Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 8.djvu/37

 INNOCENT

15

INNOCENT

structions to threaten both kings with interdict if they would not within two months conclude peace or at least ajrree upon a truce of five years. In January, 119S, the two kings met between Vernon and Andely and a truce of five years was agreed upon. The same legate was instructed by the pope to threaten Philip Augustus with interdict over the whole of France if within a month he would not be reconciled with his lawful wife, Ingeburga of Denmark, whom he had re- jected and in whose stead he had taken Agnes, daugh- ter of the Duke of Meran. When Philip took no heed of the pope's warning Innocent carried out his threat and on PJ December, 1199, laid the whole of France vmder interdict. For nine months the king remained stubborn, but when the barons and the jicople began to rise in rebellion against him he finally discanled his concubine and the interdict was lifted on 7 September, 1200. It was not, however, until 1213 that the pope succeeded in bringing about a final reconciliation be- tween the king and his lawful wife Ingeburga.

Innocent also had an opportunity to assert the papal rights in England. After the death of Arch- bisho]3 Hubert of Canterbury, in 120.5, a number of the younger monks of Christ Church assemljled secretly at night and elected their sub-prior, Reginald, as arch- bishop. This election was made without the concur- rence of the bishop and without the authority of the king. Reginald was asked not to divulge his election imtil he had received the papal approbation. But on his way to Rome the vain monk assumed the title of archbishop-elect, and thus the episcopal body of the province of Canterbury was apprised of the secret elec- tion. The liishops at once sent Peter of Anglesham as their representative to Pope Innocent to protest against the uncanonical proceedings of the monks of Christ Church. The monks also were highly incensed at Reginald because, contrary to his promise, he had divulged his election. They proceeded to a second election, and on 11 December, 1205, cast their votes for the royal favourite, John de Grey, whom the king had recommemled to their suffrages. The contro- versy between the monks of Christ Church and the bisho]5s concerning the right of electing the .\rchbishop of Canterbury, Innocent decided in favour of the monks, but in the present case he pronounced both elections invalid; that of Reginald because it had been made imcanonically and clandestinely, that of John de Grey because it had occurred before the invalidity of the former was proclaimed by the pope. Not even King John, who offered Innocent 3000 marks if he u-ould decide in favour of de Grey, could alter the pope's decision. Innocent summoned those monks of Canterbmy who were in Rome to proceed to a new election and recommended to their choice Stephen Langton, an Englishman, whom the pope had called to Rome from the rectorship of the University of Paris, in order to create him cardinal. He was duly elected by the monks and the pope himself consecrated him archbishop at Viterbo on 17 June, 1207. Innocent in- formed King Jolm of the election of Langton and asked him to accept the new archbishop. The king, however, had set his mind on his favourite, John de Grey, and flatly refused to allow Langton to come to England in the capacity of Archbishop of Canterbury. He, moreover, wreaked his vengeance on the monks of Christ Church liy driving them from their monastery and taking possession of their property. Innocent now placed the entire kingdom vmder interdict which was proclaimed on 24 March, 1208. When this proved of no avail and the king committed acts of cruelty against the clergy, the pope declared him ex- communicated in 1209, and formally deposed him in 1212. He entrusted King Philip of France with the execution of the sentence. When Philip threatened to invade England and the feudal lords and the clergy began to forsake King John, the latter made his sub- mission to Pandulph, whom Innocent had sent as leg-

ate to England. He promised to acknowledge Lang- ton as Archbishop of Canterbury, to allow the exiled bishops and priests to return to England and to make compensation for the losses which the clergy had sus- tained. He went still further, and on 13 Jlay, 1213, probably of his own initiative, surrendered the Eng- lish kingdom thiDugh Pandulph into tiie hands of the pope to be returned to him as a fief. The document of the surrender states that henceforth the kings of Eng- land were to ride as vassals of the pope and to pay an annual tribute of 1000 marks to the See of Rome. On 20 July, 1213, the king was solemnly freed from the ban at W'inchester and after the clergy had been reim- bursed for its losses the intertlict was lifted from Eng- land on 29 June, 1214. It appears that many of the barons were not pleased with the surrender of England

Tomb of I.vxocent III f>t. John I.ateran, Rome, erected by Leo XIII, IS'JO

into the hands of the pope. They also resented the king's continuous trespasses upon their liberties and his many acts of injustice in the government of the peo- ple. They finally had recourse to violence and forced him to yield to their demands by affixing his seal to the Magna Charta. Innocent could not as suzerain of England allow a contract which imposed such serious obligations upon his vassal to be made without his consent. His legate Pandulph had repeatedly praised King John to the pope as a wise ruler and loyal vassal of the Holy See. The pope, therefore, declared the Great Charter null and void, not because it gave too many liberties to the barons and the people, but be- cause it had been obtained by violence.

There was scarcely a coimtrj- in Europe over which Innocent III did not in some way or other assert the supremacj' which he claimed for the papacy. He ex- communicated .\lfonso IX of Leon, for marrying a near relative, Berengaria, a daughter of Alfonso VIII, contrary to the laws of the Church, and effected their separation in 1204. For similar reasons he annulled, in 1208, the marriage of the crown-prince, .Alfonso of Portugal, with Urraca, daughter of .Ufonso of Castile. From Pedro II of .\ragon he received that kingdom in vassalage and crowned him king at Rome in 1204. He prepareil a crusade against the Moors and lived to see their power broken in Spain at the battle of Navas de