The belief that the Pope of Rome has immediate and universal jurisdiction has been officially part of the Roman Catholic tradition since at least the eleventh century with the proclamations issued in Dictatus Papae. In the the Roman Catholic Church’s current code of law, the 1983 Code of Canon Law (a.k.a the Johanno-Pauline Code), Canon 331 clearly elucidates this doctrine:
The bishop of the Roman Church… [b]y virtue of his office he possesses supreme, full, immediate, and universal ordinary power in the Church, which he is always able to exercise freely.[1]
Papal supremacy has been a constant point of debate between the Orthodox Church and Roman Catholic Church since the Great Schism. Even before the Great Schism, papal jurisdictional powers featured in other clashes between East and West, as in the Photian Schism (A.D. 863-867), where Rome cut ties with Constantinople after Emperor Michael III deposed Patriarch Ignatius and replaced him without approval by Pope Nicholas I.
Fulk III, Count of Anjou
One might believe that the entirety of Western Christendom by the time of the eleventh century had accepted the idea that the Pope of Rome had jurisdiction over all churches, but this appears not to have been the case, as can be seen in at least one historical record dated to the eleventh century. In his Historiarum, Rodulfus Glaber (A.D. 985-1047)–a Benedictine monk residing at the renowned Cluny Monastery in the year A.D. 1030–chronicled recent events that he observed or heard during his many travels across modern day France and Italy.[2] One such account involves the construction of a monastery in Loches, a French town just southwest of Tours, and the dynamics between the local episcopacy and the Pope. In this narration, the Count of Anjou, Fulk III (A.D. 970-1040)—a ruthless warrior known to have pillaged Church properties in his conquests—is said to have been inspired to build a new monastery after returning from a penitential pilgrimage to the Holy Land.[3] His pious inspiration, however, was questioned by the local bishop, who was well aware of the ecclesiastical destruction he had wrought previously. Enraged at being denied his wish, Fulk appealed to the Pope to see his desire realized. Rodulfus’ account of these events is not lengthy, but it captures more than enough to make it interesting to us in the present. The majority of his telling of events is presented below.
***
The Monastery of Loches[4]
Many are the stories which might be told about this Fulk, but we have not repeated them so as to avoid boring the reader. However, there is one memorable tale which we will recount here. When he had shed much blood in many battles in many places, he was driven by fear of hell to go to our Saviour’s sepulchre at Jerusalem. Because he was an intrepid man he returned from there exultant, and for a time moderated his customary ferocity. It was now that he conceived the idea of building a church in the finest place on his domains and gathering there a community of monks who should intercede day and night for the redemption of his soul…
The church was built swiftly; Fulk immediately sent to Hugh, archbishop of Tours, in whose diocese it was situated, asking him to come and consecrate it; this was what he had decided. But the bishop put off coming because he said he could not present before the Lord the vow of one who had stolen property and serfs on a grand scale from the mother-church of his see. He suggested that Fulk should first agree to restore all that he had taken, and only then offer what he had vowed to God, the just judge. When his servants reported this to Fulk, his normal ferocity emerged again: he received the bishop’s reply with great indignation, made dire threats against him, and prepared recourse to higher authority. Thereupon he quickly gathered together a large amount of gold and silver money and went to Rome, where he explained to Pope John the reason for his journey, demanded his own way, and offered rich presents. To consecrate the church the pope sent back with Fulk one of those whom, in the church of St. Peter, prince of the Apostles, they call cardinals. His name was Peter, and he was endowed with the full power of the Holy See to do without fear whatever Fulk wished. When all the bishops of Gaul heard about this sacrilegious presumption they believed that it could only spring from blind avarice, for if one church could receive what had been stolen from another, then they had created a new schism in the Roman church. All were equally hostile because it was shameful that he who ruled the Apostolic See was breaking the original apostolic intention and the tenor of the canons, especially when it is an old and well-founded rule that no bishop may presume to exercise any authority in the diocese of another unless he is asked, or at least permitted, to do so by its own bishop.[5]
On a certain day in May a great multitude of people came together for the dedication of the church. Fear of Fulk and the arrogance of his pride compelled many of them to come. The only bishops there were those living under his rule and so forced to be present. On the appointed day the ceremony of dedication was begun and accomplished with great pomp, and after the customary high mass everybody returned home. Then, just before the ninth hour of that same day, at a time when the heavens were calm and fanned with gentle breezes, a hurricane struck from the south filling the church with turbulent air and pounding it long and hard. The tie-beams having been dislodged, all the timber roof-members together with all the tiles along the length of the western arm of the church fell to the ground and came to ruin. When this became known throughout the province no one doubted that the insolent presumption of Fulk had rendered his vow void. It was a clear lesson to present and future generations that they should not behave in this way. Although the pontiff of the Roman church, because of the dignity of the Apostolic See, is honoured more than any other bishop, he is not permitted to transgress the canon law in any way. For each bishop in the orthodox church[6] is bridegroom of his own see and equally embodies the Saviour, and so none should interfere insolently in the diocese of another bishopric.
***
It is worth remembering that this event transpired at the beginning of the eleventh century and that Rodulfus Glaber composed this work around A.D. 1030 while residing at the Abbey of Cluny, the origin of many reforms that were to coincide with the broader Gregorian Reforms issued by Pope Gregory VII only a few decades later. In fact, Rudolfus dedicated his Historiarum to the influential Abbot of Cluny. In other words, Rudolfus was hardly a fringe writer; rather, he was part of the main center of Christian thought in the West in his day.
Rodulfus’ language used here runs decidedly contrary to the language used in Dictatus Papae, which spells out unambiguously the Pope’s authority over all Church-related matters. While the entirety of Western Christendom eventually came under the direct rule of the Pope of Rome, Rodulfus’ account helps to show that the more Orthodox idea of local ecclesiastical rule was still to be found in the West during his lifetime.
Michael Reutman is a Fellow of the Orthodox Studies Institute and lives in Pennsylvania.
Endnotes
[1] Catholic Church & John Paul II. “Code of Canon Law – Book II – the People of God – Part II. (Cann. 330-367),” Secretariat for Communication, 14 Feb. 2018, www.vatican.va/archive/cod-iuris-canonici/eng/documents/cic_lib2-cann330-367_en.html. Accessed 10 November 2024.
[2] Britannica, The Editors of Encyclopaedia. “Radulfus Glaber.” Encyclopedia Britannica, 6 Mar. 2024, https://www.britannica.com/biography/Radulfus-Glaber. Accessed 10 November 2024.
[3] Britannica, The Editors of Encyclopaedia. “Fulk III Nerra.” Encyclopedia Britannica, 17 Jun. 2024, https://www.britannica.com/biography/Fulk-III-Nerra. Accessed 10 November 2024.
[4] Glaber, R., France, J., & Bulst, N. (1989). “Rodulfus Glaber Opera.” Clarendon. pp. 61-65.
[5] As a minor correction, according to the contemporary research of Bernard Bachrach, Rodulfus misremembered which of the eleventh-century popes actually consecrated the monastery church at Loches. While Pope John XVIII did extend his papal protection to the monastery, it was actually his successor, Pope Sergius IV, who confirmed the church during the last year of his life. Ibid, footnote 1.
[6] While the translator made these letters lowercase, a more historically accurate translation would likely capitalize them (“Orthodox Church”), as an eleventh-century writer at Cluny would not have conceived of an “orthodox church” that was not the “Orthodox Church.”