Constitutionalism - Medieval and modern: Against neo-figgisite orthodoxy (again)

History of Political Thought

Volumn 17, Issue 2, 1996, Pages 178-194

  Nederman, Cary J ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0041115174     PISSN: 0143781X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (88)

1. For some important examples, see The Cambridge History of Medieval Political Thought, c.350-c.1450, ed. J.H. Burns (Cambridge, 1988), esp. pp. 650-2; Brian Tierney, Religion, Law, and the Growth of Constitutional Thought, 1150-1650 (Cambridge, 1982); The Cambridge History of Political Thought, 1450-1700, ed. J.H. Burns and Mark Goldie (Cambridge, 1991), esp. pp. 1-6; Antony Black, Political Thought in Europe, 1250-1450 (Cambridge, 1992), esp. p. 191; and Kenneth Pennington, The Prince and the Law, 1200-1600 (Berkeley, 1993).
2. For some important examples, see The Cambridge History of Medieval Political Thought, c.350-c.1450, ed. J.H. Burns (Cambridge, 1988), esp. pp. 650-2; Brian Tierney, Religion, Law, and the Growth of Constitutional Thought, 1150-1650 (Cambridge, 1982); The Cambridge History of Political Thought, 1450-1700, ed. J.H. Burns and Mark Goldie (Cambridge, 1991), esp. pp. 1-6; Antony Black, Political Thought in Europe, 1250-1450 (Cambridge, 1992), esp. p. 191; and Kenneth Pennington, The Prince and the Law, 1200-1600 (Berkeley, 1993).
3. For some important examples, see The Cambridge History of Medieval Political Thought, c.350-c.1450, ed. J.H. Burns (Cambridge, 1988), esp. pp. 650-2; Brian Tierney, Religion, Law, and the Growth of Constitutional Thought, 1150-1650 (Cambridge, 1982); The Cambridge History of Political Thought, 1450-1700, ed. J.H. Burns and Mark Goldie (Cambridge, 1991), esp. pp. 1-6; Antony Black, Political Thought in Europe, 1250-1450 (Cambridge, 1992), esp. p. 191; and Kenneth Pennington, The Prince and the Law, 1200-1600 (Berkeley, 1993).
4. For some important examples, see The Cambridge History of Medieval Political Thought, c.350-c.1450, ed. J.H. Burns (Cambridge, 1988), esp. pp. 650-2; Brian Tierney, Religion, Law, and the Growth of Constitutional Thought, 1150-1650 (Cambridge, 1982); The Cambridge History of Political Thought, 1450-1700, ed. J.H. Burns and Mark Goldie (Cambridge, 1991), esp. pp. 1-6; Antony Black, Political Thought in Europe, 1250-1450 (Cambridge, 1992), esp. p. 191; and Kenneth Pennington, The Prince and the Law, 1200-1600 (Berkeley, 1993).
5. For some important examples, see The Cambridge History of Medieval Political Thought, c.350-c.1450, ed. J.H. Burns (Cambridge, 1988), esp. pp. 650-2; Brian Tierney, Religion, Law, and the Growth of Constitutional Thought, 1150-1650 (Cambridge, 1982); The Cambridge History of Political Thought, 1450-1700, ed. J.H. Burns and Mark Goldie (Cambridge, 1991), esp. pp. 1-6; Antony Black, Political Thought in Europe, 1250-1450 (Cambridge, 1992), esp. p. 191; and Kenneth Pennington, The Prince and the Law, 1200-1600 (Berkeley, 1993).
6. Francis Oakley, The Political Thought of Pierre D'Ailly (New Haven, 1964), pp. 1-7; F. Oakley, 'Figgis, Constance, and the Divine of Paris', American Historical Review, 75 (1969), pp. 368-86; F. Oakley, 'Celestial Hierarchies Revisited: Walter Ullmann's Vision of Medieval Politics', Past and Present, No. 50 (August 1973), pp. 3-48; F. Oakley, 'Natural Law, the Corpus Mysticum, and Consent in Conciliar Thought from John of Paris to Matthias Ugonius', Speculum, 56 (1981), pp. 786-810.
7. Francis Oakley, The Political Thought of Pierre D'Ailly (New Haven, 1964), pp. 1-7; F. Oakley, 'Figgis, Constance, and the Divine of Paris', American Historical Review, 75 (1969), pp. 368-86; F. Oakley, 'Celestial Hierarchies Revisited: Walter Ullmann's Vision of Medieval Politics', Past and Present, No. 50 (August 1973), pp. 3-48; F. Oakley, 'Natural Law, the Corpus Mysticum, and Consent in Conciliar Thought from John of Paris to Matthias Ugonius', Speculum, 56 (1981), pp. 786-810.
8. Francis Oakley, The Political Thought of Pierre D'Ailly (New Haven, 1964), pp. 1-7; F. Oakley, 'Figgis, Constance, and the Divine of Paris', American Historical Review, 75 (1969), pp. 368-86; F. Oakley, 'Celestial Hierarchies Revisited: Walter Ullmann's Vision of Medieval Politics', Past and Present, No. 50 (August 1973), pp. 3-48; F. Oakley, 'Natural Law, the Corpus Mysticum, and Consent in Conciliar Thought from John of Paris to Matthias Ugonius', Speculum, 56 (1981), pp. 786-810.
9. Francis Oakley, The Political Thought of Pierre D'Ailly (New Haven, 1964), pp. 1-7; F. Oakley, 'Figgis, Constance, and the Divine of Paris', American Historical Review, 75 (1969), pp. 368-86; F. Oakley, 'Celestial Hierarchies Revisited: Walter Ullmann's Vision of Medieval Politics', Past and Present, No. 50 (August 1973), pp. 3-48; F. Oakley, 'Natural Law, the Corpus Mysticum, and Consent in Conciliar Thought from John of Paris to Matthias Ugonius', Speculum, 56 (1981), pp. 786-810.
10. The classic works are Brian Tierney, Foundations of the Conciliar Theory (Cambridge, 1955); and Paul E. Sigmund, Nicholas of Cusa and Medieval Political Thought (Cambridge, MA, 1963).
11. The classic works are Brian Tierney, Foundations of the Conciliar Theory (Cambridge, 1955); and Paul E. Sigmund, Nicholas of Cusa and Medieval Political Thought (Cambridge, MA, 1963).
12. See the references in note 2, above.
13. Cary J. Nederman, 'Conciliarism and Constitutionalism: Jean Gerson and Medieval Political Thought', History of European Ideas, 12 (1990), pp. 189-209.
14. Francis Oakley, 'Nederman, Gerson, Conciliar Theory and Constitutionalism: Sed Contra', History of Political Thought, 16 (Spring 1995), pp. 1-19.
15. cf. Nederman, 'Conciliarism and Constitutionalism', pp. 193-202.
16. Oakley 'Nederman, Gerson, Conciliar Theory and Constitutionalism', pp. 10-12. must say that I find disturbing Oakley's willingness to countenance a free-ranging conception of modern constitutionalism, detached from some strong and defensible principles of individual rights, responsive government, and the other factors upon which I insist in my original article (Nederman, 'Conciliarism and Constitutionalism', p. 193). Oakley cites as support the proceedings of a series of American Council of Learned Societies conferences held worldwide, which 'repeatedly challenged the notion of a necessary linkage between constitutionalism and liberal democratic commitments' (p 11). My fear is that such conclusions are the result of either political naïvity or Realpolitik instead of serious theoretical reflection. I am thinking, in particular, of the much-discussed Asian model of constitutionalism in nations such as Singapore, which claim to abide by the rule of law, yet which regard their constitutional practices to be consistent with arrest without warrant, detainment without trial, suppression of political opposition and criticism, and other fundamental legal protections. Oakley may well be right that elements of modern constitutionalism do not fit well with the realities of 'group rights' and multicultural claims. But the answer is not to loosen the definition of modern constitutionalism to the point that it becomes so all-inclusive as to be meaningless; rather, we must consider seriously the benefits and costs of abandoning the modern constitutional paradigm for some other arrangement of political power and rights. It is a difficult decision but one we ultimately cannot avoid as we confront the divide between modernity and post-modernity. Coincidentally, Oakley's own institution, Williams College, is confronting just this conflict at the writing of the present article in July 1995, resulting from its decision to award an honorary doctorate to the Prime Minister of Singapore, Goh Chok Tong, whose administration was described by a 1995 US State Department report as willing 'to restrict human rights when it deemed that necessary in pursuit of its policy goals'.
17. Oakley 'Nederman, Gerson, Conciliar Theory and Constitutionalism', pp. 10-12. must say that I find disturbing Oakley's willingness to countenance a free-ranging conception of modern constitutionalism, detached from some strong and defensible principles of individual rights, responsive government, and the other factors upon which I insist in my original article (Nederman, 'Conciliarism and Constitutionalism', p. 193). Oakley cites as support the proceedings of a series of American Council of Learned Societies conferences held worldwide, which 'repeatedly challenged the notion of a necessary linkage between constitutionalism and liberal democratic commitments' (p 11). My fear is that such conclusions are the result of either political naïvity or Realpolitik instead of serious theoretical reflection. I am thinking, in particular, of the much-discussed Asian model of constitutionalism in nations such as Singapore, which claim to abide by the rule of law, yet which regard their constitutional practices to be consistent with arrest without warrant, detainment without trial, suppression of political opposition and criticism, and other fundamental legal protections. Oakley may well be right that elements of modern constitutionalism do not fit well with the realities of 'group rights' and multicultural claims. But the answer is not to loosen the definition of modern constitutionalism to the point that it becomes so all-inclusive as to be meaningless; rather, we must consider seriously the benefits and costs of abandoning the modern constitutional paradigm for some other arrangement of political power and rights. It is a difficult decision but one we ultimately cannot avoid as we confront the divide between modernity and post-modernity. Coincidentally, Oakley's own institution, Williams College, is confronting just this conflict at the writing of the present article in July 1995, resulting from its decision to award an honorary doctorate to the Prime Minister of Singapore, Goh Chok Tong, whose administration was described by a 1995 US State Department report as willing 'to restrict human rights when it deemed that necessary in pursuit of its policy goals'.
18. For example, C.J. Nederman, 'Sovereignty, War and the Corporation: Hegel on the Medieval Foundations of the Modern State', Journal of Politics, 49 (1987), pp. 499-519; C.J. Nederman, 'The Union of Wisdom and Eloquence Before the Renaissance: The Ciceronian Orator in Medieval Thought', Journal of Medieval History, 18 (1992), pp 75-95; C.J. Nederman, 'Freedom, Community and Function: Communitarian Lessons of Medieval Political Theory', American Political Science Review, 86 (1992), pp. 977-86; C.J. Nederman, 'Tolerance and Community: A Medieval Communal Functionalist Argument for Toleration', Journal of Politics, 56 (1994), pp. 901-18.
19. For example, C.J. Nederman, 'Sovereignty, War and the Corporation: Hegel on the Medieval Foundations of the Modern State', Journal of Politics, 49 (1987), pp. 499-519; C.J. Nederman, 'The Union of Wisdom and Eloquence Before the Renaissance: The Ciceronian Orator in Medieval Thought', Journal of Medieval History, 18 (1992), pp 75-95; C.J. Nederman, 'Freedom, Community and Function: Communitarian Lessons of Medieval Political Theory', American Political Science Review, 86 (1992), pp. 977-86; C.J. Nederman, 'Tolerance and Community: A Medieval Communal Functionalist Argument for Toleration', Journal of Politics, 56 (1994), pp. 901-18.
20. For example, C.J. Nederman, 'Sovereignty, War and the Corporation: Hegel on the Medieval Foundations of the Modern State', Journal of Politics, 49 (1987), pp. 499-519; C.J. Nederman, 'The Union of Wisdom and Eloquence Before the Renaissance: The Ciceronian Orator in Medieval Thought', Journal of Medieval History, 18 (1992), pp 75-95; C.J. Nederman, 'Freedom, Community and Function: Communitarian Lessons of Medieval Political Theory', American Political Science Review, 86 (1992), pp. 977-86; C.J. Nederman, 'Tolerance and Community: A Medieval Communal Functionalist Argument for Toleration', Journal of Politics, 56 (1994), pp. 901-18.
21. For example, C.J. Nederman, 'Sovereignty, War and the Corporation: Hegel on the Medieval Foundations of the Modern State', Journal of Politics, 49 (1987), pp. 499-519; C.J. Nederman, 'The Union of Wisdom and Eloquence Before the Renaissance: The Ciceronian Orator in Medieval Thought', Journal of Medieval History, 18 (1992), pp 75-95; C.J. Nederman, 'Freedom, Community and Function: Communitarian Lessons of Medieval Political Theory', American Political Science Review, 86 (1992), pp. 977-86; C.J. Nederman, 'Tolerance and Community: A Medieval Communal Functionalist Argument for Toleration', Journal of Politics, 56 (1994), pp. 901-18.
22. Oakley, 'Nederman, Gerson, Conciliar Theory and Constitutionalism', pp. 2, 5.
23. Ibid., p. 7; following John Neville Figgis, Studies of Political Thought from Gerson to Grotius, 1414-1625 (Cambridge, 1907), p. 35.
24. Ibid., p. 7; following John Neville Figgis, Studies of Political Thought from Gerson to Grotius, 1414-1625 (Cambridge, 1907), p. 35.
25. See Nederman, 'Conciliarism and Constitutionalism', pp. 190-1.
26. Francis Oakley, 'Legitimation by Consent: The Question of Medieval Roots', Viator, 14 (1983), pp. 303-35, esp. pp. 323-35; F. Oakley, 'Disobedience, Consent, Political Obligation: The Witness of Wessel Gansfort (c. 1419-1489)', History of Political Thought, 9 (1988), pp. 211-21; and Oakley, 'Nederman, Gerson, Conciliar Theory and Constitutionalism', pp. 12-14.
27. Francis Oakley, 'Legitimation by Consent: The Question of Medieval Roots', Viator, 14 (1983), pp. 303-35, esp. pp. 323-35; F. Oakley, 'Disobedience, Consent, Political Obligation: The Witness of Wessel Gansfort (c. 1419-1489)', History of Political Thought, 9 (1988), pp. 211-21; and Oakley, 'Nederman, Gerson, Conciliar Theory and Constitutionalism', pp. 12-14.
28. Francis Oakley, 'Legitimation by Consent: The Question of Medieval Roots', Viator, 14 (1983), pp. 303-35, esp. pp. 323-35; F. Oakley, 'Disobedience, Consent, Political Obligation: The Witness of Wessel Gansfort (c. 1419-1489)', History of Political Thought, 9 (1988), pp. 211-21; and Oakley, 'Nederman, Gerson, Conciliar Theory and Constitutionalism', pp. 12-14.
29. Oakley, 'Legitimation by Consent', p. 323.
30. Figgis, Studies in Political Thought from Gerson to Grotius, p. 2.
31. Ibid., p. 3.
32. Ibid., p. 31.
33. Figgis's own concerns and contributions as a political theorist are examined by Avigail I. Isenberg, Reconstructing Political Pluralism (Albany, 1995).
34. This point has lately been stressed by Antony Black in 'Political Languages in Later Medieval Europe', in The Church and Sovereignty, c.590-1918, ed. D. Wood (Oxford, 1991), and in his Political Thought in Europe, pp. 7-11.
35. This point has lately been stressed by Antony Black in 'Political Languages in Later Medieval Europe', in The Church and Sovereignty, c.590-1918, ed. D. Wood (Oxford, 1991), and in his Political Thought in Europe, pp. 7-11.
36. Conal Condren, 'Radicals, Conservatives and Moderates in Early Modern Political Thought: A Case of Sandwich Island Syndrome?', History of Political Thought, 10 (1989), pp. 525-42.
37. Ibid., p. 527.
38. Oakley, 'Nederman, Gerson, Conciliar Theory and Constitutionalism', p. 9.
39. Tierney, Religion, Law, and the Growth of Constitutional Thought, p. 103.
40. Oakley, 'Legitimation by Consent', p. 321.
41. Figgis, Studies in Political Thought from Gerson to Grotius, p. 40.
42. Oakley, 'Nederman, Gerson, Conciliar Theory and Constitutionalism', pp. 13-14.
43. Black, 'Political Languages in Later Medieval Europe', pp. 315-17.
44. Oakley, 'Legitimation by Consent', pp. 321-2; and Oakley, 'Figgis, Constance, and the Divines of Paris', pp. 373-6. In 'Nederman, Gerson, Conciliar Theory and Constitutionalism', Oakley remarks that seventeenth-century constitutionalists 'turned instinctively' to conciliar writings (p. 13) and that 'about their reading of those conciliarists there was nothing at all anachronistic (p. 14; my emphasis). For a critical view of the 'influence' issue, see Black, 'Political Languages in Later Medieval Europe', pp. 314-15.
45. Oakley, 'Legitimation by Consent', pp. 321-2; and Oakley, 'Figgis, Constance, and the Divines of Paris', pp. 373-6. In 'Nederman, Gerson, Conciliar Theory and Constitutionalism', Oakley remarks that seventeenth-century constitutionalists 'turned instinctively' to conciliar writings (p. 13) and that 'about their reading of those conciliarists there was nothing at all anachronistic (p. 14; my emphasis). For a critical view of the 'influence' issue, see Black, 'Political Languages in Later Medieval Europe', pp. 314-15.
46. Oakley, 'Legitimation by Consent', pp. 321-2; and Oakley, 'Figgis, Constance, and the Divines of Paris', pp. 373-6. In 'Nederman, Gerson, Conciliar Theory and Constitutionalism', Oakley remarks that seventeenth-century constitutionalists 'turned instinctively' to conciliar writings (p. 13) and that 'about their reading of those conciliarists there was nothing at all anachronistic (p. 14; my emphasis). For a critical view of the 'influence' issue, see Black, 'Political Languages in Later Medieval Europe', pp. 314-15.
47. Oakley, 'Legitimation by Consent', pp. 321-2; and Oakley, 'Figgis, Constance, and the Divines of Paris', pp. 373-6. In 'Nederman, Gerson, Conciliar Theory and Constitutionalism', Oakley remarks that seventeenth-century constitutionalists 'turned instinctively' to conciliar writings (p. 13) and that 'about their reading of those conciliarists there was nothing at all anachronistic (p. 14; my emphasis). For a critical view of the 'influence' issue, see Black, 'Political Languages in Later Medieval Europe', pp. 314-15.
48. See J.G.A. Pocock, The Ancient Constitution and the Feudal Law (New York, 1967); and Cary J. Nederman, 'Bracton on Kingship First Visited: The Idea of Sovereignty and Bractonian Political Thought in Seventeenth-Century England', Political Science, 40 (1988), pp. 49-66.
49. See J.G.A. Pocock, The Ancient Constitution and the Feudal Law (New York, 1967); and Cary J. Nederman, 'Bracton on Kingship First Visited: The Idea of Sovereignty and Bractonian Political Thought in Seventeenth-Century England', Political Science, 40 (1988), pp. 49-66.
50. A more elaborate discussion of the underlying methodological issues is presented by Conal Condren, 'Ideas and the Model of Political Events: A Problem of Historicity in the History of Ideas', Political Science, 36 (1984), pp. 53-66.
51. Constantin Fasolt, Council and Hierarchy: The Political Thought of William Durant the Younger (Cambridge, 1991), p. 317.
52. Ibid., pp. 316-17.
53. Ibid., p. 318 and note 3.
54. Ibid., pp. 318-19.
55. Ibid., p. 318; for a similar point, see Black, 'Political Languages in Later Medieval Europe', p. 314.
56. Ibid., p. 318; for a similar point, see Black, 'Political Languages in Later Medieval Europe', p. 314.
57. Nederman, 'Conciliarism and Constitutionalism', pp. 193-5.
58. The Letters of John of Salisbury, Volume One, The Early Years (1153-1161), ed. W.J. Millor, H.E. Butler and C.N.L. Brooke (Edinburgh, 1955), Letter #111, pp. 181-2: 'Mutuis auxiliis constant omnia, et gravia vicissim levibus temperantur, et profecto ea sic universa procedunt, quod tantam dissidentium concordiam et concordium dissidentiam idem unanimitatis "spiritus inus alit" et, ut sibi invicem vicario quodam ministerio consonent, mundani corporis partes velut membra disponit. Sic sic in humano corpore sibi invicem membra deserviunt et singulorum officia publicis usibus deputantur. Absent quidem haec magis illa minus pro mole corporis, sed in effectu salutis eius omnia uniuntur; varios habent effectus, sed si usum salutis penses, in idem universa concurrunt. Non tarnen omnia coaequantur, sed superioribus inferiora deserviunt. Pes enim qui versatur in coeno nequaquam aspirant ad captis dignitatem; sed et caput in caelum erigitur non aspernatur pedem quo inversatur in coeno.'
59. Bernard Sylvester, Cosmographia, ed. P. Dronke (Leiden, 1978).
60. John of Salisbury, Policraticus, ed. C.C.J. Webb (Oxford, 1909), Books 5 and 6.
61. For a more thorough examination of the themes discussed in this paragraph, see Cary J. Nederman, 'The Physiological Significance of the Organic Metaphor in John of Salisbury's Policraticus', History of Political Thought, 8 (1987), pp. 211-23; and Nederman, 'Freedom, Community and Function', pp. 978-83.
62. For a more thorough examination of the themes discussed in this paragraph, see Cary J. Nederman, 'The Physiological Significance of the Organic Metaphor in John of Salisbury's Policraticus', History of Political Thought, 8 (1987), pp. 211-23; and Nederman, 'Freedom, Community and Function', pp. 978-83.
63. The best general introduction to the subject is Tilman Struve, Die Entwicklung der Organologischen Staatsauffassung im Mittelalter (Stuttgart, 1978).
64. As is documented by Jacques Le Goff, 'Head or Heart? The Political Use of Body Metaphors in the Middle Ages', in Fragments for a History of the Human Body, Vol. 3, ed. M. Feher, R. Naddaff and N. Tazi (New York, 1989), pp. 3-26.
65. Oakley, 'Figgis, Constance, and the Divines of Paris', p. 380; cf. Oakley, The Political Thought of Pierre d'Ailly, pp. 55-61; and Oakley, 'Natural Law, the Corpus Mysticum, and Consent', pp. 800-1. Oakley ascribes the discovery of this development to Henri de Lubac, but Figgis had made essentially the same observation in Studies of Political Thought from Gerson to Grotius, pp. 48-9.
66. Oakley, 'Figgis, Constance, and the Divines of Paris', p. 380; cf. Oakley, The Political Thought of Pierre d'Ailly, pp. 55-61; and Oakley, 'Natural Law, the Corpus Mysticum, and Consent', pp. 800-1. Oakley ascribes the discovery of this development to Henri de Lubac, but Figgis had made essentially the same observation in Studies of Political Thought from Gerson to Grotius, pp. 48-9.
67. Oakley, 'Figgis, Constance, and the Divines of Paris', p. 380; cf. Oakley, The Political Thought of Pierre d'Ailly, pp. 55-61; and Oakley, 'Natural Law, the Corpus Mysticum, and Consent', pp. 800-1. Oakley ascribes the discovery of this development to Henri de Lubac, but Figgis had made essentially the same observation in Studies of Political Thought from Gerson to Grotius, pp. 48-9.
68. Oakley, 'Figgis, Constance, and the Divines of Paris', p. 380; cf. Oakley, The Political Thought of Pierre d'Ailly, pp. 55-61; and Oakley, 'Natural Law, the Corpus Mysticum, and Consent', pp. 800-1. Oakley ascribes the discovery of this development to Henri de Lubac, but Figgis had made essentially the same observation in Studies of Political Thought from Gerson to Grotius, pp. 48-9.
69. Oakley, 'Natural Law, the Corpus Mysticum, and Consent', pp. 802-3.
70. See Oakley, The Political Thought of Pierre d'Ailly, pp. 59-60; John B. Morrall, Gerson and the Great Schism (Manchester, 1960), pp. 64, 82-3 and passim; and Antony Black, Monarchy and Community: Political Ideas in the Later Conciliar Controversy, 1430-1450 (Cambridge, 1970), pp. 13-21.
71. See Oakley, The Political Thought of Pierre d'Ailly, pp. 59-60; John B. Morrall, Gerson and the Great Schism (Manchester, 1960), pp. 64, 82-3 and passim; and Antony Black, Monarchy and Community: Political Ideas in the Later Conciliar Controversy, 1430-1450 (Cambridge, 1970), pp. 13-21.
72. See Oakley, The Political Thought of Pierre d'Ailly, pp. 59-60; John B. Morrall, Gerson and the Great Schism (Manchester, 1960), pp. 64, 82-3 and passim; and Antony Black, Monarchy and Community: Political Ideas in the Later Conciliar Controversy, 1430-1450 (Cambridge, 1970), pp. 13-21.
73. Black, Monarchy and Community, p. 24.
74. Nicholas of Cusa, De concordantia catholica, ed. G. Kallen (3 vols., Hamburg, 1959-68), Book 1, ch. 1, para. 5.
75. Ibid., 1.1.6: 'manifestissimum est omne esse et vivere per concordantium constitui . . . Omnis autem concordantia differentiarum est. Et quanto minor contrarietas in differentiis, tanto fortior concordantia et longior vita'. have relied on the fine translation by Paul E. Sigmund, The Catholic Corcordance (Cambridge, 1991), but have often retranslated passages of Cusa's text.
76. Ibid., 1.1.6: 'manifestissimum est omne esse et vivere per concordantium constitui . . . Omnis autem concordantia differentiarum est. Et quanto minor contrarietas in differentiis, tanto fortior concordantia et longior vita'. have relied on the fine translation by Paul E. Sigmund, The Catholic Corcordance (Cambridge, 1991), but have often retranslated passages of Cusa's text.
77. Cusa, De corcordantia catholica, 1.2.12: 'Dum enim istae admirandae differentes concordantiae totius universi investigantur, quanta ibi miranda naturarum combinatio, quanta orbicularis et influentialis mutua participatio quantusve in hiis ad unum finem ordo invenitur, sapientes cognoscunt. Sufficiat pro prasenti scire pro nostra investigatione, quod, licet omnia creata in esse . . . per concordantiam uniantur naturali et originali principio . . . tamen nostra ecclesia, de qua sermo est, ex rationabilibus spiritibus et hominibus, qui cum Chrsto uniuntur, licet non omnes pariformiter, sed gradatim . . . tantum constituitur.'
78. Ibid., 2.18.156, 2.34.248.
79. Ibid., 2.34.256, 2.34.265.
80. Ibid., 2.34.261: 'nisi in ipso principe ecclesiastico, absque tamen ipso domimo, quo principes eorum dominantur eis, sit coertio aliqua, non polest recte unitas conservari. Oportet enim membra putrida et pedem abscindi et oculum scandalizantem ab ecclesia erui, si corpus ecclesiae sanum debet conservari'.
81. Nederman, 'Freedom, Community and Function', p. 978.
82. Cusa, De concordantia catholica, 2.27.214: 'Membra omnia unius ecclesiae et corporis Christi mystici habent sua singularia officia, in quibus per alia impediri absque ordinis turbatione non possunt.'
83. Ibid., 2.27.213: 'Si ita fit, ut omnis potestas regulis per universalia concilia traditis in suo regimine utatur, necessario optima reformatio sequitur.'
84. Ibid., 2.27.214: 'Quare, si sciverimus, quae cuique membro ex antiquorum regulis conveniunt, videbimus, unde corpus ecclesiae deformatum exsistit. Non enim deformatum foret, nisi excessus et abusus intervenisset. Et quia, dum caput aegrotat, cetera membra dolent, hinc integritas praesidentium salus est subditorum . . . Quare nulla maior difformitas ab aliquo potent exoriri quam ab illo, qui suae magnae potestatis intuitu licere sibi cuncta credens in subditorum iura prorumpit.'
85. James M Blythe, Ideal Government and the Mixed Constitution in the Middle Ages (Princeton, 1992), p. 202. The term was originally applied to Marsiglio of Padua's theory of the legislator.
86. Key parts of the text are reproduced in Black, Monarchy and Community, pp. 162-72.
87. Tierney, Religion, Law, and the Growth of Constitutional Thought, p. 105.
88. Oakley, 'Nederman, Gerson, Conciliar Theory and Constitutionalism', p. 5.