In 494 A.D.,
Gelasius, a bishop of Rome (r. 492-496 A.D.), wrote a very influential
letter that we know as Duo sunt (from the first two Latin
words of the text) to the Eastern Emperor Anastasius. This letter
fairly set in stone the categories by which Christian thinkers would
conceive of and live out ecclesiopolitical matters for the next
thousand years. Gelasius laid down a distinction between "two powers",
which he called the "holy authority of bishops" (auctoritas sacrata
pontificum) and the "royal power" (regalis potestas). These
two powers were, he said, to be considered independent in their own
spheres of operation, yet able and required to work cooperatively
together in whatever areas of jurisdictional overlap might arise.
This principle, sometimes called political dualism,
formed the backdrop for all of the Church-State controversies
throughout the Middle Ages. Indeed, various positions held by
both the Church and the State frequently veered away from the "mean"
set down by Gelasius, and thus tended to embrace equal and opposite
extremes which often both fomented society-endangering controversy and
prevented successful resolutions.
The text of Duo sunt1 reads as follows:
As you see, O august Emperor, there are
two by which this world is principally governed: the authority of the
sacred Pontiff, and the royal power. Between these two the greater
burden is that of the priest, as indeed he will have to render an
account for the kings of men regarding divine matters. A few small
points on this:
§ 1. Among these things you know
that you are to listen attentively to judgments from the priests, and
not to those things which are rendered by your own will.
§ 2. Supported by many great
customs and a good many authorities the Pontiffs have excommunicated
both kings and emperors.
For instance, if a few specific
examples of princes are required, [I offer these]. Pope Innocent
excommunicated Emperor Arcadius because he had conspired to drive out
St. John Chrysostom from his see. Also Ambrose, thought to be holy yet
not the bishop of the Universal Church, did not seem to the other
priests to be oppressive when he excommunicated Emperor Theodosius the
Great for his faults and excluded him from the Church.
Ambrose indeed pointed out in his own
writings that because gold is not of such great value if it is mixed
with lead, how can the royal power be of higher dignity than the
sacerdotal? He wrote this rule around the beginning of his pastorate:
Brothers, honor the sublimity of the episcopate for nothing is able to
be adequately compared with it. If the king is compared to the flashing
of lightning and the prince to preeminence, they will be far inferior,
just as if lead is compared to the glitter of gold. Obviously, since
you see that the necks of kings and the princes of the nations should
be submitted to the priests, and indeed the kings ought to pledge with
their mouths that they will believe themselves to be established by the
priests's prayers.
For related themes and expositions, see
the entries on Cum ad verum,
Hincmar of Rheims,
the Hierocratic Theory of
Government, Imitation of the
Empire, Transfer of the Empire,
Huggucio of Pisa, Pope Innocent III, and various other
entries linked from these.
1. This translation is
by Timothy G. Enloe from the Latin text found in Migne's Patrologia
Latina, Volume 187, columns 458D-459B.