That is true, but you did seem to suggest, with your statement, that you could bribe the Pope into forging documents for you. Now it may be possible to pass a little money into the Pope's hand in order to gain legitimacy for a title from him, but he wouldn't have had to "forge" anything for that, he could legitimize it on his own authority.
I understand and see no reason why Gallicanism (a bit of a misnomer in this context, but I'm still going to use it
) should not play a role in the politics of the Church-and the predilection of some clerics to 'forge' documents and otherwise act extralegally in the name of nationalism-in the game.A little before our time, but when the Church was first beginning to really exert itself during the early Dark Ages it forged and created several documents in order to increase its own authority; one of the more famous is one in which one of the Roman Emperor's is cured of some disease and, as such, claims that the heirs of Peter in Rome are stronger than the Roman government and the crown of Empire should pass to the Pope upon his death. I apologize for the story not being exact; I don't feel like tearing through my old lecture notes at the moment
You are referring to the "False Decretals" specifically the forged "Donations of Constantine" (in which the Pope cures Constantine of leprosy) which is sometimes contained therein. In truth it is debatable as to who actually forged them. The earliest compilation was, I think, written in France, and was probably part of the political conflict between the Gallicanists and the Ultramontanists. In principle not all the letters and canons in the decritals are entirely forgery, some are, other parts are confused plagerisms, and some are in fact genuine. And it is likely that the whole work was an effort to bolster the rights and authority of the local bishops (as opposed to archbishops). The pope (who was usually the champion of the bishops) was at first only incidentally a benefactor of the decritals.
Certainly by the time it was used by Leo IX & Gregory VII both the decritals and the donations were believe universally to be genuine. However the rights of the Holy See supposedly defended by the decritals, and specifically the donations, were not based solely on them, but do go back to earlier traditions of Popes such as St. Leo and of Gelasius I in the fifth century.
And anyway if I remember correctly, the Donations of Constantine don't give "the heirs of Peter in Rome a stronger authority than Roman government or the crown of the Empire," the Donations only confusingly give the Pope the ceremonial regalia of the Empire.
Last edited:
