Then follows an interesting discussion of the
question
about
the derivation of the power of the ecclesiastical prelates from
the Pope, in which he finally affirms that the power of orders
comes to them from Christ, and cannot be taken from them,
but the power of jurisdiction comes to them from the Pope,
who can annul it.
the derivation of the power of the ecclesiastical prelates from
the Pope, in which he finally affirms that the power of orders
comes to them from Christ, and cannot be taken from them,
but the power of jurisdiction comes to them from the Pope,
who can annul it.
Thomas Carlyle
2
1 Id. id. id. , chap. vii. p. 234.
" Secundo habet rationom cause agent is
reepectu ejus, quantum ad judicium.
Cum enim eum instituat, ad eum etiam
pertinet ipsum judicare. . . . Unde
dicit Hugo de Sancto Victore quod
spirituals potestas terrenam potes-
tatem et instituere habet, ut sit, et
judicare habet, si bona non fuerit.
Habet enim eam judicare: quia eam
potest et debet corrigere et dirigere,
punire et pcenam ci inferre, non solum
spiritualem sod temporalem, ratione
criminis et delicti, etiam ad ejus
destitutionem procedere si hoc delicti
qualitas exigat. Quse destitutio non
est ipsius potestatis, quia sic tolleretur
ordo potestatum sed est hominis male
utentis potestato sibi data. . . . Licet
enim aliis pontificibus conveniat de
temporali potestate judicare, nam
episcopus potest regem excommuni-
care, in quantum pertinet ad suam
dyocesim, summus tamen pontifex,
habet plenum judicium super omnes
principes, et secundum omnem modum
judicii, qui communicatus est spirituali
potestati. "
? Id. id. id. id. , p. 235. " Tertio
vero, spiritualis potestas habet ra-
tionom causse agentis respoctu tem-
poralis, quantum ad imperium. Sicut
enim contingit in artibus quod ars,
ad quem pertinet ultunus et princi-
palis finis, imperat arti ad quam per-
tinet finis secundums, qui ad princi-
palem ordinatur ; sic et in potestatibus
se habet. Unde spiritualis potestas
ad quem pertinet precipuus finis qui
est beatitudo supernaturalia, ita se
habet ad potestatem temporalem, ad
quam pertinet beatitudo naturalis,
quse est finis secundarius, ordinatur
ad supernaturalem, quod imperat ei,
et in sui obsequium utitur ea et omni-
bus, quse ei subdentur et quse ad
ipsum pertinent. . . . Unde spiritualis
? ? potestas, etiam super temporalia qus'-
Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-12-19 10:49 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. b3318617 Public Domain in the United States, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-us-google
? 414 TEMPORAL AND SPIRITUAL POWERS. [PAKT II.
When the writer has thus considered the comparison of the
Temporal and Spiritual Powers with respect to dignity and
" causalitas," he turns to the comparison of them " Secundum
continentiam," and he maintains that the Temporal Power,
which is related to the Spiritual as the inferior to the superior,
and as that which is caused to that which causes, is con-
tained in (continetur) the Spiritual Power, and that therefore
it is said that the laws of the celestial as well as of the earthly
empire were given by Christ to Peter, for Peter and each
of his successors, in whom the fulness of the Spiritual Power
dwells, possesses beforehand (prehabet) the Temporal Power
in a greater and more dignified form than the Temporal
prince. He explains his phrase when he adds that the Pope
does not carry out the functions of the Temporal Power
immediately, except in some cases, but he does this by his
commands and directions. This is what is meant when it
is said that the Temporal Power pre-exists in the Spiritual.
All temporal princes, therefore, must obey him as they would
the Lord Jesus Christ, and must acknowledge him as their
superior and their head, and if the chief Pontiff commands
one thing and the temporal prince another, men must obey
the Pontiff. 1
cunque imperium habet in quantum
spiritualibus nata sunt obsequi, et ad
spiritualia ordinari; et temporalis
potestas, jure divino quantum ad om-
nia subest spirituali in quantum
ordinatur ad ipsam et etiam propter
ipsam. "
1 Id. id. id. id. , p. 236. " Ex dictis
autem potest accipi comparatio eorum
secundum continentiam. Nam quia
virtutes inferiores continentur in supe-
rioribus, et quse sunt causatorum
preinsunt causatis; ideo temporalis
potestas, quse comparatur ad spiri-
tualem, sicut inferius ad superius, et
sicut causatum ad causam, continetur
a potestate spirituali : et propter hoc
a Christo dicuntur esse concessa beato
Petro jura ccclestis imperii et terreni,
quia Petrus et quilibet ejus successor,
in quo plenitudo spiritualis potestatis
residet, prehabet potestatem tempo-
ral em, non tam en secundum eundem
modum secundum quem habetur a
principe seculari, sed modo superiori
et digniori et prestantiori. Non enim
sic habet eam, ut exerceat ejus opera
immediate, nisi aliquibus casibus, sed
agit opera ejus nobiliori modo, scilicet
imperando et dirigendo, et ad suum
finem operibus ejus utendo, ot ideo
temporalis potestas dicitur pre-existere
in spirituali, secundum primam et
summam auctoritatem, non autem
secundum immediatam executionem
generaliter et regulariter. Propter
quod principes omnes temporales obe-
dire debent ei, apud quem spiritualis
potestas in summo residet, tamquam
domino nostra Jesu Christo, et ipsum
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-12-19 10:49 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. b3318617 Public Domain in the United States, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-us-google
? CHAP. IX. ] BONIFACE VH. AND PHILIP THE FAIR. 415
In the following chapters, among other matters, he discusses
the question in what sense it can be said that the Pope holds
the Temporal Power, not only by the Divine Law, but by the
human law--namely, by the Donation of Constantine, and
he contends that the Donation might be interpreted either
simply as a recognition of that which was already the Divine
Law, or as a means by which the vicar of Christ might more
freely exercise the authority which he already possessed by
the Divine Law ; or it might be said that in consequence of
the Donation the Pope might intervene more immediately
in temporal matters, as can be seen from the fact that when
the empire is vacant the Pope exercises an immediate temporal
jurisdiction. 1
James of Viterbo has thus arrived at his main conclusion,
and he only sets it out again in other terms when, in the ninth
chapter, he says that the Pope is superior in dignity and
causality (causalitate) to every temporal power, and that
it may be rightly said that in the chief Pontiff there pre-exists
the fulness of the pontifical and of the royal power. 2 Or
again, it is therefore right to say that the vicar of Christ has
the fulness of power, for all that governing authority which was
sicut superiorem et sicut caput reeog-
nosoere, ipsum revereri et honorary ac
ei subjici . . . unde si summus pontifex
mandaret unum, et quicunque princeps
temporalis contrarium : obediendum
est magis summo pontifiei quam
principi. "
1 Id. id. , chap. ix. p. 255. " Quinto,
considerandum est quod aummus ponti-
fex non solum jure divino sed etiam
jure humano habet potestatem tem-
poralcm : scilicet ex concessione a
Constantino facta, qui monarchiam
tenebat imperii. Si quis autem quserat,
quid operatur hoe jus humanum supra
divinum, dici potest uno modo : quod
hoc jus humanum est divini juris
manifestatio vel ad jus divinum con-
formatio et ejus imitatio et veneratio
. . . non auctoritatem contulit, sed
reverentiam impendit et regnum terre-
num coelesti subjectum esse debere
monstravit. . . . Vel potest dici quod
ista concessio fuit qusedam co-operatio
sive ministerium ad hoc ut potestatem,
quam Christi vicarius habebat jure
divino, posset liberius exeroere de
facto. . . . Potest autem et alitor dici :
videlicet quod ex hujusmodi con-
cessione potest summus Pontifex magis
immediate se intromittere de tempor-
alibus, quod ex eo patet, quia quum
vacat imperium exercere potest im-
mediate jurisdictionem temporalem,
et sio alitor exercet potestatem tem-
poralem, ut habet eam ex jure Divino
et aliter ut habet eam ex jure humano. "
Cf. chap. x. p. 192.
2 Id. id. id. , chap. ix. p. 268. " Est
etiam superior dignitate et causalitate
omni temporali potestate, ideo con-
cludi recto potest quod in summo
pontifico, pre-existit plenitudo pontifi-
? ? calia et regise potestatis. "
Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-12-19 10:49 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. b3318617 Public Domain in the United States, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-us-google
? 416
[PABT II.
TEMPORAL AND SPIRITUAL POWERS.
given by Christ to the Church, sacerdotal and royal, spiritual
and temporal, is in the chief Pontiff, the vicar of Christ. 1
The method of his argument is not the same as that of
Egidius Colonna or Henry of Cremona or Ptolemy of Lucca,
but the conclusion is the same--that is, that properly all
authority, temporal, political, as well as spiritual, belonged
to the Pope; that it was only by his grant or acquiescence
that the secular ruler possessed and exercised his political
authority, and only on the condition that he obeyed the com-
mands of the Pope.
There is one other important and interesting aspect of this
work--namely, that the author maintains that the authority
of the Spiritual Power extends over temporal things (posses-
sions) inasmuch as they are to be ordered to the end of men's
salvation,2 and he urges that the fact that the secular prince
and his subjects pay tribute--that is, tithe--to the Spiritual
Power, proves that the Spiritual Power is set over princes
even with regard to temporal things (possessions). 3
He goes on to maintain that, according to the Divine Law,
no one justly and legitimately holds any temporal possession
if he does not freely submit himself to God, and make a right
use of it. Sinners and infidels who withdraw themselves from
the lordship of God, and use these temporal things perversely,
hold them unworthily and unjustly according to the Divine
Law, whatever may be the case with human law. This is
the meaning of the saying of St Augustine that by the Divine
Law all things belong to the just. No man is subject to God
1 Id. id. id. id. , p. 272. " Verum
tamen dicitur Christi Vicarius habere
plenitudinem potestatis; quia tota
potentia gubernativa que a Christo
communicata est occlesie, sacerdotalis
et regalis, spirituali* et temporalis
est in sumrao pontifice Christo
Vieario. "
>> Id. id. id. , vii. p. 240. " Spiritualis
igitur potestas etiam super temporalia
preest, in quantum ordinantur ad
finem salutis. Et quia ad hoc data
sunt nobis a Deo, ut eis bene utamur
in ordine ad salutem : non aliter appe-
tenda et possidenda et dispensanda
sunt quam propter beatitudinem; ideo
spiritualis potestas extendit se ad ilia
secundum id ad quod nobis data sunt.
Unde ad spiritualem potestatem per-
tinet imperare bonum eorum usum et
prohibere abusum. "
* Id. id. id. , vii. p. 241. " Amplius,
princeps secularis et qui ei subsunt de
suis temporalibus censum solvunt
potestati spirituali, scilicet decimas,
quare potestas ipsa spiritualis etiam,
quantum ad temporalia, preest prin-
cipibus et principum subditis. "
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-12-19 10:49 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. b3318617 Public Domain in the United States, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-us-google
? CHAP. IX. ] BONIFACE VH. AND PHILIP THE FAIR.
417
who is not subject to the Ecclesiastical Laws, and therefore
no one justly possesses any temporal thing unless he submits
himself with regard to it to the Spiritual Power. 1
It is obvious that this is related to the doctrine of the
tenure of property which is maintained by Egidius Colonna,
which we have already discussed. 2
The same principles as those of Henry of Cremona, Ptolemy
of Lucca, and James of Viterbo are again expressed in a tract
which has been ascribed to Augustinus Triumphus, and which
may belong to this time. 3 His conclusions are the same as
those of Henry of Cremona, but the arguments which he
brings forward in support of them are somewhat different.
He begins with the audacious statement that it is clear and
obvious that all power, both spiritual and temporal, has
come to the prelates of the Church, and to the secular princes,
from Christ, but through Peter and his successors, whose
power the Eoman Pontiff represents. *
1 Id. id. id. , chap. vii. p. 211.
" Adhuc spiritualis potestas potest
communione fidelium privare. Pos-
sessio autem temporalium, et proprietas
et actio super communioationem funda-
tur, quare spiritualis potestas ad tem-
poralia se extendit. Adhuc secundum
jus divinum nullus juste ac legitime
possidet aliquid temporale si Dei
dominio a quo id habet, voluntarie
non subdatur, et si eo non recto utatur.
Propter quod infideles et peccatores
qui se Dei dominio subtrahunt et
temporalibus perverse utuntur, inique
ac injuste ipsa temporalia possident
secundum jus divinum, quicquid sit
de jure humano; et secundum hoc
verificatur illud dictum Augustini quod
' jure divino omnia sunt justorum. '
Non autem subditur Deo, qui non
est subjectus ecclesiastics potestati.
Rectus quoque usus temporalium est
secundum ordinem; ad finem quem
spiritualis potestas intendit et ad quem
dirigit. Quare nullus juste possidet
VOL. V.
aliquid temporale nisi in ejus posses-
sione spirituali potestati se subdat.
Hoc autem non esset, nisi spiritualis
potestas ad ipsa temporalia so exten-
deret. "
' Cf. p. 406.
* Cf. R. Scholz, ' Publizistik,' &c. ,
for a discussion of the date and
authorship.
* Augustinus Triumphus, ' Tractatus
b re via de duplici po testa to prelatorum
et laicorum' (in R. Scholz, ' Die
Publizistik,' p. 486). " Quamvis ergo
sit clarum et manifestum a Deo, quod
non potest aliqua tergiversatione celari,
omnem potestatem tam spiritualem
quam temporalem a Chris to in prelatos
et principes seculares derivatum esse
median to Petro ejus successore, cujus
personam Romanus pontifex repre-
sentat; temporibus tamen istis aliqui
de hoc dubitare videntur, cujus ques-
tionis radicem pro modulo intelli-
genoue nostrse, non invenire, sed in-
? ? ventum manifestare intendimus. "
Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-12-19 10:49 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. b3318617 Public Domain in the United States, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-us-google
? 418 TEMPORAL AND SPIRITUAL POWERS. [PAKT n.
Then follows an interesting discussion of the question about
the derivation of the power of the ecclesiastical prelates from
the Pope, in which he finally affirms that the power of orders
comes to them from Christ, and cannot be taken from them,
but the power of jurisdiction comes to them from the Pope,
who can annul it. With this we cannot here deal. 1
Eeturning, then, to the subject of the relation of the Spiritual
to the Temporal Power, he contends that the ultimate " causa
et principium " of corporal things must be spiritual. In all
arts the superior authority is that which directs, and it is
the spiritual which directs the temporal; the Pope, therefore,
must have authority over kingdoms and secular powers, and
their laws and statutes have no authority unless they are
confirmed by him. 2 The spiritual power which resides in
the Pope is always in its nature right (recta), while the temporal
power is sometimes perverted (obliqua), and therefore the
temporal must be instructed and controlled and judged by
the spiritual. (The individual Pope, he admits, may not
always be right. ) s
1 Id. id. , pp. 487-497.
? Id. id. , p. 497. " Si ergo Pupa,
verus Christi vicarius et successor
Petri, est principium et causa omnium
spiritualium, principium et causa debet
esse omnium temporalium et corpora-
lium. Omnes ergo potestatum spiri-
tualium et temporalium a Romano
pontifice recognoscere debent, contra-
rium autem facientes non ponunt
unum principium. . . . Cum igitur
potestas spiritualis Paps e habet pro
fine ipsum Deura modo spirituali, ad
quem nemo pervenire potest, nisi
mediantibus donis spiritualibus, quo-
rum ipse est amministrator et uni-
versalis dispensator, potestas vero
temporalis regis vel imperatoris in-
tendat et habeat pro fine ipsum bonum
commune et bonum multitudinis na-
turale, et modo naturali; ad quod
quilibet pervenire potest mediantibus
virtutibus ; oportet quod habeat Papa
imperare regibus et secularibus princi-
pibus, et eos habet dirigere et ordinare,
ac ab ipso eorum potestas debet deri-
vari: nec non eorum leges et statuta
per ipsum Papam confirmari, nec robur
et firmitatem habent eorum leges, nisi
postquam fuerunt per ipsum Papam
approbatse. "
* Id. id. , p. 499. " Cum igitur
potestas spiritualis residens in Papa,
universaliter loquendo, semper sit
recta (et dico universaliter, quod licet
posset esse obliquitas in isto Papa vel
in illo propter infectionem appetitus,
potestas tamen spiritualis ipsa semper
recta est, quia immediate est a Deo,
qui est ipsa regula), per talem potes-
ta tom spiritualem debet institui potes-
tas temporalis re gum et principum, et
debet judicari et regulari per ipsum,
sicut obliquum judicatur et regulatur
per rectum. Nam planum est, quod
potestatem secularem contingit quan-
? ? doque esse obliquum. "
Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-12-19 10:49 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. b3318617 Public Domain in the United States, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-us-google
? CHAP. EC. ] BONIFACE VII. AND PHILIP THE FAIR. 419
Both powers, therefore, the Spiritual and the Temporal,
reside in the Pope, for he is the representative of Christ, who
said, "All power is given to me in heaven and in earth; "
the Spiritual Power both in respect of authority and of its
exercise, the temporal in respect of authority, while he com-
mits the exercise of it to kings and princes as his instruments.
Both Powers, therefore, the Temporal and the Spiritual,
reside in the Pope, and are derived from him, as the one head
of the universal Church, to the clergy and the laity, and as
they are conferred by him, can by him be taken away. 1
1 Id. id. , p. 500. " Utramque ergo
potestatem spiritualem et temporalem
residere consequitur in summo pontifice,
undo Christus cujus personam repre-
sents t, dicit Matth. ult. , ' Data est
mini omnes potestas in coelo et in
terra'; sed potestas spirituals residet
in ipso quantum ad auotoritatem et
ad executionem, sed temporalis quan-
tum ad auotoritatem, non autem quan-
tum ad immediatam executionem, quia
commitit exercionem talis potestatis
secularis regibus et principibus, qui de-
bent esse organa et instrumenta ejus,
in parendo mandatis ipsius in omnibus,
et in exequendo potestatem tempora-
lem ad requisitionem ejus. Et quantum
ad talem executionem, non est incon-
veniens quod papa aliqua recognoscat
a regibus et secularibus.
Secundum causam primariam, in-
stitucionem et auotoritatem univer-
salem, utraquo potestas in Romano
pontifice residet et ab ipso, tamquam
ab uno capite universalis ecclesiss, in
clerieos et laicos debet derivari. Et
per consequens omnes predictas potes-
tates, casu interveniente, per Roma-
num pontinoem possunt privari, quia
sicut ab ipso potestas spiritualis et
temporalis omnibus oonfertur, sie ab
eis per eum auferri potest. "
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-12-19 10:49 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. b3318617 Public Domain in the United States, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-us-google
? 420
CHAPTER X.
BONIFACE Vm. AND PHILIP THE FAIR. "CONTRO-
VERSIAL LITERATURE, II. "
We have in the last chapter examined a number of pamphlets
or tracts in some detail, which seem, with the work of
Ptolemy of Lucca and the Canonists with whom we have
dealt in earlier chapters, to represent in its most extreme
and explicit form the claim that the Papacy possessed in
principle all Temporal as well as all Spiritual authority. How
far it can be said that they were drawing out in explicit and
dogmatic terms, the principles set forward by Boniface VHI.
in the Bulls " Ausculta Fili" and " Unam Sanctam " is a
matter which is open to question. Boniface was at least
more guarded and more general. There is, however, no doubt
that the claims, whether as stated by Boniface or by these
other writers, were at once repudiated by the secular power in
France and by its literary representatives. We have already
referred to some tracts which illustrate this, but we must
examine a little more closely some of them which seem to
illustrate the confidence with which the claim that the papal
See possessed a universal temporal jurisdiction was repudiated,
and some aspects of their argumentative processes.
It seems to us that the most comprehensive and also the
most really effective of these tracts or pamphlets was the work
of John of Paris, entitled ' Tractatus de potestate regia et
papali,' but there are two smaller works which we must first
consider briefly, the ' Quaestio in Utramque Partem ' and the
' Qusestio de Potestate Papa. '1
1 For a detailed account of these Schonen und Boniface VIII. ,' pp. 224
works and their authors, see R. Soholz, and 252.
' Die Publizistik zur Zeit Philippe des
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-12-19 10:49 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. b3318617 Public Domain in the United States, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-us-google
? CHAP. X. ] BONIFACE Vm. AND PHILIP THE FAIR. 421
The first of these, the ' Quaestio in Utramque Partem,' was
at one time attributed to Egidius Colonna, but this attribu-
tion is not really compatible with his authorship of the work
' De Ecclesiastica Potestate,' which we have already con-
sidered ; there seems, however, no reason to doubt that it
belongs to this time. The writer sets out to show by a series
of arguments drawn from philosophy, from the Holy Scrip-
tures, from the Canon Law, and from the Civil Law, that the
Pope had not any universal Temporal lordship. He proceeds
to contend that the Temporal as well as the Spiritual Power
is derived directly from God; that the two Powers are dis-
tinct and divided, and he quotes the Gelasian statement that
it was Christ Himself who divided them ; that Christ exercised
no Temporal authority, and when he created the Spiritual
Power, gave it no Temporal authority, and that it is only in
Spiritual matters that the Temporal is subject to the Spiritual
authority.
He insists very emphatically that the King of France holds
his authority from no one except God Himself, neither from
the Pope nor from the emperor. He then cites a number of
arguments by which it was intended to prove that the Pope
possessed a universal Temporal authority, and refutes them
one by one. As we shall see, the same kind of enumeration
reappears both in the ' QuaeStio de Potestate Papae' and in
John of Paris, and there is nothing very distinctive or im-
portant in this part of the work; but it is worth while to
observe that when he comes to the Donation of Constantine,
he does not dispute its authenticity, but urges that the jurists
maintained that it was invalid; the emperor could not
alienate a large part of the empire. If he did, his action
was not binding upon his successors ; and he adds that even
if it were valid it would have no reference to France, for
the Franks were never subjects of the empire. It is also
noteworthy that the author contradicts the assertion that
Pope Zacharias had deposed the last of the Merovingian
kings. This, he contends, was done by the barons; the
Pope was only consulted by them about the propriety of
their action.
The ' Qusestio de Potestate Papae' contains an interesting
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-12-19 10:49 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. b3318617 Public Domain in the United States, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-us-google
? 422 TEMPORAL AND SPIRITUAL POWERS. [PABT II.
summary of the arguments for the Temporal authority of the
Pope, of arguments against this, and a detailed refutation
of the first. This would be of considerable interest if these
arguments were not more completely stated and considered
in the work of John of Paris, and it is to this that we turn.
John of Paris begins by setting out in his preface that
there are two errors about the authority of the Church : the
first, that of those whom he calls the Waldensians, that it ib
contrary to the nature of the Church that it should have any
lordship in temporal things or possess temporal riches; the
second, which he calls that of Herod, who, when he heard
that Christ was born, thought that he was an earthly king.
This latter is the error of those who maintain that the Pope,
inasmuch as he is in the place of Christ, possesses the lordship
of secular authority and property, and that the secular prince
holds his authority from the Pope. John maintains that these
views were both wrong; it is right that the prelates of the
Church should hold temporal lordship and property, but they
hold these by the authority and grant of the secular prince. 1
It is the second question which John discusses in his treatise ;
but his argument also leads him to further and highly signifi-
1 John of Paris,' Tractatus de Potes-
tato regiaetpapali. ' Proemium. "Modo
oonsimili circa potestatem ecclesiasti-
corum pontificum, veritas medium
ponit inter duos errores. Nam error
Waldensium fuit, successoribus Apos-
tolorum, scilicet, pape et prelatis eccle-
siasticis dominium in temporalibus
ropugnare, nec eis licero habere divitias
temporal es. . . . Alius vero fuit error
Herodis, qui audiens Christum regem
natum, credidit ipsum esse regem
terrenum. Ex quo derivare videtur
opinio quorundam modernorum, qui
in tantum supra dictum errorem Wal-
densium declinant, ad oppoeitum tota-
liter deflexi: ita ut asserant, dominum
Papam, in quantum est loco Christi,
in terris habere dominium in tem-
poralibus bonis principum et baronum,
et cognitionem seu jurisdictionem.
Dicunt etiam, quod hanc potestatem
in temporalibus habet Papa excel-
lenti us quam princeps secularis ; quia
Papa habet cam secundum primariam
auctoritatem, ut a Deo immediate,
princeps autem habet eam a Papa
mediate. . . . Inter has autem opiniones
tam contrarias, quarum primam erron-
eam omnes putant, puto ego quod
veritas medium ponit, scilicet quod
prelatis ecclesise non repugnat habere
dominium in temporalibus et jurisdic-
tionem, contra primam opinionem.
Neo debetur eis per se, rati one sui
status, et rations qua sunt vicarii
Jesu Christi et apostolorum succes-
sores : sed eis convenire potest, habere
talia concessione et permissione prin-
cipum, si ab eis ex devotione aliquid
fuit collatum eis, vel si habuerint
aliunde. "
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-12-19 10:49 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. b3318617 Public Domain in the United States, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-us-google
? CHAP, x. ] BONIFACE ViH. AND PHILIP THE FADS.
423
cant questions, which anticipate the development of the
Conciliar movement.
He begins with the Aristotelian principle that the State
is a natural institution, which exists for the benefit of the
whole community; but he also asserts the necessary place
of the Church in human life, for it is its function to lead men
to an end which is beyond nature. 1 He maintains that there
must be one head in spiritual matters, and that it was Christ
Himself, and not any Conciliar authority, which conferred
this position upon Peter and his successors ; but he repudiates
the conception that God has appointed one head over men in
temporal matters. 2 He is prepared to admit that the dignity
of the priest is greater than that of the prince ; but this does
not mean that the priest is greater than the prince in all
things, and that the authority of the prince is derived from
the priest, for the authority of both is derived from the divine
power itself. The priest, therefore, is greater than the prince
in spiritual matters, and the prince is greater than the priest
in temporal matters. 3
At this point John digresses to discuss the question, in what
sense the Pope has authority over the property of the Church.
He is " generalis dispensator . . . bonorum ecclesiasticorum,"
but not " dominus eorum. " It is the universal Church which
is lord and proprietor of these properties " generaliter," and
the separate communities and churches have " dominium " in
1 Id. id. , 1 and 2.
* Id. id. , 8.
' Id. id. , 5. " Nec tamen si princeps
major est sacerdos dignitate, et sim-
pliciter oportet quod eo sit major in
omnibus. Non enim sio se habet
poteetas secularis minor ad potestatem
spiritualem majorem, quod ex ea
oriatur vol derivatur : siout se habet
potestae proconsulis ad imperatorem,
qui eo major est in omnibus, quia
potestas sua ab eo derivatur. Sed
se habet sicut potestas paterfamilias
ad potestatem magistri militum, qua-
rum una non est derivata ab alia, sed
ambse a quadam superion potestate.
Et ideo in aliquibus potestas secularis
major est potestate spirituali, scilicet
in temporalibus, nec quoad ista est
ei subjecta in aliquo, quia ab illo non
oritur: sed ambse oriuntur ab una
suprema potestate, scilicet divina imme-
diate : propter quod inferior non est
omnino subjecta superiori, sed in his
solum in quibus suprema subjecit eam
majori. . . . Est ergo sacerdos in spiri-
tualibus major principe, et e converso
in temporalibus princeps major sacer-
dote : licet simpliciter sacerdos major
sit, quantum spirituale majus est
temporali. "
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-12-19 10:49 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. b3318617 Public Domain in the United States, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-us-google
? 424
[PABT II.
TEMPORAL AND SPIRITUAL POWERS.
those things which belong to them. If, therefore, the Pope
deals arbitrarily with Church property, he is bound to make
restitution, and he may even be deposed if, when he is admon-
ished of his fault, he does not amend. 1 We return later to the
question of deposition.
John returns to the main question, and contends that
even if Christ held both Temporal and Spiritual Power, He
did not commit them both to Peter and his successors ; on
the contrary, he gave to Peter the Spiritual, and to Csesar
the Temporal. The two Powers, as the Popes had said (re-
ferring to Gelasius), are distinct. The one cannot be conceived
of as drawn from the other, but each, the secular as well as
the spiritual, is derived immediately from God. Thus the
Pope does not hold both swords, nor does he possess any
jurisdiction in temporal matters, unless it is granted to him
by the prince, and John maintains that if it were contended
that Constantine gave the Church authority (imperium) in
Italy, and consequently temporal jurisdiction, this would
imply that the Church did not already possess that power. 2
1 Id. id. , 6. " (Papa) est generalis
dispensator omnium generaliter bono-
rum ecclesiasticorum, spiritualium et
temporalium. Non quidem quod sit
dominus eorum, sed sola communitas
universalis Ecclesise est domina et
proprietaria illorum bonorum genera-
liter, et singulse communitates et
ecclesise dominium habent in bonis
sibi competentibus . . . .
propter quod si alitor pro libito dis-
traheret papa, et non bona fide, de
jure non tenet: et non solum tenetur
ad penitenciam de peccato, quasi
propter abusum rei non suse, sed in-
fideliter agit, et ad restitutionem
tenetur, scilicet aliunde de patrimonio
proprio, si habet aliquid, vel acquireret
(cum sit fundator rei non suse). Et
etiam sicut monasterium posset agere
ad depositionem abbatis, vel ecclesia
particularis ad depositionem episcopi,
si appareret quod dissiparet bona
monasterii vel ecclesise, et quod infide-
liter, non pro bono communi, sed pro
privato, ea detraheret seu distraheret.
Ita si appareret quod papa bona eccle-
siarum infideliter detraheret seu dis-
traheret, scilicet non ad bonum com-
mune, cui superintendere tenetur, cum
sit summus episcopus : deponi posset,
si admonitus non corrigeretur, dist. 40
can. (Si papa) ubi dicitur ' Cunctos
judicaturus, a nemine judicandus est,
nisi deprehendatur a fide devius'
(Gratian, Dec. , D. 40, 6). Ubi dicit
glosa : quod si comprehendetur in
quocunque alio vitio et admonitus non
corrigatur, sed scandalizet, vel scan-
dalizaret ecclesiam, idem posse fieri.
Sed forte secundum alios hoc fieri
posset per solum concilium generale,
argumentum 20, 1 distinct: can.
nemo autem" (Gratian, Dec. , D.
81, 7).
* Id id.
1 Id. id. id. , chap. vii. p. 234.
" Secundo habet rationom cause agent is
reepectu ejus, quantum ad judicium.
Cum enim eum instituat, ad eum etiam
pertinet ipsum judicare. . . . Unde
dicit Hugo de Sancto Victore quod
spirituals potestas terrenam potes-
tatem et instituere habet, ut sit, et
judicare habet, si bona non fuerit.
Habet enim eam judicare: quia eam
potest et debet corrigere et dirigere,
punire et pcenam ci inferre, non solum
spiritualem sod temporalem, ratione
criminis et delicti, etiam ad ejus
destitutionem procedere si hoc delicti
qualitas exigat. Quse destitutio non
est ipsius potestatis, quia sic tolleretur
ordo potestatum sed est hominis male
utentis potestato sibi data. . . . Licet
enim aliis pontificibus conveniat de
temporali potestate judicare, nam
episcopus potest regem excommuni-
care, in quantum pertinet ad suam
dyocesim, summus tamen pontifex,
habet plenum judicium super omnes
principes, et secundum omnem modum
judicii, qui communicatus est spirituali
potestati. "
? Id. id. id. id. , p. 235. " Tertio
vero, spiritualis potestas habet ra-
tionom causse agentis respoctu tem-
poralis, quantum ad imperium. Sicut
enim contingit in artibus quod ars,
ad quem pertinet ultunus et princi-
palis finis, imperat arti ad quam per-
tinet finis secundums, qui ad princi-
palem ordinatur ; sic et in potestatibus
se habet. Unde spiritualis potestas
ad quem pertinet precipuus finis qui
est beatitudo supernaturalia, ita se
habet ad potestatem temporalem, ad
quam pertinet beatitudo naturalis,
quse est finis secundarius, ordinatur
ad supernaturalem, quod imperat ei,
et in sui obsequium utitur ea et omni-
bus, quse ei subdentur et quse ad
ipsum pertinent. . . . Unde spiritualis
? ? potestas, etiam super temporalia qus'-
Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-12-19 10:49 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. b3318617 Public Domain in the United States, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-us-google
? 414 TEMPORAL AND SPIRITUAL POWERS. [PAKT II.
When the writer has thus considered the comparison of the
Temporal and Spiritual Powers with respect to dignity and
" causalitas," he turns to the comparison of them " Secundum
continentiam," and he maintains that the Temporal Power,
which is related to the Spiritual as the inferior to the superior,
and as that which is caused to that which causes, is con-
tained in (continetur) the Spiritual Power, and that therefore
it is said that the laws of the celestial as well as of the earthly
empire were given by Christ to Peter, for Peter and each
of his successors, in whom the fulness of the Spiritual Power
dwells, possesses beforehand (prehabet) the Temporal Power
in a greater and more dignified form than the Temporal
prince. He explains his phrase when he adds that the Pope
does not carry out the functions of the Temporal Power
immediately, except in some cases, but he does this by his
commands and directions. This is what is meant when it
is said that the Temporal Power pre-exists in the Spiritual.
All temporal princes, therefore, must obey him as they would
the Lord Jesus Christ, and must acknowledge him as their
superior and their head, and if the chief Pontiff commands
one thing and the temporal prince another, men must obey
the Pontiff. 1
cunque imperium habet in quantum
spiritualibus nata sunt obsequi, et ad
spiritualia ordinari; et temporalis
potestas, jure divino quantum ad om-
nia subest spirituali in quantum
ordinatur ad ipsam et etiam propter
ipsam. "
1 Id. id. id. id. , p. 236. " Ex dictis
autem potest accipi comparatio eorum
secundum continentiam. Nam quia
virtutes inferiores continentur in supe-
rioribus, et quse sunt causatorum
preinsunt causatis; ideo temporalis
potestas, quse comparatur ad spiri-
tualem, sicut inferius ad superius, et
sicut causatum ad causam, continetur
a potestate spirituali : et propter hoc
a Christo dicuntur esse concessa beato
Petro jura ccclestis imperii et terreni,
quia Petrus et quilibet ejus successor,
in quo plenitudo spiritualis potestatis
residet, prehabet potestatem tempo-
ral em, non tam en secundum eundem
modum secundum quem habetur a
principe seculari, sed modo superiori
et digniori et prestantiori. Non enim
sic habet eam, ut exerceat ejus opera
immediate, nisi aliquibus casibus, sed
agit opera ejus nobiliori modo, scilicet
imperando et dirigendo, et ad suum
finem operibus ejus utendo, ot ideo
temporalis potestas dicitur pre-existere
in spirituali, secundum primam et
summam auctoritatem, non autem
secundum immediatam executionem
generaliter et regulariter. Propter
quod principes omnes temporales obe-
dire debent ei, apud quem spiritualis
potestas in summo residet, tamquam
domino nostra Jesu Christo, et ipsum
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-12-19 10:49 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. b3318617 Public Domain in the United States, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-us-google
? CHAP. IX. ] BONIFACE VH. AND PHILIP THE FAIR. 415
In the following chapters, among other matters, he discusses
the question in what sense it can be said that the Pope holds
the Temporal Power, not only by the Divine Law, but by the
human law--namely, by the Donation of Constantine, and
he contends that the Donation might be interpreted either
simply as a recognition of that which was already the Divine
Law, or as a means by which the vicar of Christ might more
freely exercise the authority which he already possessed by
the Divine Law ; or it might be said that in consequence of
the Donation the Pope might intervene more immediately
in temporal matters, as can be seen from the fact that when
the empire is vacant the Pope exercises an immediate temporal
jurisdiction. 1
James of Viterbo has thus arrived at his main conclusion,
and he only sets it out again in other terms when, in the ninth
chapter, he says that the Pope is superior in dignity and
causality (causalitate) to every temporal power, and that
it may be rightly said that in the chief Pontiff there pre-exists
the fulness of the pontifical and of the royal power. 2 Or
again, it is therefore right to say that the vicar of Christ has
the fulness of power, for all that governing authority which was
sicut superiorem et sicut caput reeog-
nosoere, ipsum revereri et honorary ac
ei subjici . . . unde si summus pontifex
mandaret unum, et quicunque princeps
temporalis contrarium : obediendum
est magis summo pontifiei quam
principi. "
1 Id. id. , chap. ix. p. 255. " Quinto,
considerandum est quod aummus ponti-
fex non solum jure divino sed etiam
jure humano habet potestatem tem-
poralcm : scilicet ex concessione a
Constantino facta, qui monarchiam
tenebat imperii. Si quis autem quserat,
quid operatur hoe jus humanum supra
divinum, dici potest uno modo : quod
hoc jus humanum est divini juris
manifestatio vel ad jus divinum con-
formatio et ejus imitatio et veneratio
. . . non auctoritatem contulit, sed
reverentiam impendit et regnum terre-
num coelesti subjectum esse debere
monstravit. . . . Vel potest dici quod
ista concessio fuit qusedam co-operatio
sive ministerium ad hoc ut potestatem,
quam Christi vicarius habebat jure
divino, posset liberius exeroere de
facto. . . . Potest autem et alitor dici :
videlicet quod ex hujusmodi con-
cessione potest summus Pontifex magis
immediate se intromittere de tempor-
alibus, quod ex eo patet, quia quum
vacat imperium exercere potest im-
mediate jurisdictionem temporalem,
et sio alitor exercet potestatem tem-
poralem, ut habet eam ex jure Divino
et aliter ut habet eam ex jure humano. "
Cf. chap. x. p. 192.
2 Id. id. id. , chap. ix. p. 268. " Est
etiam superior dignitate et causalitate
omni temporali potestate, ideo con-
cludi recto potest quod in summo
pontifico, pre-existit plenitudo pontifi-
? ? calia et regise potestatis. "
Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-12-19 10:49 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. b3318617 Public Domain in the United States, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-us-google
? 416
[PABT II.
TEMPORAL AND SPIRITUAL POWERS.
given by Christ to the Church, sacerdotal and royal, spiritual
and temporal, is in the chief Pontiff, the vicar of Christ. 1
The method of his argument is not the same as that of
Egidius Colonna or Henry of Cremona or Ptolemy of Lucca,
but the conclusion is the same--that is, that properly all
authority, temporal, political, as well as spiritual, belonged
to the Pope; that it was only by his grant or acquiescence
that the secular ruler possessed and exercised his political
authority, and only on the condition that he obeyed the com-
mands of the Pope.
There is one other important and interesting aspect of this
work--namely, that the author maintains that the authority
of the Spiritual Power extends over temporal things (posses-
sions) inasmuch as they are to be ordered to the end of men's
salvation,2 and he urges that the fact that the secular prince
and his subjects pay tribute--that is, tithe--to the Spiritual
Power, proves that the Spiritual Power is set over princes
even with regard to temporal things (possessions). 3
He goes on to maintain that, according to the Divine Law,
no one justly and legitimately holds any temporal possession
if he does not freely submit himself to God, and make a right
use of it. Sinners and infidels who withdraw themselves from
the lordship of God, and use these temporal things perversely,
hold them unworthily and unjustly according to the Divine
Law, whatever may be the case with human law. This is
the meaning of the saying of St Augustine that by the Divine
Law all things belong to the just. No man is subject to God
1 Id. id. id. id. , p. 272. " Verum
tamen dicitur Christi Vicarius habere
plenitudinem potestatis; quia tota
potentia gubernativa que a Christo
communicata est occlesie, sacerdotalis
et regalis, spirituali* et temporalis
est in sumrao pontifice Christo
Vieario. "
>> Id. id. id. , vii. p. 240. " Spiritualis
igitur potestas etiam super temporalia
preest, in quantum ordinantur ad
finem salutis. Et quia ad hoc data
sunt nobis a Deo, ut eis bene utamur
in ordine ad salutem : non aliter appe-
tenda et possidenda et dispensanda
sunt quam propter beatitudinem; ideo
spiritualis potestas extendit se ad ilia
secundum id ad quod nobis data sunt.
Unde ad spiritualem potestatem per-
tinet imperare bonum eorum usum et
prohibere abusum. "
* Id. id. id. , vii. p. 241. " Amplius,
princeps secularis et qui ei subsunt de
suis temporalibus censum solvunt
potestati spirituali, scilicet decimas,
quare potestas ipsa spiritualis etiam,
quantum ad temporalia, preest prin-
cipibus et principum subditis. "
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-12-19 10:49 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. b3318617 Public Domain in the United States, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-us-google
? CHAP. IX. ] BONIFACE VH. AND PHILIP THE FAIR.
417
who is not subject to the Ecclesiastical Laws, and therefore
no one justly possesses any temporal thing unless he submits
himself with regard to it to the Spiritual Power. 1
It is obvious that this is related to the doctrine of the
tenure of property which is maintained by Egidius Colonna,
which we have already discussed. 2
The same principles as those of Henry of Cremona, Ptolemy
of Lucca, and James of Viterbo are again expressed in a tract
which has been ascribed to Augustinus Triumphus, and which
may belong to this time. 3 His conclusions are the same as
those of Henry of Cremona, but the arguments which he
brings forward in support of them are somewhat different.
He begins with the audacious statement that it is clear and
obvious that all power, both spiritual and temporal, has
come to the prelates of the Church, and to the secular princes,
from Christ, but through Peter and his successors, whose
power the Eoman Pontiff represents. *
1 Id. id. id. , chap. vii. p. 211.
" Adhuc spiritualis potestas potest
communione fidelium privare. Pos-
sessio autem temporalium, et proprietas
et actio super communioationem funda-
tur, quare spiritualis potestas ad tem-
poralia se extendit. Adhuc secundum
jus divinum nullus juste ac legitime
possidet aliquid temporale si Dei
dominio a quo id habet, voluntarie
non subdatur, et si eo non recto utatur.
Propter quod infideles et peccatores
qui se Dei dominio subtrahunt et
temporalibus perverse utuntur, inique
ac injuste ipsa temporalia possident
secundum jus divinum, quicquid sit
de jure humano; et secundum hoc
verificatur illud dictum Augustini quod
' jure divino omnia sunt justorum. '
Non autem subditur Deo, qui non
est subjectus ecclesiastics potestati.
Rectus quoque usus temporalium est
secundum ordinem; ad finem quem
spiritualis potestas intendit et ad quem
dirigit. Quare nullus juste possidet
VOL. V.
aliquid temporale nisi in ejus posses-
sione spirituali potestati se subdat.
Hoc autem non esset, nisi spiritualis
potestas ad ipsa temporalia so exten-
deret. "
' Cf. p. 406.
* Cf. R. Scholz, ' Publizistik,' &c. ,
for a discussion of the date and
authorship.
* Augustinus Triumphus, ' Tractatus
b re via de duplici po testa to prelatorum
et laicorum' (in R. Scholz, ' Die
Publizistik,' p. 486). " Quamvis ergo
sit clarum et manifestum a Deo, quod
non potest aliqua tergiversatione celari,
omnem potestatem tam spiritualem
quam temporalem a Chris to in prelatos
et principes seculares derivatum esse
median to Petro ejus successore, cujus
personam Romanus pontifex repre-
sentat; temporibus tamen istis aliqui
de hoc dubitare videntur, cujus ques-
tionis radicem pro modulo intelli-
genoue nostrse, non invenire, sed in-
? ? ventum manifestare intendimus. "
Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-12-19 10:49 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. b3318617 Public Domain in the United States, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-us-google
? 418 TEMPORAL AND SPIRITUAL POWERS. [PAKT n.
Then follows an interesting discussion of the question about
the derivation of the power of the ecclesiastical prelates from
the Pope, in which he finally affirms that the power of orders
comes to them from Christ, and cannot be taken from them,
but the power of jurisdiction comes to them from the Pope,
who can annul it. With this we cannot here deal. 1
Eeturning, then, to the subject of the relation of the Spiritual
to the Temporal Power, he contends that the ultimate " causa
et principium " of corporal things must be spiritual. In all
arts the superior authority is that which directs, and it is
the spiritual which directs the temporal; the Pope, therefore,
must have authority over kingdoms and secular powers, and
their laws and statutes have no authority unless they are
confirmed by him. 2 The spiritual power which resides in
the Pope is always in its nature right (recta), while the temporal
power is sometimes perverted (obliqua), and therefore the
temporal must be instructed and controlled and judged by
the spiritual. (The individual Pope, he admits, may not
always be right. ) s
1 Id. id. , pp. 487-497.
? Id. id. , p. 497. " Si ergo Pupa,
verus Christi vicarius et successor
Petri, est principium et causa omnium
spiritualium, principium et causa debet
esse omnium temporalium et corpora-
lium. Omnes ergo potestatum spiri-
tualium et temporalium a Romano
pontifice recognoscere debent, contra-
rium autem facientes non ponunt
unum principium. . . . Cum igitur
potestas spiritualis Paps e habet pro
fine ipsum Deura modo spirituali, ad
quem nemo pervenire potest, nisi
mediantibus donis spiritualibus, quo-
rum ipse est amministrator et uni-
versalis dispensator, potestas vero
temporalis regis vel imperatoris in-
tendat et habeat pro fine ipsum bonum
commune et bonum multitudinis na-
turale, et modo naturali; ad quod
quilibet pervenire potest mediantibus
virtutibus ; oportet quod habeat Papa
imperare regibus et secularibus princi-
pibus, et eos habet dirigere et ordinare,
ac ab ipso eorum potestas debet deri-
vari: nec non eorum leges et statuta
per ipsum Papam confirmari, nec robur
et firmitatem habent eorum leges, nisi
postquam fuerunt per ipsum Papam
approbatse. "
* Id. id. , p. 499. " Cum igitur
potestas spiritualis residens in Papa,
universaliter loquendo, semper sit
recta (et dico universaliter, quod licet
posset esse obliquitas in isto Papa vel
in illo propter infectionem appetitus,
potestas tamen spiritualis ipsa semper
recta est, quia immediate est a Deo,
qui est ipsa regula), per talem potes-
ta tom spiritualem debet institui potes-
tas temporalis re gum et principum, et
debet judicari et regulari per ipsum,
sicut obliquum judicatur et regulatur
per rectum. Nam planum est, quod
potestatem secularem contingit quan-
? ? doque esse obliquum. "
Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-12-19 10:49 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. b3318617 Public Domain in the United States, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-us-google
? CHAP. EC. ] BONIFACE VII. AND PHILIP THE FAIR. 419
Both powers, therefore, the Spiritual and the Temporal,
reside in the Pope, for he is the representative of Christ, who
said, "All power is given to me in heaven and in earth; "
the Spiritual Power both in respect of authority and of its
exercise, the temporal in respect of authority, while he com-
mits the exercise of it to kings and princes as his instruments.
Both Powers, therefore, the Temporal and the Spiritual,
reside in the Pope, and are derived from him, as the one head
of the universal Church, to the clergy and the laity, and as
they are conferred by him, can by him be taken away. 1
1 Id. id. , p. 500. " Utramque ergo
potestatem spiritualem et temporalem
residere consequitur in summo pontifice,
undo Christus cujus personam repre-
sents t, dicit Matth. ult. , ' Data est
mini omnes potestas in coelo et in
terra'; sed potestas spirituals residet
in ipso quantum ad auotoritatem et
ad executionem, sed temporalis quan-
tum ad auotoritatem, non autem quan-
tum ad immediatam executionem, quia
commitit exercionem talis potestatis
secularis regibus et principibus, qui de-
bent esse organa et instrumenta ejus,
in parendo mandatis ipsius in omnibus,
et in exequendo potestatem tempora-
lem ad requisitionem ejus. Et quantum
ad talem executionem, non est incon-
veniens quod papa aliqua recognoscat
a regibus et secularibus.
Secundum causam primariam, in-
stitucionem et auotoritatem univer-
salem, utraquo potestas in Romano
pontifice residet et ab ipso, tamquam
ab uno capite universalis ecclesiss, in
clerieos et laicos debet derivari. Et
per consequens omnes predictas potes-
tates, casu interveniente, per Roma-
num pontinoem possunt privari, quia
sicut ab ipso potestas spiritualis et
temporalis omnibus oonfertur, sie ab
eis per eum auferri potest. "
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-12-19 10:49 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. b3318617 Public Domain in the United States, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-us-google
? 420
CHAPTER X.
BONIFACE Vm. AND PHILIP THE FAIR. "CONTRO-
VERSIAL LITERATURE, II. "
We have in the last chapter examined a number of pamphlets
or tracts in some detail, which seem, with the work of
Ptolemy of Lucca and the Canonists with whom we have
dealt in earlier chapters, to represent in its most extreme
and explicit form the claim that the Papacy possessed in
principle all Temporal as well as all Spiritual authority. How
far it can be said that they were drawing out in explicit and
dogmatic terms, the principles set forward by Boniface VHI.
in the Bulls " Ausculta Fili" and " Unam Sanctam " is a
matter which is open to question. Boniface was at least
more guarded and more general. There is, however, no doubt
that the claims, whether as stated by Boniface or by these
other writers, were at once repudiated by the secular power in
France and by its literary representatives. We have already
referred to some tracts which illustrate this, but we must
examine a little more closely some of them which seem to
illustrate the confidence with which the claim that the papal
See possessed a universal temporal jurisdiction was repudiated,
and some aspects of their argumentative processes.
It seems to us that the most comprehensive and also the
most really effective of these tracts or pamphlets was the work
of John of Paris, entitled ' Tractatus de potestate regia et
papali,' but there are two smaller works which we must first
consider briefly, the ' Quaestio in Utramque Partem ' and the
' Qusestio de Potestate Papa. '1
1 For a detailed account of these Schonen und Boniface VIII. ,' pp. 224
works and their authors, see R. Soholz, and 252.
' Die Publizistik zur Zeit Philippe des
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-12-19 10:49 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. b3318617 Public Domain in the United States, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-us-google
? CHAP. X. ] BONIFACE Vm. AND PHILIP THE FAIR. 421
The first of these, the ' Quaestio in Utramque Partem,' was
at one time attributed to Egidius Colonna, but this attribu-
tion is not really compatible with his authorship of the work
' De Ecclesiastica Potestate,' which we have already con-
sidered ; there seems, however, no reason to doubt that it
belongs to this time. The writer sets out to show by a series
of arguments drawn from philosophy, from the Holy Scrip-
tures, from the Canon Law, and from the Civil Law, that the
Pope had not any universal Temporal lordship. He proceeds
to contend that the Temporal as well as the Spiritual Power
is derived directly from God; that the two Powers are dis-
tinct and divided, and he quotes the Gelasian statement that
it was Christ Himself who divided them ; that Christ exercised
no Temporal authority, and when he created the Spiritual
Power, gave it no Temporal authority, and that it is only in
Spiritual matters that the Temporal is subject to the Spiritual
authority.
He insists very emphatically that the King of France holds
his authority from no one except God Himself, neither from
the Pope nor from the emperor. He then cites a number of
arguments by which it was intended to prove that the Pope
possessed a universal Temporal authority, and refutes them
one by one. As we shall see, the same kind of enumeration
reappears both in the ' QuaeStio de Potestate Papae' and in
John of Paris, and there is nothing very distinctive or im-
portant in this part of the work; but it is worth while to
observe that when he comes to the Donation of Constantine,
he does not dispute its authenticity, but urges that the jurists
maintained that it was invalid; the emperor could not
alienate a large part of the empire. If he did, his action
was not binding upon his successors ; and he adds that even
if it were valid it would have no reference to France, for
the Franks were never subjects of the empire. It is also
noteworthy that the author contradicts the assertion that
Pope Zacharias had deposed the last of the Merovingian
kings. This, he contends, was done by the barons; the
Pope was only consulted by them about the propriety of
their action.
The ' Qusestio de Potestate Papae' contains an interesting
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-12-19 10:49 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. b3318617 Public Domain in the United States, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-us-google
? 422 TEMPORAL AND SPIRITUAL POWERS. [PABT II.
summary of the arguments for the Temporal authority of the
Pope, of arguments against this, and a detailed refutation
of the first. This would be of considerable interest if these
arguments were not more completely stated and considered
in the work of John of Paris, and it is to this that we turn.
John of Paris begins by setting out in his preface that
there are two errors about the authority of the Church : the
first, that of those whom he calls the Waldensians, that it ib
contrary to the nature of the Church that it should have any
lordship in temporal things or possess temporal riches; the
second, which he calls that of Herod, who, when he heard
that Christ was born, thought that he was an earthly king.
This latter is the error of those who maintain that the Pope,
inasmuch as he is in the place of Christ, possesses the lordship
of secular authority and property, and that the secular prince
holds his authority from the Pope. John maintains that these
views were both wrong; it is right that the prelates of the
Church should hold temporal lordship and property, but they
hold these by the authority and grant of the secular prince. 1
It is the second question which John discusses in his treatise ;
but his argument also leads him to further and highly signifi-
1 John of Paris,' Tractatus de Potes-
tato regiaetpapali. ' Proemium. "Modo
oonsimili circa potestatem ecclesiasti-
corum pontificum, veritas medium
ponit inter duos errores. Nam error
Waldensium fuit, successoribus Apos-
tolorum, scilicet, pape et prelatis eccle-
siasticis dominium in temporalibus
ropugnare, nec eis licero habere divitias
temporal es. . . . Alius vero fuit error
Herodis, qui audiens Christum regem
natum, credidit ipsum esse regem
terrenum. Ex quo derivare videtur
opinio quorundam modernorum, qui
in tantum supra dictum errorem Wal-
densium declinant, ad oppoeitum tota-
liter deflexi: ita ut asserant, dominum
Papam, in quantum est loco Christi,
in terris habere dominium in tem-
poralibus bonis principum et baronum,
et cognitionem seu jurisdictionem.
Dicunt etiam, quod hanc potestatem
in temporalibus habet Papa excel-
lenti us quam princeps secularis ; quia
Papa habet cam secundum primariam
auctoritatem, ut a Deo immediate,
princeps autem habet eam a Papa
mediate. . . . Inter has autem opiniones
tam contrarias, quarum primam erron-
eam omnes putant, puto ego quod
veritas medium ponit, scilicet quod
prelatis ecclesise non repugnat habere
dominium in temporalibus et jurisdic-
tionem, contra primam opinionem.
Neo debetur eis per se, rati one sui
status, et rations qua sunt vicarii
Jesu Christi et apostolorum succes-
sores : sed eis convenire potest, habere
talia concessione et permissione prin-
cipum, si ab eis ex devotione aliquid
fuit collatum eis, vel si habuerint
aliunde. "
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-12-19 10:49 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. b3318617 Public Domain in the United States, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-us-google
? CHAP, x. ] BONIFACE ViH. AND PHILIP THE FADS.
423
cant questions, which anticipate the development of the
Conciliar movement.
He begins with the Aristotelian principle that the State
is a natural institution, which exists for the benefit of the
whole community; but he also asserts the necessary place
of the Church in human life, for it is its function to lead men
to an end which is beyond nature. 1 He maintains that there
must be one head in spiritual matters, and that it was Christ
Himself, and not any Conciliar authority, which conferred
this position upon Peter and his successors ; but he repudiates
the conception that God has appointed one head over men in
temporal matters. 2 He is prepared to admit that the dignity
of the priest is greater than that of the prince ; but this does
not mean that the priest is greater than the prince in all
things, and that the authority of the prince is derived from
the priest, for the authority of both is derived from the divine
power itself. The priest, therefore, is greater than the prince
in spiritual matters, and the prince is greater than the priest
in temporal matters. 3
At this point John digresses to discuss the question, in what
sense the Pope has authority over the property of the Church.
He is " generalis dispensator . . . bonorum ecclesiasticorum,"
but not " dominus eorum. " It is the universal Church which
is lord and proprietor of these properties " generaliter," and
the separate communities and churches have " dominium " in
1 Id. id. , 1 and 2.
* Id. id. , 8.
' Id. id. , 5. " Nec tamen si princeps
major est sacerdos dignitate, et sim-
pliciter oportet quod eo sit major in
omnibus. Non enim sio se habet
poteetas secularis minor ad potestatem
spiritualem majorem, quod ex ea
oriatur vol derivatur : siout se habet
potestae proconsulis ad imperatorem,
qui eo major est in omnibus, quia
potestas sua ab eo derivatur. Sed
se habet sicut potestas paterfamilias
ad potestatem magistri militum, qua-
rum una non est derivata ab alia, sed
ambse a quadam superion potestate.
Et ideo in aliquibus potestas secularis
major est potestate spirituali, scilicet
in temporalibus, nec quoad ista est
ei subjecta in aliquo, quia ab illo non
oritur: sed ambse oriuntur ab una
suprema potestate, scilicet divina imme-
diate : propter quod inferior non est
omnino subjecta superiori, sed in his
solum in quibus suprema subjecit eam
majori. . . . Est ergo sacerdos in spiri-
tualibus major principe, et e converso
in temporalibus princeps major sacer-
dote : licet simpliciter sacerdos major
sit, quantum spirituale majus est
temporali. "
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-12-19 10:49 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. b3318617 Public Domain in the United States, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-us-google
? 424
[PABT II.
TEMPORAL AND SPIRITUAL POWERS.
those things which belong to them. If, therefore, the Pope
deals arbitrarily with Church property, he is bound to make
restitution, and he may even be deposed if, when he is admon-
ished of his fault, he does not amend. 1 We return later to the
question of deposition.
John returns to the main question, and contends that
even if Christ held both Temporal and Spiritual Power, He
did not commit them both to Peter and his successors ; on
the contrary, he gave to Peter the Spiritual, and to Csesar
the Temporal. The two Powers, as the Popes had said (re-
ferring to Gelasius), are distinct. The one cannot be conceived
of as drawn from the other, but each, the secular as well as
the spiritual, is derived immediately from God. Thus the
Pope does not hold both swords, nor does he possess any
jurisdiction in temporal matters, unless it is granted to him
by the prince, and John maintains that if it were contended
that Constantine gave the Church authority (imperium) in
Italy, and consequently temporal jurisdiction, this would
imply that the Church did not already possess that power. 2
1 Id. id. , 6. " (Papa) est generalis
dispensator omnium generaliter bono-
rum ecclesiasticorum, spiritualium et
temporalium. Non quidem quod sit
dominus eorum, sed sola communitas
universalis Ecclesise est domina et
proprietaria illorum bonorum genera-
liter, et singulse communitates et
ecclesise dominium habent in bonis
sibi competentibus . . . .
propter quod si alitor pro libito dis-
traheret papa, et non bona fide, de
jure non tenet: et non solum tenetur
ad penitenciam de peccato, quasi
propter abusum rei non suse, sed in-
fideliter agit, et ad restitutionem
tenetur, scilicet aliunde de patrimonio
proprio, si habet aliquid, vel acquireret
(cum sit fundator rei non suse). Et
etiam sicut monasterium posset agere
ad depositionem abbatis, vel ecclesia
particularis ad depositionem episcopi,
si appareret quod dissiparet bona
monasterii vel ecclesise, et quod infide-
liter, non pro bono communi, sed pro
privato, ea detraheret seu distraheret.
Ita si appareret quod papa bona eccle-
siarum infideliter detraheret seu dis-
traheret, scilicet non ad bonum com-
mune, cui superintendere tenetur, cum
sit summus episcopus : deponi posset,
si admonitus non corrigeretur, dist. 40
can. (Si papa) ubi dicitur ' Cunctos
judicaturus, a nemine judicandus est,
nisi deprehendatur a fide devius'
(Gratian, Dec. , D. 40, 6). Ubi dicit
glosa : quod si comprehendetur in
quocunque alio vitio et admonitus non
corrigatur, sed scandalizet, vel scan-
dalizaret ecclesiam, idem posse fieri.
Sed forte secundum alios hoc fieri
posset per solum concilium generale,
argumentum 20, 1 distinct: can.
nemo autem" (Gratian, Dec. , D.
81, 7).
* Id id.
