|
CRIVELLUCCI LORDS OF KARMA COUNSEL
VALENTINA DORIA II THE SOPHIA OF ALL THE SOPHIA'S OF WISDOMS
THE HISTORY OF CRIVELLI ITALIAN SALSA
HISTORY OF THE GOTHS
HISTORY OF THE VISGOTHS
CRIVELLUCCI COUNSEL
HISTORY OF THE LOMARDS
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA - LOMBARDY
CRIVELLUCCI
Bibliography
The earliest historian of Lombardy is PAULUS WARNEFRID (730-797), known as Paulus
Diaconus, a Benedictine of Monte Cassino, and chancellor of King Desiderius. His Historia. Langobardorum is an important authority
for the traditions, customs, and political history of his people to the end of the eighth century (P.L., XCV; Mon. Ger. Hist.:
Script. Rer. Langob., Berlin, 1878). See also TROYA, Codex diplom. Longobard. (Naples, 1852), and besides the histories of
LEO, HARTMANN, CANT٬ SCHMIDT, and others, the valuable work of. HODGKIN, Italy and her Invaders, V-VI (London, 1895);
POUPARDIN, Hist. des principautés lombardes de l'italie mérid. (Paris, 1907); IDEM, Instit. polit. Et adm. des princip. lombardes
(Paris, 1907). For the relations of the Roman Church with the Lombards see Liber Pontificalis, ed. DUCHESNE (Paris, 1885),
passim, and DUCHESNE, Les év�d'Italie et l'invasion lombarde in Mélanges d'archéol. et d'hist., XXIII, XXIV
(Paris, 1903); also CRIVELLUCCI, Le chiese cattoliche ed i Lombardi
ariani in Studi Storici, IV (6), XIII. On the Lombard communes see DANTIER in Revue Europ�ne, 1859, III-IV, and WILLIAMS,
The Communes of Lombardy, VI to X century, in Johns Hopkins, Univ. Hist. Studies (Baltimore, 1891). The medieval chroniclers
of Lombardy are to he found in MURATORI, Script. rer. Ital. (1725), 28 vols., folio, passim; see also the Mon. Germ. Hist.,
the Hist. Patria Monumenta, and the Archivo Storico Lombardo-Veneto (Milan, 1874, sqq.). For Lombard art see MALVEZZI, Le
glorie dell'arte Lombarda (Milan, 1892), 590-1850, also the histories of ecclesiastical art by KRAUS, KUHN, and others. On
the medieval financial operations of the Lombards see PITOU, Les Lombards en France et ࠐaris (1892), and all economical
histories of the Middle Ages, e.g., CUNNINGHAM, Western Civilization.
BELOW IS THE LINK TO VIEW THE REST OF THIS DOCUMENT
THE HISTORY OF THE CRIVELLI
THE HISTORY OF THE CRIVELLI
THE HISTORY OF THE CRIVELLI
THIS IS
POPE URBAN III
NEW OFFICIAL TITLE
THAT WAS PRODICTED
40 YEARS
BEFORE HE BECAME
POPE
THE HISTORY OF THE CRIVELLI
THIS
ROD OF RULE
HAS BEEN CHARGED WITH A CHARGER
GLOVES MUST BE WORN WHEN HANDELING
IT
JUST LIKE TAKING OUT
MY
SEEDS OF LIFE
OUT
OF ME
POPE URBAN III
UBERTO OF THE MILANESE FAMILY OF CRIVELLI
Pope Urban III
Reigned 1185-87, born at Milan; died at Ferrara, 19 October, 1187. Uberto, of the noble Milanese family of the Crivelli, was created cardinal by Lucius III in 1182 and Archbishop of Milan in 1185.
On 25 November of this year Lucius died at Verona, and the archbishop was elected to succeed him on the same day; he was crowned on 1 December.
This haste was probably due to fear of imperial interference.
Urban inherited from his predecessor a legacy of feud with the great Emperor Frederick Barbarossa, and this was embittered by personal enmity, for at the sack of Milan in 1162 the emperor had caused several of the pope's relatives to be proscribed or mutilated.
It has been noticed that the breach between Lucius III and Frederick coincided with the arrival in Northern Italy (August, 1185) of Constance, the heiress of the Kingdom of Sicily, who was betrothed to Frederick's son Henry.
The marriage, which was celebrated at Milan on 4 Jan., 1186, six weeks after Urban's accession, "constituted for the papacy the gravest check it had suffered for a long time.
By it was ruined the whole political edifice so laboriously raised by the popes of the eleventh and twelfth centuries to keep in check the power of the Emperors in Italy and to assure the independence of the Papal States" (Chalandon, II, 390).
By this marriage was lost that Norman support on which the papacy had so long relied in its contest with the empire. Nor was this the only cause
of quarrel.
The treaty of 1177 had left unsettled the question of the succession to the estates of Matilda
of Tuscany, while Frederick had seized the revenues of vacant German bishoprics and suppressed nunneries for the sake of their property.
Urban maintained the refusal of Lucius III to crown Henry, and the Patriarch of Aquileia was induced by the emperor to perform the office, although it belonged to the pope in right of the Archbishopric of Milan which he had retained, possibly to that end, after his election.
Urban replied by excommunicating the patriarch and the bishops who had assisted at the ceremony.
On 31 May he promoted to the cardinalate the archdeacon Folmar, and next day consecrated him as Archbishop of Trier, contrary to a promise he had made to the emperor, for though Folmar had been canonically
elected, Frederick had granted investiture to Rudolf, the candidate of the minority.
The emperor clossed the passes of the Alps against the pope's messengers to Germany, and sent Henry to ravage the Papal States.
Urban had hoped for support from the German bishops, but at the Diet of Gelnhausen (April or May, 1187), from which the papal legate, Philip von Heinsberg, Archbishop of Cologne, was excluded, Frederick won the bishops to his side and caused them to send letters to the pope urging him "to do justice to the Emperor in those things which were justly demanded of him" (Arnold of Lübeck, III, 18).
Urban replied by summoning the emperor to appear before his tribunal at Verona, and was only prevented from pronouncing excommunication against him by the Veronese, who, as Frederick's subjects, would not permit the sentence to be promulgated in their city.
Urban set out for Venice, where he would have been able to carry out his threat, but died at Ferrara, after a pontificate of a year and eleven months.
His death is ascribed by Benedict of Peterborough to grief at the news of the utter defeat of the crusaders at the battle of Hattin, and it is commonly stated that it was caused by the news of the fall of Jerusalem, but William of Newburgh assures us that the report of the disaster of Hattin (3-4 July) did not reach
the Holy See till after the election of Gregory VIII, so it is hardly probable that Urban III ever heard of the surrender of the Holy City which
took place on 2 October.
A curious story is told by Peter of Blois, Archdeacon of Bath, who claims to have been intimate with the pope ("in scholis Urbani socius et descipulus fueram Maldyebyrig") and connects his death with
his wrath against Baldwin, Archbishop of Canterbury.
At the very beginning of his pontificate Urban had granted the request made to his predecessor
by Henry II of England, and appointed Baldwin Apostolic legate in the Province of Canterbury, but in the latter's quarrel with the monks of his cathedral the pope had taken the part of the monks, and the archbishop had proved obdurate.
Perhaps this was not the only cause of the pope's anger; for Baldwin, moved probably by jealousy, had persuaded the king to conduct back to Normandy the legates sent to crown John as King of Ireland (Benedict of Peterborough, "Gesta regis Henrici Secundi"). The pope even sent a gold crown ("coronam auro contextam") for this purpose.
He exerted himself to bring about peace between England and France, and on 23 June, 1187, his legates by threats of excommunication prevented a pitched battle between the armies of the rival kings near Châteauroux, and brought
about a two years' truce.
Urban's letters show zeal for the Holy Land and a desire to promote peace among the quarrelling Christian potentates of Syria.
Unfortunately, it cannot be ascertained whether the interesting letter addressed to Philip
of France (Jaffé, "Regesta", 15,924) really belongs to this pope.
The number of privileges in favour of the Knights Hospitallers is remarkable.
The letters and privileges of Urban III are given in P.L., CCII.
His tomb, "a handsome sarcophagus resting on four columns" (Gregorovius), may still be seen
in Ferrara cathedral.
SEE LINK
FOR
POPE URBAN III
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15211a.htm
FREDRICK I CUT OFF POPE URBAN III FROM GOING TO THE VATICAN AND THE POPE SET UP
A HOSPITAL OR A HOLY SEE...
Holy See
(From the Latin Sancta Sedes, Holy Chair).
A term derived from the enthronement-ceremony of the bishops of Rome.
The seat or chair in question must not be confounded with the ancient sedes gestatoria
in the centre of the apse of St. Peter's, and immemorially venerated as the cathedra Petri, or Chair of Peter; the term means, in a general sense, the actual seat (i.e. residence) of the supreme pastor of the Church, together with the various ecclesiastical authorities who constitute the central administration.
In this canonical and diplomatic sense, the term is synonymous with "Apostolic See", "Holy Apostolic See", "Roman Church", "Roman Curia".
The origin of these terms can only be approximately ascertained.
The word sedes, "chair", is an old technical term applicable to all episcopal sees.
It was first used to designate the Churches founded by the Apostles; later the word was applied to the principal Christian Churches.
These ecclesiae dictae majores were understood to be the five great patriarchal sees
of Christian antiquity: Rome, Alexandria, Antioch, Jerusalem, and Constantinople.
To these the word sedes was applied: "quod in iis episcopi sederent in thronis", and
of Rome it was expressly said: "Romana quidem erat prima sedes propria dicta." Thus, Gelasius I (492-496) at a Roman council: "Est ergo prima Petri apostoli sedes."
In the earliest Christian writings, also, we often find references to the see or chair of Peter: "Sedet in cathedra Petri".
Throughout the early Middle Ages the term was constantly in official use. Thus, in the "Liber Pontificalis" (ed. Duchesne, II, Paris, 1892, 7), under Leo III (795-816): "Nos sedem apostolicam, quae est caput omnium Dei ecclesiarum, judicare non audemus."
(We dare not judge the Apostolic See, which is the head of all the Churches of God.)
We can thus readily understand how Holy See came be the technical term for the pope, the central ecclesiastical government, and the actual abode of the same.
The papal reservations of benefices, customary in the Middle Ages, made necessary a more exact knowledge of the location of the "Holy See", e.g. when the incumbent of a benefice happened to die "apud sanctam sedem".
Where was the "Holy See", when the pope lived apart from the ordinary central administration?
From the thirteenth to the fifteenth century we find no satisfactory solution of
this question, and can only observe the decisions of the Curia in individual cases.
Thus, it was not deemed necessary that the pope should reside in Rome: "Ubi Papa, ibi Curia", i.e., it was taken for granted that the Curia or machinery of administration always followed the pope.
This is clearly shown by an interesting case under Nicholas III, who lived at Soriano from 8 June, 1280, till his death on 22 August of the same year.
There were with him only his personal attendants, and the officials in charge of
the papal seal (bullatores). The Curia, properly speaking, was at Viterbo, whither the pope frequently went to transact affairs, and where he also gave audiences: "Audientiam suam fecit."
Nevertheless, he ordered Bulls to be dated from Soriano, which was done (Baumgarten, "Aus K. und Kammer", Freiburg, 1907, 279). More than
a century later, as appears from the official rules drawn up under Benedict XIII (Pedro de Luna; rules 148, 151, 158) and John XXIII (rule 68), this important point was still undecided. The aforesaid rules of Benedict XIII and John XXIII appeared on 28 November, 1404, and 5 June, 1413, respectively (Von Ottenthal, "Die papstlichen
Kanzleiregeln von Johann XXII bis Nikolaus V", Innsbruck, 1888, pp. 148, 151, 152, and 185). During the journey of Martin V (1417-1431) from Constance to Rome it frequently occurred that the pope and ecclesiastical authorities were separated from each other; even at this late date the official location of the "Holy See", in as far as this was legally important, was not
yet authoritatively fixed. This uncertainty, says Bangen, caused Clement VIII to draw up the Constitution: "Cum ob nonnullas", in which it is laid down that, if the pope and the pontifical administration should not reside in the same place, the utterances of
both are authoritative, provided they are in agreement with each other. Covarruvias and Gonzalez agree that: "Curia Romana ibi censetur esse, ubi est papa cum cancellaria et tribunalibus
et officialibus suis, quos ad regimen ecclesiae adhibet" (the Roman Curia is considered to be where the pope is, with the chancery, tribunals, and officials whom he employs in the Government of the Church). (Bangen, "Die römische Kurie", Münster, 1854, I, i, 5). Hinschius (System des katholischen
Kirchenrechts, III, Berlin, 1883, 135, remark 6) follows the medieval opinion:
"Ubi Papa, ibi Curia";
but this seems no longer tenable.
Enter subhead content here
|
