Very early reforms of the Church?

I'm not too keen on the Church's history, but I wonder if the Church could have been reformed long before it got as nearly as bad as it did. I know there were attempts but the reformers were either killed or exiled. Perhaps one of the early Popes recognize the potential for corruption and proactively prevents this?

Edit: FFS, wrong subforum
 
Before this is moved...

There were reforming Popes. Saint Gregory VII is one of the most famous. He enforced celibacy (to control nepotism in the hierarchy) and took a hard line against lay investiture (divorcing the Church's hierarchy from the Emperor's control, in theory anyway). He cracked down on simony. And he wasn't alone--the monastic orders (particularly the Franciscans and Dominicans) took a hard line on abuses and sins that tarnished the repute of the Church, in keeping with the idea that, when fighting heresy, it is good to be holier than they (hence, the Dominican and Franciscan poverty, emerging from the struggle against the Albigensian heresy).

The issue is, however, that to reform, one must first have a problem that deforms. So you won't get reform in the Church until you get a major crisis going--be it the Imperial investiture crisis, the epidemic of gnosticism in southern France, or Lutheranism.
 
Lutheranism? Wasn't the whole reason why he started railing against the Church was its rampant corruption?

It was no worse in his time than it was any time earlier. And Luther started railing against the Church in large part because he disagreed with a number of theological points (the Sacraments, and salvation through faith alone, and the number of books in the Bible).

But that's exactly my point--corruption without consequence just kind of sits there until a suitably-annoyed Pope gets elected, as it did for a long time. Generally speaking, issues are only dealt with when heresy or schism are already occurring (the Church tends to find other, somewhat more pressing matters to deal with otherwise--like the attempted reunification with the Orthodox Church, or a crusade against the Turk, or the struggle against the Emperor or some or other King).

The outbreak of heresy in northern Europe led directly to the Council of Trent and the Counter-Reformation--the Mass was standardized, the Jesuits formed and deployed to reconvert Europe alongside the older Orders, and the Roman Inquisition took threats of dissent much more seriously than it had previously (which led to unintended consequences, as when Galileo took it upon himself to propose interpretations of scripture consistent with heliocentric theory).
 
The other problem is that there were LOTS of reform movements in the Church. Most of the big monastic orders were founded as 'pure' reactions to the 'corrupt' existing orders. Then, of course, most of the new guys got popular, got lots of donations, ended up rich - and became as corrupt as the existing houses.

To keep reform happening, you have to have a long term force keeping the hierarchy's eye on reform (not on power, money, etc.).

To some extent, that happened with the Reformation - the Protestant churches posed a threat that the RCs met with the Counter Reformation, which eliminated a lot of abuses that had existed up til then, and let them stay abolished.

Hmmm... What if Orthodoxy and Catholicism overlapped in more places. If some western ruler converted to Orthodoxy, and much of Central Europe had both kinds of churches. Then you might possibly be able to get the competition you'd need.

Oooo... Just had another thought.
If the bardic/skaldic immunity spread further, and secondarily, some took up the habit of excoriating the powerful (nobles, rich merchants, churchmen), you might, just MIGHT, be able to keep reforms in place.
 
Before this is moved...

There were reforming Popes. Saint Gregory VII is one of the most famous. He enforced celibacy (to control nepotism in the hierarchy) and took a hard line against lay investiture (divorcing the Church's hierarchy from the Emperor's control, in theory anyway). He cracked down on simony.

Also, he reformed the papal election process, which had fallen into the hands of the Roman mob, more or less. (At one time in the early 1000s, there were three rival "Popes" in Rome - one in the Vatican, one in the Lateran, and one in Santa Maria Maggiore, with running street fights between their followers.)

Things were a lot better after him, for a good long while.
 
Top