r/HolyRomanEmperors • u/Dapper_Tea7009 • 16d ago
Was Frederick II seen as an enemy of Christianity during his time,and did contemporary monarchs support his excommunications?
6
u/Objective-Golf-7616 Frederick II 15d ago edited 15d ago
It’s significant that not a single monarch in Europe supported his excommunications nor did any offer meaningful support to Innocent IV when he illegitimately deposed the emperor in 1245 in Lyon—this would be contrary to ‘rendering unto Caesar’ as Louis IX himself put it. If anything, Frederick’s excommunications, especially the last one in 1239 and reaffirmed in 1245 when he was illegally deposed, added to his legendary status among his contemporaries and his preeminence. His ‘deposition’ did not denude the fact that he was still the most powerful and prestigious monarch in Christendom; it actually burnished his feared reputation as a Western Caesar who could stand truly outside the conventional power of the papacy. Seen in the proper scope (ie what Philip IV would do to the papacy in a few decades), this was seismic.
1
2
u/Dapper_Tea7009 15d ago
Can you elaborate on the meaning of ‘rendering unto Caesar’?I have read that Louis only let the pope talk about the excommunications in France,but not preach a crusade against the Hohenstaufen
1
u/cycnusater 13d ago
Passage of the Bible in which Jesus states “give on to Ceaser what is his and to God what belongs to God”
It was used as a basis for the separation of temporal and religious power, e.g Emperor v. Pope. Deposing the Emperor was a clear breach of this.
2
1
u/Great_AEONS Henry IV 15d ago
Yeah he certainly was seen as an enemy of Christianity, at least as far as the church was concerned. That said, it is pretty obvious that the other monarchs saw Frederick's excommunication as political nonsense from Innocent's part. Despite that fact, it did not exactly translate to actual political support as most of the powerful monarchs weren't ever willing to present a compelling case for his innocence nor actually stop the church's shenanigans, absolutely to benefit from his pain and suffering. They were more than willing to support the church's endeavor when they stood to benefit from that, especially after Freddy died from all the pressure and many of them lunged at his dynasty like vultures.
1
u/Sad_Victory3 14d ago
The temporal power has always been submitted to the spiritual power which the pope is the leader of in Christendom, hence the holy roman emperors thought they were spiritually superior and even wanted to vassalize the pope with temporal means, the guelphs better decided to vassalize the emperor, thing Frederick and other monarchs opposed given they wanted autonomy or even dominance in Europe, legitimacy they lacked.
1
u/Lemmy-Historian 15d ago
Yes, he was seen as an enemy of Christianity by many people. He was hated for getting Jerusalem back without a fight. Many Muslims we’re welcome at his court in Sicily.
Excommunications: different thing. Monarchs didn’t like the idea of popes being able to depose monarchs. Princes within the empire brought up the question, if they would be seen as sinners as his electors and supporters during his excommunication while he was trying to revert it.
There was chaos in Italy after his death which the pope had a good part in. The emperor started to be remember so fondly that there were even bets that he was still alive and would return to save the empire. Later this legend would be transferred to his grandfather.
12
u/Cultural_Act_8513 Louis II 15d ago edited 15d ago
Even tho I am a huge fan of Frederick II's delightful work, I would say that he seen as an enemy of the Church, but not necessarily of Christianity itself, and contemporary monarchs generally did not support his excommunications. The conflict was not a religious dispute, but a fierce political battle over who held ultimate power in Christendom: the Pope or the Emperor. But that's just my opinion.