In the late eleventh century, the conflicting ideas between lay investiture were becoming very serious. Lay investiture, in the basic sense, was the appointments of bishops, priests and other clergymen made by lay persons, usually including lords and kings. Lay investiture had been tradition for centuries among upper class men, as it gave them power in ecclesiastical matters. The church in Rome, on the other hand, did not like the idea. The pope believed that he held power over all of Western Christendom, including the king, and that he was the one and only authority in making church appointments. As the eleventh century moved on, tensions grew between the church and state on this issue. Then, in about 1075, Pope Gregory VII banned all lay investiture. This act angered monarchs, such as the emperor Henry IV, as it was a threat towards the imperial power held by them. Out of these events, the whole idea of kingship and what powers it actually held came into question. Were the king and other lords allowed to hold powers in religious matters or were those powers solely for the Pope? Did the Pope hold powers to depose disobeying kings? Differing opinions on these matters were formed in the later years of the eleventh century. In looking at three sources from the time (Gregory VII, Manegold of Lautenbach, and the Anonymous of York), a good interpretation of the differing opinions of that time can be formed. Therefore, the conflicting ideas regarding king and pope were formed as the tensions between the two grew.
As the power of the church was growing through the eleventh century, lay investiture stood as a block for the church to assert total power over church appointments. Christian leaders knew that if they were to gain more power over the kings, they would have to bring a stop to lay investiture. Pope Gregory VII took action in 1075 when he prohibited all lay investiture.
