I have only now come across this, because for some reason I no longer get e-mail notifications of LJ replies. I hope you do.
The short answer is that there is no clear timeline from election by the locals, to election by the king, to selection by the Pope. One clear case study is that of the important Archbishops of Tours, in western France, told in some detail by Gregory of Tours (himself an Archbishop) and his friend Venantius Fortunatus. King Lothar, an adventurer who was to go in twenty years from landless royal exile to king of all the Franks, took power in Tours about 542, and found there an unfriendly and powerful Archbishop, Iniuriosus. Who elected Iniuriosus is not clear, but when he did the King the favour of dying, Lothar disregarded the townsmen's choice and picked first one, then another of his own courtiers. The first died early, the second not only died, but went disastrously senile first - this was a major setback in the King's efforts to bring Tours under control, because this man was the first Frank by birth he had appointed to this obstinately Roman town. After his death, the townsmen nervously approached Lothar with the name of an irreproachable and very rich local aristocrat, and the King answered: "That is one of the noblest houses in the country - let the will of God and of St.Martin be done". This was a surrender; but when Gregory himself was elected his successor, Venantius' poem in his praise shows that everyone was terrified that the king (Lothar's successor) would react to the election with violence, and that everyone was relieved to see him come back alive from the King's court. This is a microcosm of a European macrocosm in which the kings and other secular powers would always struggle to bring such a powerful office as that of Bishop under their direct or indirect control.
However, the tradition that a Bishop had to be in communion with the Pope was a limit to this. A Bishop selected without the Pope's knowledge or consent was in an effective state of schism. In the grim sixth and seventh centuries, this did not much matter, since a good few of the Christian areas of Europe were not even physically able to reach the Pope. A touching story shows the kind of events this could lead to: Chad, a monk nominated to be Bishop of Lichfield, met Theodore, sent by the Pope to be Archbishop of Canterbury. The great Theodore, one of the finest churchmen in his time and the effective founder of the English Church, examined Chad's titles to be a Bishop and declared them defective. Chad humbly answered: "If my title is defective, I shall gladly renounce it. I never thought myself good enough, and indeed I only took the office at the request of my betters." Theodore then decided that he was the right kind, and personally reconsecrated him. As Chad had a religious objection to riding a horse, and this was necessary to perform his functions as Bishop, Theodore even personally held his stirrupt to show that he could legitimately do so.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2008-02-23 06:04 pm (UTC)The short answer is that there is no clear timeline from election by the locals, to election by the king, to selection by the Pope. One clear case study is that of the important Archbishops of Tours, in western France, told in some detail by Gregory of Tours (himself an Archbishop) and his friend Venantius Fortunatus. King Lothar, an adventurer who was to go in twenty years from landless royal exile to king of all the Franks, took power in Tours about 542, and found there an unfriendly and powerful Archbishop, Iniuriosus. Who elected Iniuriosus is not clear, but when he did the King the favour of dying, Lothar disregarded the townsmen's choice and picked first one, then another of his own courtiers. The first died early, the second not only died, but went disastrously senile first - this was a major setback in the King's efforts to bring Tours under control, because this man was the first Frank by birth he had appointed to this obstinately Roman town. After his death, the townsmen nervously approached Lothar with the name of an irreproachable and very rich local aristocrat, and the King answered: "That is one of the noblest houses in the country - let the will of God and of St.Martin be done". This was a surrender; but when Gregory himself was elected his successor, Venantius' poem in his praise shows that everyone was terrified that the king (Lothar's successor) would react to the election with violence, and that everyone was relieved to see him come back alive from the King's court. This is a microcosm of a European macrocosm in which the kings and other secular powers would always struggle to bring such a powerful office as that of Bishop under their direct or indirect control.
However, the tradition that a Bishop had to be in communion with the Pope was a limit to this. A Bishop selected without the Pope's knowledge or consent was in an effective state of schism. In the grim sixth and seventh centuries, this did not much matter, since a good few of the Christian areas of Europe were not even physically able to reach the Pope. A touching story shows the kind of events this could lead to: Chad, a monk nominated to be Bishop of Lichfield, met Theodore, sent by the Pope to be Archbishop of Canterbury. The great Theodore, one of the finest churchmen in his time and the effective founder of the English Church, examined Chad's titles to be a Bishop and declared them defective. Chad humbly answered: "If my title is defective, I shall gladly renounce it. I never thought myself good enough, and indeed I only took the office at the request of my betters." Theodore then decided that he was the right kind, and personally reconsecrated him. As Chad had a religious objection to riding a horse, and this was necessary to perform his functions as Bishop, Theodore even personally held his stirrupt to show that he could legitimately do so.