Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 11.djvu/506

 PAPAL

456

PAPAL

may be made more universal, more practicable, ami of greater sanction.

Neoro, liiamarck, il Papa el V Arhilr'ittt Inlrrnnrimmlc (Asti. 1882); P001.E, lUmtratiom of Midurrat I'nHliral Thmght (Lon- don. ISSl); MuRPHV. C'Aai'r of I'.lrr (I.oniluii, 1.SS5I; L6pez. Dc- recho II Arbitrajc internacional (P:iria, IS'.U); KlcilKT. Les Gucttcs fi la fMiiz (Paris. 1S99); Gierke. Das deulsche Uenossenschafts- reckt. III. tr. Mmtland. Political Theories of the- Middle Age (Cambridge. 1900) ; Ouphant, Rome and Reform (London, 1902) ; Barry, Papal Monarchal (London. 1902); Cahlyi-e. History of Medicnal Political Thought inthe Wesl, I (London and Edinburg)!. 1903). II (London and Edinburgh, 1909) ; Barry in DuMin Re- new (Oct., 1907). 221-4.3; F1OQI3. Political Theories from (Irrson to Crotius (Cambridge. 1007) ; Go.s.seun. The Power of the Pope in the Middle Ages (New York. 1852) ; Scholtz, Die Publizistik zur Zeit Philipps des Schinen (Stuttgart, 1903); RiEZLER, Die lite- rarischen Wiedersacher der Papste zur Zeit Ludwigs des Bayers (Leipzig, 1874); HERaENRdTHER, Church and State, etc. tr. (Lon- don. 1872).

Bede Jarrett. Papal Chancery. See Roman Curia.

Papal Elections. — Tiie method of electing the pope has v;vric(l consitlerably at different periods of the history of the Church. As to the earliest ages, Fer- raris (op. cit. infra) says that St. Peter himself con- stituted a senate for the Roman Church, consisting of twenty-four priests and deacons. These were the councillors of the Bishop of Rome and the electors of his successors. This statement is drawn from a canon in the "Corpus Juris Canonici" (can. "Si Petrus", cans. 8, Q. 1). Historians and canonists, however, generally hold that the Roman bishopric was filled on its vacancy in the same manner as other bishop- rics, that is, the election of the new pope was made by the neighbouring bishops and the clergy and faith- ful of Rome. Nevertheless, some maintain that the naming of the successor of St. Peter was restricted to the Roman clergy, and that the people were admitted to a part in the elections only after the time of Syl- vester I (fourth century). After Constantine had given peace to the Church, the Christian Roman em- perors often took part in the institution of a new pope and at times their influence was very marked. From the fourth century onwards, therefore, a new force had to be reckoned with. The occasion for the interfer- ence of the Roman emperors and later of the kings of Italy was afforded by disputed elections to the papal chair. The most noted of the earlier instance was at the election of Boniface I (418). This gave occasion to the decree (c. 8, dist. 79) that when an election was disputed a new candidate should be chosen.

The interference of the secular power was always distasteful to the Roman clergy, as shown by their unwilhngness to observe decrees on the subject made even by popes, as in the case of Simplicius and others. The example of the Roman emperors was followed by the barbarian kings of Italy, of whom the first to interfere was Theodoric the Ostrogoth, at the election of Symmachus in 498. On the recovery of their in- fluence in the Italian peninsula, the Eastern emperors required that the choice of the electors for a new pope must be made known to the Exarch of Ravenna, who in turn forwarded it to Constantinople, and until the emperor's confirmation was received, the candidate was not to be acknowledged as Bishop of Rome. This resulted in long vacancies of the Holy See. The cus- tom lasted until the pontificate of Benedict II (684- 85). A similar claim was put forward by the Western emperors in the Middle Ages, and some demanded it owing to a concession made by Adrian I to Charle- magne. This pretended concession is now recognized as spurious. As to the so-called confirmation of papal elections by the secular power, Ferraris (loc. cit. infra) notes that it must not be so understood as to imply that the new pope received the papal power from the emperor. This would be heretical, for the elected candidate receives his power from Christ.

The confirmation of the emperor, then, was only to en.sure that the canons of the Church should be carried out without hindrance from factious and se-

ditious dissenters. It must be admitted that the Holy Roman emperors sometimes made use of their overwliclmiiig [lower unscrupulously, ;inil more than once (Miididalcs were clccti'd lo I lie |i:i|i:H'y by direct imp('ri:d iiomiiuition. Otto 111 is iic.lilcd with the nomination of (iregory V and Sylvester 11, and Henry 111 with the etTectuid naming of Clement 11, Dama- 8US 11, Leo IX, and Victor II. But it is obvious that such nomination is not re;d elerlioii, for the ac- ceptance of the lej;al electors w:is ii((i'ss:iry to ratify the choice, though undoubtedly they wcmld naturally be swayed by circumstances to gi\(' (>ffect to the imperial preference. It has sometimes been said that in the earlier ages popes have apjiointed their succes- sors in the pontificate. Thus, St. Peter is said to have so chosen Clement 1. The authority on which the statement rests is now generally acknf)wledged to be apocryphal. Boniface 11 chose Vigilius for his .suc- cessor in .5.3 1, but later repented and publii'ly withdrew the nomination. Baronius (H. JO., ann. i(.)S^>, 1087) states that Gregory Vll in 1085 elected Victor III as his successor; that Victor in like manner chose Urban II in 1086, and Urban elected Paschal 11 in 1099. It is to be noted that the canon "Si Transitus" in the "Corpus Juris" (can. "Si Trans", 10, dist. 70) seeme to imply the right of the pope to nominate his suc- cessor, since its opening words are: "If the death of the pope take place so unexpectedly that he cannot make a decree concerning the election of his successor, etc." However, these so-called elections were never more than nominations, for none of the persons thus named ever presumed to declare themselves popes before the ratification of the legal electors had been obtained.

It is certain at present, that, according to ecclesi- astical law (c. "Episcopo", 3; c. "Plerique", 5; can. "Moyses", 6, caus. 8, Q. 1), the pope cannot elect hia successor. It is commonly held also that he is pro- hibited from doing so by Divine law, though the con- trary has also been held by canonists. As to the gradual restrictions and determinations governing the mode of election of the pontiffs, we note that in 006 Boniface 111 decreed that the electors should not meet until the third day after the pope's burial. In 769 a decree was framed in a synod of tlie Lateran, that the Roman clergy were to choose as pope only a priest or deacon, and forbade the laity to take any part in the election. The newly-elected was, how- ever, to receive the homage of the laity before he was conducted to the Lateran basilica. This decree caused widespread discontent among the influential laymen, and Nicholas I in a Roman Synod held in 862 restored the right of suffrage to the Roman nobles. John IX in 898 confirmed the custom of having the consecration of the new pontiff take place in the pres- ence of the imperial ambassadors. In 96.3, the Em- peror Otto 1 endeavoured to bind the Romans by oath not to elect anyone as pope until he had been nomi- nated by the emperor.

An epoch-making decree in the matter of papal elections is that of Nicholas 11 in 10.59. According to this constitution, the cardinal bishops are first to meet and discuss the candidates for the papacy, and se- lect the names of the most worthy. They arc then to summon the other cardinals and, together with them, proceed to an election. Finally, the as.sent of the rest of the clergy and the laity to the result of the suffrage is to be sought. The choice is to be made from the Roman clergy, unless a fit candidate cannot be found among them. In the election regard is to be had for the rights of the Holy Roman emperor, who in turn is to be requested to show similar respect for the Apostolic See. In case the .election cannot be held in Rome, it can validly be held elsewhere. What the imperial rights are is not explicitly stated in the decree, but it seems plain from contemporary evi- dence that they require the results of the election to be forwarded to the emperor by letter or messenger, in