography

Secondary Source:

HERLIHY,D.New Catholic Encyclopedia (USA: The Catholic University of America, 1967).

Instrument:

Http://www.shadowedrealm.com/medieval-articles/exclusive/medieval_period_important_points

on Aug. 3, 2004.

Http://www.articlemyriad.com/rise-secularism-medieval-europe-historical-circumstances-

advantages on Jan. 17, 2012.

Http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2009/entries/giles/.