TheMotherChurch 49
as she lay dying, buried her at his own expense, and so incurred the wrath
of the local inquisitor of heretical depravity, Fra Guido of Vicenza.^213 One
extant episcopal visitation book, admittedly late, shows the cappellani as a
group of men who generally responded well when questioned on sacraments,
respect for the reserved sacrament, and Latinity.^214 Admittedly, the priest
was a local man in a small community. Being well known and local did not
guarantee piety, morality, or learning—perhaps just the opposite. Nonethe-
less, the ecclesiastical legislation of the communal period shows a greater
concern for enhancing clerical dignity than for correcting vice. While clerical
concubinage does appear as a topic of legislation, the synods of the commu-
nal period more often legislated to foster clerical identity and to separate
priests from activities unsuitable to their state—such as playing dice and
running taverns.^215 Synods concerned themselves with clerical dress, profane
pastimes, and practice of secular professions, particularly that of lawyer.^216
Synods tried to increase clerical professionalism, exactly what one would
expect when the priests were mostly local men. Above all, they expected the
local clergy to take care of the elderly and indigent, to perform the sacra-
ments, and to show a good example to their flock.^217 Don Giacomo comes
immediately to mind.
When the lower clergy legislated for themselves, as they did in clerical
confraternities like the consortia of Bologna, their own concerns took first
place. Rome already had an association of the lower clergy in the tenth
century.^218 Such clerical associations sprang up all over north and central
Italy at the time of the foundation of the communes: Faenza ( 1120 ), Ferrara
( 1139 ), Bologna ( 1180 s), Modena ( 1189 ), Rovigo (by 1200 ), Pisa (early 1200 s),
Parma ( 1224 ), and Florence ( 1311 , which may be an error for 1131 ). Similar
associations existed in Udine, Venice, Vicenza, Mantua, Lodi, Pavia, Parma,
- On this incident, see pages 444 – 46 below.
- Camerino, Archivio Storico Diocesano,msBenedetto Chiavelli,Liber Visitationis ( 1380 – 1386 );on
this visitation book, see A. Fiecconi and E. Taurino, ‘‘Pievi e parrocchie nelle Marche delxiiiexiv
secolo,’’Pievi e parrocchie,ed. Erba et al., 2 : 862 – 64. Antonio Rigon, ‘‘Organizzazione ecclesiastica e cura
d’anime nelle Venezie: Ricerche in corso e problemi da risolvere,’’ ibid., 720 , agrees with this positive
assessment. - For legislation on concubinage, see Lombardy (ecclesiastical province),Constitutiones Domini Coele-
stini Legati in Lombardia( 1287 ), 8 , Mansi 24 : 884 , and Lucca Synod ( 1300 ), 24 ,p. 221 (which seems more
about scandal caused by priests’ housekeepers). The lack of legislation leads Cinzio Violante, ‘‘Sistemi
organizzativi della cura d’anime in Italia tra Medioevo e Rinascimento: Discorso introduttivo,’’Pievi e
parrocchie,ed. Erba et al., 1 : 29 , to think that laypeople did not care about concubinage. It might just as
well indicate that concubinage was not very common. However, absence of anticoncubinage laws does
not prove one thing or the other. M. A. Kelleher, ‘‘Like Man and Wife: Clerics’ Concubines in the
Diocese of Barcelona,’’Journal of Medieval History 28 ( 2002 ): 350 , suggests concubinage was ‘‘common.’’ - On attire: Milan (ecclesiastical province),Synodus Provincialis Pergami habita in Castono sive Cassono
Mediolani Archiepiscopo annomcccxi,ed. Carlo Castiglioni,RIS^29 : 3 : 5 – 6 ; Ravenna Council ( 1314 ), 10 , pp.
543 – 44 ; Ravenna Council ( 1317 ), pp. 603 – 4. On drinking, dicing, or profane speech: Grado Council
( 1296 ), 19 ,p. 1168 ; Lucca Synod ( 1308 ), 29 , 38 , 39 , 68 , 69 , pp. 183 – 84 , 193 – 94. On lawyering: Lucca
Synod ( 1300 ), 36 ,p. 224 ; Verona Stat.ii( 1276 ), 1. 120 , pp. 105 – 6 ; Bologna Stat.ii( 1288 ), 6. 39 – 40 , 2 : 32 – 33. - Novara Synodii( 1298 ), 1. 1 ,p. 172.
- See Tommaso di Carpegna Falconieri,Il clero di Roma nel Medioevo: Istituzioni e politica cittadina
(secoliviii–xiii)(Rome: Viella, 2002 ).