Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T06:59:57.136Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Corporate Idea and the Body Politic in the Middle Ages

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 August 2009

Anton-Hermann Chroust
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The social thought of the Middle Ages, which undertook to comprehend and scientifically to formulate the nature and foundation of all human society, proceeded from the principle of a single and uniform but articulate whole. The idea of an organic conception of all human society in its entirety was as familiar to the mediaeval mind as the notion of an atomistic or mechanistic constrution of human associations was alien to that mind. Aside from issuing into a distinct and definite theory of “public law,” the mediaeval efforts to understand mankind in its entirety and to treat every form of human society as an organic unity were the starting points of a novel philosophy of law and state which brought about a new and glorious development of legal, social, and political ideas. This development was fully in line with the professed aim of the mediaeval spirit, namely the spiritual and moral education of die western world. It had for its core the doctrine of the Church, and for its goal the elaboration of an integrated outlook on all of human life. In die fields of legal, social, and political speculation this development was greatly enhanced by the collaboration of theologians, philosophers, and jurists. Here, as elsewhere, die mediaeval mind displayed and, on the whole, preserved that high degree of unity of thought and purpose which had its roots not only in that commonly shared conception of a single harmonious universe governed by one infinitely wise God, but also in the conviction that all first premises of right thought or right action were divinely revealed truths rather than discoveries made by human reason alone.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Review of Politics , Volume 9 , Issue 4 , October 1947 , pp. 423 - 452
Copyright
Copyright © University of Notre Dame 1947

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Compare Gierke, O., Das Deutsche Genoasenschaftsrecht Berlin 1881, vol. III, p. 546.Google Scholar

2 Gierke, O., op. cit., vol. III, p. 546.Google Scholar

3 De Diversis Quaestionibus I, 79Google Scholar, 1, in Patrol. Lat. vol. 40, 90.Google Scholar

4 Contra Faustum XXII, 27Google Scholar, in: Patrol. Lat. vol. 42, 418Google Scholar, “Lex aelerna est ratio Jivina vel voluntas Dei, ordinetn naluralem conservari iubens, perturbari vetans.”

5 De Libero Arbitrio I, 6, 15Google Scholar, in: Patrol. Lat. vol. 32, 1229.Google Scholar

6 De Trinitate VIII 3; VIII, 4.Google Scholar

7 De Vera Religione XI, 21Google Scholar, in: Patrol. Lat. vol. 34, 131Google Scholar; De Libero Arbitrio II, 9, 26Google Scholar, in: Patrol. Lat. vol. 32, 1254Google Scholar ff.; De Trinitate XIV, 15.Google Scholar

8 This comprehension of the lex aeterna by man is, so to speak, man's conscious participation in the lex aeterna. It is the lex naluralis (moralis), in other words, the “imprint” of the lex aeterna on our soul. For “the lex aeterna is that ineradicable and sublime administration of all things which proceeds from the Divine Providence.” (De Diversis Quaestionibus I, 53, 2Google Scholar). Of this absolute administration there is in—and transscribed on—the rational soul of man the lex naturalis, “in order that all men in this way of life and within the scheme of secular morals might serve as images of such an absolute administration.…” (De Diversis Quaestionibus I, 53, 2Google Scholar, in: Patrol. Lat. vol. 40, 36)Google Scholar. Accordingly, St. Augustine defines the lex naturalis as that law “which is just, in order that everything and everyone might be most orderly.” De Libero Arbitrio, I, 6, 15Google Scholar: Compare also Ennar. in Psalm. 145, 5Google Scholar, in: Patrol. Lat. vol. 37, 1887Google Scholar.

9 Ennar. in Psalm. 144, 13Google Scholar, in: Patrol. Lat. vol. 37, 1878.Google Scholar

10 Compare De Trinitate VIII, 9.Google Scholar

11 St. Augustine, , De Diversis Quaestionibus I, 53, 2.Google Scholar

12 This parallelism of microcosm and macrocosm has been emphasized by John of Salisbury (Johannes Saresberiensis, 1120–1180, in: Policraticus (Migne, , Patrol. Lat., vol. 199, 385 ff.)Google Scholar IV, 1–4; IV, 6; V, 2–6; VI, 21) who instances that the respulica is a body fashioned by God in the likeness of the macrocosm of universal nature and the microcosm of man. See also Floriacensis, Hugo, Tractates de Regia et Sacerdotali DignitatiGoogle Scholar (in: Monumenta Germaniae, Libelli de Lite II, p. 465 ff.)Google Scholar I, 1; Pelagius, Alvarus, De Planctu Ecclesiae I, 37Google Scholar; Somnium Viridarii (ascribed to Philippe de Mazieres) I, 37Google Scholar ff.; Nicolaus of Cues, De Concordanlia Catholica, I, 1–4Google Scholar; Dante, , De Monorchia I, 7; I, 6Google Scholar, who speaks of the correspondence of the universilas humana and the universal whole on the one hand, and the correspondence of the univera'faj humana and the smaller communities or particular associations on the other hand. But Dante borrows the essence of this idea from St. Thomas Aquinas. See for instance, St. Aquinas, Thomas, Summa contra Gentiles III, 76–83Google Scholar; De Regimine Princlpum I, 12.Google Scholar

13 Dominicus de Dominicis Venetus, De Potesiate Papae, in: Cod. Vat. Lat. 4123, fol. 63v. Compare also Aristotle, Metaphysics 1076 a 3.

14 See, for instance, the fable of Menenius Agrippa (in: Livy II, 32) about the organic relation of the stomach to the other parts of the body. — This fable is being quoted, among others, by John of Salisbury, , Policraticus, VI, 24.Google Scholar

15 Remigio de' Girolami of Florence (in: Contra Falsos Ecclesiae Professores, Cod. 940 C4, fol. 154r - 196r, National Library of Florence) in an allegorical manner attempts to carry out this idea of unity even as regards the various branches of learning. He shows that only in and through the single Church the many rules of grammar, logic, geometry, rhetoric, music, arithmetic, and astronomy are fully realized in one single harmonious meaning. — It is quite possible that Remigio is here under the influence of the Anticlaudianus of Alanus ab Insulis.

16 Aquinas, St. Thomas, Summa Theologica I, quaest. 103Google Scholar, art. 3; Boëthius, , De Consolatione Philosophiae II, 2Google Scholar, in: Patrol. Lat. vol. 63, 771.Google Scholar

17 St. Augustine, , De Libero Arbitrio I, 5, 15Google Scholar; St. Thomas, Aquinas, Summa Theologica I, II, quaest. 91Google Scholar, art. 1; also ibid, quaest. 91, art. 2; art. 4; art. 5; quaest. 93, art. 1; art. 2; art. 4; art. 5; art. 6; Anonymous Cod. Borgh. 139 (saec. XIII, Vat. Lib.) folio 97 ff., quaest. 1: quaesitum est de lege aeterna; William of Auxerre, Summa Aurea IIIGoogle Scholar, tract. 7, chap. 1. quaest. 3; Hales, Alexander of, Summa Universae Theologiae, IIIGoogle Scholar, quaest. 26, membrum 1; ibid, membrum 3: “… lex aeterna est quae iuslum est ul omnia sint ordinatissima.…” ibid.: lex aeterna … est … principium ordinis …; Anonymous Cod. 128 (saec. XIII, Biblioiheca Communale d“Assist) folio 213r ff., quaeslio est de lege aeterna, particularly quaest. 5, de utilitale legis aelernae (folio 214v); d'Aquasparte, Matteo, Quaestiones Disputatae de Legibus (in: Cod. 159, saec. XIII–XIV. Biblioiheca Communale d”Assisi) folio 240r–282v, particularly folio 240r ff.Google Scholar

18 See, for instance, St. Augustine, , De Civitate Dei XII, 4Google Scholar; XII, 15; XII 18; et al.; – It is St. Augustine who together with certain authoritative pronouncements of St. Paul (see infra) lays the foundation of this doctrine. — Aquinas, St. Thomas, Summa Theologica I, quaest. 96Google Scholar, art. 4: “… multa ordinanlur ad unum …”; Paris, John of, Tractatus de Regia Potestale el Papali (in Goldast) I, 2, p. 108 ff.Google Scholar

19 Epistola de Iuribus Imperii Romani 7; 8.Google Scholar

20 The application of the principle of “unity before plurality” to human society is vigorously expounded by Aquinas, St. Thomas in his De Regimine Principum I, 2; I, 3; I, 12Google Scholar; Summa contra Gentiles III, 81Google Scholar. See also Floriacensis, Hugo, Tractatus de Regia et Sacerdoiali Dignitati I, 1Google Scholar; Colonna, Aegidius RomanusDe Regimine Principum III, 2, 3Google Scholar, Dante, , De Monorchia I, 5Google Scholar tf.; Pelagius, Alvarus, De Planctu Ecclesiae, I, 40Google Scholar; Parisiensis, Johannes, Tractatus de Regia Potestaie el Papali I, 1Google Scholar; Antonius de Rosellis (died 1466), De Monorchia she Potestale Imperatoris et Papae II, 5 ff.Google Scholar; de Andlo, Petrus, De Imperio Romano-Germanico (written in 1460) I, 8.Google Scholar

21 Aquinas, St. Thomas, Summa contra Gentiles IV, 76Google Scholar; Pelagius, Alvarus, De Planctu Ecclesiae I, 7; I, 13; I, 24 ff.; I, 63; I, 36 ff.Google Scholar

22 Aquinas, St. Thomas, Summa Theologica II, II, quaest. 10 ff.Google Scholar; ibid. III, quaest. 8, art. 1 ff.; Augustinus Triumphus de Ancona (1243–1328), Summa de Polestate Ecclesiastica IGoogle Scholar, quaest. 18, art. 23 ff.; art. 29 ff.; Pelagius, Alvarus, De Planctu Ecclesiae I, 13; I, 37; I, 40.Google Scholar

23 See especially St. Augustine, , De Vera Religione I, 24Google Scholar, in: Patrol. Lat. vol. 34, 150Google Scholar; De Libero Arbilxio II, 7, 15Google Scholar ff.; Aquinas, St. Thomas, De Regimine Principum I, 14Google Scholar;—Some of the arguments used by St. Thomas Aquinas are akin to those employed by Aristotle in Nicomachean Ethics 1094 a 10 ff. — Compare note 18, supra.

24 Aquinas, St. Thomas, Comment, in Eth. Aristot., lectio 1Google Scholar; —See also De Regimine Principum I, 3Google Scholar; Compare St. Augustine, , De Civitaie Dei XV, 8; XV, 16Google Scholar; De Diversis Quaestionibus I, 46Google Scholar: “Est enim civitas … rationalism mullitudo legis unius socieiate devincta …; Epistola 138, 10Google Scholar (in: Patrol. Lat., vol. 33, 529)Google Scholar; Epistola 155. 3Google Scholar (in: Patrol. Lot. vol. 33. 670).Google Scholar

25 Aquinas, St. Thomas, De Regimine Principum I, 3Google Scholar; Summa contra Centiles IV, 1Google Scholar; Dante, , De Monorchia I, 15Google Scholar; — Dante considers the principle of absolute unity as being the source of everything that is good. To him the maxime ens is the maxime unum, and the maxime unum the maxime bonum. See also Dante, , Divina Commedia, Paradiso VIII, 1126.Google Scholar; Pope Gregory IXGoogle Scholar, in: Annal. Eccles., vol. XIII. 1302. no. 12.Google Scholar

26 This idea originally goes back to Aristotle; see Nicomachean Ethics 1094 a 10 6. Compare Hannibaldus de Hannibaldis, II. Sententiae dist. 44, art. 2.

27 Dante, , De Monorchia I, 7; III, 16Google Scholar. —Compare ibid. I, 5 if.; I, 8 ff.

28 Aquinas, St. Thomas, Summa Theologica I, II, quaest. 91, art. 1.Google Scholar

29 De Monorchia I, 3Google Scholar. Compare also ibid. I, 4; HI, 16; III, 15; —Guido Vernani of Rimini (in: De Reprobatione Monarckiae composita a Dante Alighiero Florentine, edit. Jarro, )Google Scholar, however, by referring to Aristotle's Politics VII, 2Google Scholar, attacks Dante's arguments in favor of a single monarch and one single world monarchy (chap. 4 ft., edit. Jarro). See also De Reprobatione chap. 8: “Dicit enim [scil., Dante] in eodem capitulo [I, 3 of De Monorchia, note of the present author], et sequenti, quod intellects possibilis non potest actuari, id est perfici, nisi per lotum genus humanum.… Et ad hoc adducit auctorilatem Averroys, qui hoc dicit in Commentario super librutn 3. libr. deanima [of Aristotle].…” Guido's rejection of Dante's universalistic idea is prompted by the fact that he sees in this idea an argument in favor of Averroës' mono-psychism. Compare also Guido, , op. cit., chap. 10.Google Scholar

30 Contra Falsos Ecclesiae Professores, seventh argument. — In order to bolster his argument Remigio quotes Aristotle (Politics I, 2Google Scholar; Metaphysics 1075 a 14; 1028 a 31, 982 a 17); St. Augustine, (De Civilate Dei I, 19)Google Scholar; St. Paul, (Romans 13:1)Google Scholar; Psalm 103:24)Google Scholar, and a sentence from the pseudo-Aristotelian De Mundo which he, however, confounds with the pseudo-Aristotelian De Coelo. Remigio quotes the Versio Nicolai Siculi (Antiquus quidem est sermo et paternus est cunctis hominibus, quod a Deo omnia el per Deum consistant). The Versio Manfrediana, however, reads as follows: Antiquus quidem igilur est omnibus hominibus quod et deo omnia et per deum nobis consisterunt.

31 Compare, in general, Episcoporum ad Hludoxoicum Imperatorem Relatio, in: Monumenta Cerm. Hist. Capit. II, 29Google Scholar, (Now: Mon. Germ. Hist, Leg. sect. 3, vol. II. 2, p. 610).Google Scholar

32 Origen, , Archon, Peri, (in the translation of Rufinus) I, 6, 1.Google Scholar

33 The theologians of the Middle Ages very frequently use the terra ecclesia universalis in order to define or describe the whole of mankind as being one single order or unity. Compare, for instance, Engelbert of Volkersdorf (1250–1311), De Ortu, Progressu el Fine Romani Imperii 15; 17; 18Google Scholar; Augustinus Triumphus de Ancona (1243–1328), Summa de Poteslate Ecclesiastica IGoogle Scholar, quaest. 1, art. 6; Pelagius, Alvarus, De Planclu Ecclesiae I, 13Google Scholar; Occam, William of, Octo Quaestiones, quaest. 3, Chap. 1Google Scholar; Dialogue III, tract. 2, lib. 1, chap. 1.Google Scholar

34 At the councils (synods) of Worms and Paris (829) as well as in the Capitulary of Worms (see: Monumtnia Germaniae, Leges I, 333Google Scholar) it was stated that the “universalis sancia ecclesia Dei unum corpus manifesle esse credalur eiusque caput Christus.” Similar ideas which express the notion that mankind is but a single body with a divinely ordained spiritual as well as temporal constitution of its own, we find in Jonas of Paris (died 843), De Institutione Regia; - See also Pope Gregory VIIGoogle Scholar, Registrum IGoogle Scholar, Epistola 19, anno 1073 (in: Monumtnia Cregoriana); Ivo of Chartres (died 1115), Epistola 106 (in: Migne, , Patrol. Lat. vol. 162, 217 ff.Google Scholar); St. Bernard, (1091–1153), Epistola ad Conradum Regem, annoGoogle Scholar 1146 (in: Patrol. Lat., vol. 182, 440 ff.Google Scholar); Gerhohus Reicherspergensis, De Corruptione Statu Ecclesiae, praef. p. 11 (in: Monumenta Cermaniae, Libelli de Lite III, p. 131 ff.Google Scholar); Floriacensis, Hugo, Tractates de Regia et Sacerdotal! Dignitate I, 1Google Scholar; St. Thomas Cantuarensis (St. Thomas Becket, 1116–1170), Epistola 179 (in: Patrol. Lat., vol. 190, 652)Google Scholar; Pope Innocent III (1198–1216), Registrum super Negotiis Romani Imperii in: Patrol. Lat., vol. 216, 997; 1012; 1162Google Scholar; Aquinas, St. Thomas, Summa Theologica III, quaest. 8, art. 1Google Scholar; art. 2; Vincent of Beauvois, Speculum Doctrinale VII, 31.Google Scholar

35 Contra Falsos Ecclesiae Professores, eighth and ninth argument.

36 See, for instance, Episcoporum ad Hludoviiaim Imperatorem Relatio (829) in: Monumenta Cermaniae Histor., Capit. II, 29Google Scholar, (now: Mon. Cerm. Hist., Leg. III, vol. II, 2, p. 610).Google Scholar

37 The Roman legal genius, to be sure, already had conceived the legal order as an effective institution for delimiting and securing the various interests and powers of action which in their aggregate make up what is commonly called the legal personality of every Roman citizen. This concept of the legal personality as it was devised by the Roman jurists is the first tangible and practical expression of the idea of the irreplaceable and irreducible worth and dignity of the human personality and individuality. The declaration that within a politically organized society established by law men in their relations to one another are endowed with certain clearly denned and rigorously delimited rights, is perhaps the most telling pronouncement the ancient world made concerning the problem of the human personality and the dignity of the individual.— Compare, Chroust, A.-H., “The Function of Law and Justice in the Ancient World and the Middle Ages,” in: Journal of the History of Ideas, vol. VII (1946), no. 3, p. 302 ff.Google Scholar; — This Roman definition of the proper function of the legal order, however, is but an outgrowth of a legal polity which sees in the law primarily an instrument devised to secure certain personal interests. It is not, as it is with the mediaeval thinkers, the cogent result of man's divine ordination, the inescapable outgrowth of the belief that each and every human individual is essentially the holy vessel of an immortal soul destined to an everlasting life of heavenly bliss. This novel Christian conception of the individual and his absolute worth endows the classical Roman idea of giving every one his own with an infinitely profounder significance. Compare Chroust, A.-H, op. cit., p. 331.Google Scholar

38 Compare Gierke, O., op. cit., p. 514.Google Scholar

39 de' Girolami, Remigio, Contra Falsos Ecclesiae ProfessoresGoogle Scholar fol. 160v, Pelagius, Alvarus, De Planclu Ecclesiae I, 13Google Scholar; Somnium Viridarii (ascribed to Philippe de Mazieres), II, 6Google Scholar ff.; Occam, William of, Dialogus IIIGoogle Scholar, tract. J, lib. 2, chap. 1; Monte, Petrus a, De Potestate Romani Pontificis et Ceneralis Concilii sive de Primatu I, 16.Google Scholar

40 This notion of Remigio is taken from Dionysius the Areopagite, De Caelesti Merarchia 10Google Scholar, in: Patrol. Craec. vol. IV, 275Google Scholar. Similar ideas are found in Aristotle, Physics II, 1 (193 b 7 ff.).Google Scholar

41 Contra Falsos Ecclesiae Professores, fol. 161 r.

42 Guido Vernani of Rimini, De Reprobatione Monarchiae 13.Google Scholar

43 Summa de Potestate Ecclesiastica IGoogle Scholar, quaest. 19, art. 2. Compare also ibid. I, quaest. 5, art. I; I, quaest. 1. art. I; 1, quaest. 1, art. 6; Johannes Andreae Mugellanus (1270–1348), Novella in Decretales Gregorii IX.Google Scholar

44 Pope Gelasius' epistle (496) to Emperor Anastasius I, in: Thiel, , Epistolae Romanorum Ponlificum I, 394Google Scholar, no. 12. Compare also Decretum Cratiani X, D. 96Google Scholar; See Mansi V, 531 (the summons of Emperor Theodosius to attend the council of Ephesus); Chrysostom, John, Ad Corinth. Homil. IV, 4Google Scholar, in: Patrol. Craec. vol. 61, 508.Google Scholar — The same idea is found in the Register of Pope Gregory VII, edit. Caspar, in: Monumenta Cerm. Histor. VII, 25.Google Scholar

45 Buridanus, Johannes, Quaestiones Super Octo Libras Politicorum, quaest. 5 (fol. 113r).Google Scholar

46 St. Augustine, , De Diversis Quaestionibus 54Google Scholar, in: Patrol. Lat. vol. 40, 38.Google Scholar

47 St. Victor, Hugh of, De Sacramentiis II, 2, 4Google Scholar; Salisbury, John of, Policraticus IV, 3Google Scholar; de' Girolami, Remigio, Contra Falsos Ecclesiae ProfessoresGoogle Scholar (fol. 165r); Rimini, Guido Vernani of, De Potesiate Papae, 7.Google Scholar

48 Epistola ad Corinth. Homil. 15, 3 ff.Google Scholar; De Sacerdotium III, 1.Google Scholar

49 Oratio 17.

50 Epistola 249, in: Patrol. Lat., vol. 78.Google Scholar

51 Milan, St. Ambrose of (in: Sermo ad Auxentium 36)Google Scholar clearly states that the “imperator em'm intra ecclesiam … est.” Compare also Ivo of Chartres, Epislola 106 (in: Patrol. Lat., vol. 162)Google Scholar; Salisbury, John of, Policraticus V, 2; 3Google Scholar (in: Patrol. Lat., vol. 199)Google Scholar; Hales, Alexander of, Summa Universae Theologlae IIIGoogle Scholar, quaest. 40, membrum 2; Hugo de St. Victor, , De Sacramenlis II, 2, 4Google Scholar; Aquinas, St. Thomas, Summa Theologica II, II, quaest. 60, art. 6Google Scholar; Lucca, Ptolomaeus of, De Regimine Principum III, 10Google Scholar; Pelagius, Alvarus, De Planciu Ecclesiae I, 37.Google Scholar

52 De Concordantia Catholica I, 1 ff.Google Scholar

53 Determinatio Compendiosa de Jurisdictione Imperii 7.Google Scholar Compare also Falkenberg, John of, De Mundi Monorchia I, 7, in: Clm 764, fol. 10r–12v.Google Scholar

54 de' Girolami, Remigio, Contra Falsos Ecclesiae Professores 37, (fol. 164v)Google Scholar. Compare also Guido Vemani of Rimini, De Potestate Summi Pontificis fol. 45r, in: Cod. I, X, 51Google Scholar, Bibl. Nat. Florence, fol. 45r–59v.

55 de Viterbo, Jacobus, De Regimine Christiano, p. 131 (edit. Aquillière).Google Scholar

56 Rimini, Guido Vernani of, De Potesiale Papae 14.Google Scholar

57 de San Severino, Dominicus, De Dei Potentia Infinita, fol. 66v, in: Cod. Vat. Lat. 1007.Google Scholar

58 The expression unanimitas applied to the idea of the body politic to my knowledge appears for the first time in Orleans, Jonas of, De Institulione Regia 3, at the end.Google Scholar

59 De Concordantia Catholica I, 1–6Google Scholar; III, 1:—According to Nicolaus of Cues every secular part or member of the universal whole has some analogous spiritual counterpart which so to speak represents the soul in this secular part. Thus, the Pope, for instance, represents the soul in the brain; the patriarchate corresponds to the soul in the senses; the archiepiscopate represents the soul in the arms; etc. — The comparisons at times become rather exaggerated and superficial. See, for instance, Salisbury, John of, Policraticus V, 2Google Scholar; Beauvais, Vincent of, Speculum Doclrinale VII, 8, ff.Google Scholar; Lucca, Ptolomaeus of, De Regimine Principum II, 7; IV, 11; IV, 23Google Scholar; Volkersdorf, Engelbert of, De Regimine Principum III, 16Google Scholar; Aeneas Silvius Piccolomini (1405–1464); (Pope Pius II, 1458–1464)Google Scholar, De Oriu et Auctoritate Romani Imperii 18.Google Scholar

60 Candida, Humbert of Silvia, Adversus Simoniacos III, 21Google Scholar; in: Monumenla Cerm. Hislor., Libelli de Lite. I, 225 ff.Google Scholar

61 Nicolaus of Cues, for instance, when comparing human associations with human bodies uses all the medical knowledge of his day. See De Concordantia Catholica I, 10; III, 41Google Scholar. Thus in the “spiritual life” Christ is, according to Nicolaus, the single heart, whence in the guise of arteries the canones branch out in every direction. In the “secular life” the various public offices from the Emperor down to the lowest public official are the several limbs, while the leges constitute the nerves and the leges imperiales the brain. — Compare also Salisbury, John of, Policraticus V, 1 ff.Google Scholar, Beauvais, Vincent of, Speculum Doctrinale VII, 8–14.Google Scholar

62 De Officiis Minislrorum III, 3, 17Google Scholar, in: Partol. Lat. vol. 16, 149 ff.Google Scholar

63 Policraticus V, 2Google Scholar. Compare also Ptolomaeus of Lucca, De Regimine Principum II, 7Google Scholar; Beauvais, Vincent of, Speculum Doctrinale VII, 8.Google Scholar Compare also Floiiacensis, Hugo, Traclaius de Regia et Sacerdotali Dignitale I, 2; I, 1.Google Scholar

64 Summa Theologica, II, I, quaest. 81, art. 1Google Scholar. – See also De Regimine Principum I, 1Google Scholar; de Lucca, Ptolomaeus, De Regimine Principum II, 7Google Scholar: “Quodlibet regnum she civitas, sive caslrum, sive quodcumque aliud collegium assimilatur humano corpori.” Compare ibid. IV, 23; Volkersdorf, Engelbert of, De Regimine Principum III, 16Google Scholar; Padua, Marsilius ofDefensor Pads I, 15Google Scholar; Occam, William of, Octo QuaesloinesGoogle Scholar, quaest. 8, chap. 5. Dialogus III, tract. 1, lib. 2, chap. 1; III, tract. 2, lib.1, chap. 1Google Scholar; Girolami, Remigio de', Contra Falsos Ecclesiae Professores, chap. 37 (fol. 164v).Google Scholar

65 Beauvais, Vincent of, Speculum Doctrinale VII, 8Google Scholar: “corpus reipublicae mysticum;” Piccolomini, Aeneas Silvius, De Ortu et Auctoritate Romani Imperii 18Google Scholar: “mysticunt corpus reipublicae;” Laudensis, Martinus de Caratis, De Represaliis 5; 6.Google Scholar

66 De Regimine Principum III, 19.Google Scholar

67 Compare Rimini, Guido Vernani of, De Potestate Papae, 14.Google Scholar

68 Aquinas, St. Thomas, Summa Theologica I, quaest. 103, art. 4.Google Scholar

69 Rimini, Guido Vernani of, De Potestate Papae 14.Google Scholar

70 De Civiiate Dei XIX, 13Google Scholar: — Compare also Ptolomaeus of Lucca, De Regimine Principum IV, 9.Google ScholarFloriancensis, Hugo, Tractates de Regia et Sacerdotali Dignitate I, 1; I, 12.Google Scholar

71 De Civitate Dei XIX, 13Google Scholar: — The coelestis civitas, as distinguished from the civitas terrena, again, is ordinatissima, minutely regulated, and concordissima, in other words, a “societas fruendo Deo el invicem in Deo.” (ibid.)

72 De Civitate Dei XIX, 21.Google Scholar

73 John, of Salisbury, , Policraticus VI, 20 ff.Google Scholar

74 Colonna, Aegidius Romanus, De Regimine Principum I, 2, 12.Google Scholar Compare also ibid. I, 1, 13; III, 1, 5; III, 1, 8, III, 2, 34; III, 3, 1; III. 3, 23.

75 Compare also Aquinas, St. Thomas, Lectio 2 ad Rom. 12.Google Scholar

76 Lucca, Ptolomaeus of, De Regimine Principum IV, 23Google Scholar; Dominicus de Dominicis Venetus, De Potestate Papae fol. 58r, in: Cod. Vat. Lat. 4123; Rimini, Guido Vemani ofDe Potestate Papae 14.Google Scholar

77 Volkersdorf, Engelbert of, De Regimine Principum III, 16.Google Scholar

78 Compare, for instance, Gregory I, Moralia IV, 29, 55Google Scholar, in: Patrol. Lat., vol. 75, 665.Google Scholar

79 De Civitate Dei XIX, 21. — It should be noted here that this passage from Cicero has come down to us through the authority of St. Augustine.Google Scholar

80 See also Pelagius, Alvarus, De Planctu Ecclesiae I, 63Google Scholar: “ecclesia est … unum Mum ex multis partibus constitutum et sicul unum corpus ex multis membris compaction.…” Compare Baldus de Ubaldis (1327–1400), Commentarius in Usus Feudorum 32: “Imperium est in similitudine corporis humani.…”

81 Volkersdorf, Engelbert of, De Regimine Principum III, 16.Google Scholar

82 Padua, Marsilius of, Defensor Pads, I, 2; I, 15.Google Scholar

83 This definition is actually taken from Justinian's Institutes I, 2Google Scholar, De lure Nalurali, Gentium et Chili; Digest I, 1, 1Google Scholar, De Iustilia et lure, 2Google Scholar. — It was reiterated, with some modifications, by Isidore of Seville in his Etymologiae (or Origines) V, 4Google Scholar ff., whence it gained great authority for the whole of the Middle Ages. Compare, for instance, Decretum Gratiani, canon I, d'st. 1; Rufinus, Summa Decreiorum, edit. Singer, H., p. 6 ff.Google Scholar; Auxerre, William of, Summa Aurea IIIGoogle Scholar, tract. 7, chap. 1., quaest. 1; Treviso, Johannes of, Summa III, 1Google Scholar (iri: Cod. Vat. Lai. 1187); Cremona, Roland of, Summa (in: Bibl. Mazarine, Paris, Cod. 795) fol. 132r–133Google Scholar; Philippus Grevius (or Philip of Grève), Summa Quaestionum Theologicarum (in: Cod. Vat. Lai. 7669) fol. 130 ff.; Hales, Alexander, Summa Universae Theologiae IIIGoogle Scholar, quaest. 27, membr. 4; art. 1, par. 1; Anonymous Cod. Borgh. 139Google Scholar, in: Bibl. Vat. Lai., saec. XIIIGoogle Scholar (ascribed to an otherwise unknown Franciscan scholar), quaest. 2; St. Bonaventure, , Commentarii in Quaduor Libros Senientiarum Petri Lombardi VGoogle Scholar, dist. 33, art. 1, quaest. 2; d'Aquasparta, Matteo, Quaestiones Disputatae de Legibus (in: Co J. 159 (saec.XIII–XIV), Bibl. Communale d'Assisi) folio 243r ff.Google Scholar; Magnus, Albertus, De Bono et de Virlulibus (in: City Archives of Cologne 6 B f 79) folio 166r ff.Google Scholar; Aquinas, St. Thomas, Summa Theologica I, II, quaest. 94, art. 2.Google Scholar

84 Padua, Marsilius of, Defensor Pads I, 15Google Scholar. Compare also ibid., I, 8; II, 24.

85 Oclo Quaestiones, quaest. VIII, 5.

86 William, of Occam, , Oclo Quaestiones, quaest. I, 11Google Scholar; quaest. VIII, 5. See also Dialogus III, tract. 2, lib. 3, chap. 2; and chap. 4.

87 Compare Gierke, O., op. cit., p. 576.Google Scholar

88 Pelagius, Alvarus, De Planctu Ecclesiae I, 63.Google Scholar

89 St. Ambrose, of Milan, , De Officüs Ministrorum III, 3, 17Google Scholar, in: Patrol. Lat. vol. 16, 150.Google Scholar

90 Compare John, of Salisbury, , Policralicus V, 2Google Scholar; Aquinas, St. Thomas, De Regimine Principum, I, 12Google Scholar; Colonna, Aegidius Romanu, De Regimine Principum I, 2, 12Google Scholar; I, 1, 13; Engelbert, of Volkersdorf, , De Regimine Principum III, 16Google Scholar; Pelagius, Alvarus, De Planctu Ecclesiae I, 63Google Scholar; de Ubaldis, Baldus, Commentarius in Usus Feudoram, prooem. 32Google Scholar; Nicolaus, of Cues, , De Concordaniia Calholica I, 10; I, 14 ff.; III, 41.Google Scholar

91 St. Aquinas, Thomas, Summa Theologica II, II, quaest. 58, art. 5Google Scholar. — Compare also I Corinthians 12: 66Google Scholar: “And whether one member suffer, all the members suffer with it; and one member be honored, all the members rejoice with it.” Compare also Ptolomaeus, of Lucca, , De Regimine Principum IV, 23Google Scholar, John, of Paris, Tractatus de Regia, Poleslale et Papali 1.Google Scholar

92 Compare St. Aquinas, Thomas, Summa Theologica I, quaest. 96, art. 3Google Scholar: “We must of necessity admit that in the primitive state there would have been some inequality.…” See ibid, quaest. 96, art. 4: “… a man is the master of a free subject, by directing him either towards his proper welfare, or the common good. Such a type of mastership would have existed in the state of innocence between man and man, for two reasons: first, because man is by nature a social being, and thus in the state of innocence he would have led a social life. Now a social life cannot exist among a number of people unless under the direction of one to look after the common welfare; for many, as such, seek many things, whereas one attends only to one.…” See also Summa contra Ceniiles III, 81Google Scholar; Andreas of Randuf, , De Modis Uniendi ac Reformandi Ecclesiam in Concilio Universali II, 7; II, 17, who speaks of “membra inequaliter composita.”Google Scholar

93 St. Thomas Aquinas, Lectio 2 ad Rom. 12. Compare Summa Theologica I, quaest. 81, art. 1.Google Scholar

94 Ptolomaeus of Lucca, De Regimine Principum II, 23.Google Scholar

95 I, Gregory, Moralia IV, 29, 55Google Scholar, in: Patrol. Lat. vol. 75, 665.Google Scholar

96 Contra Julianum Pelagianum IV, 12, 61Google Scholar, in: Patrol. Lat. vol. 44, 767 ff.Google Scholar

97 De Civitate Dei XIX, 13Google Scholar. Compare also Ptolomaeus of Lucca (in: De Regimine Principum IV, 9Google Scholar) and Floriacensis, Hugo (in: Tractates Je Regia et Sacerdolali Dignitate I, 1Google Scholar; I, 12) who restate St. Augustine's definition of what constitutes the proper social order.

98 Dominicus de Dominicis Venetus, De Pottstate Papae (written between 1455 and 1458) in: Cod. Vat. Lat. 4123. fol. 58r.

99 St. Ambrose, of Milan, , De Officiis Ministrorum I, 24.Google Scholar

100 St. Augustine, , De Civitate Dei XIX, 14Google Scholar. Compare also I Peter 4–10: “As every man hath received the gift, even so minister the same to another….”

101 Aquinas, St. Thomas, Summa Theologica I, quaest. 96, art. 3Google Scholar: See also Romans 13: 1Google Scholar: “The things mat are of God are well-ordered.”

102 Marsilius, of Padua, , Defensor Pads II, 5Google Scholar. - Marsilius distinguishes three parks vel officio civilatis in the narrower sense of the terms, namely the priestly, the judiciary, and the military, as well as three “offices” in the wider sense of the terms, namely agriculture, trade, and handicraft.

103 Ennar. in Psalm. 144, 13Google Scholar, in: Patrol. Lat. vol. 37, 1892.Google Scholar

104 Vernani, Guido of Rimini, , De Polestatae Papae 14.Google Scholar

105 Compare Antonius de Butrio (a famous canonist, 1338–1408), Commentaria in Quinque Libros Decrelalium chap. 4, X, 1, 6, 14 ff.Google Scholar; Pelagius, Alvarus, De Planctu Ecclesiae, I, 36.Google Scholar

106 Compare Colonna, Aegidius Romanus, De Regimine Principum II, 1, 2Google Scholar; Engelbert, of Volkersdorf, , De Ortu, Progressu, el Fine Romani Romani Imperii 15; 17; 18.Google Scholar

107 De Regia Potestate el Papali 3.Google Scholar

108 Somnium Viridarii I, 36.Google Scholar

109 Marsilius, of Padua, , Defensor Pacis, I, 17.Google Scholar

110 Compare Hugh of St. Victor, , De Sacramentiis II, 2, 4.Google Scholar

111 Engelbert, of Volkersdorf, , De Orlu, Progressu, et Fine Romani Imperii 18.Google Scholar

112 Marsilius, of Padua, , Defensor Pacis II, 24.Google Scholar

113 Compare Mugellanus, Johannes Andreae, Novella in Decretales Gregorii IX, chap. 4, I, 1, 13Google Scholar: “ecclesia universalis est unum Christi corpus … cuius caput est Romana ecclesia … inferiores ecclesiae sunt huius capitis membra quae sunt Vel membra ex capite vel membra ex membris sicut in corpore humano a brachio manus, a manu digiti, a digitis ungulae proveniunt.” See also St. Bernard, , De Consideralione III, p. 82Google Scholar; Marsilius, of Padua, , Defensor Pacis II, 24.Google Scholar

114 Rodrigo Sanches de Arévalo, Defensorium Ecclesiae et Status Ecclesiastici, fol. 35v, in: Cod. Vat. Lai. 4106 Ir-238.—Compare also St. Thomas Aquinas, IV. Sent., dist. 18, quaest. 1, art. 1; Summa Theologica I, quaest. 60, art. 1; Alexander, of Hales, , Summa Universae Theologiae IV, quaest. 35Google Scholar; John, of Torquemada, , Summa Ecclesiae (edit. Venetiis 1561) II, 113.Google Scholar

115 De Institution Laicali II, 20Google Scholar, in: Patrol. Lat. vol. 106, 211.Google Scholar

116 Vernani, Guido, De Reprobalione Monarchiae 11 (edit. Jarro, ).Google Scholar

117 Marsilius, of Padua, , Defensor Pacis I, 2; I, 5.Google Scholar

118 De Institutione Regia, prooem.

119 Dominicus de Dominicis Venetus, De Poleslate Papae, in: Cod. Vat. Lat. 4123, fol. 58r. Compare also St. Thomas Aquinas, I. Sent. dist. 20, quaest. 3, art. 1; Summa Theologica I, quaest. 42, art. 3.

120 Ptolomaeus, of Lucca, , De Regimine Principum II, 26Google Scholar. See also Aquinas, St. Thomas, Summa contra Gentiles III, 76 ff.Google Scholar; Engelbert, of Volkersdorf, , De Regimine Principum III, 21: “in ordinaiione debita el proportione ad invicem … partium.…”Google Scholar

121 Dominicus de Dominicis Venetus, De Polcsiale Papae, in: Cod. Vat Lat. 4123, fol. 58r; de Viterbo, Jacobus, De Regimine Christiano p. 131. (edit. Arquilliere).Google Scholar

122 Aquinas, St. Thomas, Lectio 2 ad Romanos 12.Google Scholar

123 Ptolomaeus, of Lucca, , De Regimine Principum II, 23Google Scholar. - Compare also John, of Salisbury, , Policraticus V, 2Google Scholar; Marsilius, of Padua, , Defensor Pacis I, 2Google Scholar; Pelagius, Alvarus, De Planctu Ecclesiae I, 63Google Scholar; William, of Occam, , Octo Quaestiones, quaest. I, 1; quaest. VIII, 5.Google Scholar

124 Marsilius, of Padua, , Defensor Pacis I, 5Google Scholar; I, 2. Marsilius distinguishes between several officia, that is, the several functions of the various clearly denned organs of the body politic. Compare also Engelbert, of Volkersdorf, , De Regimine Principum III, 16Google Scholar; John, of Salisbury, , Policraticus V, 2Google Scholar; Ptolomaeus, of Lucca, , De Regimine Principum II, 23.Google Scholar

125 Compare Gierke, O., op. cit, p. 582.Google Scholar

126 St. Aquinas, Thomas, Summa Theologica I, quaest. 96, art. 4Google Scholar. Compare Ptolomaeus, of Lucca, , De Regimine Principum IV, 23Google Scholar; Marsilius, of Padua, , Defensor Pacis I, 17.Google Scholar

127 Remigio de' Girolami of Florence, Contra Falsos Ecclesiae Professores 37 (fol. 164v).

128 St. Aquinas, Thomas, Summa Theologica I, quaest. 96, art. 4Google Scholar.—Compare also Summa contra Gentiles IV, 76.Google Scholar

129 Ptolomaeus, of Lucca, , De Regimine Principum IV, 23.Google Scholar

130 Marsilius, of Padua, , Defensor Pacis I, 17Google Scholar.—Compare also John, of Paris, Tractatus de Regia Potestate et Papali (written in 1303) 1Google Scholar; de Andlo, Petrus, De Imperio Romano-Cermanico I, 3.Google Scholar

131 Compare Pelagius, Alvarus, De Planctu Ecclesiae I, 7; I, 13; I, 36.Google Scholar

132 Dante, , De Monorchia I, 15Google Scholar.—Compare de Andlo, Petrus, De Imperio Romano-Cermanico I, 3.Google Scholar

133 Compare Hincmar, of Reims, , Pro Ecclesiae Libertatum Defensione 1Google Scholar, in: Patrol. Lat, vol. 125, 1049Google Scholar; Damian, Peter, Liber Gralissimus 39Google Scholar, in: Monumenta Germ. Hist., Lib. de Lite I, 72Google Scholar; Lambert, , Annates ad Annum 1074Google Scholar, in: Monumenta Germ. Hist., Scriptores, Rer. Germ. p. 199Google Scholar; Ennodius, , Liber pro Synodo, in: Monumenta Germ. Hist., Auct. Ant. VII, 52Google Scholar; Decretum Gratiani I, D. 40.Google Scholar

134 De Inslitulione Regia 7. Compare also Jonas of Orleans, Hisloria Translations, prooem., in: Patrol. Lat, vol. 106, 389.Google Scholar

135 John, of Salisbury, , Policraticus IV, 1 ff.; IV, 5Google Scholar; Aquinas, St. Thomas, De Regimine Principum I, 14Google Scholar; Dante, , De Monorchia I, 12.Google Scholar

136 Floriacensis, Hugo, Tractatus de Regia et Sacerdotali Dignitali I, 4.Google Scholar

137 Aquinas, St. Thomas, De Regimine Principum I, 14Google Scholar; Pelagius, Alvarus, De Planctu Ecclesiae I, 62Google Scholar; Ptolomaeus, of Lucca, , De Regimine Principum II, 5 ff.Google Scholar; Floriacensis, Hugo, Tractates de Regia et Sacerdoiali Dignitate I, 4; I, 6; 1,7Google Scholar; Manigold of Lautenbach, Tractatus adversus Wenricum (written in 1085), in: Monumenta Germaniae, Libelli de Lite I, p. 301Google Scholar; Engelbert, of Volkersdorf, , De Regimine Principum II, 1 ff.Google Scholar; de Rosellis, Antonius, Monorchia sive de Poteslate Imperatoris et Papae I, 64Google Scholar; de Andlo, Petrus, De Imperio Romano-Cermanico I, 3; II, 16 ff.Google Scholar

138 See Monumenta Cermaniae, Legum. sect. IV I, p. 346Google Scholar, et al. Thus at the Councils of Paris and Worms in 829 it was held that all rulership is only a minislerium a Deo commissum.“ It was also stated that the term “rex” must be derived from “recte agere,” and that ceasing to rule righteously and justly any rex becomes a tyrannus.

139 Hervaeus Natalis (Brito), De Poteslate Papae 2Google Scholar;-Fulbert of Chartres had already declared that the secular rulers are vicarii Christi. See Epislola 30Google Scholar, in: Patrol. Lat., vol. 141, 216Google Scholar. Compare also Scotus, Sedulius, De Rectoribus Chrislianis I, 11.Google Scholar

140 See John, of Salisbury, , Policraticus IV, 1 ff.; IV, 5Google Scholar; Ptolomaeus, of Lucca, , De Regimine Principum III, 11Google Scholar: “regnum non est propter regem, sed rex propter regnum.” Engelbert, of Volkersdorf, , De Regimine Principum V, 9Google Scholar: “procuratio reipublicae invenla est ad utiliialem eorum qui commissi sunt, et non eorum qui commissionem susceperunt.” Dante, , De Monarchia I, 12Google Scholar: “non enim cives propter consoles, nee gens propter regem, sed e converso consules propter cives et rex propter gentem.”

141 Compare de Menun, Jean, Roman de la Rose V, 5297 ff.Google Scholar

142 Engelbert, of Volkersdorf, , De Regimine Principum I, 10Google Scholar; Dante, , De Monarchia I, 12Google Scholar; Aquinas, St. Thomas, Summa Theologica I, quaest. 96, art. 4Google Scholar; William, of Occam, , Octo Quaestiones, quaest. III, 5Google Scholar.—Every breach of these duties turns the rulership into an outright tyranny. See note 138. supra. Compare also Floriacensis, Hugo, Tractatus de Regia et Sacerdotali Dignitate I, 7 ff.Google Scholar; Petrus Blesensis (died 1200), Epistola, in: Migne, P. L., vol. 200, 476Google Scholar; John, of Salisbury, , Policraticus III, 17 ff.Google Scholar; Ptolomaeus, of Lucca, , De Regimine Principum III, 11Google Scholar; Aquinas, St. Thomas, De Regimine Principum I, 3 ff.Google Scholar; Vincent, of Beauvais, , Speculum Doctrinale VII, 8Google Scholar, Occam, Dialogus III, tract 1, lib. 2, chap. 6 ff.; Octo Quaestiones, quaest. III, 14.Google Scholar

143 Obviously, then, the rightfulness of command is determined by the fact whether or not it is in agreement with the commands of God. Compare St. Augustine, , De Civitate Die XIX, 14Google Scholar; Aquinas, St. Thomas, Summa Theologica I, II, quaest. 91, art. 2; quaest. 94, art. 1–6; quaest. 97, art. 1Google Scholar; ibid. II, II, quaest. 57, art. 2; Colonna, Aegidius Romanus, De Regimine Principum III, pars 2, cap. 29Google Scholar; Vincent, of Beauvais, , Speculum Doctrinale VII, 41 ff.; X, 87Google Scholar; William, of Occam, . Dialogus III, tract. 1, lib. 2, chap. 6Google Scholar; tract. 2, lib. 2, chap. 26 ff.; de Ubaldis, Baldus, Commenlarius in Usus Feudorum I, 3, 24 ff.Google Scholar

144 St. Augustine, , De Diversis Quaestionibus I, 53, 2Google Scholar; ibid. 31, 1 ff.; De Trinilate XII, 15Google Scholar; Aquinas, St. Thomas, Summa Theologica I, II, quaest. 91, art. 1; art. 2; art. 4; art. 5Google Scholar; William, of Auxerre, , Summa Aurea III, tract. 7, chap. 1, quaest. 3Google Scholar; Alexander, of Hales, , Summa Universae Theologiae III, quaest. 27, membr. 1, art. 1; art. 2Google Scholar; Anonymous Cod. Borgh. (saec. XIII, Lib. Val. no. 139) folio 97 ff.Google Scholar, quoted in: Chroust, A.-H., “The Philosophy of Law from St. Augustine to St. Thomas Aquinas,” in: The New Scholasticism, vol. 20 (1946) no. 1, p. 51 ff. and footnote.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

145 St. Augustine, , Ennar. in Psalm. IX, 8Google Scholar, in: Patrol. Lat. vol. 36, 120 ff.Google Scholar

146 Aquinas, St. Thomas, Summa Theologica I, II, quaest. 90, art. 3; quaest. 97, art. 3Google Scholar; Ptolomaeus, of Lucca, , De Regimine Principum II, 8; III, 8; IV, 1Google Scholar; Engelbert, of Volkersdorf, , De Regimine Principum I, 10Google Scholar; I, 11; William, of Occam, , Dialogus III, tract. 1, lib. 2, chap. 6Google Scholar; de Andlo, Petrus, De Imperio Romano-Germanico I, 8Google Scholar; John, of Salisbury, , Policraticus IV, 2Google Scholar; Colonna, Aegidius Romanu, De Regimine Principum III, pars 2, cap. 2.Google Scholar

147 Compare Aquinas, St. Thomas, Summa Theologica I, quaest. 96, art. 4.Google Scholar

148 See Colonna, Aegidius Romanus, De Regimine Principum III, pars 2, cap. 2:Google Scholar “lotus populus magis dominatur.…” Compare also Nicolaus, of Cues, , De Concordontia Catholica II. 9 ff.Google Scholar; II, 20; III, praef.; III, 41.

149 Marsilius, of Padua, , Defensor Pacis I, 7; I, 8; I, 12; I, 13; I, 15; I, 17.Google Scholar

150 See J., Koch, Durandus de S. Porciano, Forschungen zum Streit um Thomas von Aquino zu Deginn des 14. Jahrhunderts, vol. I, p. 172; 173.Google Scholar

151 Patricius, of Siena, , De Insiitutione Reipublicae I, 1Google Scholar. Compare also Marsilius, of Padua, , Defensor Pacis I, 17Google Scholar; William, of Occam, , Dialogus III, tract. 1, lib. 2, chap. 2.Google Scholar

152 Nicolaus, of Cues, , De Concordantia Catholica III, 4Google Scholar: “tunc divina censetur, quando per concordantiam communem a subiectis exorihur.”

153 De Investigatione Antichristi 38.Google Scholar

154 Nicolaus, of Cues, , De Concordantia Catholica II, 12; II, 13; III, 4; HI, 41.Google Scholar