D. Erasmus, Encomium Moriae sive declamatio in laudem Stultitiae, Lugduni Batavorum, apudA. Cloucquium, 1624, p. 82:
Inter eruditos iureconsulti sibi vel primum vindicant locum,neque quisquam alius aeque sibi placet, dum Sisyphi saxum assidue volvunt, ac sexcentas legeseodem spiritu contexunt, nihil refert quam ad rem pertinentes, dumque glossematis glossemata,opiniones opinionibus cumulantes, efficiunt ut studium illud omnium difficillimum essevideatur' (cited from the online edition available at http://www.let.leidenuniv.nl/Dutch/Latijn/ErasmusLaus1624.html; accessed 2 July 2012).
J. Baker, The Oxford history of the laws of England, Vol. 6: 1483-1558, Oxford 2003, p. 177-179
B. Cummings, Conscience and the law in Thomas More, in: H.E. Braun/E. Vallance(eds.), The Renaissance conscience, [Renaissance Studies, Special Issues, 3], Oxford 2011,p. 29-51.
E. Peters, The sacred Muses and the Twelve Tables, legal education and practice, Latin philologyand rhetoric, and Roman history, in: K. Pennington/M.H. Eichbauer (eds.), Law as professionand practice in Medieval Europe, Essays in honor of James Brundage, Aldershot 2011, p. 137-152;
J. Papy, Justus Lipsius, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Fall 2011 edition (available athttp://plato.stanford.edu/entries/justus-lipsius/; last visited 2 July 2012)
the introduction by J. Waszink to J. Lipsius, Politica, Six books of politics or political instruction, ed. J. Waszink,Assen 2004, p. 15-24
D.R. Kelley, History, law and the human sciences, Medieval and Renaissance perspectives,[Variorum Collected Studies Series, 205], Aldershot 1984;
D. Osler, Budaeus and Roman law,Ius commune, 13 (1985), p. 195-212;
I. Maclean, Interpretation and meaning in the Renaissance,The case of law, [Ideas in Context, 21], Cambridge 1992.
But see J.F. Keenan, A history of Catholic moral theology in the twentieth century, From confessingsins to liberating consciences, London-New York 2010, p. 1-34.
Ch. Donahue, Jr., A crisis of law, Reflections on the Church and the law over the centuries, TheJurist, 65 (2005), p. 1-30.
For a critical assessment of this evolution, see C.J. Errázuriz Mackenna,Justice in the Church, A fundamental theory of canon law, Montréal 2009.
Recent biographies of Adrian of Utrecht include M. Verweij, Adrianus VI (1459-1523), detragische paus uit de Nederlanden, Antwerpen-Apeldoorn 2011;
G. Gielis/M. Gielis, Adrianof Utrecht (1459-1523) as professor at the University of Louvain and as a leading figure in theChurch of the Netherlands, Fragmenta, Journal of the Royal Netherlandish Institute in Rome,4 (2010), p. 1-21
almost identical to the Dutch contribution M. Gielis, Adriaan van Utrecht(1459-1523) als professor aan de Universiteit van Leuven en als kerkelijk leider in de Nederlanden,in: Jaarboek 2001-2002
Provinciale Commissie voor Geschiedenis en Volkskunde (Antwerpen),Antwerpen 2003, p. 40-56)
N.H. Minnich, Adrian VI, in: H.J. Hillebrand (ed.), TheOxford encyclopedia of the Reformation, New York 1996, vol. 1, p. 8.
For a Dutch translation of the letters exchanged between Erasmus and Adrian VI, see M. Verweij,Pas de deux in stilte, De briefwisseling tussen Desiderius Erasmus en paus Adrianus VI (1522-1523),Rotterdam 2002, with a foreword by Mgr. A.H. van Luyn.
Verweij, Pas de deux in stilte, p. 58-59 (letter from Erasmus to Adrian VI, Basel, 1 August1522).
According to the common opinion, Adrian of Utrecht's thought did not differ very muchfrom that of contemporary theologians at Louvain;
cf. L. Vereecke, De Guillaume d'Ockhamà saint Alphonse de Liguori, Études d'histoire de la théologie morale moderne 1300-1787, [BibliothecaHistorica Congregationis Sanctissimi Redemptoris, 12], Rome 1986, p. 302.
This traditionalassessment of the relationship between Adrian and contemporary theological thought was castinto doubt by M.W.F. Stone (in an article which was later accused with plagiarism), viz.
Adrianof Utrecht as a moral theologian, in M. Verweij (ed.), De Paus uit de Lage Landen: Adrianus VI(1459-1523), Catalogus bij de tentoonstelling ter gelegenheid van het 550ste geboortejaar vanAdriaan van Utrecht, [Supplementa Humanistica Lovaniensia, 27], Leuven 2009, p. 19-44.
The novelty of Adrian's moral thought in comparison with the medieval scholastic tradition isstressed by Rudolf Schüßler in Hadrian VI. und das Recht auf Verweigerung zweifelhaft rechtmäßigerBefehle, in: N. Brieskorn/M. Riedenauer (eds.), Suche nach Frieden, Politische Ethik in derFrühen Neuzeit, I, [Theologie und Frieden, 19], Stuttgart 2000, p. 41-62.
Reference will be made to the Paris 1527 edition of Adrian's Quaestiones quodlibeticae. Thisedition was chosen mainly for pragmatic reasons, as it is paginated and easily readable.
As faras the passages relevant to this article are concerned, there are no substantial differences betweenthis edition and the first publication of the work, which was edited by Martin Dorpius andpublished in Louvain in 1515 by Dirk Martens, or the 1522 Paris edition, which is among thelast editions Adrian could possibly have seen during his lifetime.
A reprint of the Venice 1522edition was published in 1964 by The Gregg Press. Several editions of Adrian's Quaestionesquodlibeticae are available online, e.g. the Lyons 1547 edition at the digital library of theUniversity of Granada under http://adrastea.ugr.es/search*spi/cSEARCH= BHR%20A%20004%20413 [last visited on 28 March 2013].
The twelve questions dealt with in Adrian's Quaestiones quodlibeticae, Parisiis, Apud C.Chevallonium, 1527 (of which we shall only discuss the sixth) are: 1. Utrum propter scandalumvitandum in proximo liceat alicui contravenire voto vel iuramento a se prius rite facto;2.
Utrum tenemur ad mandatum superioris contra propriam sententiam agere dum scimuspropositum apud maiores verti in dubium;
Utrum licet ministrare Eucharistiam aut absolutionisbeneficium impendere ei qui se asserit a criminibus abstinere non posse;
Utrumcurabilior sit et minus deum offendat, qui peccat ex ignorantia vel infirmitate, an is qui peccatde industria;
Utrum sacerdos consulens de artificio ac iusto labore decimas solvi non oportere,possit sine gravi dolore peccati indulgentiam promereri;
An transgressio humani praeceptiiuris vel hominis inducat mortale peccatum;
Utrum mortalis culpa committi possit absqueeo quod libero consensu creaturam aliquam incommutabili bono peccator praetulerit in amore;
Utrum orans pro multis aeque prosit singulis ac si pro unoquoque tantundem oraret;
Anlicet dare alicui pecuniam ut dignitatem ac merita suae personae collatori exponendo beneficiumei procuret;
Utrum levitatis et corrupti animi iuste culpetur iudex, qui etsi non facit, tamenubi pecunia offerretur iustitiam pro munere servaret aut prostitueret, vel saltem in eum adducereturaffectum, ut cuperet contra iustitiam sententiam licite ferri posse;
Utrum deterior sit aliumsceleris notare occulti vel manifesti, an sic tacentem alios audire nec prohibere;
Utrum ispropter cuius peccatum populus plaga percutitur vel ad peccandum inducitur, post non reparatoprius rerum vel animae damno rite poenitere13 Matthew 18:15.
Keenan, A history of Catholic moral theology in the twentieth century, London-New York 2010,p. 1-34.
On 'modernist' voices at the Louvain Faculty of Theology in the early sixteenth century,.
See W. François, Maarten van Dorp, the Oratio Paulina (1516-1519), and the biblical-humanistvoice among the Louvain theologians, Lias, Journal of Early Modern intellectual culture and itssources, 39 (2012), p. 163-193.
However, other scholars have highlighted the 'traditional',that is 'scholastic', nature of the same voices;
see D. Verbeke, Maarten van Dorp (1485-1525)and the teaching of logic at the University of Louvain, Humanistica Lovaniensia, Journal of Neo-Latin Studies, 2013, forthcoming.
It may be noted that Maarten van Dorp edited Adrian ofUtrecht's Quaestiones quodlibeticae and fiercely opposed Erasmus' Praise of Folly.
R.E. McNally, Adrian VI (1522-1523) and Church reform, Archivum Historiae Pontificiae,7 (1969), p. 253-285.
For thorough investigations, see K.-H. Ducke, Handeln zum Heil, Eine Untersuchung zurMorallehre Hadrians VI., [Erfurter Theologische Studien, 34], Leipzig 1976, p. 142-149
R.B. Hein, 'Gewissen' bei Adrian von Utrecht (Hadrian VI.), Erasmus von Rotterdam und ThomasMore, Ein Beitrag zur systematischen Analyse des Gewissensbegriffs in der katholischen nordeuropäischenRenaissance, [Studien der Moraltheologie, 10], Münster 1999
R.B. Hein, Conscience,Dictator or guide, Meta-ethical and biographical reflections in the light of a humanist concept ofconscience, in: J. Clague/B. Hoose/G. Mannion (eds.), Moral theology for the twenty firstcentury, Essays in celebration of Kevin Kelly, London 2008, p. 34-50.
The works by Heinshould be completed with the recent monographs by D.R. Klinck, Conscience, equity and theCourt of Chancery in Early Modern England, Farnham 2010
the essays by H.E. Braun, E.Vallance, R. Schüßler, B. Cummings, A. Redden, C. Tilmouth, J. Daybell,N. Reinhardtcontained in H.E. Braun/E. Vallance (eds.), The Renaissance conscience, [Renaissance Studies,Special Issues, 3], Oxford 2011.
A standard work on the history of moral decision making from Antiquity to the moderntimes is R. Schüßler, Moral im Zweifel, [Perspektiven der analytischen Philosophie, NeueFolge], Paderborn, Vol. 1: Die scholastische Theorie des Entscheidens unter moralischer Unsicherheit,2003, and Vol. 2: Die Herausforderung des Probabilismus, 2006.
A bit narrower in scope butequally useful are I. Kantola, Probability and moral uncertainty in Late Medieval and EarlyModern times, [Schriften der Luther-Agricola-Gesellschaft, 32], Helsinki 1994
J.A. Fleming,Defending probabilism, The moral theology of Juan Caramuel, Washington DC 2006.
A recentwork of interest investigating moral decision making in the period of classical canon law andMedieval scholastic philosophy is M.V. Dougherty, Moral dilemmas in Medieval thought, FromGratian to Aquinas, Cambridge 2011.
Klinck, Conscience (supra, n. 17), p. 1-12.
W. Decock, From law to paradise, Confessional Catholicism and legal scholarship, Rechtsgeschichte,Zeitschrift des Max-Planck-Instituts für europäische Rechtsgeschichte, 18 (2011), p. 12-34.
Cited infra, n. 82.
Cited in P. Prodi, Una storia della giustizia, dal pluralismo dei fori al moderno dualismo tracoscienza e diritto, Bologna 2000, p. 430, n. 89.
Klinck, Conscience (supra, n. 17), p. 107-140 and p. 183-218.
Baker, The Oxford history of the laws of England, Vol. 6: 1483-1558, p. 171-190;
N.W. Jones,The Elizabethan Court of Chancery, Oxford 1967.
M. Turrini, La coscienza e le leggi, Morale e diritto nei testi per la confessione della prima etàmoderna, [Annali dell'Istituto storico italo-germanico, Monografie, 13], Bologna 1991.
On Beets and Briard, see the scant notes in H. De Jongh, L'ancienne Faculté de Théologie deLouvain au premier siècle de son existence (1432-1540)
Les débuts, son organisation, son enseignement,sa lutte contre Érasme et Luther, Louvain 1911, p. 94-99 and p. 149-151.
Ducke, Handeln zum Heil (supra, n. 17), p. 72;
Hein, 'Gewissen' (supra, n. 17), p. 199,n. 158.
For a short biography of Everaerts, see D. van den Auweele, in: G. Van Dievoet e.a. (eds.),Lovanium docet, Geschiedenis van de Leuvense Rechtsfaculteit (1425-1914), Cataloog bij detentoonstelling in de Centrale Bibliotheek (25.5-2.7.1988), Leuven 1988, p. 60-63
O.Vervaart, Studies over Nicolaas Everaerts (1462-1532) en zijn Topica, Arnhem 1994 [=doct.diss.], p. 3-25.
On Everaerts' familiarity with the theologian Conrad Summenhart (1455-1502)
see Vervaart,Studies over Nicolaas Everaerts, p. 110-111.
Compare L. Waelkens, Nicolaas Everaerts, Uncélèbre méconnu du droit commun (1463/4-1532)', Rivista internazionale di diritto comune,15 (2004), p. 182
Everaerts raisonne toujours utroque iure.
En outre il ne cite pas seulementles légistes et les canonistes, mais également des moralistes et des pénitenciers comme Angelusde Clavasio, Astesanus de Asti ou Conrad Summenhart'.
V. Brants, La faculté de droit de l'Université de Louvain à travers cinq siècles, Etude historique,Paris-Bruxelles 1917, p. 8-9;
R. Dekkers, Het humanisme en de rechtswetenschap in deNederlanden, Antwerpen 1938, p. 1-36.
W. Endemann, Studien in der romanisch-kanonistischen Wirthschafts-und Rechtslehre bis gegenEnde des siebenzehnten Jahrhunderts, Berlin 1874, vol. 1, p. 59.
Baldus de Ubaldis, Commentaria in septimum, octavum, nonum, decimum et undecimumCodicis libros, Lugduni 1585, ad C. 7,59,1, num. 3, fol. 99v:
Forum enim conscientiae estforum boni et aequi coniunctim, et est tribunal veritatis et non fictionis, nam quando aequumbono opponitur contradictione, divina iustitia potius amplectitur aequum quam id quod iuscivile vocat bonum, ut ff. de iustitia et iure, l. 1 in princip. [D. 1,1,1]. Perfecta enim iustitiarequirit haec duo simul, ut ibi patet'.
Francisco Vivio, Decisiones regni Neapolitani, Venetiis, apud D. Zenari, 1592, lib. 1, decis. 160, num. 10-11, p. 229.
Pieter Peck, Tractatus de amortizatione bonorum a principe impetranda, cap. 7 (an clerus tutaconscientia legem amortizationis fraudare possit), in: Opera omnia, Antverpiae, apud H. Verdussen,1679, p. 445-446.
See also Decock, Theologians (supra, n. **), p. 346-352.
Aquinas, Summa Theologiae (Ed. Leonina, tom. 7), IaIIae, quaest. 96, art. 4 (Utrum lexhumana imponat homini necessitatem in foro conscientiae), concl., p. 183:
Respondeo dicendumquod leges positae humanitus vel sunt iustae vel iniustae. Si quidem iustae sint, habent vimobligandi in foro conscientiae a lege aeterna, a qua derivantur; secundum illud Prov. 8:
Per mereges regnant, et legum conditores iusta decernunt. Dicuntur autem leges iustae et ex fine, quandoscilicet ordinantur ad bonum commune; et ex auctore, quando scilicet lex lata non exceditpotestatem ferentis; et ex forma, quando scilicet secundum aequalitatem proportionis imponuntursubditis onera in ordine ad bonum commune'.
Adrian of Utrecht, Quaestiones quodlibeticae duodecim, quibus accesserunt Joannis BriardiAthensis quaestiones item quodlibeticae, Parisiis, Apud C. Chevallonium, 1527, quaest. 6, art.
, concl. 2, litt. g, fol. 111r: 'Lex iusta, praeceptum iustum superioris laici vel ecclesiastici ligatin foro conscientiae, sed ad metas solum rationis seu causae finalis quae praetenditur'.
A recent contribution on the subject of Luther's conception of Christian liberty is R. Schwarz,Luthers Freiheitsbewußtsein und die Freiheit eines Christenmenschen', in: D. Korsch/V. Leppin(eds.), Martin Luther, Biographie und Theologie, [Spätmittelalter, Humanismus, Reformation,53], Tübingen 2010, p. 31-68.
Even though Luther also claimed that nobody before him had praised temporal governmentas highly as he did, he remained consistent in his view that temporal authorities cannot coerceconscience if that would jeopardize salvation;
see D.M. Whitford, Luther's political encounters,in: D.K. McKim (ed.), The Cambridge companion to Martin Luther, Cambridge 2003,p. 182-183.
This does not necessarily mean that the Lutheran tradition, which is notablyvariegated, agreed on this point of doctrine;
cf. H.J. Hillerbrand, The legacy of Martin Luther,in: D.K. McKim (ed.), The Cambridge companion to Martin Luther, Cambridge 2003, p. 230.
Martin Luther, De libertate christiana dissertatio, Norembergae, Petreius, 1524, passim.
For an overview of the most important aspects of Adrian of Utrecht's (Pope Adrian VI's)pontificate, see Verweij, Adrianus VI (supra, n. 7), p. 59-122.
See the edition (accompanied by a Dutch translation) by M. Verweij of Pope Adrian VI'sinstruction to Francesco Chieregati in M. Verweij (ed.), De Paus uit de Lage Landen, AdrianusVI (1459-1523), Catalogus bij de tentoonstelling ter gelegenheid van het 550ste geboortejaarvan Adriaan van Utrecht, [Supplementa Humanistica Lovaniensia, 27], Leuven 2009, p. 275:
Quinto attendant finem ad quem Lutherani tendunt ut scilicet sub colore libertatis Evangelicaequam hominibus proponunt, omnis potestas superioritatis tollatur.
Nam licet ab initio prae setulerint ecclesiasticam potestatem tanquam tyrannice et contra Evangelium occupatam annihilareseu reprimere velle, tamen cum eorum fundamentum, scilicet libertas quam praedicant, aequevel plus militet contra potestatem saecularem quod scilicet illa nullis praeceptis quantumvisiustis et rationalibus obligare possit homines ad parendum sub poena peccati mortalis, manifestumest'.
For further discussion of Adrian's letter to Chieregati, see R. McNally, Pope Adrian VI andChurch Reform, p. 279-282.
Martin Luther, Concerning governmental authority [1523], in: H.J. Hillerbrand (ed.), TheProtestant Reformation, New York et al. 20092 [=1968], p. 83.
They even maintained correspondence afterwards; cf. L.P. Gachard (ed.), Correspondance deCharles Quint et d'Adrien VI, Rome 1970 [= reprint from the 1859 edition].
Verweij, Adrianus VI (supra, n. 7), p. 39-57;
R. Fagel, Adrian of Utrecht in Spain (supra,n. 47), p. 23-45.
Adrian of Utrecht, Quaestiones quodlibeticae, quaest. 6, art. 1, concl. 2, litt. g, fol. 111r.
In D. Liebs, Lateinische Rechtsregeln und Rechtssprichwörter, München 2007, p. 45, num. 23,X 2,28,16 is also cited as a possible source of origin of the expression 'cessante causa cessateffectus'.
In its explicit form, though, we could only find it in the abovementioned decretals.
On the history of this maxim, see E. Cortese, La norma giuridica, Spunti storici nel dirittocomune classico, [Ius nostrum, 6], Milano 1962, vol. 1, p. 238-242.
Panormitanus, Commentaria super Decretalibus, tom. 6 (Super tertio libro Decretalium), adX. 3,49,8, fol. 234r, num. 39:
Si causa est expressa in lege et potest probari causam istam nonextitisse in casu occurrenti, non debet servari constitutio, nec in foro animae nec iudiciali, quiaratio legis est lex, et non econtra, unde ubi cessat ratio cessat lex, ut in l. non dubium C. delegi, etc.'.
This passage is discussed in H. Krause, Cessante causa cessat lex, Zeitschrift derSavigny-Stiftung für Rechtsgeschichte, Kanonistische Abteilung, 46 (1960), p. 97-98.
For the classical origins of this maxim, see Cicero, De officiis, 1, 10, 33.
Apart from C. 3,1,8,no fragment in the Corpus Justinianeum itself comes close to formulating it.
Panormitanus, Commentaria super Decretalibus, tom. 2 (Super secunda parte libri primiDecretalium), ad X 1,41,1, fol. 155v, num. 19.
Nicolaas Everaerts, Topicorum seu de locis legalibus liber, Lovanii, Theodoricus Martinus1516, loc. 34 (a ratione legis stricta seu limitata ad restrictionem ipsius legis), fol. 43v:
Ratio legisest anima legis, unde sicut anima dominatur corpori, ita ratio legis vel canonis dominaturverbis'; loc. 64 (a lege cessante), fol. 81v:
Hoc tamen volo te scire, quod ille non loquitur sinelege qui allegat rationem, quia lex est omne quod ratione consistit'.
Glossa Causam ad D. 3,1,1,5, in Corporis Iustinianaei Digestum vetus (ed. Gothofredi), tom. 1, col. 330:
Quid ergo si aliqua bona foemina inveniatur, poteritne postulare Videtur quodsic, quia causa cessante, cessat effectus (...), sed dico contra, quia illud obtinet in causa finali.Hic autem, sc. improbitas Calphurniae, fuit impulsiva, nam alia fuit finalis, sc. ne contrapudicitiam etc.
et ne officiis virilibus etc. (...) et alias est causa impulsiva (...)'.
On the distinctionbetween causa impulsiva (the immediate occasion which had pushed the legislator into action,e.g. Calpurnia's turpitude)
causa finalis (the general aim of that particular law, e.g. prohibitingwomen from interfering with the business of men), see Krause, Cessante causa (supra, n. 50),p. 92-93
E. Cortese, La norma giuridica (supra, n. 49), vol. 1, p. 217-221.
S. Kuttner, Urban II and the doctrine of interpretation, A turning point, Studia Gratiana, 15(1972), p. 62, n. 21.
Everaerts, Topicorum seu de locis legalibus liber, loc. 85 (a cessatione rationis), fol. 96v.
Following the gloss, Everaerts is careful to stress that the maxim only holds in regard to the causa finalis.
Francisco Suárez, Tractatus de legibus et legislatore Deo, in: Opera omnia, ed. C. Berton,Parisiis, Apud L. Vives, 1856, tom. 6, lib. 6, cap. 9, p. 39-46.
Krause, Cessante causa (supra, n. 50), p. 89, n. 28.
P. Bellini, Denunciatio evangelica e denunciatio iudicialis privata, Un capitolo di storiadisciplinare della Chiesa, Milano 1986.
Also discussed in Decock, Theologians (supra, n. **),p. 88-101.
The Council of Sens (1141) is a case in point.
Subsequent to Bernard of Clairvaux's vainefforts to 'fraternally correct' Abelard in private, a council was summoned to judge Abelard;cf.
W. Verbaal, The Council of Sens reconsidered, Masters, monks, or judges', Church History,74.3 (2005), p. 481-483.
E.g. Martin de Azpilcueta (Dr. Navarrus), Relectio in cap. Novit de iudiciis, not. 5, num. 1,in: Opera Omnia, Venetiis, Apud D. Nicolinum, 1601, tom. 3: Commentarii et tractatusrelectionesve, fol. 76r.
H. Coing, English equity and the 'denunciatio evangelica' of the Canon law, Law QuarterlyReview, 71 (1955), p. 223-241.
R.K. Rittgers, The reformation of the keys, Confession, conscience, and authority in sixteenthcenturyGermany, Cambridge Mass. 2004, p. 3.
But see E. Roth, Die Privatbeichte und Schlüsselgewaltin der Theologie der Reformatoren, Gütersloh 1952.
For a historical account of the development of this concept, see L. Hödl, Die Geschichte derscholastischen Literatur und der Theologie der Schlüsselgewalt, Teil. 1:
Die scholastische Literaturund die Theologie der Schlüsselgewalt von ihren Anfängen an bis zur Summa Aurea des Wilhelmvon Auxerre, [Beiträge zur Geschichte der Philosophie und Theologie des Mittelalters, Texteund Untersuchungen, 38, 4], Münster 1960.
Francisco Suárez, Commentaria in tertiam partem Divi Thomae, a quaestione 84 usque adfinem, Disp. 16 (De potestate clavium), sect. 1, coroll. (potestatem hanc esse per modum judicii),num. 10, in: Opera omnia, ed. C. Berton, Parisiis, 1861, tom. 22, p. 340:
Ex quibus facileetiam colligitur, potestatem hanc esse judiciariam, seu per modum judicii exercendam; quodetiam est de fide, ut constat ex Conc. Trid., sess. 14, cap. 1, ubi propterea can. 9
definitabsolutionem esse actum judicii et sententiae prolationem. Quod etiam maxime confirmaturex traditione Ecclesiae, quae in illis verbis semper intellexit, constituisse Christum Dominumin Ecclesia sua quoddam tribunal, et reliquisse judices, apud quos peccatorum et conscientiarumcausae tractarentur;
quod verba illa Christi, remittendi et retinendi peccata, ligandique et solvendi,satis indicant, ut disp. seq. sect. 2 latius expendam'.
F. Merzbacher, Azpilcueta und Covarruvias, Zur Gewaltendoktrin der spanischen Kanonistikim Goldenen Zeitalter, in G. Köbler/H. Drüppel/D. Willoweit (eds.), Friedrich Merzbacher,Recht-Staat-Kirche, Ausgewählte Aufsätze, [Forschungen zur kirchlichen Rechtsgeschichteund zum Kirchenrecht, 18], Wien-Köln-Graz 1989, p. 275-302 (294-295).
See alsoL. Villemin, Pouvoir d'ordre et pouvoir de juridiction, Histoire théologique de leur distinction,Paris 2003.
The contemporary debate about power in the Roman Catholic Church centersaround the interpretation of canons 129-144 in book 1, title 8 (De potestate regiminis) of the1983 Code of Canon Law;
see the notes by Myriam Wijlens in J.-P. Beal et al. (eds.), A newcommentary on the Code of Canon Law (commissioned by the Canon Law Society of America),Study edition, Washington DC 2000, p. 183-194.
Francisco Suárez, Disputationes de censuris in communi et in particulari de excommunicatione,suspensione et interdicto, ac praeterea de irregularitate, disp. 14
De sexto effectu excommunicationismajoris, qui est privatio jurisdictionis ecclesiasticae), in: Opera omnia, ed. C. Berton, Parisiis1861, tom. 23, p. 366:
Hic est ultimus effectus excommunicationis pertinens ad privationemspiritualem bonorum, in quo nihil addere oportebat de jurisdictione spirituali pertinente adforum poenitentiae; nam in superioribus dum ostendimus excommunicatum privatum essepotestate administrandi sacramenta, satis est consequenter ostensum, esse privatum jurisdictionejudicandi in illo foro.
Solum ergo hic agimus de jurisdictione in foro exteriori'.
Bellini, Denunciatio evangelica (supra, n. 59), p. 52-53.
Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, IIaIIae, quaest. 33, art. 1
Utrum fraterna correctio sitactus caritatis), in: Opera omnia iussu impensaque Leonis XIII edita, tom. 8: Secunda secundaea quaestione I ad quaestionem LVI cum commentariis Cardinalis Cajetani, Romae 1895,p. 262-263.
Augustinus, serm. 393 Maur. (= PL 39, c. 1715): 'Nam si scirem non tibi prodesse, non teadmonerem, non te terrerem'.
The founder of the devotio moderna, Geert Grote (1340-1384), was notably hostile to Romanand canon law;
see P. Brachin, Adrien VI et la devotio moderna, Études germaniques, 14 (1959),p. 97-105 (103).
However, the same cannot necessarily be said of his followers.
Besides Adrianof Utrecht one could cite the example of Arnold Gheyloven of Rotterdam (c. 1375-1442), aregular canon at the Windesheim monastery at Groenendaal, whose work on practical theologyis replete with references to the canon law tradition;
cf. A.G. Weiler, Het morele veld van deModerne Devotie, weerspiegeld in de Gnotosolitos parvus van Arnold Gheyloven van Rotterdam,1423
Een Summa van moraaltheologie, kerkelijk recht en spiritualiteit voor studenten in Leuvenen Deventer, [Middeleeuwse studies en bronnen, 96], Hilversum 2006, p. 41-72.
M. Stolleis, Juristenbeschimpfung, oder: 'Juristen-böse Christen', in: Th. Stammen et al. (eds.),Politik-Bildung-Religion, Hans Maier zum 65. Geburtstag, Paderborn et al. 1996, p. 163-170.
For further analysis, see K.-H. Ducke, Das Verhältnis von Amt und Theologie im Briefwechselzwischen Hadrian VI. und Erasmus von Rotterdam, [Erfurter Theologische Studien, 10], Leipzig1973.
Verweij, Pas de deux in stilte, p. 75 (letter from Pope Adrian VI to Erasmus, Rome 23 January1523).
This controversy has been studied mostly from the perspective of dogmatic theology, cf. E.J.Van Eijl, La controverse louvaniste autour de la grâce et du libre arbitre à la fin du 16ième siècle,in: M. Lamberigts (ed.), L'augustinisme à l'ancienne faculté de théologie de Louvain, [BibliothecaEphemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium, 111], Leuven 1994, p. 207-282.
L. Lessius, In III Partem D. Thomae de Sacramentis et Censuris, quaest. 8, art. 5, dubium8 (quanta requiratur scientia in confessario), num. 50, in: De beatitudine, de actibus humanis,de incarnatione Verbi, de sacramentis et censuris praelectiones theologicae posthumae.
Acceseruntvariorum casuum conscientiae resolutiones, ed. I. Wijns, Lovanii, apud C. Coenestenium,1645, p. 240.
Quoniam igitur hujus salutis via inactionibus liberis morumque rectitudine posita est, quae morum rectitudo a lege tanquam abhumanarum actionum regula plurimum pendet;
idcirco legum consideratio in magnam theologiaepartem cedit; et dum sacra doctrina de legibus tractat, nihil profecto aliud quam Deumipsum ut legislatorem intuetur. (...)
Deinde theologicum est negotium conscientiis prospicereviatorum; conscientiarum vero rectitudo stat legibus servandis, sicut et pravitas violandis, cumlex quaelibet sit regula, si ut oportet servatur, aeternae salutis assequendae;
si violetur, amittendae;ergo et legis inspectio, quatenus est conscientiae vinculum, ad theologum pertinebit.'
This passage is also commented upon in D. Tamm, Rechtswissenschaft im Dienste der Theologie,Zur Stellung der Rechtswissenschaft an den nordischen Universitäten im 17.
Jahrhundert, in: D.Tamm (ed.), Med lov skal land bygges og andre retshistoriske afhandlinger, Copenhagen 1989,p. 185-195.
Dissertatioprolegomena de casuisticae theologiae originibus, locis atque praestantia), part. 3 (pars apologetica),cap. 1, p. lxv:
Est enim theologia illa moralis quasi jurisprudentia, ac scientia civilis, quae sibene definiatur, non in eo sita est, quod quispiam memoria leges omnes scriptas teneat, quamviset id non sit extra ipsam, sed quod ubi leges nihil dicunt, norit id, quod rectum est invenire.'
E. Van Roey, Le contractus germanicus ou les controverses sur le 5% au XVIe siècle, Revued'Histoire Ecclésiastique, 3 (1902), p. 901-946.
