Pope Leo X was at the helm of affairs in the Church at the outbreak of the Reformation and in some sense became the saviour of the Reformation by neglecting for two years to proceed vigorously against Luther because of his entanglement in the European politics of the time. In his electoral oath Leo had undertaken to continue the fifth Lateran Council (1512-17) called for reforming the Church. But the Council concluded just seven months before Martin Luther posted his 95 theses in Wittenberg with these words in eerie unawareness of what would come soon: “Finally it was reported to us on several occasions through the cardinals and the prelates of the three committees that no topic remained for them to discuss and that over several months nothing at all had been brought before them by anyone.” When one speaks of bad Popes in Church history, one thinks in particular of Alexander VI but the decay in the Church was even more dangerous in the reign of Leo X. Of course he cannot be charged with the enormous misdeeds by which Alexander VI sullied the throne of Peter; instead he was guilty of shocking negligence, irresponsible frivolity, and prodigal love of pleasure. One does not find in him an awareness of duty and responsibility of the supreme shepherd of the Church and a manner of life in conformity with this responsibility. The deterioration of the Christian is achieved not only in an openly wicked life, but also furtively and hence more dangerously in an inner wasting away, a slow loss of substance, an imperceptible secularization and a confused lack of responsibility.

Born at Florence in 1475 as Giovanni de’ Medici, the second son of Lorenzo the Magnificent, he was early destined for the Church. When the conclave of March 22, 1513 elected him as Pope Leo X, it was the crowning of his political and ecclesiastical ambitions. He was a well educated and polished Renaissance man, tutored by humanists and was rather well-versed in theology and canon law, and interested in literature, the arts, the theatre, and music. He took possession of his office and of Rome in a great festive display which in the form of a Corpus Christi precession, was an exhibition of the Pope and his court. On a great placard could be read” “Once Venus reigned {that is, Alexander VI}, then Mars {that is, Julius II}, and now Pallas Arthene takes the sceptre.” Humanists and artists saluted in the new Pope their patron but the display of pomp and power proclaimed openly the frivolous worldliness and thoughtless unconcern which characterized the pontificate of Leo X, the pontificate in which Martin Luther was to sound the bugle to the Reformation. “Depravity has become so taken for granted that those soiled by it no longer notice the stench of sin.” These words which could justly characterise the reign of Leo X were uttered, not by an enemy of the Church, but by no less than the successor of Leo X, Pope Adrian VI, at his first consistorial allocution.

Besides being the head of the Church, Leo was devious and double-tongued politician and an inveterate nepotist. His aim was to keep Italy and in a special way Florence free from foreign domination and to advance his family. For this he spent considerable amount of his time and energy in diplomatic and even military errands, resulting often in political and financial disaster. Easygoing and pleasure-loving, Leo was recklessly extravagant and desperate for money. In addition to his pleasures, he had to pay for his wars and for the construction of St Peter’s. To raise money, he borrowed extensively and sold offices, even cardinals’ hats. For St Peter’s he renewed the indulgence authorized by Julius II and by a lucrative but simoniacal deal with Albrecht of Brandenburg, archbishop of Magdeburg and Mainz, arranged for the indulgence to be promoted by preachers in his dioceses. It was when this preaching began that Martin Luther reacted by posting his ninety-five theses of protest in Wittenberg, thus beginning the Protestant Reformation. When the news reached Rome in early 1518, Leo instructed the general of his order to silence him. But the movement was to continue and it was unfortunate that he and the Curia had failed to appreciate the significance of the revolution that was taking place in the Church.

Isaac Padinjarekuttu
(Professor of Church History at Oriens Theological College, Shillong)