A Colonial Church?
Brian Golding
Writing at the beginning of twelfth century, Eadmer Canterbury thought that ‘all things, spiritual and temporal, waited on nod king [i.e. William I]’.1 The controlled all communication with pope, approved measures laid down in ecclesiastical synods, only by his express leave could bishops impose canonical sanctions for grave moral offences barons ministers. To Eadrner, had brought from Normandy a heritage tight secular control over Church, which he then successfully imposed upon its English counterpart. There can be no doubt I took an active interest affairs Anglo-Norman nor Rufus was equally forceful, if less diplomatic. Yet when we look post-Conquest Church it is hard to evaluate what developments were directly attributable Normans. Many changes result new! policies ideologies affecting western emanating primarily (but not exclusively) Rome.2 By introducing abbots beyond, may have accelerated pace change, but did alter direction. Continental integrity learning been chosen Confessor; bishop, Wulfstan Worcester, represented best Church. Reform already air before 1066, many respects reform archaic, light new ideas current Roman curia. reforms late-eleventh-century papacy irrevocably changed face Church; there deep faultline running here, but, as Margaret Gibson has convincingly demonstrated, Archbishop Lanfranc lay Carolingian side divide.3