To the reformers in the Church lay investiture appeared
intolerable. How could the Church keep itself unspotted from the world when its
highest officers were chosen by laymen and were compelled to perform unpriestly
duties? In the act of investiture the reformers also saw the sin of simony
[35]--the sale of sacred powers—because there was such a temptation before the
candidate for a bishopric or abbacy to buy the position with promises or with
money.
[35] A name derived from Simon Magus, who offered money to
the Apostle Peter for the power to confer the Holy Spirit. See Acts,
viii, 18-20.
LAY INVESTITURE AS VIEWED BY THE SECULAR AUTHORITY
The lords, on the other hand, believed that as long as
bishops and abbots held vast estates on feudal tenure they should continue to
perform the obligations of vassalage. To forbid lay investiture was to deprive
the lords of all control over Church dignitaries. The real difficulty of the
situation existed, of course, in the fact that the bishops and abbots were both
spiritual officers and temporal rulers, were servants of both the Church and
the State. They found it very difficult to serve two masters.
