Conflicts with the Papacy
The relations of the Teutonic Order with the papacy were, for the greater part of the Order’s history, cordial and mutually supportive. The Order was, throughout its history, one of the principal instruments of papal policy in the Baltic, and the papacy was, throughout the Order’s history, one of the Order’s principal sources of political and financial support. The Order received, in the course of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, a substantial body of papal bulls that confirmed its privileges, granted it extensive rights of ecclesiastical jurisdiction, and provided it with substantial revenues from the tithes and the indulgences of the Baltic region. The Order’s relations with the papacy were, however, not without tension, and the Order was involved, on several occasions in the late medieval period, in serious constitutional disputes with the Holy See. The disputes were, generally disputes about the Order’s exempt status, about the Order’s territorial possessions, and about the Order’s right to acquire new possessions in the Baltic region.
The Papal Protection of the Order
The papacy assumed, from the earliest years of the Order’s existence, a special responsibility for the protection of the Order and its privileges. Pope Celestine III confirmed the Order in 1192, in one of the earliest papal documents concerning the fraternity, and the Order’s principal claims to its religious status — its Augustinian vocation, its exempt status, its right to hold properties without the intermediation of the local bishops — were, in the course of the thirteenth century, repeatedly confirmed by the papacy. The papal protection of the Order was, a central element in the Order’s institutional security, and it was a continual source of friction with the local episcopate of the Empire and the Baltic.
The Order’s exempt status — its status as a religious order directly subject to the Holy See, without the intermediary jurisdiction of the local bishops — was, in the Middle Ages, a controversial privilege. The exempt orders were, the diocesan bishops, a continual infringement of the ordinary authority of the bishop in his own diocese, and the bishops were, in consequence, not always willing to defer to the Order’s privileges. The Order was involved, in the course of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, in a substantial number of disputes with the bishops of the Empire, of Poland, of Bohemia, of Livonia, and of Prussia, in which the bishops challenged the Order’s right to hold churches, to collect tithes, to appoint priests, and to exercise the other ordinary functions of the diocesan bishop within the Order’s territories. The Order’s defence in these disputes was generally the defence of its papal privileges, and the papacy was generally sympathetic to the Order’s position.
The papal protection of the Order was, however, not unconditional. The papacy expected, in return for its protection, that the Order would defend the Latin rite in the Baltic, that the Order would support the papal political programme in the region, and that the Order would defer to the papacy on matters of religious discipline. The Order’s compliance with these expectations was generally satisfactory, but the Order’s continuing military operations against Lithuania after the conversion of 1386 were, the papacy, a substantial embarrassment, and the papacy was, in the late fourteenth and early fifteenth centuries, increasingly reluctant to support the Order’s claim to a continuing crusading vocation in the Baltic.
The Bulls of the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Centuries
The Order’s principal bulls were, generally granted in the period of the Order’s greatest expansion, in the thirteenth and early fourteenth centuries. The Golden Bull of Rimini, granted by Emperor Frederick II in 1226, confirmed the Order’s possession of the Culmer Land and the Prussian territories that the Order was to conquer in the course of the Prussian crusade. The bull of 1226 was, in the Order’s constitutional history, a foundational document, and it , was the principal legal basis of the Order’s claim to the Prussian territories.
The papal bulls were, however, more numerous and more varied than the imperial grants. Pope Honorius III, in 1221, granted the Order the right to retain the tithes of the Prussian territories for the support of the Order’s religious and military establishment. Pope Gregory IX, in 1230, confirmed the Order’s possession of the Prussian territories and granted the Order the right to acquire new territories in the Baltic. Pope Innocent IV, in 1245, confirmed the Order’s exemption from the jurisdiction of the local bishops. Pope Nicholas IV, in 1292, granted the Order the right to incorporate the surviving Sword Brothers of Livonia into the Teutonic Order. The cumulative effect of these bulls was, in the course of the thirteenth and early fourteenth centuries, to constitute the Order as one of the most privileged religious institutions in Latin Christendom, and the Order’s privileges were, the local bishops and the secular princes of the region, a continual source of resentment.
The bulls were, however, not always consistent in their provisions, and the Order’s privileges were, in consequence, the subject of substantial constitutional argument. The Order claimed, on the basis of the bull of 1230, that its possession of the Prussian territories was, in perpetuity, a possession in the name of the Holy See, and that the Order’s rights in the territories were, in consequence, inalienable. The papacy claimed, on the basis of the bull of 1245, that the Order’s exemption from the jurisdiction of the local bishops was a privilege that the Order had not always observed, and that the Order was, in consequence, liable to the supervision of the Holy See. The Order’s response to this claim was generally a refusal to acknowledge the papacy’s right of supervision, and the refusal was, in the late fourteenth and early fifteenth centuries, a substantial source of friction between the Order and the Holy See.
The Disputes over the Order’s Possessions
The most serious conflict between the Order and the papacy was the long dispute over the Order’s territorial possessions in the Baltic region. The Order’s principal source of revenue was, by the late Middle Ages, the demesne lands of the Teutonic State, and the Order was, the papacy, a religious order whose territorial possessions were, in principle, subject to the supervision of the Holy See. The papacy claimed, on a number of occasions in the late medieval period, that the Order’s possession of the Prussian territories was a possession in the name of the Holy See, and that the Order was, in consequence, obliged to account to the papacy for the management of the territories and the use of the revenues.
The Order’s response to this claim was generally a refusal. The Order argued, on the basis of the bull of Rimini and the subsequent papal confirmations, that its possession of the Prussian territories was a possession in its own right, and that the Order’s rights in the territories were, in consequence, not subject to the supervision of the Holy See. The Order also argued, with some justice, that the Order’s management of the Prussian territories had been, on the whole, a conscientious and successful management, and that the Order’s record in the Christianisation and the administration of the territories was, in itself, a sufficient justification of the Order’s right to the possession.
The dispute was, in part, a dispute about the constitutional position of the Order, and it was, in part, a dispute about the political future of the Baltic. The papacy was, in the late fourteenth and early fifteenth centuries, increasingly concerned that the Order was using its religious mission as a pretext for political expansion, and the papacy was, in consequence, increasingly sympathetic to the Polish-Lithuanian argument that the Order’s continuing military operations in the Baltic were, in effect, a war of aggression against a Christian ruler. The Order’s defeat at Grunwald in 1410 was, a substantial political setback, and the Order’s loss of the western Prussian territories to Poland in the Second Peace of Thorn in 1466 was, in effect, the resolution of the dispute in favour of the Polish-Lithuanian position.
The Disputes over Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction
The Order’s relations with the papacy were, in addition to the disputes over the territorial possessions, the subject of a substantial number of disputes over the Order’s ecclesiastical jurisdiction. The Order claimed, on the basis of its exempt status, the right to hold churches, to appoint priests, to collect tithes, and to exercise the other ordinary functions of the diocesan bishop within the Order’s territories. The local bishops of the Empire, of Poland, of Bohemia, of Livonia, and of Prussia challenged the Order’s claim, on the grounds that the Order’s exempt status was, an exemption from the jurisdiction of the local bishop in matters of religious discipline, and that the Order was not, in consequence, entitled to exercise the ordinary functions of the diocesan bishop within the Order’s territories.
The disputes were, generally resolved by compromise. The Order was, in many cases, willing to acknowledge the ordinary jurisdiction of the local bishop in matters of pastoral care and the administration of the sacraments, in exchange for the local bishop’s acknowledgement of the Order’s right to hold the churches of the Order’s territories and to collect the tithes of the Order’s subjects. The compromises were, a central element in the constitutional stability of the Order’s territories, and the Order’s relations with the local episcopate were, by the late Middle Ages, on the whole, more cordial than they had been in the thirteenth century.
Sources
- Biskup, Marian. Der Deutsche Orden im Zeitalter der Reformation. Marburg: Elwert, 1989.
- Boockmann, Hartmut. Der Deutsche Orden: Zwölf Kapitel aus seiner Geschichte. Munich: Beck, 1981.
- Housley, Norman. Contesting the Crusades. Oxford: Blackwell, 2006.
- Strehlke, Ernst, ed. Tabulae ordinis Theutonici. Berlin: Weidmann, 1869.
Related Reading
For the founding of the Order at Acre, see the article on the founding. For the Order’s relations with Pope Gregory IX, see the article on Pope Gregory IX. For the conflict with Pope John XXII, see the article on the conflict with John XXII. For the Prussian state, see the pillar on the Teutonic State. For the Order’s exemption and its constitutional consequences, see the pillar on Order structure. For the Order’s defeat at Grunwald, see the article on the Battle of Grunwald.