medieval-religion: Scholarly discussions of medieval religion and culture
>>> was this stricture in place before the reign of Innocent III?
>>>
>
>
>> not even after him
>>
>
> well, Herwig, it is in place now, so we must assume that it came into being
> sometime after Innocent3 and before today, mustn't we?
>
indeed we must, thus: not even put in place by him
better? :-)
> but, you are saying that Innocent wasn't responsible for its implementation?
>
yes
> i do know that we start seeing Italian canons in the chapter of Chartres in
> the course of the 13th c., and always assumed that that was an indication of
> increasing Papal influence
yes, in many cases such people got their prebends by papal provision
> --though not quite the same thing as demanding (much less actually getting) that a bishop get an official OkeyDoaky from the Papa himself .
>
archbishops needed to receive their pallium from Rome. Bishops were
meant to be canonically elected, and this was sufficient. Innocent III
was very clear about this. The pope's involvement was brought about by
any irregularity (disputed election, translation from one see to
another, prolongued vacancy ...). Innocent III was very clear about this
as well, but especially in the 14th century the definition of what was
irregular was more and more broadened, so papal influence increased. The
relevant definitions were put down rather in chancery instructions than
in decretals.
Best, Herwig
**********************************************************************
To join the list, send the message: join medieval-religion YOUR NAME
to: [log in to unmask]
To send a message to the list, address it to:
[log in to unmask]
To leave the list, send the message: leave medieval-religion
to: [log in to unmask]
In order to report problems or to contact the list's owners, write to:
[log in to unmask]
For further information, visit our web site:
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/medieval-religion.html
|