Last updated 27/06/24: Online ordering is currently unavailable due to technical issues. We apologise for any delays responding to customers while we resolve this. For further updates please visit our website: https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 July 2009
The confused and tumultuous circumstances surrounding the election to the papacy of Urban VI, its corollaries, the subsequent defection of thirteen of the cardinals, their election of a rival pontiff, and the ensuing years of dismal division within the Church—these form the general background to this tract, which is a product, therefore, of the immense outburst of polemical writing occasioned by the onset, in 1378, of the Great Schism. The more immediate circumstances surrounding it are the failure by 1403 of the French withdrawal of obedience from the Avignonese pope to produce a settlement of the Schism, the breakdown of all subsequent negotiations between the rival pontiffs, and finally the convocation, by dissident cardinals from both camps, of a general council which was to meet at Pisa in March, 1409.
1. The most recent account of the events which culminated in the Great Schism is that of Ullmann, W., Origins of the Great Schism (London, 1948)Google Scholar; the standard treatment of the Schism is the monumental work of Valois, Noël, La France et le Grand Schisme d'Occident, 4 vols. (Paris, 1896–1902).Google Scholar
2. Probably the best general introduction to Conciliar theory is still the essay of Figgis-printed, J. N. in his Studies in Political Thought from Gerson to Grotius, 2nd ed. (Cambridge, 1931)Google Scholar, but the most valuable and also the most recent treatment of the sources of Cociliar theory is that of Tierney, Brian, Foundations of the Conciliar Theory (Cambridge, 1955)Google Scholar. A brief but useful survey of earlier works on Conciliar theory is to be found at the beginning of this latter work (pp. 7–13).
3. The most valuable overall treatments of d'Ailly's life and thought are those of Tschackert, P., Peter von Ailli (diss. Gotha, 1877)Google Scholar and Salembier, L., Petrus de Alliaco (lat. diss. Lille, 1886)Google Scholar. The most recent biography is, however, Salembier's later work, Le Cardinal Pierre d'Ailly (Tourcoing, 1931)Google Scholar— which also contains the most up to date listing of d'Ailly's writings.
4. Both of these are to be found in Tschackert, Peter von Ailli, App. V, pp. [15]-[16], and App. IV, pp. [12]- [15]. The Epistola Diaboli Leviathan has been translated into English by Raymond, I. W., Church History: Studies in Christianity and Culture, XXII (1953), pp. 181–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. D'Ailly owed to the Avignonese Pope. Benedict XIII, not only his episcopal see of Cambrai, but also his earlier position as Bishop of Le Pay—see Salembier, . Le Cardinal Pierre D'Ailly, pp. 114–117.Google Scholar
6. See Salembier, , Le Cardinal Pierre D'Ailly, pp. 243–244Google Scholar. Louis Ellies du Pin incorrectly ascribed the tract to Gerson, d'Ailly's pupil, and included if (in a version which omitted its closing sentence) in his edition of Gerson's works—see Joaanis Gersonii Opera Omnia. II (Antwerp, 1706), cols. 112–113Google Scholar. There is, however, no doubt that it was d'Ailly who wrote the tract, for he himself cites it as hi own in one of his later works, the Apologia concilii Pisana—ed. Tsackert, Peter von Ailli, App. X, p. [34]. I have translated the version to be found in Martene, E. and Durand, V.. Vetervm Scriptorum et Monumestorum …amplissima collectio. VII (Paris, 1733)Google Scholar, cols. 909–911—a version whieh is, in general, less corrupt and more intelligible than that edited by du Pin. Only in the three cases indicated below, have I preferred the reading given in du Pin's edition.
7. This conception, which is closely related to the idea of equity, is eramined in his Nichomachean Ethics, V, 10: cf. also Rhetoric, I, 13. For a brief discussion, see Barker, Ernest. The Politics of Aristotle (Oxford 1946), App. II, p. 367–372Google Scholar; and also, SirVinogradoff, Paul, Outlines of Historical Jurisprudence. II (Oxford, 1922), pp. 63–71Google Scholar. Cf. infra, n. 20.
8. Eph. v, 23.
9. This is almost, but not unite, a quotation of Rom. xii, 5; cf. I Cor. xii, 12 and 20.
10. Canticles vi, 9 (In the Vulgate: vi. 8).
11. The reference is, of course, to the Nicene Creed.
12. Matt. xviii, 20.
13. The word “aolity” may be said to mean “a politically organized community.” Its decline to the status of an archaism in the English language has contributed to the difficulties attendant upon the translation, not only of the medieval, but also of the Greek vocabulary of politics.—cf. Barker, , The Politics of Aristotle, pp. lxiii–lxviiiGoogle Scholar.
14. Canticles, vi, 4 and 10. The Vulgte (vi, 3 and 9) reads: “… velut castrorum acies ordinata.”
15. I have followed the fuerunt convocata of du Pin's edition (col. 112 C) rather than the fuerint of Martene and Durand.
16. Acts xv, 23 ff.
17. The reference is to the first two books of canon law contained within the Corpus Juris Canonici—the Concordantia Disconcordantium Canonum written by Gratian about the year 1148 and commonly known simply as the Decretum, and the Decretales of Gregory Ix, a collection which was made in 1230 at the order of Pope Gregory IX, and which was drawn from the letters of popes who ruled after 1148. D'Ailly uses the expression “common law most normally to refer to the canon law.
18. E. g. Dec. Grat., dist. 17, caps. 1–5.
19. Here I have followed du Pin's edition which reads (col. 113 B) “occurrente evidenti utilitate” instead of simply “evidenti utilitate.”
20. Nich. Ethics, V, 10—cf. supra, n. 7. The meanings attached to epikeia have by no means been constant—for a discussion of the history of the concept see Riley, L. J., The History, Nature and Use of Epikeia in Moral Theology (diss. Washington, 1948), pp. 1–67Google Scholar. The scholastic theologians, however, used it as a synonym for equity. Thus Aquinas could say: “Since human actions, with which laws are concerned, are composed of contingent singulars and are innumer able in their diversity, it was not possible to lay down rules of law that would apply to every single case. Legislators in framing laws attend to what commonly happens although if the law he applied to certain cases it will frustrate the equality of justice and be injurious to the common good, which the law has in view … In these and like cases it is had to follow the law, and it is good to set aside the letter of the law and to follow the dictates of justice and the common good. This is the object of epikeia which we call equity.” —Summa Theologies, 2a 2ae, qu. 120, art. 1: translated by the Fathers of the English Dominican Province, XII (London, 1922), p. 169Google Scholar. D'Ailly's notion of epikeia clearly coincides with that of Aquinas.
21. Du Pin's edition, which I have followed here, reads: (col. 113 c) “ …et in fundamento praedicto possent superaedificari aliquae aliae propositiones …” whereas the version to be found in Martene and Durand substitutes saepe aedificare—a variant which is most probably a corruption of the original text.
