ipl-logo

King Henry IV: Lay Investiture Controversy

936 Words4 Pages

“There for three days, before the castle gate, he laid aside all his royal gear; barefoot and wearing coarse wool, he stood pitifully, and did not stop begging for our apostolic help and compassion, until he had moved everyone there, or who heard tell of his, to great reverence and pity.”- Pope Gregory VII (Swainson, Bill). This was a time that a king begged for forgiveness so he could come back to the Roman Catholic Church. In the Holy Roman Empire, King Henry IV had a certain power called lay investiture. Lay investiture is a practice that nobles or prestigious people, such as kings, did; giving bishops and abbots the power over church offices (Richard Abels). Kings would sell these spiritual offices for money and those that buy the space regain the money used to buy the position from the peasants working in the Church. Kings believed that lay investiture was a divine right and that it was allowed since he had been blessed by God. Nevertheless, popes believed that kings did not have the right to do this. These two conflicting ideas caused the Lay Investiture Controversy.
Kings had been excommunicated by the pope for practicing lay investiture. The end of the Investiture Controversy was the creation of the Concordat of Worms (Henry V, and …show more content…

Lay investiture created many different events that changed the balance of power. King Henry IV was excommunicated by Pope Gregory VII for practicing lay investiture. This shows that the balance of power can be easily flipped. Furthermore, Dictatus Papae, which was created because of the Lay Investiture Conflict, gave the pope more power than the king. Likewise, the agreement between Pope Calixtus II and King Henry V which was called the Concordat of Worms banned lay investiture and created a process of electing bishops. As the old saying goes, “What goes up, must come

Open Document