The Intertwining of the Church and State in the Middle Ages

When I sat down to start these readings on the Church in the Middle Ages I was a little weary on what the material would cover and how they would be presented and constructed. It was not because I had not been acquainted with Medieval history before, but my knowledge was in the context of theatre history and dramaturgy and not strictly in a history form. However, as I delved into the readings, I was quite happy to discover that the narratives used and the content covered was very stimulating and enriching.

One subject that I found particularly interesting while reading R.W. Southern's book Western Society and the Church in the Middle Ages was how closely connected the Church and state were in the Middle Ages. As a person living in a predominantly secular nation in the 21st century it is challenging to comprehend a world where there is no separation of Church and state. Even more difficult to decipher is the fact that the Church controlled the law and courts, the taxes, and was the largest literary body, yet according to Southern were not a police-state or had much means of coercion. I have to ask myself- how could the Church incur so much power, yet had no police or dependable army of their own? Southern maintains that the only power of coercion that that the Church had over the secular rulers, as well as the people in Christendom, which was the ability to excommunicate them. Since the Church needed the consent and co-operation of independent rulers to sustain their power in certain regions, they used this power of excommunication as a last resort. For the most part, the rulers would abstain from refusing demands from the Church because it would be detrimental for their region to lose its ties with Rome. It would also have resulted in a harsh backlash from a faithful public in their kingdom. There were a few rulers who were not as afraid of excommunication, such as King John in the early 13th century England. He lived as a excommunicate for four years, but still kept some aspects of Church life within his country. However, taking in account that he did not live as an excommunicate forever shows the power that the Church has over medieval societies. Allowing myself to understand these concepts of using excommunication as means of coercion I realize that in order to live a full life in medieval society it is difficult to live ones life outside of the realm of the Church, for, as Southern points out, the Church could not be a state among many, but it had to be the state and the society.

Another point of interest to me was the view of history that people had during the Middle Ages. It was very much teleologic- meaning there was a set path that history would follow and it was based on a divine purpose that would be come about. Society at this time lived their lives understanding that they were there as solely a will of God. They were certain that divine providence would intervene when it was deemed necessary to judge their actions as a society, as well as their individual actions. This, according to Southern, explained why the purpose of all forms of human governments, whether it be pope, emperor, or king, was to ensure that all people followed a 'single Christian path'. This path was depicted in the one unifying book for all of Christendom- the Bible. The Bible has a chapter that dictates the end of the world for all Christians. This chapter, the Book of Revelations, made statements to what the future holds for the world, and people during this time took all of its credence verbatim. This teleologic mentality was reflected in the way societies were constructed, and put into context why the Church had the overreaching influence that it did in the medieval world.