The First Jubilee and the Last Medieval Pope

The Catholic Thing

By Christian Browne.
The first jubilee was the result of popular piety that found papal approbation. In 1299, word spread across Europe that the pilgrims to St. Peter's tomb would receive a plenary indulgence with the dawn of the new century. Responding to the growing crowds in the Eternal City, on February 22, 1300, Boniface the eighth issued a Papal Bull declaring a Holy Year and formally offering the most indulgent of indulgences to those faithful who venerated the Apostles Peter and Paul at their respective basilicas. Contemporary sources say perhaps 200,000 pilgrims made the journey to Rome, instituting a pious custom that endures more than seven centuries later.
The first jubilee was a triumph, yet history has been rather unkind to Boniface the eighth. Dante, who participated in the pilgrimage, helped to spoil Boniface's reputation by predicting in Inferno that the pope would wind up in Hell amongst the simoniacs, though historical evidence for that particular papal sin is slender. Boniface is often held up as an aggressive, even absurd, proponent of papal power, largely based upon the final sentence in his bull Unam Sanctam: "Furthermore, we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff."
Unam Sanctam, however, is not the medieval equivalent of a modern totalitarian manifesto. It was an attempt to re-state the principles of the proper governance of society - a Constitution of Christendom - under which "there are two swords; namely, the spiritual and the temporal."
The temporal sword is a legitimate source of authority entrusted to the hand of the prince, distinct from but, ultimately, at the service of the Spiritual Sword. Spiritual matters are obviously superior to temporal concerns. From the perspective of Faith, this conception is logical and indisputable. It is not a claim to worldly power after the manner of a dictator, but a natural consequence of the order of Creation.
The Constitution of Christendom did not endorse absolute monarchy. On the contrary, the pope, as Vicar of Christ, had the right and the duty to judge princes. The potens iudicaris was not an arbitrary power of subjective preferences, but one based upon the objective application of the moral law. It was a guarantor of equality, because all men, pauper or prince, are subject to the Divine Law. A king is not excused from, and is not beyond, the moral law. The Church exists to enforce the moral precepts.
The natural supremacy of the Spiritual Sword also enabled the pope to act as arbiter in conflicts between princes. The pope could seek peace, settling violent conflicts among the Christian nations. Dissolute and immoral rulers who might be cruel, tyrannical or unfaithful could face the sting of the Spiritual Sword, since the pope might impose punishments such as excommunication or interdict, as warranted.
By the close of the 13th century, the rising nation-states, England and France, began to chafe under this constitutional order and the annoying interference of the Church that it permitted. The French King Philip IV was a ruthless operator - a throwback to Emperor Henry IV and a precursor of Henry VIII and Napoleon. He wished to curtail the independence of the Church and eliminate papal influence over the affairs of his kingdom.
Unam Sanctam was partly the result of the conflict that arose over Philip's assertion of the right to tax the clergy (he needed money for war) in defiance of canon law. Despite Boniface's attempts at conciliation, the dispute grew beyond taxation to touch the fundamentals of the rights of the papacy to govern the clergy. Philip also sought to place the Church under his control after the manner of the German Emperors, against whom Boniface's predecessors had struggled for over two hundred years.
Boniface could not let that happen. He was a tough, and perhaps somewhat rash, ruler, but he acted in good faith. Philip, on the other hand, had no intere...