Ecclesiastic and political power

Modern Society and the Interactions between Ecclesiastical and Political Authorities

Modern society greatly benefited from the interactions between ecclesiastical and political authorities, particularly in medieval Europe. Theodosius I, who ruled during the Roman kingdom, established Christianity as the official religion of the kingdom, and as a result, the Church was incorporated into the state. As a result, the Church and Christian principles had a strong influence on most state activities and policies, which were ultimately incorporated into other kingdoms throughout Europe. The relationship between the political and ecclesiastical authorities is depicted frequently in David Ganz, Einhard, and Notker’s biography of Charlemagne. Additionally, most of the achievements of Charlemagne can be credited to the fact that he upheld Christian religious values alongside his government, which was acceptable to the people based on their tradition of faith.

Ecclesiastical Authority and its Impact on Political Authority

Although the ecclesiastical power can greatly enhance political power, it may also act as a hindrance in other cases and even lead to war and conflict. This is evident from the conflicts that arose in the 9th century between the papacy and the other secular kingdoms in Europe, shortly after the collapse of the Roman Empire. The following sections of this essay aim to discuss whether ecclesiastical authority enhances political authority as depicted in Gregory of Tours, Einhard, and Notker.

Relationship between Ecclesiastical and Political Authorities

The close relations between ecclesiastical and political powers depicted in Charlemagne’s biography by Einhard, Notker, and Ganz can also be seen in other books such as “The History of the Franks” by Gregory of Tours. First, the book contains numerous references to Christianity, including events, people, and geographical locations. For instance, the chronological history of the Franks resembles events in the Bible, including creation, the birth of Christ, and the apostles. The integration of religious history with political and social history shows that religion was respected as much as political and social authorities.

Also, the book specifically points out the importance of ecclesiastical power to the people who identified with their faith, aside from their nationality. For instance, in Chapter 28, King Clovis who is not Christian marries Queen Clotilda, a Christian, and she constantly requests him to convert to Christianity. In Chapter 29, the author states that: “He had a first-born son by queen Clotilda, and as his wife wished to consecrate him in baptism, she tried unceasingly to persuade her husband, saying: ’The gods you worship are nothing, and they will be unable to help themselves or anyone else. For they are graven out of stone or wood or some metal.’” According to the Queen, it was important for her husband to be a Christian because she claimed that her children would die if not baptized the Christian way, just like her first-born son. Furthermore, it was beneficial to the King politically when he became a Christian as he would have a better chance of gaining the support of the Franks, from where the Queen came from.

In another section, the book also highlights the importance of ecclesiastical authority, not only among the Christians but also among the secular kingdoms. For instance, even though King Clovis had agreed to abandon his religion for Christianity, he was not sure whether his people would do the same willingly. When approached by Saint Remi, Bishop of Rheims, King Clovis claims that: “I gladly hear you, most holy father; but there remains one thing: the people who follow me cannot endure to abandon their gods; but I shall go and speak to them according to your words.” Fortunately, King Clovis’ people had also heard about Christianity and were willing to abandon their gods. This shows that ecclesiastical authority was very important to the people during this time, and was considered alongside political power. In this case, ecclesiastical authority enhanced political authority immensely.

Ecclesiastic Power and its Effect on Political Power

Ecclesiastic power may also be an impediment to political power in certain cases, usually as a result of power struggles between the two parties. For instance, during the reign of King Philip IV (1285 - 1314), the King wanted to make more revenue and claimed that he had the right to tax the French clergy. Pope Boniface VIII, on the other hand, claimed that the clergy were not required to pay taxes to a secular ruler unless the Pope consents. However, the underlying issue was who, between the church and the monarch, had the ultimate supremacy over the people including the clergy. King Philip IV captured the Pope when the Pope excommunicated him, and the latter died of shock after the incident.

Conclusion

In summary, ecclesiastic authorities have both advantages and disadvantages to political power. Although ecclesiastic power can be useful in garnering the support of the masses, the challenge arises when it is not clear which party has the ultimate supremacy. The interactions between the church and monarch in medieval Europe have shaped modern civilization where eventually the monarch (later becoming the state) assumed ultimate supremacy. However, the church remains a highly influential entity to date, and political leaders have to acknowledge this influence when making decisions on behalf of the people.

Bibliography

Einhard, Notker, and David Ganz. Two lives of Charlemagne. London: Penguin, 2008.

Gregory and Ernest Brehaut. History of the Franks. New York: Octagon Books, 1965.

Spielvogel, Jackson J. Western Civilization. Australia: Wadsworth/Cengage Learning, 2012.