Abstract

This chapter investigates the legal origins of the prohibition against impaired clerics. Petitions and letters helped to define ‘invalidity’ as a legal category, since they contributed directly to medieval canon law's statutes regarding so-called ‘defects’ of body and mind. This institutional construction of disability allowed the Apostolic See to set a standard for bodies and minds, in order to distinguish the normatively able-bodied from those deemed ‘abnormal’, impaired. The Papal Chancery thus defined a physical standard in which a body diverging from the norm was considered ‘defective’, and thereby unfit for clerical office, according to two criteria: its capacity and its image. They were only two mitigating factors for disabled clerics: their innocence and their ‘ignorance’ (i.e., their lack of ‘culpability’) in relation to the existence of their impairment.

Keywords: Canon Law; Default; Irregularity; Normality; Circumstances

The prospect of a wholly undesirable – an impaired – cleric serving in their midst was simply too much for the Augustinian community of Saint-Saturnin (Toulouse) to countenance. They were compelled to appeal to the very top of the Church hierarchy, the Pope himself. With this letter to Saint-Saturnin's abbot, Pope John XXII acceded to the wider community's wishes and recalled the prohibition of such improper clerical appointments, presumably much to their relief. So doing, John lent papal authority to the characterization of impaired men as unfit for clerical office, further concretizing statutes set out in canon law. Physical, sensory, and/or intellectual ‘defects’ disqualified men from clerical office, not the least because such impairments were often, though not always, considered to reflect the individual's moral defect. Alongside stipulating specific impairments, the Chancery's response is productively expansive, with an effusive prohibition on any condition, physical or mental, which rendered a cleric ‘in any other way unfit’ for the role. In canon law, such conditions were grouped similarly broadly under the categories of ‘defects of body’ (defectus corporis) or ‘defects of mind’ (defectus mentis).

Abstract

As argued through this book, studying petitions and letters enriches our understanding of institutional and religious history: it sheds light on the Church's place in society and on the contemporary understanding of disability. Indeed, the process of supplication could erase the negative institutional effects of disability by actively including the disabled cleric within the ecclesial and Christian body. With this process, the Apostolic See thus created a metaphorical place conducive to negotiation, where disabled clerics could disclose their physical and/or mental difficulties to advocate for themselves, requesting accommodations from the institutional Church.

Keywords: Inclusion; Apostolic Penitentiary; Modern Canon Law; Modern Legislation

The petitions received and the letters issued by the Papal Chancery between the twelfth and fourteenth centuries attest to the recognition of disability by the pontifical institution. They record the existence of supplicants’ physical or mental impairment and, on a case-by-case basis, authorize petitioners to adapt their duties, both as clerics and as Christians, according to their abilities. These documents are situated on the borderline between institutional edicts and lived experiences, between administrative theory and real-world practice. A petitioner's initial request set into motion an intense and complex epistolary exchange, highlighting the dynamism of all the actors involved, disabled supplicants and curial personnel alike. With the dispensation of grace, a privilege allowed only to the Pope, the Chancery established a system that allowed the Church hierarchy to govern the souls and bodies of all Christians, the clergy included. Indeed, grants of papal grace permitted the institution a greater degree of control over the clergy than ever before. Similarly, the petition process functioned as a formidable instrument by which the papacy exerted its authority throughout Christendom, increasing the Church's already considerable sway over late medieval Christian society. Every step in the construction of the dialogue served papal authority: each protagonist, from the supplicant to the scribes, contributed to strengthening the Church's power. The perception of physical or mental conditions, including old age and chronic or terminal illnesses, allowed for the recognition of disability as a condition. The Church developed extensive administrative protocols out of necessity, as a means of effectively supervising the clerics in its employ, many of whom were scattered across the Christian world.

Abstract

As presented in this chapter, during the petition process, supplicants defined their impairments through dialogue with the Papal Chancery. They drew on medical and religious culture, evident in the specific words deployed in letters, to present the causes of their impairments and to relate their ongoing experiences. Letters from the Chancery in response make use of similar terminology and frameworks, highlighting that petitioners’ conceptualizations of disability was shared by the Curia's staff and vice versa. The legal, cultural, and linguistic frameworks provided by Chapters 1 and 2 allow us to develop argumentative strands in the later chapters.

Keywords: Discourses; Aetiology; Medicine; Religion

All applicants to the orders were subject to vetting to ensure their suitability. Yet men hoping to become responsible for the care of souls (cura animarum) were under even more intense scrutiny. The care of souls was perhaps the single most important task in the clerical portfolio; clerics with such benefices must be above reproach, and thus were held to higher standards of idoneity than the rank-and-file clergy. This is exemplified in a letter from Urban VI (1318–1389) to the Franciscan leadership, written at some point after 1381 and collected by the convent S. Francesco di Conegliano, now preserved in the Archivio Status Tervisii. The Pope addresses Ludovicus de Venetiis, Minister General of the Order of Friars Minor, and Marcus de Conegliano, professor of the same Order, on an urgent matter: ensuring that sufficient checks have been undertaken on a candidate pursuing the role of master in the order, Brother Franciscus Belluni. Beyond illuminating this specific case, the letter reveals how the popes continued to resolve the tricky question of access to the sacred orders at the beginning of the Great Schism.

Franciscus’ request is neither as straightforward nor as simple as it might first appear. Masters in the Franciscan order were permitted to preach, to give sermons and to celebrate the divine offices.

Abstract

The introduction presents the main historical context to the study at hand, with an in-depth focus on the corpus: the petitions sent to the popes and the letters written in answer by the Papal Chancery. It investigates the identity of the petitioners, alongside procedures and regulations relating to the written documents themselves. Most writers were members of the Italian and French high clergy, though individuals from all levels of the Church are represented in the petitions. The correspondence between such clerics and the Papal Chancery depended upon established writing and regulatory processes, both in terms of the rules put in place by the Chancery to guarantee its intervention and the mechanisms available to supplicants for reporting their impairments and making an effective case for dispensations.

Keywords: Petition; Papal Letters; Experiences; Methodology; Discourses

Using this sentence, Pope Leo found much-needed biblical justification for an act that appeared senseless to all those around him. Shortly after his election to the papacy, Leo had encountered a beautiful woman who, with due reverence, kissed his hand chastely. This unleashed within Leo, as legend has it, a fleshly temptation so powerful that he had only one option to staunch its fire: to cut off his hand, as prescribed in Matthew 5.30. Whilst this may have resolved the new Pope's internal spiritual struggles, it generated another set of problems entirely, even threatening his position as leader of the Church. Following canonical regulations on clerical impairment, his distal forearm amputation rendered him ineligible to perform Mass. The clergy openly voiced their dissatisfaction with a pontiff who could not fulfil one of the most basic, one of the most important, clerical tasks. Their disparaging sentiments were shared by the Roman laity, who threatened a revolt against Leo's religious authority. And so, Leo turned to another beautiful woman to resolve his situation: he entrusted his misfortunes to the Virgin Mary and prayed to her for a miraculous remedy. She dutifully appeared to him in a vision, restored his hand and explicitly authorized him to celebrate Mass.

Abstract

This chapter probes the fate of the disabled men who were less fortunate: those who had to leave the clergy entirely, either of their own volition or due to the severity of their disability. At times, poor health or impairment forced clerics to resign from their positions as they became unable to perform their rights and duties. Often, they were forced to find care and support outside of their clerical community. Case studies demonstrate, however, that petitions and pontifical letters sometimes allowed for the adaptation, even contravention, of existing rules so that the disabled former clerics could live out their days with dignity.

Keywords: Resignation: Retirement; Transfers; Leprosaria

Invoking the sixth-century Pope Gregory the Great, Gratian sets out a roster of unsuitable candidates for the priestly office in his Decree, written between 1140 and 1150. He cites the usual suspects – men who have been married twice, simoniacs, usurers, and so on – before seizing upon the least desirable of all: the mad, or as Gratian puts it, men ‘rendered frantic or possessed by the devil’ (forssenez ou travaillez del deable). It seems clear, then, that an individual with defectus mentis is prohibited from entering the priesthood, and certainly from giving the sacraments. Yet, in a letter sent to Bishop Eleutherius of Tournai and later compiled by Gratian, Gregory the Great asserts that bouts of madness or the loss of one's senses do not always provide grounds for the expulsion of a recently ordained cleric: ‘for that which prevents entry into orders does not always entail the deposition of a cleric already ordained’. Gratian relies directly on this letter to draw his own conclusions: a bishop overcome by passion (passio) leading to insanity (mente alienate) could not be forced to resign, as he had already been ordained. On one hand, the Decree rules that a cleric, who, weighed down by old age or illness (defectus corporis), is prevented from performing his office, is authorized to substitute a person in his place. In those cases, assessors were nominated, implying that such well-off clerics continued to receive the income associated with their office until their death. On another hand, the Decretals of Gregory IX highlight the link between old age and lack of vigour, both of which can provoke a cleric's resignation.

This research began in Montpellier, in the south of France. I wanted to work on medieval disability, following a long family history that made me very curious about this issue in pre-modern times. A meeting with Mr. Julien Théry, who introduced me to supplications and papal letters, in which I found a formidable cache of material for the cultural history of the medieval period, marked the beginning of the long path that is the writing of a book. I ‘go up’ to Paris to meet Mr. Henri-Jacques Stiker, whose book, Corps infirmes et société, was always at my bedside. He introduced me to Mr. Didier Lett, in whom I found a thesis director, in the noblest sense of the word. His help and advices allowed me to give substance to my ideas. I would also like to thank Mrs. Maaike van der Lugt, Mrs. Irina Metzler, Mr. Charles de Miramon, and Mrs. Myriam Winance, who did me the honor of reading and discussing this work.

This book would never have seen the light of day without the financial, but also human and logistical support of the University of Paris Diderot, and more particularly of the ICT laboratory and its successive directors, Mrs. Liliane Hilaire-Pérez, Mrs. Anna Caiozzo, and Mrs. Charlotte de Castelnau-l’Estoile as well as Mrs. Laurence Griffoul. I particularly thank the ED 382, its former director, Mr. Jean-Pierre Guilhembet, and its former co-director, Mrs. Florence Binard, for the training I received during the thesis. I would also like to thank the students of the University of Paris Diderot for the pleasure I took in teaching them medieval history, historiography, and historical methodology. I feel honoured to have seen them grow and flourish in contact with the teaching staff and their nascent or already affirmed passion.

My research benefited from three grants from the École française de Rome, during which I was able to build up my corpus of documents. I would like to thank Mrs. Catherine Virlouvet, Mr. Pierre Savy, and Mr. Stéphane Gioanni for having welcomed me, as well as those in charge of the library of the French School, Mrs. Annie Coisy and Mr. Clément Pieyre, for their letters, which allowed me to enter the Vatican Apostolic Archives. I took great advantage of the ideal setting offered by the French School, which gave rhythm to my research during my stays.

Abstract

This chapter moves to examine the consequences of the ‘failure’ of such disability tests and of clerics’ disclosures of impairment in petitions. In such cases, gracious papal letters sometimes allowed for the relaxation of ecclesiastical regulations to accommodate the disabled cleric's conditions, if he himself desired to remain in the clergy and was deemed capable enough. The process of supplication was used to improve clerics’ lives by adapting existing statutes to their personal situations.

Keywords: Coadjutors; Monastic Rules; Transfers; Mobility

The cover of the book you have in your hands, reader, represents a sick bishop, bedridden, who dictates his wishes to a notary, located at the bottom of his bed, as close as possible to the viewer. Behind the sick man stands another bishop, who helps him to write the letter, and, on the right, the recipient of the letter, the Pope. From this iconographic representation, and from the text that inspired the illustration, we can determine that the sick bishop is addressing a supplication to the Pope in order, no doubt, to delegate some (if not all) of his attributions to his colleague, who will become coadjutor or substitute bishop. Indeed, the preamble to cause 7 of Gratian's Decree, illustrated here, speaks of what a bishop overwhelmed by a long illness should do:

The text continues with chapter 1, ‘the pain of the body does not deprive the bishop of his honour’, which is exemplified in the miniature since the bishop is depicted in his sickly state, certainly, but still wearing all the attributes worthy of his office. Whether he is in the process of relinquishing some of his prerogatives or abdicating altogether, it is indeed the act of supplication of a sick bishop who seeks to adapt his duties to his physical condition that is depicted here.

This chapter expands on issues raised in earlier chapters, to consider in depth the accommodations offered and/or authorized by the pontifical institution that allowed impaired clerics to remain in the clergy. Through the supplication process, the Curia facilitated the inclusion of disabled petitioners, by adapting regulations to their personal situations.

Abstract

This chapter interrogates the tests used by the Church to determine disability. These were required at several stages of the clerical profession: canon law stipulates that all candidates applying for admission to the secular and regular orders, and all clerics wishing to receive a promotion, must be examined before their appointment. Supposedly a ‘quality-control’ measure to guarantee the uniformity of the clerical condition at all levels, this evaluation was required from a cleric's first tonsure to their entrance into the priesthood, up until his election as bishop or abbot, when the Pope himself, in theory at least, conducted the examination.

Keywords: Examination; Promotion; Election; Education; Black Death

The Papal Chancery routinely blocked the entry of disabled clerics into minor and major orders, alongside preventing their receipt of a benefice attached to the care of souls (cura animarum). Restrictions of grace of this kind were more prevalent in the thirteenth century, when the number of such promotions granted to disabled churchmen remained low. Analysis of the relevant petitions addressed to the Papal Chancery by the disabled clerics and papal letters sent in response suggests, however, an openness to the inclusion of disabled clerics within major orders in the following century. While the thirteenth century saw a large proportion of resignations by disabled secular clerics (51% of letters, compared to 15% in the fourteenth century, see Chapter 5) the pontifical institution received significantly more requests for secular promotions during the fourteenth century, with the topic figuring in 33% of letters (94) and 26% of petitions (22) in the latter period, compared to just 17% of thirteenth-century letters (32) (see Figure 3.1).

These numbers show that the pontifical institution granted graces to receive a benefice with the care of souls and/or a promotion to the major orders to disabled clerics more willingly during the fourteenth century. Indeed, the Papal Chancery authorized the request of 64% of petitioners seeking to accede to a pastoral role, that is, benefices cum cura (vs. 31% in the thirteenth century), and 77% of those wishing to join major orders (vs. 27% in the previous century). The results for petitions to join the minor orders are in line with letters of the thirteenth century, with most petitioners prohibited from joining major orders (four out of six cases), alongside fewer spontaneous requests to enter minor orders (two cases out of six).