Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T10:12:23.871Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Concerning the Political Theories of the Medieval Canonists

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 August 2017

Alfons M. Stickler
Alfons M. Stickler*
Affiliation:
Pontificium Athenaeum Salesianum Turin
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The Maitland Memorial Lectures for 1948, delivered at Cambridge University by Dr. Walter Ullmann, were published in 1949, somewhat enlarged, under the title, Medieval Papalism: The Political Theories of the Medieval Canonists (London, Methuen & Co., 1949; pp. xiv, 230). In six chapters the author sets forth his views on certain fundamental problems of medieval political history which were given their doctrinal development and practical realization by the canonists jointly with the popes, that is to say, by the legislative authority and the jurisprudence of the medieval Church.

Type
Miscellany
Information
Traditio , Volume 7 , 1951 , pp. 450 - 463
Copyright
Copyright © 1951 by Fordham University Press 

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 Cf. in detail the present writer's article, “Magistri Gratiani sententia de potestate ecclesiae in statum,’ Apollinaris 21 (1948) 36–111.Google Scholar

2 Summa ‘Et est sciendum’ (Stuttgart, MS hist. fol. 419) ad D. 22 (fol. 35ra) : ‘Quia autem tunc temporis a Constantino in grecia(m) est translatum Imperium, volunt quidam constantinopolitanum debere esse romanum imperatorem. Tamen quia quodam tempore ecclesia ab hereticis vexabatur et cum vocatus grecorum imperator ad ecclesie auxilium venire contempsit, datum est Imperium facienti eius iustitiam et tunc Karolus invitatus venit, ut C. xxiii. q. ult. hortatu; unde ad francos est translatum, qui tunc temporis dominabantur.’ Google Scholar

3 JL n.12020.Google Scholar

4 Vatican MS Reg. lat. 1061, fol. 4ra.Google Scholar

5 Ibid. fol. 18ra.Google Scholar

6 p. 195 n.3: ‘The inconsistency and vacillation of the Glossa Palatina is noteworthy.’ Google Scholar

7 Of the text quoted p. 195 n.2 he says, ‘the cryptic (and otherwise contradictory) passage ***’ Google Scholar

8 Vatican MS Pal. lat. 624, fol. 49ra.Google Scholar

9 Ibid. fol. 264rb.Google Scholar

10 MS Vat. lat. 1377, fol. 75va; Vat. lat. 2509, fol. 71va.Google Scholar

11 MSS cit. fols. 187va and 179rb respectively (3 Comp. ant. 2.1.3); cf. Gillmann, , in Archiv für kath. Kirchenrecht 98 (1918) 408 n.4.Google Scholar

12 MSS cit. fols. 256rb and 248vb respectively (4.12.2).Google Scholar

13 X 4.17.7, v. ad regem. Google Scholar

14 X 2.28.7, v. credimus; 4.17.13, v. habet potestatem; 2.1.13, v. iurisdictionem nostram; 22.11 v. iustitia. Google Scholar

15 Commentaria in Decretales (Venet. 1581). 4.17.7 (causam que, ii; vol. IV, fol. 36r) v. nos attendentes: ‘*** Hugo dixit quod papa habet potestatem a deo quoad spiritualia solus, imperator habet potestatem a deo solus quoad temporalia nec subest in eis papae. Gladium tamen accipit ab altari Et secundum hanc opinionem iurisdictiones divisae sunt et distinctae. Et sunt duo vicarii dei in terris, unus in spiritualibus, alius in temporalibus. Ala. et T contra et dicunt quod, licet Imperium a deo processerit, tamen executionem gladii habet imperator ab ecclesia, et ecclesia una et unum corpus est Hoc amplector; dico tamen quod papa non habet se intromittere de temporalibus in alterius praeiudicium, j(nfra) e. per venerabilem § rationibus. Sed imperator indistincte se intomittit: quia a deo hoc sibi est immediate commissum, ut s(upra) in princ. huius gl. Persona tamen imperatoris, si excedat etiam in temporalibus, corrigi poterit tamquam inferior per papam tamquam per superiorem, ut no(tatur) j. eo. per venerabilem § rationem.’ — 4.17.13 (per venerabilem; IV, fol. 39r) v. rationibus: ‘iiii. pars decret. in qua evidenter reprobat opinionem illorum qui dicunt quod adeo sunt distinctae iurisdictiones quod nihil ad papam de temporalibus, ut notatur supra eo. causam ii. et quod non potest legitimare quoad temporalia nisi in patrimonio b. Petri ***’; v. regionibus: ‘hoc idem casualiter facere possumus etiam specialiter dispensando et hoc non solum quoad spiritualia, ut quidam dicere voluerunt, sed etiam quoad temporalia: nam et licet aliqui scripserint iurisdictiones adeo distinctas esse quod nihil ad nos de temporalibus, hoc tamen intelligi debet regulariter verum ubique terrarum inter christianos fideles unitatem ecclesiae, non schisma foventes, xxiii. q.i. loquitur, et bonum oboedientiae ac plenitudinem potestatis nobis a deo commissae considerantes.’ He then enumerates the cases in which the Church exercises by exception temporal power, v. casualiter : ‘ut praemissum est, et forsan in aliis in quibus subditi suffraganeorum subsunt metropolitanis, ut notatur supra de offic. ordin. pastoralis, secundum Goffr.; quasi dicat, imperator praeest omnibus temporalibus immediate et a deo hoc constitutum est, ut probant concordantiae inductae s. eod. causam ii. Tamen et in his subest papae in casibus, et persona sua immediate deo et papae nihilominus, sicut et episcopus immediate subest papae etiam quoad sibi commissa et subditos Dicamus igitur cum domino Innocentio iii. quod quicquid facit papa Deus facere creditur, dum tamen evidenter non peccet nec faciat contra fidem Sed et quamvis persona imperatoris subsit papae et temporalia per quandam consequentiam, tamen imperator magis potest in temporalibus, quae a deo immediate tenet, ut supra dictum est, et ideo, dummodo caveat a peccato, de ipsis potest disponere prout placet.***’.Google Scholar

16 De dispensatione in iure canonico praesertim apud decretistas et decretalistas (Brugia 1925).Google Scholar

17 “Gratian und die Eigenkirchen,’ Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung für Rechtsgeschichte, Kan. Abt. 1 (1911) 30ff. Google Scholar

18 Archiv für kath. Kirchenr. 106 (1926) 156, with references to other places where he discusses the matter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

19 Chiesa e stato nella dottrina di papa Innocenzo III (Rome 1940).Google Scholar

20 “De ecclesiae potestate coactiva materiali apud magistrum Gratianum,’ Salesιanum 4 (1942) 2–23, 97-119; ‘De potestate gladii materialis ecclesiae secundum “Quaestiones Bambergenses” ineditas,’ ibid. 6 (1944) 113-140; ‘Il potere coattivo materiale della Chiesa nella riforma Gregoriana secondo Anselmo di Lucca,’ Studi Gregoriani 2 (1947) 235-85; ‘Il “gladius” nel registro di Gregorio VII,’ ibid. 3 (1948) 89-103; ‘Der Schwerterbegriff bei Huguccio,’ Ephemerides iuris canonici 3 (1947) 201-42, where the general problems are discussed ex professo; and the article cited above n.1.Google Scholar

21 Cf. n.20.Google Scholar