Digital Continent Feast of Sts. Peter and Paul 2016 | Page 67

60
A king ’ s obedience aided in the determination of suitability as a Christian ruler which was judged by the authority of the pope . This concept too was not revolutionary or new . Henry III had required that his nobles swear their allegiance to his son three separate times . On the second occasion the oath used the words ‘ si rex iustus futurus esset ’, which obligated the nobles only if the boy grew to be a just king . 128 That statement alone suggested that it was the king ’ s actions which merited fidelity , not his birth into royalty alone . Pope Gregory ’ s thoughts on the subject agreed . The pope held directive power over the Christian community which included the king . The Church had no authority over political offices when exercised in a lawful manner but divine judgment granted the ability to withdraw the legal power of a king , or any Christian for that matter , if he dispensed his duties unlawfully . The pope possessed the power to excommunicate the ruler , casting him out from the Christian community , but this held no political weight . The Church held no power over the sinner once he had been ousted from the Church . When a ruler was excommunicated , the subjects could be freed from their obligation to serve him because he was a heretical ruler . Thus freed , subjects were not at moral risk and did not turn their back on their faith . If the pope deposed a king it was declarative rather than definitive . Deposed , he was not considered a true king in the view of the Church . This judgment and its sentence was moral in nature rather than
128 Joachimsen , 17 .