Celestine V |
He was chosen pope at a time when the cardinals were
deadlocked between the candidates of various rival families of Roman nobility. The Colonna, the Orsini, the Caetani, and
other Roman families vied for control of the papacy and played off one another
in conclave after conclave in the thirteenth century. After the death of Nicholas IV in 1292 the
Cardinals were unable to come to a consensus for more than two years. Pietro Angelerio, also known as Pietro da
Moronne (his hermitage had been at Moronne near Naples), a hermit monk known
for his rigid asceticism, wrote the cardinal electors a letter castigating them
for not giving the Church a pope. The cardinals,
frustrated, elected Pietro. Pietro
refused. A delegation of prelates and
the Kings of Naples and Hungary prevailed on him finally to accept and he was
crowned pope at L’Aquilia, about 62 miles north east of Rome. He chose to reign under the name Celestine V.
His papacy was a disaster and Celestine knew it. He was an old man—79 years old—and had been a
monk his whole life. He had no idea how
to deal with the politics of the papacy.
From the very first he wanted out.
And he had a very sly canon lawyer to advise him on just how it could be
done in Cardinal Benedetto Caetani.
Celestine resigned. Caetani was
elected on the first day of the conclave.
Celestine returned to his hermitage but was not allowed to remain
there. Caetani, now Boniface VIII, was
afraid that Celestine would fall into the hands of Boniface’s enemies and be
used against him as a sort of counter-pope.
Celestine tried to flee to what is today Croatia, across the Adriatic
from Italy but Boniface’s agents captured him and kept him under arrest at
Ferentino south of Rome. He died ten
months later—some claim murdered on orders of Boniface, but that is
unlikely.
Boniface was an ambitious man who was sort of the
papacy’s Richard Nixon in as that he would have been a good pope, even a great
pope, except for his character flaws that in the end turned his virtues into
vice. His hunger for power and his
arrogance brought him into conflict with Philip IV of France, a man whose
greatness was matched by a truly evil character. (Philip was also known as Philip the Fair, but Fair as in good looking not as in a good man.) Boniface was flawed; Philip evil to the
core—but a great king. And just as there
is a lesson to be learned in the Jimmy Carter like goodness of the ineffective
Celestine, there is a lesson to be learned in the evil Philip who was a good
king. Good men are often not great men
and great men are rarely good men. We
won’t go into Boniface’s papacy for now except to say that Dante placed
Boniface in the deepest ring of hell and he put Celestine in hell as
well—though not as deeply—for making Boniface’s papacy possible by himself resigning
the responsibility to which he had been entrusted. And Benedict?
Well his papacy has been lackluster, perhaps even plagued, though by no
means as bad as Celestine’s. But learn
from Celestine—there is no guarantee that papacy Benedict makes way for will be
any better and it could be worse. Let us
pray that it won’t be.
No comments:
Post a Comment