Pope Gregory VI (1045-1046)

A secondary pope, but a pivotal point in Church history

Gregory VI left no encyclical, no dogmatic council, no lasting legal reform, nor was he canonized a saint. His pontificate lasted less than twenty months. Yet, he stands at the exact point where the Latin Church transitions from a Roman papacy captured by aristocratic families to the reforming papacy of the 11th century.^[9][10]

Before him, Roman families—especially the Tusculani and their rivals—had turned the papal election into a matter of urban domination. After him, Henry III’s intervention opened a sequence of reforming German or Lorraine popes: Clement II, Damasus II, Leo IX, Victor II. This imperial solution saved Rome from immediate chaos but also posed a new problem: would the Church be freed from Roman clans only to become dependent on the German king?^[11]

The pope of an ambiguous remedy

Gregory VI’s case forces us to consider a distinction rarely visible in quick accounts. The intention may be upright while the means remain objectively flawed. John Gratian seems to have wanted to remove Benedict IX from the Apostolic See to restore less scandalous governance to Rome; Treccani notes that the new pope was initially welcomed enthusiastically by Benedict’s opponents, and that Peter Damian wrote him a warm letter urging energetic reform — Sennis uses the words "calorosa lettera" and "energica azione di riforma"; the Catholic Encyclopedia specifies the content: dealing with the scandals of the Church in Italy, targeting notably the bishops of Pesaro, Città di Castello and Fano.^[12][13]

But the pontificate began with a sum of money given or reimbursed as part of the resignation. Even if Gregory acted with simplicity and good faith, the spiritual office appeared to have changed hands by contract. This is precisely what the synod of Sutri could not allow to stand: the remedy against Benedict IX’s scandal bore a stain that reformers could not normalize.^[14][15]

Gregory VII’s Humiliated Master

Perhaps the most fruitful aspect of the case is personal. The young Hildebrand works alongside Gregory VI as a chaplain or collaborator. After Sutri, he accompanies him into exile in Germany.

“The exile of January 1047 is the first precisely datable event in the life of the future Gregory VII.” — Robert Somerville, Encyclopedia of Religion (via Encyclopedia.com), own translation^[16]

Hildebrand thus learns reform through humiliation. He sees a personally esteemed pope fall for trying to buy peace for the Church; he sees a German king resolve a Roman crisis while effectively seizing enormous influence over the papal election; he sees the Church’s freedom depend in turn on money, clans, then the Empire. The future Gregory VII will retain from this school a central intuition: the Church will only be truly reformed if it regains a real libertas Ecclesiae — the freedom of the Church.

A Brief but Very Sensitive Dossier

Sources on Gregory VI are less abundant than those on Gregory VII, Leo IX, or Innocent III, but they are solid enough to establish the broad outlines: John Gratian, archpriest of Saint John at the Latin Gate; Benedict IX’s resignation for money; rivalry with Sylvester III and Benedict’s return; Henry III’s intervention; the Synod of Sutri; resignation or deposition; exile with Hildebrand; probable death in Cologne.^[17][18]

Horace K. Mann’s Catholic Encyclopedia offers the classic Catholic synthesis. Treccani, in Antonio Sennis’s article for the Enciclopedia dei Papi, is more critical and precise about uncertainties: exact name, obscure family origin, late Pierleoni tradition, difficult canonicity to settle, source variants on deposition or self-resignation, and debate on death.^[19]

What Is Not Known for Certain

Treccani emphasizes several obscure areas. The birth name is certainly John; the appellation Gratian or John Gratian is attested, but forms vary. Place, date of birth, and family are unknown. The tradition linking him to the Pierleoni appears very late, in the 17th century, in an inscription that Ottavio Pierleoni had affixed in 1674 on the tomb of his ancestor Pietro di Leone, in the atrium of the Basilica of Saint Paul; it therefore cannot be treated as an 11th-century fact.^[20]

The exact canonicity of the election is also delicate. Some sources present Benedict IX as having handed over his pontifical honor in writing to John the archpriest; others emphasize that the election brought money to Benedict. Treccani even notes uncertainty about the payer: was the sum paid directly by Gregory, or by supporters whom he later reimbursed?^[21] For the article, the sure point is simpler: a financial transaction surrounds John Gratian’s accession to the papacy, and this transaction makes his title untenable at the time of Sutri.

Why Do Sources Diverge on Sutri?

The sources do not all say the same thing about the final act. Some speak of a deposition ordered by the King of Germany or the synod; others present Gregory as acknowledging his fault, invoking mitigating circumstances, then judging himself unworthy of the pontifical dignity.^[22] The Catholic Encyclopedia sums up the ambiguity by saying some historians see a voluntary resignation, others a synodal deposition.^[23]

This divergence is not a detail. If Gregory was simply deposed by imperial power, the episode illustrates Henry III’s control over Rome. If he withdrew himself after synodal judgment, the episode rather manifests an ecclesial conscience: a pope recognizing that his election was tainted by simony, even if his intention was good. Both dimensions likely intersect: imperial and synodal pressure was real, but Gregory accepted bearing the fault rather than provoking a schism.

The last Tusculan pope

Benedict IX, born Theophylact, belonged to the powerful family of the Counts of Tusculum. Britannica presents him as the last pope from this house and notes that he occupied the Roman See three times: from 1032 to 1044, briefly in 1045, and again from 1047 to 1048.^[24] This trajectory alone shows the extent of the disorder: the pontificate became a possession that was lost, reclaimed, and contested according to power struggles.

The ancient tradition is very hostile to Benedict IX. He is accused of youthfulness, violence, licentious living, fleeing from the Roman insurrection, selling the pontificate, and then resuming his claims. The moral details must be treated with caution, as medieval chroniclers often polemicized; but the institutional fact is indisputable: Benedict IX was at the heart of a crisis in which the pontifical dignity seemed subject to the interests of a family.^[25][26]

Sylvester III, pope of the rival faction

The crisis was not limited to Benedict and Gregory. In January 1045, a Roman faction expelled Benedict and installed the bishop John of Sabina on the throne, who took the name Sylvester III. Benedict quickly returned and forced him to retreat to his diocese, but Sylvester did not entirely renounce his claims. The Catholic Encyclopedia notes that his party probably retained control of part of Rome.^[27]

This explains why the agreement with Benedict IX could not suffice. Even if Benedict had indeed left, Rome remained divided. The recognized pope had to govern a city where at least two other figures claimed or could revive a right to the Apostolic See.

The temptation of redemption

In this context, John Gratian appears as a man capable of resolving Rome’s deadlock. He was archpriest of Saint John at the Latin Gate and had a reputation for probity. According to the tradition reported by New Advent, Benedict IX asked his godfather or spiritual relative if he could resign; once reassured about the possibility of resignation, he agreed to cede the pontificate for a large sum.^[28]

The human logic is understandable: it is better to pay a bad pope to leave than to leave the Roman Church in his hands. But the sacramental and canonical logic is more demanding. A spiritual office cannot be sold, even for good reasons. The purchase of peace with money creates a deadly precedent: if one can buy a pope’s departure, one can also buy his arrival.

Archpriest of Saint John at the Latin Gate

The only truly solid fact about Gregory VI’s prior career is his role as archpriest of San Giovanni a Porta Latina. This Roman church, connected to Johannine memory, gives John Gratian a genuine place within the Roman clergy. He was therefore not a foreign adventurer arriving with an army; he belonged to the Roman ecclesiastical world.^[29][30]

This detail matters. In a Rome dominated by armed families, the archpriest represents another possibility: a clergyman reputed to be upright, well-known enough to be accepted, and sufficiently connected to reformist circles to receive the hope of Peter Damian and Hildebrand.

The Reformers’ Reception

Treccani emphasizes that Gregory VI’s arrival was initially welcomed with joy by those opposed to Benedict IX. Peter Damian wrote him in 1045, after the May 1 election, a warm letter — edition reference given by Sennis: Patrologia Latina, vol. CXLIV, cols. 205-206 — urging him to undertake vigorous reform, notably against the scandalous bishops of Pesaro, Città di Castello and Fano named by the Catholic Encyclopedia.^[31][32] The Catholic Encyclopedia also states that his accession was joyfully received even by a strict defender of the law like Saint Peter Damian.^[33]

It is therefore important to avoid misunderstanding: Gregory VI did not immediately appear as a scandalous intruder. For many contemporaries eager for reform, he seemed the best available solution. The problem would later become apparent when the good intention could no longer be separated from the price paid.

“A man of wonderful simplicity.” — Latin phrase mirae simplicitatis by James Loughlin in the Catholic Encyclopedia (after Watterich, Vitæ Rom. Pont., I, 76), own translation^[34]

The Role of Hildebrand

Hildebrand is associated with Gregory VI’s pontificate from this period. New Advent names him as his capellanus or chaplain, destined to become the great Pope Gregory VII.^[35] Treccani speaks of a constant good understanding between Gregory VI and Ildebrando, the future Gregory VII, collaborator and friend of the pope.^[36]

This presence gives the pontificate its prophetic dimension. Gregory VI fails to reform Rome; but the man who learns alongside him will become, twenty-seven years later, the pope who gives his name to the Gregorian reform. In God’s history, some failures become seminaries.

A City Divided Among Three Claimants

Gregory VI inherits a papacy without peace. Benedict IX soon regrets his resignation and demands the pontificate again; Sylvester III retains a faction; Gregory VI holds the title recognized by a significant part of the clergy. New Advent describes a situation where each claimant seems to control a portion of the city, making a normal restoration of order nearly impossible.^[37][38]

The table shows why the episode is so serious. Rome does not just have a bad pope; it has a fragmented papacy. The crisis affects the visibility of Catholic unity.

Letters, Councils, and Armed Force

The pope does not remain inactive. He tries to act both as pastor and as temporal leader of a troubled city.

“Gregory attempted to restore religious order by letters and councils, and civil order by armed force.” — Horace K. Mann, Catholic Encyclopedia, own translation^[39]

But he lacks resources. The finances are empty, the clergy is affected by corruption, factions are armed, and the pope’s legitimacy is weakened by the accusation of simony. Gregory VI thus finds himself in the nearly impossible position of a reformer whose very title provides a weapon to his adversaries.

The Appeal to Henry III

Faced with the deadlock, influential clerics and laypeople break communion with the claimants and ask the German king Henry III to cross the Alps to restore order.^[40] Henry has two objectives: to receive the imperial crown and to pacify Rome. He descends into Italy in the autumn of 1046, accompanied by princes and bishops of the Empire.^[41] The appeal to the Empire is understandable but dangerous. It grants an external secular power the ability to judge, guide, or impose a solution to a papal crisis. In the short term, Henry ends the chaos. In the long term, the Church will have to fight to ensure that the freedom of its election is not absorbed by the imperial protector.

Why Sutri and not Rome?

The synod convened in Sutri, not in the heart of Rome. This choice has a political logic: Sutri is close enough to address the Roman crisis but far enough to avoid direct pressure from urban factions. Gregory VI went out to meet Henry III and met him in Piacenza; according to New Advent, he was received with the honors due to a pope and agreed to convene the synod requested by the king.^[42]

Treccani, however, nuances the significance of this honor: the pope may have been received with respect, but it is unlikely that his legitimacy was fully recognized on this occasion. A few weeks later, he indeed had to appear before a synod that precisely examined the validity of his accession.^[43]

The case of Sylvester III and Benedict IX

Sylvester III was the only other claimant to appear at the synod, according to New Advent. His case was quickly resolved: he was stripped of clerical rank and condemned to a monastery. Benedict IX, however, refused to appear; he was condemned in Rome on December 23–24, after the synod had relocated.^[44][45]

This sequence shows that Sutri did not merely settle Gregory’s case. It aimed to erase a triple rivalry and declare the see vacant. Henry III could then receive the imperial crown from a pope whose election would not be contested by the Roman families.

The particular case of Gregory VI

Gregory’s case was more delicate. Benedict had resigned, Sylvester seemed to be a factional intruder, but Gregory had been recognized as pope. The problem was not that he was immoral like Benedict, nor violent like the Roman factions; the problem was that the act by which he obtained the pontificate was judged simoniacal.^[46]

The Catholic Encyclopedia attributes a clear conviction to the synod: even if the operation aimed to free the Holy See, it bore the outward appearance of simony and constituted a flaw in Gregory’s title. Treccani adds that some sources show him declaring his own guilt, with mitigating circumstances, and judging himself unworthy to retain the pontifical dignity.^[47][48]

“Gregory made no defense other than his good intentions.” — Catholic Encyclopedia (James Loughlin), own translation of the summary on Sutri^[49]

Resignation or deposition?

The nuance must be preserved. Simply saying “Henry III deposes Gregory VI” obscures part of the record; simply saying “Gregory freely abdicates” overlooks the synodal and imperial pressure. The sources allow for both aspects: the king created the framework and heavily influenced the outcome; Gregory, convinced or constrained by the ecclesiastical judgment, took an act of withdrawal.^[50][51]

From a Catholic perspective, this nuance is essential. The Church does not regard Sutri as a normal precedent allowing the King of Germany to depose popes at will. Rather, it sees it as an exceptional episode born of exceptional disorder, where the awareness of simony and the necessity of peace led to vacating a contested title.

Suidger of Bamberg Becomes Pope

After Sutri and the Roman sessions, the See was declared vacant. Henry III first proposed Adalbert of Bremen, who refused; the choice then fell on Suidger, bishop of Bamberg, who took the name Clement II and was enthroned at Saint Peter’s on Christmas Day 1046.^[52] The new pope immediately crowned Henry III and his wife Agnes of Aquitaine.

Clement II inaugurated a genuine phase of reform. In January 1047, a Roman synod strongly condemned simony. Britannica also notes that his pontificate began a period of reform continued by his successors.^[53] However, the question of electoral freedom was not resolved; it was merely shifted.

Saving Rome through the Empire: Benefit and Danger

Loughlin, in the entry on Clement II, aptly expresses the paradox. Henry III protected Rome from chaos, but he did not fully understand the necessary independence of ecclesiastical elections. The reformers themselves might initially believe that a new era was opening thanks to the emperor; they would later discover that the Church could not exchange the tyranny of Roman factions for a lasting dependence on imperial power.^[54]

This point directly connects Gregory VI to the future Gregorian reform. The crisis of 1046 proves that Rome needs external aid; it also proves that external aid cannot become the norm. Reform must simultaneously purify Roman simony, aristocratic violence, and imperial interference.

“The fact that Henry had protected the Roman Church gave him no rightful claim to become its master.” — James Loughlin, Catholic Encyclopedia, own translation^[55]

The Line Leading to 1059 and Gregory VII

The 1046 solution indirectly prepared the 1059 decree on papal election, promulgated under Nicholas II, which entrusted cardinal-bishops with a decisive role to limit both Roman factions and lay pressures. It also prepared the Investiture Controversy: if the king could thus influence the pope’s election, why not the bishops’? The Gregorian response would be precisely to refuse that spiritual power be conferred by secular authority.^[56]

Gregory VI is therefore a threshold figure. He does not provide the institutional solution, but his failure makes the solution necessary.

Formal Simony, Appearance of Simony, Good Faith

The moral difficulty of the case lies on three levels. The first is the material act: a sum of money changes hands in a papal resignation. The second is intention: Gregory or his supporters probably wanted to free Rome from an unworthy pope. The third is the public effect: the pontificate appears to have been acquired by payment.^[57][58]

Catholic theology does not reduce everything to subjective intention. Good intention may lessen personal guilt, but it does not make pure an act that introduces money into access to a spiritual office. The judgment at Sutri therefore focuses less on Jean Gratian’s inner psychology than on whether a title publicly tainted can be allowed to stand.

Why the Remedy Could Not Become the Rule

Imagine that the means employed by Gregory VI were accepted without reservation. Every papal crisis could then be resolved by a “buyout”: a candidate or his friends would pay a scandalous incumbent to leave office. Immediate peace would be obtained at the cost of structural corruption. Money would become a normal instrument of spiritual governance.

This is precisely what the 11th-century reform would combat under the name simony: not only the direct sale of offices but any reduction of the sacred to a negotiable value. Gregory VI is touching because he desires good; he is dangerous because his means render the good legally impure.

A Catholic Lesson on Bad Popes

The case of Gregory VI also allows for a balanced Catholic stance toward papal scandals. Yes, there have been real disorders in the history of the papacy. Yes, Benedict IX remains a profoundly humiliating case. Yes, a pope recognized as legitimate may have had to withdraw because his accession was flawed. But no, this does not destroy Christ’s promise to His Church.

History rather shows a gradual purification. The Church does not deny scandal; it judges it. It does not sanctify the money given to Benedict; it acknowledges the fault. It does not canonize the armed intervention of the German king; it will learn to free itself from it. Catholic faith does not need impeccable popes to believe in divine assistance; it needs to see that, even through humiliating crises, the Church receives the grace to correct itself.

In Germany with Hildebrand

After Sutri, Gregory was taken to Germany by Henry III, accompanied by Hildebrand. New Advent places this departure in May 1047 and indicates that he died shortly thereafter.^[59] Treccani specifies that the exile was likely intended to keep him as far as possible from Rome, where he still had supporters within the Curia; he was probably taken to Cologne.^[60] Somerville (Encyclopedia of Religion, via Encyclopedia.com) dates to January 1047 Hildebrand’s departure into exile with the deposed pontiff, while Mann places in May 1047 Gregory’s removal to Germany: two close milestones of the same first half of 1047.^[61][62]

The word “prison” should not be understood as a squalid jail. New Advent, in the entry on Clement II, speaks of an honorable custody for Gregory and his chaplain.^[63] But the fact remains: a pope or former Roman pope was held beyond the Alps, under the control of the German king.

The Failed Candidacy after Clement II’s Death

The death of Clement II on October 9, 1047, briefly reopened the question. Treccani notes that some, notably Wazo of Liège (spelled "Wazone" in Sennis), considered Gregory VI the most legitimate candidate to resume the pontifical seat. Henry III ultimately chose Poppo of Brixen, who became Damasus II.^[64][65]

This detail is valuable. It shows that Gregory VI was not universally despised after Sutri. His person could still appear respectable, perhaps even more legitimate than a new candidate imposed by the king. But his return was politically and canonically impossible.

Probable Death in Cologne

The date of death remains uncertain. New Advent suggests a probable death in Cologne in early 1048; Treccani prefers to say he must have died around this period, since no reliable news exists after the election of Damasus II.^[66][67]

The article therefore adopts a cautious formulation: Gregory VI probably died in Cologne around 1047–1048. This prudence is preferable to false precision, especially for a pontificate whose sources are brief and often biased.

A Failure That Prepared Reform

Gregory VI’s legacy lies not primarily in what he accomplished, but in what his case made evident. Papal elections needed purification; simony had to be combated; Roman families had to be prevented from treating the See of Peter as a possession; and the emperor had to be prevented from becoming the ordinary master of elections.^[68][69]

The sequence 1046–1059–1075 is coherent: Sutri resolves a crisis, Nicholas II’s decree reorganizes papal elections, Gregory VII pushes the logic of ecclesiastical freedom to the point of conflict with Henry IV. The very name Gregory VII, chosen by Hildebrand in 1073, can be read as a tribute to the fundamental legitimacy of his former master, even though the latter’s pontificate ended in the disgrace of Sutri.

A Warning for Reformers

Gregory VI warns all Catholic reformers: the urgency to save the Church does not justify means that sully the Church. One does not fight simony by an ambiguous transaction. One does not purify elections with money. One does not restore lasting spiritual freedom by abandoning the election to the political protector of the moment.

This lesson remains deeply spiritually relevant. True zeal must accept slowness, the poverty of pure means, canonical patience, and the cross of apparent powerlessness. Gregory VI sought a shortcut; God drew from his humiliation a school for Hildebrand.

A Figure to Judge Without Simplism

Old accounts may be tempted to portray Gregory VI as an ordinary simoniac; apologetic narratives may be tempted to make him an innocent hero. The sources invite a third way. He was probably a man of good reputation, supported by reformers, animated by a right intention; he was also involved in a transaction that made his title impossible to defend in a Church determined to fight the sale of the sacred.

His story is therefore neither that of a saintly pope unjustly deposed, nor that of a greedy usurper. It is that of a churchman placed in an extreme crisis, who chose an ambiguous means to deliver Rome, then accepted or endured a humiliation that allowed the Church to better understand what it had to reject.

• Pope Benedict IX — the Tusculan pope whose resignation for money sparked the direct crisis of Gregory VI.
• Pope Clement II — the German pope elected after Sutri and the first reformer of the imperial sequence.
• Pope Saint Leo IX (1049-1054) — the pontiff who gave the reform a European form.
• Pope Saint Gregory VII (1073-1085) — Hildebrand, former exile companion of Gregory VI.
• The Gregorian Reform — the great movement responding to simony, clerical marriage, and lay investiture.
• The Investiture Controversy — the conflict where the question of the Church’s freedom became explosive.