Arnold of Brescia

From New World Encyclopedia

Arnold of Brescia, (c. 1090–c.1155), also known as Arnaldus (Italian: Arnaldo da Brescia), was a monk from Italy who called on the Church to renounce ownership of property, participated in the Commune of Rome, and was hanged by the Church.

Born in Brescia, Arnold became an Augustinian canon and then prior of a monastery in Brescia. He became very critical of the temporal powers of Catholic Church that involved it in a land struggle in Brescia against the count-bishop of Brescia. He called on the Church to renounce ownership of the property and return it to the city government, so as not to be tainted by possession, one aspect of a renunciation of worldliness that he preached. He was condemned at the Second Lateran Council, in 1139, and forced from Italy.

Though as a religious reformer no less than a political leader Arnold failed,[1] his teachings on apostolic poverty continued potent after his death, among "Arnoldists" and more widely among Waldensians and the Spiritual Franciscans, though no written word of his has survived the official condemnation.[2] Protestants rank him among the precursors of the Reformation.[3]

Life

Born at Brescia toward the end of the eleventh century aspired to a perfect life from his youth. Before reaching adulthood, he entered a convent of canons regular in his native city, where he was ordained a priest and appointed provost of his community. Arnold reportedly completed his studies under the direction of Peter Abelard. If the report is accurate, he must have gone to Paris about 1115. Arnold did express admiration for the French pioneer of scholasticism later in life, and Saint Bernard of Clairvaux, Abelard's accuser, intimates that Abelard summoned Arnold to his side after the Lateran Council of 1139. In the judgment of some critics, however, there is insufficient evidence for this first sojourn of Arnold in France.

Whether or not he studied with Abelard, it seems clear that Arnold was influenced by his philosophy and desire for reform. Even his detractors admit that he was qualified for for the high office of provost at Brecia by his detachment from earthly things, his love of religious discipline, and the clearness of his intellect. Arnold also possessed and originality and charm of expression that he brought to the service of a lofty ideal. Brescia yielded to his influence, and in the course of several years Arnold advanced to be the unrivaled head of the reform movement then stirring the city.

Brescia, like most other Lombard cities, was beginning to exercise its municipal rights. The government was in the hands of two consuls elected annually. Checking their authority was the local bishop, who was also as principal landowner. Inevitable conflicts arose between the rival forces, involving not only political issues, but also religious passions. These conditions grieved Arnold. He pointed out the evils which afflicted both the city the Catholic Church, concluding that the chief causes of these sins were the corrupting wealth of the clergy and the temporal power of the bishop. He suggested taking the immediate and drastic measure stripping the monasteries and bishoprics of their wealth, and transfering it to laity. This, he held, was the surest and quickest method of satisfying the civil authorities and of bringing back the clergy to the practice of the apostles.

To reduce this to a working theory, Arnold reportedly formulated the following propositions: "Clerics who own property, bishops who hold regalia [land tenures by royal grant], and monks who have possessions cannot possibly be saved. All these things belong to the [temporal] prince, who cannot dispose of them except in favor of laymen."

The higher clergy, of course, vehemently rejected Arnold's teachings, but elements in the growing middle class of merchants and artisans welcomed them. Brescia was apparently thrown into crisis, although its details are not clear due to the scarcity of documents. From the testimony such men as Otto of Freisingen, Saint Bernard, and John of Salisbury, some facts seem clear. First, a journey was made by the local bishop, Manfred, to Rome about 1138. An insurrection arose during his absence. Arnold allegedly attempt to seize the bishop's temporal power when he returned. Arnold sought to justify his revolt and appealed to Rome, but was condemned by Innocent II at the Lateran Council, in 1139. The pope command Arnold to keep silence and sent him into exile. He was forbidden to return to Brescia without the express permission of the pontiff.

The issue came before the Synod of Sens in 1140. There, we find Arnold by the side of the famous Abelard, who was about to make his final struggle in defense of his own views. Opposing them both was the equally famous Bernard of Clairvaux, whose intellect matched Abelard's and whose piety outshone even that of the ascetic Arnold. Accounts written by the victors portray the debate as a utter rout in favor of the conservative Bernard.

Both men were condemned to perpetual confinement in separate monasteries, a sentence that was confirmed by Innocent II in his bull dated July, 16 1140. Arnold's writings were also condemned to be burned as a further measure. None of his writings survive, and we know of his teachings only through the reports of his enemies.

Abelard publicly recanted his views and took refuge with Peter the Venerable, Abbot of Cluny. The younger and more rebellious Arnold was less compliant. He retired temporarily to Mont Sainte-Geneviève at Paris, where he soon opened public courses of moral theology, continuing to preach his radical ideas concerning apostolic poverty.According to John of Salisbury, he attracted disciples mainly for the impoverished people of the city who were so needy that they had to beg their daily bread. This state of affairs, however, accorded very well with Arnold's teachings which sharply censured the luxury of bishops and the worldly possessions of monks. Wealth, Arnold insisted was the real virus that was infecting the Church. Arnold's attacks did not stop here, however. His condemnation was reportedly never far from his mind, and he engaged his harsh diatribes against those who had condemned Abelard and himself. Since Abelard himself had capitulated, however, Arnold stood virtually alone, and his reputation was no match for that of the likes of Bernard. In addition to preaching in Paris, Arnold also seems to have taken refuge in Zurich then probably in Bavaria.[4]

Life and death in Rome

Arnold of Brescia burned at the stake at the hands of the Papal guards.

Arnold, who is known only from the vituperative condemnation of his foes, was declared to be a demagogue; his motives were impugned.

Arnold having returned to Italy after 1143, he made his peace in 1145 with Pope Eugene III, who ordered him to submit himself to the mercy of the Church in Rome (CE). When he arrived, he found that Giordano Pierleoni's followers had asserted the ancient rights of the commune of Rome taken control of the city from papal forces and founded a republic, the Commune of Rome. Arnold sided with the people immediately and, upon Pierleoni's deposition, soon rose to the intellectual leadership of this radical new group, calling for liberties and democratic rights. Arnold taught that clergy while owning property had no power to perform the Sacraments. He succeeded in driving Pope Eugene into exile in 1146, for which he was excommunicated, 15 July 1148. When Pope Eugene returned to the city in 1148, Arnold continued to lead the blossoming republic despite his excommunication. In summing up these events, Caesar Baronius called Arnold "the father of political heresies," while the Protestant view is expressed by Edward Gibbon, who found that "the trumpet of Roman liberty was first sounded by Arnold."

After Eugene's death, Pope Adrian IV swiftly took steps to regain control of Rome, inviting Frederick Barbarossa, who took Rome by force in 1155, after a Holy Week interdict, forced Arnold again into exile. He was seized by Imperial forces and was finally tried by the Roman Curia as a rebel. Importantly, he was never accused of heresy. As a result of his conviction for rebellion, he was hanged and his body burnt. Faced with the stake, he refused to recant any of his positions; since he remained a hero to large sections of the Roman people and the minor clergy, his ashes were cast into the Tiber, to prevent his burial place becoming venerated as the shrine of a martyr.

In 1882, after the collapse of Papal temporal powers, the city of Brescia erected a monument to its native son.

Cathoic encyc

Thus he described the Abbot of Clairvaux as a man "puffed up with vainglory, and jealous of all those who have won fame in letters or religion, if they are not of his school." Thus boldly challenged, Bernard took up the gauntlet and denounced Arnold to Louis VII as "the incorrigible schismatic, the sower of discord, the disturber of the peace, the destroyer of unity," and brought it about that the "Most Christian King drove from the kingdom of France" him whom Italy had already exiled.

Arnold, compelled to flee, took refuge in Switzerland and fixed his abode at Zurich in the Diocese of Constance. The Abbot of Clairvaux continued active in pursuit, and some time afterwards (1143) we find the exile in Bohemia begging protection from a papal legate named Guy. This prelate — who must not be confounded with his namesake, disciple of Abelard, and later pope — received him with kindness and, touched by his misfortunes, treated him with great friendliness. This attitude vexed St. Bernard, who addressed to the legate a discourse on prudence, which, however, remained unheeded by Guy. There is every reason to believe that Arnold had given his host pledges of sincere submission, for this fact alone would explain his return to Italy, thenceforth open to him. This, too, explains the solemn abjuration which he made at Viterbo, before Pope Eugenius III, in 1145. The pontiff, on reconciling him with the Church, had imposed a form of penance then customary: fasts, vigils, and pilgrimages to the principal shrines of Rome. Unfortunately, in the air which Arnold was about to breathe there were floating the germs of revolt. Rome was endeavouring to re-establish her Senate to the detriment of the temporal power of the popes. A movement so thoroughly in keeping with the earlier thoughts and the secret desires of the repentant innovator could not but secure his sympathy and even his outspoken support. It was soon discovered that he was vilifying the clergy and disseminating from the Capital his plans for ecclesiastical reform. The Curia became the chief object of his attacks; he depicted the cardinals as vile hypocrites and misers playing among Christians the role of Jews and Pharisees. He did not even spare the pope. Eugenius III, whose gentle moderation this terrible reformer had but recently acknowledged, was suddenly transformed into the executioner of the Church, more concerned "with pampering his own body, and filling his own purse than with imitating the zeal of the Apostles whose place he filled." In particular, Arnold reproached the pope for relying on physical force, and for "defending with homicide" his rights when contested. Eugenius III was forced to leave the Eternal City, and for some time (1146-49) Roman democracy triumphed under Arnold of Brescia. Though excommunicated by the pope (15 July, 1148), Arnold did not despair of his position. By degrees, however, his revolutionary programme took on another character. The abolition of the temporal power of the papacy was now only the first of his demands; the second contemplated the subordination of the spiritual to the civil power. Wetzel, one of his disciples presumed to offer to King Conrad III the keys of the Castle of Sant' Angelo, so that the German emperors might have the future disposal of the tiara and the government of Rome. Arnold's policy, at first republican, thus ended in downright imperialism. Frederick Barbarossa, however, Conrad's successor, refused to support the schemes of the Roman agitators. With much cleverness and tact, Eugenius III won over the emperor to the cause of the papacy. Arnold was thus rendered helpless. The senatorial elections of November, 1152, had turned against him, and marked the beginning of his fall.

Little is known of Arnold during the brief reign of Anastasius IV (July, 1153 - December, 1154), but the election of Adrian IV was fatal to his cause. He had fallen into the hands of Odo, Cardinal-Deacon of St. Nicholas in carcere Tulliano, but was freed by the Viscounts of Campagnatico, and found for some years a safe refuge in their territory. They "looked on him as a prophet" inspired by God. However, as in an agreement between Adrian and Frederick Barbarossa, the pope obtained the emperor's promise that he would seize the person of Arnold and remove him, willing or unwilling, from the custody of the Viscounts of Campagnatico. Frederick did not hesitate to make and keep this promise, and accordingly Arnold was handed over to the Curia. It is quite difficult to give an exact account of the trial of Arnold. According to the story recorded by Gerhoh de Reichersperg, he was secretly removed from the ecclesiastical prison and put to death by the servants of the prefect of Rome, who had suffered great injuries from the revolution fomented by Arnold. It is very probable, however, that the Curia had a larger share in his condemnation. One analyst goes so far as to say that the pope personally ordered him to be hanged. Another writer affirms, with more semblance of truth, that Adrian confined himself to demanding Arnold's degradation, so that he might be delivered over to the secular power. According to the author of a poem recently discovered (and he seems to be well informed), Arnold when brought in sight of the gallows faced his death courageously. When urged to recant his teachings, he answered that he had nothing to withdraw, and was ready to suffer death for them. He asked only for a brief respite to pray and beg Christ's pardon for his sins. After a short mental prayer he gave himself up to the executioner, and offered his head to the noose. After hanging from the gallows for a short time, his body was burned, and the ashes thrown into the Tiber, "for fear", says one chronicler, "lest the people might collect them and honour them as the ashes of a martyr."

"Forger of heresies," "sower of schisms," "enemy of the Catholic Faith," "schismatic," "heretic," such are the terms used by Otto of Freisingen, by the author of the "Historia Pontificalis," by the Abbot of Clairvaux, by Eugenius III, and Adrian IV to stigmatize Arnold. Given the vagueness of these characterizations, it is not easy to specify the dogmatic errors into which the innovator fell. Otto of Freisingen echoes a rumour according to which Arnold held offensive views on baptism and the Eucharist. His contemporaries (notably St. Bernard, who pursued so bitterly the "squire" of Abelard) lay nothing of the kind to his charge. The abbot of Clairvaux in one of his letters accuses Arnold of being "an enemy of the Cross of Christ." But must we conclude from this that Arnold was a follower of Pierre de Bruys, who condemned the adoration of the Cross? It is much more probable that the words of St. Bernard are to be taken broadly or in a metaphorical sense. In reality it was in practical matters that Arnold showed himself inimical to the teachings accepted at his time. He began by condemning the abuses occasioned by the wealth of the churchmen, an act which in itself placed him in the class of true reformers; St. Bernard and Gerhoh de Reichersperg said the same thing. But Arnold did not stop at this; he went so far as to deny the very principle of proprietary right as claimed by the Church, and thereby assailed the temporal power of the papacy. "All earthly possessions belong to the prince, the pope should relinquish the government of Rome; bishops, priests, and monks can own nothing without incurring the penalty of eternal damnation." On all these various points the innovator, to say the least, was plainly guilty of temerity. And since he clashed with a hierarchy that was not prepared to sanction his views, he ended by questioning its authority. According to him, the Church had become corrupt in the persons of covetouss and simoniacal priests, bishops, and cardinals, and was no longer the true Church. "The pope," he says, "is no longer the real Apostolicus, and, as he does not exemplify in his life the teachings of the Apostles, there is no obligation of reverence and obedience towards him." The unworthy clergy lose the right of administering the sacraments, and the faithful need no longer confess" to them. It is sufficient that they confess to one another. If it be true, as stated by the anonymous author of the poem above quoted, that Arnold had fallen into these errors, the schismatical and heretical character of his teachings remains no longer doubtful. His disciples, i.e. those whom the thirteenth-century documents call the Arnoldists, or Arnaldists, taught other errors no less serious, for which, however, Arnold cannot justly be held responsible.

See also

  • Arnoldist
  • History of Rome in the Middle Ages

Notes

  1. Greenaway 1931:162.
  2. Arnold's life depends for its sources on Otto of Freising and a chapter in John of Salisbury's Historia Pontificalis.
  3. Rosalind B. Brooke. The Coming of the Friars (1974) sets Arnold in the broader intellectual history that culminated in the thirteenth-century institutions of the mendicant friars.
  4. Reginald L. Poole, "John of Salisbury at the Papal Court" The English Historical Review 38 No. 151 (July 1923:321-330) p. 323f.

References
ISBN links support NWE through referral fees

  • Catholic Encyclopedia: "Arnold of Brescia"
  • (Bookrags) "Arnold of Brescia"
  • Romedio Schmitz-Esser, Arnold von Brescia im Spiegel von acht Jahrhunderten Rezeption. Ein Beispiel für Europas Umgang mit der mittelalterlichen Geschichte vom Humanismus bis heute, Vienna-Berlin-Münster 2007.
  • Romedio Schmitz-Esser, Arnold of Brescia in Exile: April 1139 to December 1143 – His Role as a Reformer, Reviewed, in: Exile in the Middle Ages. Selected Proceedings from the International Medieval Congress, University of Leeds, 8-11 July 2002, ed. by Laura Napran and Elisabeth van Houts, Turnhout 2004, p. 213-231.
  • Grado Giovanni Merlo, La storia e la memoria di Arnaldo da Brescia, in: Studi Storici 32/4 (1991) p. 943-952.
  • Maurizio Pegrari (ed.), Arnaldo da Brescia e il suo tempo, Brescia 1991.
  • George William Greenaway, Arnold of Brescia, (Cambridge University Press) 1931. The first biography in English.
  • Pasquale Villari, Mediaeval Italy from Charlemagne to Henry VII, 1910.
  • Ferdinand A. Gregorovius, History of the City of Rome in the Middle Ages 6th ed. 1953-1957.

Credits

New World Encyclopedia writers and editors rewrote and completed the Wikipedia article in accordance with New World Encyclopedia standards. This article abides by terms of the Creative Commons CC-by-sa 3.0 License (CC-by-sa), which may be used and disseminated with proper attribution. Credit is due under the terms of this license that can reference both the New World Encyclopedia contributors and the selfless volunteer contributors of the Wikimedia Foundation. To cite this article click here for a list of acceptable citing formats.The history of earlier contributions by wikipedians is accessible to researchers here:

The history of this article since it was imported to New World Encyclopedia:

Note: Some restrictions may apply to use of individual images which are separately licensed.