Science fiction author Poul Anderson wrote the novel The Shield of Time, which depicts two alternative story scenarios. On the one hand, the imperial power completely defeated the papacy and, on the other, the papacy became victorious, humiliating and marginalizing imperial power. Both ended in a highly authoritarian and repressive 20th century, totally stripped of democracy or civil rights. The conclusion of a protagonist is that the result in the actual story (no power won a clear victory, with the two continued to balance against each other) was the best from the point of view of human freedom. While the monarchy was involved in the conflict with the Church, its power diminished and localized rights of domination over peasants multiplied, which eventually led to the election of bishops and abbots in Germany taking place, according to the terms of the agreement, in the presence of the emperor (or his legate) as a judge (“without violence”) between potentially in disputed parties. , free of bribes, which maintained the emperor`s decisive role in the selection of these great territorial tycoons of the Empire. But without quarrel, the canons of the cathedral should choose the bishop, the monks should choose the abath. Beyond the borders of Germany, Burgundy and Italy, the election would be carried out by the Church without imperial interference. [Citation required] On the eve of the revolution, the French state was on the verge of bankruptcy. Repeated attempts at financial reform had failed, but the revolution paved the way for a new approach that had involved the Church from the outset.
On August 4, 1789, when the remnants of France`s feudal past were abolished in one night of vast reforms, the clergy agreed to abandon tithing and allow the state to assume its funding. The Declaration of Human and Citizen Rights of 26 August did not recognize the particular position of the Catholic Church. Now that all authority was within the nation, the Church found itself open – and vulnerable – to further reforms. On November 2, 1789, the new French National Assembly, known as the Constituent Assembly, adopted a decree that provided all the property of the Church to the nation. Talleyrand, Bishop of Autun and one of the few clerics to support the measure, argued that all church property belongs to the nation and that its return, by helping to create a better society, should therefore be considered a “religious act”.” On 16 July 1801, France signed a document with Rome known as the Concordant, the result of eight months of painstaking negotiations. Catholicism was now to be recognized only as “the religion of the vast majority of French citizens”, a description that deprived the Church of any privileged place within the state, and the Church should renounce all claims to property lost during the Revolution. However, the most dramatic step of the concordat was to place the Church under the authority of the state. In measures reminiscent of the Civil Constitution of 1790, all members of the clergy had to swear allegiance to the government that their salaries should be paid by the state and that the dioceses were redesigned and reconciled with the administrative services. In addition, all bishops should be appointed by Napoleon, which further minimized the authority of Rome. This trend was confirmed in 1802 with the addition of the “organic articles” concordat, 27 articles were developed and announced without consultation with Rome. Article 1, which required that all Rome`s instructions be approved by the government, suggested that in this new relationship, papal authority meant little.
Napoleon`s church, like the Gallic Church of the former regime, had its own national identity. The rejection of the position of the Cardinal of Lomenia on 23 February by Pope Pius VI, who refused “spiritual approval”, guaranteed that it would become a Shi`ism. The subsequent condemnation of the revolutionary regime by the Pope and the rejection of all the clerics who had been sworn in completed the.