Conciliarism and Papalism (Cambridge Texts in the History of Political Thought)

Rating:
Summary: Papacy and the Councils
Review: Collection of primary sources on the debate which raged within the Roman Church for centuries before the Reformation.

Deals with the authority of the Pope and councils. If one council establishes the authority of the Pope, which council establishes the authority of that council...and that council...and that council...?

Rating:
Summary: Quick Review
Review: Collection of primary sources on the debate which raged within the Roman Church for centuries before the Reformation.

Deals with the authority of the Pope and councils. If one council establishes the authority of the Pope, which council establishes the authority of that council...and that council...and that council...?

Rating:
Summary: Papacy and the Councils
Review: Nearly a century after conciliarism's high-water mark at Constance, followed by a death knell with Pius II's Execrabilis in 1460, its major points of contention bubbled up in 1511. The occasion was a council held in Pisa and then in Milan by a handful of dissident cardinals backed by France's Louis XII, who was at war with Pope Julius II. In response,Julius II called the Fifth Lateran Council, which met beginning in 1512. The dueling councils and rhetoric renewed a debate about conciliar and papal authority chronicled in this new set of translations. First Cajetan, master general of the Dominicans, staunchly defended papal monarchy in his Auctoritas papae et concilii sive ecclesiae comparata. Jacques Almain, barely two months after receiving his theology doctorate at Paris, answered Louis XII's call for a rebuttal. Claiming the supremacy of a general council over a pope, Almain argued that the Church is a collective body and the pope a delegated authority; the Church retains the right to defend herself, even if the danger comes from her own minister. The editors continue with Cajetan's answer and then add a coda to Almain's position drawn from John Mair's 1518 commentary on Matthew's gospel. The three authors pursue their central points by revisiting familiar questions: To whom did Christ bestow his authority? What is the relationship between pope and general council, especially in the case study of an heretical pontiff? What is the nature of ministerial power? How should the Church and council be understood as a body or community with respect to its head? Who cannot fail: pope or council?

The collection is very helpful because the juxtaposition of opposing viewpoints highlights their differences. The editors successfully walk a fine line between plodding and florid prose, a task that is especially difficult since the authors wrote in a very programmatic style. They allow the reader to hear the passion behind the debate...The volume also fits comfortably in the series "Cambridge Texts in the History of Political Thought," because apart from the topic of council and pope, at issue more broadly is the matter of whether civil government is a viable model with which to pattern or even discuss ecclesiastical government. For Cajetan, the answer is no; for Almain and his mentor Mair, yes. This collection should find a home on the shelves of historians, theologians, political scientists, and their graduate students interested in late medieval ecclesiology, particularly since this battle was joined just as the issues of ecclesiastical polity and authority were about to be re-evaluated in Luther's challenge and Rome's response.

CHRITOPHER M. BELLITTO