The Church Was Instrumental in Creating and Publicising the Magna Carta

[Frodo]

Something for the anti-religious zealots among us to contemplate:

Magna Carta scribes identified ahead of 800th anniversary

14 June 2015
From the section UK

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[DemPGH]

Well, a couple things. One, the goodly monks were good chronicle keepers. After Henry Tudor defeated Richard III at Bosworth, Henry had all copies of the Titulus Regius (Title of the King) condemned and expunged. That's so he could push his own propaganda. The Titulus Regius laid out Richard III's claim to the throne. One copy of it survived, and it had been transcribed into a chronicle. Thankfully.

Unfortunately, there are no good guys here.

John was excommunicated by Innocent III in 1209 after the pope attempted to undermine John politically and John retaliated. It had to do with church appointments. At every possible opportunity the Latin Church sought to overreach on its already gross power. Julius II and Innocent VIII are fantastic examples of what a horribly violent and corrupt Mafia like bureaucracy the papacy was for centuries.

Not that I sympathize with John. He was terrible. His promotion and then systematic destruction of the deBraose family (William, Mathilda, and their children) I think is one of the final straws that forced the barons c. 1213-15 to finally say, "That's enough, buddy." It's one of the things that is seldom talked about, but the deBraose family was big time.

[afleitch]

Something for the anti-religious zealots among us to contemplate:

I don't think it's surprising to anyone that the Magna Carta (in it's first and last breaths also outlining the independence of the church) was scribed by the only professional scribes of the day; those who worked for the church.

[Georg Ebner]

The Pope demanded from King John to reject the Magna Charta and all parties did not take that document as serious as the second half of the 8 centuries, when it was indeed immensely important&influential (cf. Macaulay, his grandnephew Trevelyan, Maitland a.s.o.).

[DemPGH]

The Pope demanded from King John to reject the Magna Charta and all parties did not take that document as serious as the second half of the 8 centuries, when it was indeed immensely important&influential (cf. Macaulay, his grandnephew Trevelyan, Maitland a.s.o.).

I think John had hoped that it would just sort of go away once he agreed to it, which it didn't, but his consent to it was more or less forced, and then Innocent, even more appalled by that, attempted to annul it later in 1215, probably because he saw it as interference that would destabilize feudal/religious order.

Anyway, it was the law of the land, and as such the Church was the only real body that could print and disseminate it, so I don't think they were taking sides.

[ingemann]

John was excommunicated by Innocent III in 1209 after the pope attempted to undermine John politically and John retaliated. It had to do with church appointments. At every possible opportunity the Latin Church sought to overreach on its already gross power. Julius II and Innocent VIII are fantastic examples of what a horribly violent and corrupt Mafia like bureaucracy the papacy was for centuries.

How dare the Pope try and appoint his own bishops. The modern papacy is trying similar shenanigans in China right now.

The papal appointment of bishops was a relative new concepts at the time and had nothing to do with faith, but was purely a way for the papalcy to extent its secular power. The kings while they still had power to appoint clergy had in many countries given large possessions to the Church, with the papalcy taking control over the appointment of bishops it was a de facto attack on and weakening of the state power and the strengthening of a transnational organisation ruled by corrupt Italian nobles.

...and the comparison with modern China both tasteless and show a complete lack of any ability to reflect on history. Any lack of religious freedom in modern China can not be compared to how even the concept of religious choice was ridiculous in medieval Europe and something people could be executed for suggesting.