Pope Leo VIII (963-965)

A secondary pope, but a major canonical case

Leo VIII is no canonised saint, no doctor, no great reformer. No corpus of certain pontifical letters allows us to attribute to him a lasting policy. The Catholic Encyclopedia even notes that no surviving document informs us of acts accomplished during the period in which he can safely be held legitimate pope.^[7] In a superficial encyclopedia, his notice would therefore run to a few lines.

But his case is crucial for understanding the real history of the papacy. Leo VIII stands at the point where four realities meet: the moral decadence of John XII, the imperial intervention of Otto, Roman resistance to a pope imposed from outside, and the ecclesial reception that ended by counting Leo in the official list. Few pontificates show as clearly that the promise made to Peter does not mean that all the human procedures surrounding the pope are pure.

A crisis that the lists of popes oversimplify too quickly

Modern lists often give: John XII (955–964), Leo VIII (963–965), Benedict V (964), John XIII (965–972). This sequence is useful, but it masks the tension. Between December 963 and June 964, several claims overlapped. John XII, deposed by Otto's synod, did not recognise the sentence; Leo VIII was elected while John lived; Benedict V was elected by the Romans after John's death, while Leo was still alive.

Britannica signals this in its list of popes and antipopes: either Leo VIII or Benedict V may be considered an antipope, depending on the angle taken.^[8] This caution is not relativism: it reflects the difficulty of the facts. The Church does not deny the crisis; it absorbed it by keeping both names, with a debated historical status.

The beginning of the Ottonian problem

Leo VIII also inaugurates a cycle. With him, the emperor no longer contents himself with being crowned in Rome; he intervenes directly in the deposition, election, restoration and humiliation of competing popes. Otto believes he is restoring Roman order; at the same time he opens an explosive question: how far may the emperor guarantee the Church without dominating it?

This problem would run through the 11th century. The forged documents attributed to Leo VIII during the Investiture Controversy would even claim that the pope had conceded to Otto the right to appoint popes and bishops. Modern historians reject these texts as imperial fabrications of the Investiture Controversy period.^[9][10] But the very fact that such documents were forged in Leo VIII's name shows how far his pontificate had become a symbol: that of a papacy the Empire wished to keep within bounds.

The solid core

The principal sources are few but convergent: the official file of the Holy See, Mann's notice in the Catholic Encyclopedia, the notice of the New Catholic Encyclopedia reproduced by Encyclopedia.com, Treccani, the Liber Pontificalis edited by Duchesne, Jaffé's Regesta and above all the Historia Ottonis of Liudprand of Cremona, witness and Ottonian propagandist of the events.^{[11][12][13][14][15]}

An indispensable primary source: Liudprand of Cremona

Liudprand of Cremona is at once precious and dangerous. Precious, because he takes part in the events: he accompanies Otto, translates his German speech into Latin before the Italians, attends the Roman crisis, and writes the Historia Ottonis before March 965, while Leo VIII is still alive.^[16] Dangerous, because his text is an unofficial defence of imperial policy. Becker's edition of Liudprand's Werke says so clearly: the Historia Ottonis must be read as a justification of imperial policy in 963–964.^[17]

It must therefore be used as a direct witness, not as a neutral judge. When Liudprand recounts that Benedict V acknowledges his fault and declares himself invader of the Apostolic See, the detail is crucial; but it comes from an author favourable to Otto and to Leo. The article must keep this tension: without Liudprand, the dossier is incomplete; with Liudprand alone, it becomes Ottonian propaganda.

"The Historia Ottonis may be regarded with fair certainty as a semi-official justification of imperial policy in the years 963–964." — Joseph Becker, introduction to the MGH edition of Liudprand (translated from German for this article; German original checked in note)^[18]

What we do not know

We do not know Leo VIII's date of birth. Mann only gives his death between 20 February and 13 April 965; the official list of the Holy See retains March 965.^[19][20] Nor do we possess any certain spiritual portrait of him, or any personal doctrinal act. His family is located near the Clivus Argentarii, the present-day Via di Marforio area between the Corso and the Roman Forum, but that does not allow us to reconstruct an intimate biography.^[21]

John XII, Octavian turned pope

Leo VIII's predecessor is John XII, born Octavian, son of Alberic II. Alberic had made the Romans swear that after the death of Agapetus II, they would elect his son. Octavian thus becomes pope very young, at about eighteen, while retaining the temporal power of the Roman family.^[22][23]

John XII crowns Otto I emperor in Rome on 2 February 962, with his wife Adelaide. A few days later, on 13 February 962, the agreement known as the Privilegium Ottonianum settles relations between the emperor and the papacy: Otto confirms possessions of the Roman Church, but the text also strengthens imperial control over Roman order.^[24][25][26]

The Privilegium Ottonianum: protection and surveillance

The Privilegium Ottonianum is not a simple gesture of piety. It renews the Carolingian logic of protection of the Holy See, but in a context where Rome has just emerged from several decades of family capture. For Otto, the pope must be stable enough to legitimise the Empire; for John XII, the emperor must contain the Italian enemies and guarantee the pontifical territories.

The contradiction soon appears. Britannica notes that John XII rebels when Otto imposes the Privilegium Ottonianum, which demands of him an oath of obedience to the emperor.^[27] The pope then seeks support against the emperor, notably from Adalbert of Ivrea, son of Berengar II. Otto understands that the man who crowned him is now working against him.

The accusations against John XII

The synod of November–December 963, assembled at St Peter's under Otto's authority, accuses John XII of many crimes: sacrilege, simony, perjury, violence, immorality, liturgical negligence. Liudprand transmits the dossier in brutal language. The historian must avoid two errors: whitewashing John XII out of apologetic embarrassment, or swallowing uncritically all the rhetoric of an imperial witness.

The central point is sufficient: John XII had gravely compromised pontifical dignity and broken politically with Otto. But the canonical question remains: can an emperor have a living pope deposed by a synod held under his military protection? It is this question that weighs on Leo VIII from the very first minute.

A lay protoscriniarius

At the time of his election, Leo is not a bishop, nor a priest, nor even simply a major cleric according to the reading of Mann and the New Catholic Encyclopedia. He is protoscriniarius, that is, a senior head of the Roman chancery, "first of the scriniarii".^[28][29][30]

This office is not insignificant. The protoscriniarius knows the acts, the chancery, the procedures, the archives, the juridical formulas. Leo thus belongs to the administrative staff of the Roman Church. But he does not yet belong to the sacred orders normally required to be elected and consecrated Bishop of Rome.

All the ordinations in a single day

Leo is chosen on 4 December 963 and consecrated Bishop of Rome on 6 December. Between the two, Bishop Sico of Ostia confers on him the required orders. Mann insists on the irregular character: all the lower orders are given to him between election and consecration, in violation of the canonical interstices (the minimum delays Church law imposes between the reception of each order).^[31] The New Catholic Encyclopedia formulates the same idea: Leo is promoted to all orders in a single day, without observing the canonical delays.^[32]

A first period difficult to defend

During this first period, Leo VIII is very difficult to regard as fully legitimate pope. John XII has not accepted his deposition; the synod acted under imperial domination; the election promoted a layman to the episcopate in a canonically abnormal time. Treccani sums up soberly: whether or not John XII's deposition was legitimate is a question hardly soluble.^[33]

Catholic prudence therefore consists in not making December 963 a model. This is not an example of the Church's liberty; it is a moment of crisis in which the emperor imposes a solution on a papacy scandalised by its own holder.

The Roman riot and Leo's expulsion

A few weeks after Leo VIII's consecration, the Romans attempt to shake off imperial authority. The riot of 3 January 964, encouraged by John XII's party, is crushed by Otto's troops.^[34] Leo then intercedes so that the emperor returns to the Romans hostages he had received: this detail, preserved by Mann, is one of the rare pastoral gestures attributed to Leo in this period.^[35]

But as soon as Otto leaves Rome for Spoleto, the city turns round. John XII returns, retakes power, and Leo takes refuge with the emperor. The pope deposed by Otto shows that his Roman authority was not destroyed: as long as the imperial troops are absent, he can still govern the city.

The synod of 26 February 964

John XII then assembles a synod at St Peter's, on 26 February 964. There he declares Leo's election null, because Leo did not belong to the ecclesiastical orders at the time of his promotion, and he degrades the clerics ordained by him.^[36][37] Treccani mentions this Lateran council or synod of 964 as the act that declared Leo's election null.^[38]

The formula transmitted by Mann is severe: John XII condemns Leo as one of the employees of his curia who failed his faith.^[39] This is therefore not a simple quarrel of persons. John XII attacks the root: Leo is said to have been promoted without canonical title and against the living pope.

The sudden death of John XII

John XII dies on 14 May 964, suddenly, at twenty-seven or twenty-eight according to reconstructions.^[40][41] The death of the scandalous pope does not settle the crisis. If the Romans had accepted Leo, they would have recalled him. They do not. They elect instead a cardinal-deacon, Benedict, afterwards called Benedict V.

This choice is decisive. It proves that, for an important part of Rome, Leo VIII still remains Otto's candidate rather than the pope received by the local Church. The question of legitimacy shifts: after John XII's death, Leo is no longer in competition with John, but with Benedict V.

The election of Benedict V

Benedict V, later nicknamed Grammaticus, is elected by the Romans after John XII's death. He is no unknown: Liudprand presents him among the Roman clerics and the dossier shows him involved in the preceding events.^[42] His election has a simple argument: John XII is dead, Rome elects a new pope in the local line, without recalling Leo.

But Otto sees it as a rebellion. For the emperor, Leo VIII is already pope; Benedict's election is a usurpation. He therefore returns to Rome, retakes the city on 23 June 964 according to the New Catholic Encyclopedia, and has Benedict appear before Leo and the synod.^[43]

The deposition scene according to Liudprand

Liudprand recounts a very striking scene. Benedict is asked whether he can deny having promised, with the other Romans, never to elect or ordain a pope without the consent of the emperor and his son Otto. Benedict answers: "If I have sinned, have pity on me." He then throws himself at the feet of Leo and Otto, acknowledges having sinned and made himself invader of the Roman see. He renders the pallium and the pontifical ferula; Leo breaks the ferula, strips Benedict of the pontifical ornaments and reduces him to the diaconate (the pallium is the white woollen band worn by the pope and archbishops as a sign of their office, the ferula the pope's pastoral staff, and to be "reduced to the diaconate" is to be stripped of all orders received save the first degree of ordained ministry).^[44]

Liudprand thus recounts that Benedict, prostrate at the feet of Leo and the emperor, asks pardon while acknowledging he had sinned and made himself the invader of the Apostolic See (paraphrase of the Latin, whose exact words are quoted in note).^[45]

This scene is crucial for Mann. If Benedict truly accepts his deposition, then the crisis can be resolved: Leo becomes the sole recognised holder. If, on the other hand, the scene is only a staging imposed by force, the argument is weaker. Catholic tradition has retained the practical solution: Benedict V too is counted as pope, but Leo VIII is received in the official list for the period following Benedict's deposition.

Benedict V exiled to Hamburg

Benedict V is sent into exile in Hamburg, where he dies on 4 July 965.^[46] This detail is harsh, but important: Otto does not merely settle a canonical quarrel; he physically removes the rival. The Roman papacy leaves the grip of Alberic's family, but falls under the heavy hand of the Empire.

The balance is therefore paradoxical. Leo VIII's regularisation is possible, but it happens by a brutal imperial method. The Church finally receives Leo; history must not for all that present his return as a peaceful restoration of ecclesial liberty.

What was later attributed to him

Leo VIII was long attributed acts by which he is said to have conceded to Otto and his successors the right to choose popes and invest bishops. Mann summarises these texts: Leo is said to have given Otto the right to appoint whom he wished pope or bishop and to have restored to the emperor the lands previously granted to the papacy.^[47]

The New Catholic Encyclopedia identifies three suspect or forged documents: the Privilegium minus, the Privilegium maius and the Cessatio donationum, all preserved or discussed in the MGH Constitutiones. The Privilegium minus and the Privilegium maius present themselves as two pontifical concessions to the emperor, the Cessatio donationum as a restitution of territories to Otto; all three are forgeries of the Investiture Controversy, published as such in the Constitutiones series of the Monumenta Germaniae Historica, the great critical edition of medieval Germanic laws. It attributes them to the Investiture Controversy period, not to Leo VIII's true government.^[48]

Why these forgeries are revealing

These forgeries do not tell us what Leo VIII really did; they tell us what the 11th-century imperial party wished to be able to prove. At the moment when emperors and popes clash over the investiture of bishops, it was useful to produce a precedent: a 10th-century pope is said to have recognised in the emperor a massive right over pontifical election and ecclesiastical appointments.

Now Leo VIII's real history lent itself to this diversion. He had been elected under Otto, restored by Otto, saved by Otto. His name could become the perfect argument for saying: the emperor does not usurp, he exercises an ancient right. Modern historical criticism destroys this argument by showing the documents to be forgeries.^[49][50]

The true lesson: the Church's liberty would have to be reconquered

Leo VIII is not responsible for the forgeries later produced in his name. But his pontificate shows why the Gregorian reform would become necessary. As long as pontifical election remains vulnerable to the Roman aristocracy or to the emperor, the Church risks depending on an outside force to resolve its internal crises.

The 11th-century reform would answer this double wound: on one side the Roman families that had imposed John XII; on the other the Empire that had imposed Leo VIII. Catholicism does not deny these humiliations. It sees in them the concrete history through which the Church learns to protect more strictly the liberty of the spiritual office.

The papacy is not destroyed by bad popes

Leo VIII is poorly understood if isolated from John XII. The crisis begins because a very young pope, issued from an imposed dynastic succession, scandalises Rome and breaks with the emperor he crowned. For Catholic apologetics, it would be tempting to soften John XII. That would be an error. Catholic history is stronger when it acknowledges that some popes were unworthy.

But personal unworthiness does not destroy the office. John XII creates no new dogma; Leo VIII creates no heresy; Benedict V modifies not the faith. The Roman succession crosses the crisis with damaged procedures, but doctrine remains. This is precisely one of the soberest historical arguments in favour of the Church: she survives not because her men are always worthy, but because her sacramental and doctrinal structure does not depend on their individual virtue.

Ecclesial reception counts

Leo VIII's case also shows the importance of reception. A contested election is clarified not only by an isolated juridical act. It is clarified by the Church's subsequent acceptance, the absence of lasting protest, the resolution of the rival and the way the official lists stabilise memory. That is why Mann places Leo's secure legitimacy not in December 963, but after Benedict V's accepted deposition.^[51]

This logic does not erase imperial violence. It only shows that the Church sometimes knows how to regularise a situation born in disorder, without making disorder a norm.

The emperor as remedy and as danger

Otto I acts with a partly just intention: he wants to end a scandalous papacy and stabilise Rome. But he acts with a dangerous means: military pressure on the pope's election. The immediate result is an apparent peace; the long result is a tension that would run through the whole Middle Ages.

Leo VIII is therefore a warning. When civil power saves the Church from an internal crisis, it can also make her pay for its help. The Church needs protectors; she cannot become their instrument. This truth, still confused in 964, would become central in the great struggle for the Church's liberty.

A threshold pope

Leo VIII is a threshold pope: behind him, the Roman saeculum obscurum; before him, the Ottonian Empire and the tensions of the Investitures. He wrote almost nothing, governed almost nothing freely, left almost nothing personal. But his pontificate concentrates in a few months one of the major problems of Western Christian history: who protects the Church when Rome corrupts itself, and who protects the Church against those who claim to protect her?

This question alone justifies the article. Leo VIII is not great by his acts; he is important because his case obliges us to think rigorously about pontifical legitimacy, the human weakness of popes, ecclesial reception and the Church's liberty before imperial power.

• Pope Agapetus II (946-955) — last pope before John XII, under Alberic II.
• Pope John XII (955-964) — immediate predecessor and direct cause of the Ottonian crisis.
• Pope Benedict V (964) — rival of Leo VIII after John XII's death.
• Pope John XIII (965-972) — successor of Leo VIII, in a Rome still dependent on Otto.
• Gregorian Reform — later response to simony, investitures and lay domination.
• Papal infallibility — to distinguish the personal unworthiness of certain popes from the Church's doctrinal protection.