No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Gender Difference and Indifference in the Writings of Pope Innocent III
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 21 March 2016
Extract
Both R. Howard Bloch and Jean Leclercq have recently included the name of Pope Innocent HI (1198-1216) among the ranks of medieval misogynistic writers. Such an anti-feminist designation results from his treatise De miseria humanae conditionis (1195), which he authored whilst a cardinal deacon, as Lothario de Segni. However, the passages cited by Bloch and Leclercq only appear misogynistic when we consider them superficially. If we look at the entire corpus of Innocent’s writings and his actions, in their proper contexts, we discover that this Pope can not be so easily categorized. Rather, our analysis will show that there is much more diversity in his perspective on gender than originally thought.
The De miseria should be seen in its unique context when evaluating its attitude towards women. Books I and HI of the treatise belonged to the contemptus mundi tradition which emphasised the vileness and misery of human existence. Moreover, John C. Moore has recently proposed that Book II is a speculum curialis which reflected the questionable moral practices Innocent observed during his career in the Roman Curia.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Ecclesiastical History Society 1998
References
1 I would like to thank Norma Kroll and Joseph Goering for their helpful suggestions in sharpening and clarifying the argument in earlier versions of this paper.
R. Howard Bloch, Medieval Misogyny and the Invention of Western Romantic Love (Chicago, 1991), pp. 19–21, 25; Jean Leclercq, Women and St. Bernard of Clairvaux, trans. Marie-Bernard Said, Cistercian Studies Ser., 104 (Kalamazoo, MI, 1989), pp. 139–45. For a general discussion of misogyny see Marie Thérèse d’Alverny, ‘Comment les théologiens et les philosophes voient la femme’, Cahiers de civilisation médiévale, 20 (1977), pp. 105–29; Vern L. Bullough, ‘Medieval medical and scientific views of women’, Viator, 4 (1973), pp. 485–501. An older but still useful survey of misogyny is Katherine Rodgers, M., The Troublesome Helpmate: a History of Misogyny in Literature (Seattle, WA, 1966).Google Scholar
2 Lothario dei Segni, On the Misery of the Human Condition, trans. Margaret Mary Dietz, The Library of Liberal Arts (Indianapolis, IN, 1969) and the Latin critical edition De miseria humane conditionis, ed. Michele Maccarrone (Lugano, 1955). On Innocent Ill’s pontificate in general see, Brenda Bolton, Innocent III: Studies on Papal Authority and Pastoral Care, Collected Studies Series (Aldershot, 1995); Helene Tillmann, Pope Innocent III, trans. Walter Sax (Amsterdam, 1980); Christopher Cheney, R., Innocent III and England, Papste und Papsttum, 9 (Stuttgart, 1976).Google Scholar
3 On a general discussion of gender theory and its uses in historical writing, see the seminal article by Scott, Joan W., ‘Gender: a useful category of historical analysis’, AHR, 91 (1986), pp. 1053–75 Google Scholar. On sexual differences in the Middle Ages and their implication for gender construction, see Cadden, Joan, The Meanings of Sex Differences in the Middle Ages: Medicine, Science, and Culture (Cambridge, 1993)Google Scholar, and Salisbury, Joyce E., ‘Gendered sexuality’,Google Scholar in Vera Bullough, L. and Brundage, James A., eds, Handbook for Medieval Sexuality (New York, 1996), pp. 81–102.Google Scholar
4 Robert Bultot, ‘Mépris du monde, misère et dignité de l’homme dans la pensée d’Innocent III’, Cahiers de civilisation médiévale, 4 (1961), p. 441. See also Jean Delumeau, Sin and Fear: the Emergence of a Western Guilt Culture, 13th-18th Centuries, trans. Eric Nicholson (New York, 1990), pp. 14, 16, 21–3, 42–7.
5 Moore, John C., ‘Innocent III’s De miseria humanae conditionis: a speculum curiae?, CathHR, 67 (1981), pp. 556–7, 563.Google Scholar
6 Bloch, Medieval Misogyny, pp. 20–1, and Leclercq, Women and St. Bernard, p. 145 n. 25, citing Dietz, Misery, 1.17, p. 20; Maccarrone, De miseria, 1.17, pp. 23–4.
7 Dietz, Misery, 1.17, pp. 20–1, Maccarrone, De miseria, 1.17, pp. 23–4.
8 Block, Medieval Misogyny, p. 25, citing Dietz, Misery, 1.6, p. 10; Maccarrone, De miseria, 1.6, p. 13.
9 Dietz, Misery, 1.1, p. 6; 1.5, pp. 9–10; 1.10, p. 13; 1.15, pp. 17–18 and Maccarrone, De miseria, 1.1, p. 8; 1.5, p. 12; 1.10, p. 16; 1.15, pp. 20–1.
10 Dietz, Misery, 2.2, p. 33; 2.14, p. 43; 2.17-22, pp. 45–9; 2.26-33, pp. 51–7; Maccarrone, De miseria, 2.2, p. 39; 2.14, pp. 49–50; 2.17-22, pp. 51–7; 2.26-33, pp. 59–65.
11 Dietz, Misery, Prologue, p. 3; Maccarrone, De miseria, Prologus, p. 4; Bultot, ‘Mépris’, pp. 442, 448. Bultot attempts to reconstruct the treatise on man’s dignity by using other Innocentian works on pp. 448–53.
12 Bultot, ‘Mépris’, p. 442.
13 Dietz, Misery, 1.4, p. 9; Maccarrone, De miseria, 1.4, p. 12.
14 Hageneder, O. and Haidacher, A., eds, Die ‘Register Innocenz’ III, Bd. I, Pontifikatsjahr 1198/99 (Graz and Cologne, 1964), 63, pp. 93–4 Google Scholar [hereafter Register, 1]; PL 214, col. 55; Regesta pontificium Romanorum inde ab. a post Christum natum 1198 ad 1304, ed. A. Potthast, 2 vols (Berlin, 1874–5, repr. Graz, 1957) [hereafter Potthast], I, no. 517.
15 Innocent’s answer is very similar to that of Pope Gregory the Great who had clearly pointed out that a woman could enter the Church even immediately after birth. See D.$ c.2: CIC, 1, cols 7–8. Despite this repeated statement, the notion of uncleanness persisted. See Waltar von Arx, The churching of women after childbirth history and signification’, Concilium, 112 (1979), pp. 63–72, for an historical discussion of this practice of churching.
16 PL 217, cols 310–688; For an analysis of all the sermons, see Moore, John C., ‘The sermons of Pope Innocent IH’, Ramisene historische Mitteilungen, 36 (1994), pp. 81–142 Google Scholar, on dating see esp. pp. 85–7; C. J. Vause, The sermons of Innocent III: a rhetorical analysis’ (University of California Ph. D. dissertation, Santa Barbara, 1984) and the much older study by G. Scuppa, ‘I Sermoni di Innocenzo IH’ (Pontificia Universitas Lateranense dissertation, Rome, 1961).
17 PL 217, col. 662. I would like to thank John Doran for this reference.
18 PL 217, cols 581, 577–8, 531, 580, 562. On Innocent’s mariology see Wilhelm Imkamp, ‘Vtrgimtas quam ornavit humilitas: Die Verehrung der Gottesmutter in den Sermones Papst Innocenz III’, Laleranum, 46 (1980), pp. 344–78.
19 PL 217, col. 400, ‘et in Eva peccaverunt caeterae muliercs, in Adam vero caeteri viri’.
20 D’Alverny, ‘Comment les théologiens’, pp. 107, no.
21 PL 217, col. 368; translation in Moore, The sermons’, p. 95.
22 PL 217, cols 528–9; Moore, The sermons’, pp. 97–9, has doubts about the authenticity of this text.
23 Rosemary Radford Ruether, ‘Misogynism and virginal feminism in the Fathers of the Church’, in Rosemary Radford Ruether, ed., Religion and Sexism: Images of Woman in Jewish and Christian Traditions (New York, 1974), pp. 156–8.
24 PL 217, col. 542.
25 PL 217, col. 929.
26 A good introduction to the registers, their manuscript tradition, and printed editions can be found in Cheney, C. R. and Cheney, Mary G., The Letters of Pope Innocent III (1198-1216) concerning England and Wales: A Calendar with an Appendix of Texts (Oxford, 1967), pp. ix-xxiv.Google Scholar
27 Renée Metz, ‘Le statut de la femme en droit canonique médiéval’, in her La femme et l’enfant Jans le droit canonique médiéval, Variorum Collected Studies (Aldershot, 1985), ch. IV, pp. 97–102.
28 PL 216, col. 356; Potthast, I, no. 4143.
29 PL 216, col. 356.
30 I Cor. 7.3-6; Elizabeth M. Makowski, The conjugal debt and medieval canon law’, JMedH, 3 (1977), pp. 99–100; Brundage, James A., ‘Sexual equality in medieval canon law’,Google Scholar in Rosenthal, Joel T., ed., Medieval Women and the Sources of Medieval History (Athens, GA, and London, 1990), pp. 66–79 Google Scholar.
31 James A Brundage, The crusader’s wife: a canonistic quandary’, Studia Gratiana, 12 (1967), pp. 428–30.
32 PL 216, cols 904–5; Potthast, I, no. 4807.
33 Ibid.: ‘cum per hoc matrimoniale vinculum non solvatur, sed subtrahatur ad tempus cohabitatio conjugalis: quod in multis aliis casibus fieri frequenter oportet.’
34 PL 215, col. 1583; Potthast, I, no. 3668 (1-21 Feb. 1209).
35 X3.3 2.4-6: CIC, 2, cols 579–80.
36 PL 215, cols 593–4; Potthast, I, no. 2470 (9 April 1205).
37 Ibid.
38 For a complete description of these three cases, see my article, The spousal relationship: marital society and sexuality in the letters of Pope Innocent IIP, Mediaeval Studies, 56 (1994), pp. 98–103.
39 Norman Tanner, P., ed., Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils, 2 vols (London and Washington, DC, 1990), 1, p. 198:Google Scholar c.7, Lateran II; see Barstow, Anne L., Married Priests and the Reforming Papacy: The Eleventh-Century Debates, Texts and Studies in Religion, 12 (New York, 1982), pp. 47–104 Google Scholar, and John E. Lynch, ‘Marriage and celibacy of the clergy: an bistorico-canonical synopsis, Part II”, The Jurist, 32 (1972), pp. 189–201, for discussions of the problem of clerical marriage with some reference to the status and situation of concubines.
40 Hageneder, O. et al, eds, Die Register Innocenz’ III, Bd VI, Pontifikatsjahr 1203/1204 (Vienna, 1995), no. 196, p. 333 Google Scholar [hereafter Register, VI]; PL 215, col. 223; Potthast, I, no. 2060. ‘Ad recipiendas autem huiusmodi mulieres patres, fratres et consanguíneos moneas diligentius et inducas et cogas etiam, prout videris expediré.’
41 This was reported by Peter Damián, PL 145, col. 411, cited by Bernhard Schimmelpfennig, ‘Ex fornicatone nati: studies on the position of priests’ sons from the twelfth to the fourteenth century’, Studies in Medieval and Renaissance History, ns 2 (1979), p. 17.
42 Register, I, no. 112, pp. 169–70; PL 214, cols 102–3; Potthast, I, no. 114.
43 Register, VI, no. 2, pp. 5–6; PL 215, cols 10–11; Potthast, I, no. 1836. See also PL 215, cols 765–7, Potthast, I, no. 2656 (13 Jan. 1206), where in a similar case of adultery, the same twofold solution was given.
44 See Jean Dauvillier, Le manage dans le droit classique de l’église depuis le Décret de Gratien (1140) jusqu’à la mort de Clément V (1314) (Paris, 1933), p. 293.
45 Register, VI, no. 2, pp. 5–6; PL 215, cols 10–11; Potthast, I, no. 1836.
46 X. 4.13.2: CIC, 2, cols 696–7.
47 A similar twofold solution was given for a woman in an unconsummated marriage impeded by supervenient affinity where a husband, without consummating the union, handed his unwilling wife over to a relative for sexual intercourse. Once again, the Alexandrine distinctions did not hold. See PL 216, col. 1264; X.4.13.6: C1C, 2, col. 698; Potthast, I, no. 1182 (Nov.-Dec. 1200).
48 Register, VI, no. 108, p. 174; PL 215, cols 113–14; Potthast, I, no. 1946.
49 Ibid.: ‘cum et temerarium fuerit hujusmodi juramentum, et adulterium sit utrimque commissum.’
50 Brundage, James A., Law, Sex and Christian Society in Medieval Europe (Chicago, IL, 1987), p. 247,CrossRefGoogle Scholar noted the canonist Gratian’s position here. However, refer to pp. 307, 320–1, where some decretists such as Rufinus, Sicard of Cremona, and Johannes Faventinus said that some of the penalties of husband and wife differed in practice.
51 PL 216, col. 24; Potthast, I, no. 3698.
52 See Alexander Ill’s decree in X.3.32.1: CIC, 2, col. 529.
53 Langebek, Jacob, ed., Scriptores rerum Danicarum medii aevi, 9 vols (Hauniae, 1772–1834), 6, p. 12; Potthast, I, no. 536 (20 Sept-31 Dec. 1198).Google Scholar
54 Ibid.
55 PL 214, col. 196. For Innocent’s patronage of religious women in particular, see Brenda Bolton, ‘Daughters of Rome: all one in Christ Jesus’, in her Innocent III, also SCH, 27 (1990), pp. 101–15. On the Pope’s financial assistance to Cistercian monasteries see also her article ‘For the see of St. Peter: the Cistercians at Innocent Ill’s nearest frontier’, Innocent III, ch. 2, pp. 1–20, esp. pp. 10–12.
56 PL 217, col. 1154: ‘Quidquid in Regula constitutum est, de fratribus et sororibus intclligitur, ut eidem Regulae subjaceant quia indignum satis videretur, si in domo Sancti Spiritus acceptio vel correctio fratrum et sororum duobus modis fieret; unde ordinatum est, ut sicut sub und Regula vivimus, ita sub eisdem judiciis Regulae subjecti esse debemus.’ Brenda Bolton says that despite many probable revisions, part of the primitive text of this rule is datable to 1213. On Innocent’s hospital see her article, ‘“Received in his Name”: Rome’s busy baby box’, in Innocent HI, and SCH, 31 (1994), pp. 153–67.
57 PL 217, col. 1144.
58 Gal. 3.28.