government, and a transformation of the Roman Court. a return to the past," he wrote,

99 66

"is an impossibility in history. The Middle Ages are left behind once for all .."; and again,

66

The

necessity of a complete renovation of the Church is already dawning on the vision of all who think without prejudice. ..." Within twenty years the Roman Church replied by enacting the Constitution Pastor Eternus, and, pursuing the madness of her course, excommunicated men like Döllinger and Tyrrell.

The doctrines of Marsilius and Aquinas came to a supreme issue in the conciliar struggle. The Great Schism, characterized by the conflicting claims of several different Popes, extended from 1378 to 1417. Pope Gregory XI terminated the residence of the French Popes at Avignon and again made Rome the seat of the Papal Court. He died there in 1378. The question of the nationality of the Pope became one of importance. An Italian meant Rome; a Frenchman meant Avignon. This caused divisions in the College of Cardinals, and precipitated the Great Schism when the claims of two to three Popes divided the allegiance of Christendom. The scandal became so great, and the paralysis of authority in the Church so complete, through the conflict of the claimants and their vigorous exchange of excommunications, that the Church itself in the interest of self-preservation had to act. Quite in derogation of Papal theory that the Pope alone could act, a group of Cardinals took command and issued an Encyclical Letter calling the Church to a General Council at Pisa in 1409. The Council met and deposed the two existing claimants

to the Papacy for schism, heresy, perjury, and the scandalizing of the Church. It declared the Holy See vacant and elected Alexander V as Pope, making three claimants to the Papal throne. The authority of the Council of Pisa is disputed by Roman Catholic authority because it was not summoned by the Pope; nevertheless it is used in Roman Catholic argument as a stepping-stone in legalism to the validity of the succeeding General Council of Constance (1414). That Council disposed in various ways of the various claimants to the Papacy, not without much protest on their part, and terminated in the election of Martin V as the sole and legitimate Pope.49 At its close in 1418 it had asserted the subordination of the Pope to a General Council of the Church by the enactment of the famous Five Articles of Constance, to which Roman Catholic authority gives this condensed expression:

66 .. the council, legitimately called in the Holy Spirit, is a general council, represents the whole Church Militant, has its authority directly from God; and that in all that pertains to faith, the extinction of the schism and reformation in head and members, every Christian, even the pope, is bound to obey it; that in case of refusal to obey the council all recalcitrant Christians (even the pope) are subject to ecclesiastical punishment and in case of necessity to other (civil) sanctions; that without the consent of the Council Pope John cannot call away from Constance the Roman Curia and its officials, whose absence might compel the closing of the council or hinder its work; that all censures inflicted

49 See C. E., vol. xiii, pp. 539-541; vol. xii, pp. 112-114; vol. iv, pp. 288-293.

since his departure by the pope on members and supporters of the council are void, and that Pope John and the members of the Council have hitherto enjoyed full liberty."

99 50

The legality of the election of Martin V as Pope, and the continuity of the Papal office, depended on holding that the Council of Constance was a legal and authoritative body. On the other hand, if it was held to be such, Papal absolutism was in danger because by the terms of the Five Articles the Church, acting in its representative Council, would be supreme over the Pope and government by the consent of the governed would be sanctioned. The result was that in Papal doctrine the sessions of the Council covering the proceedings which appertained to the election of Pope Martin V were legal and authoritative; on the other hand, the sessions covering the proceedings that recognized government by the consent of the governed were held illegal and unauthoritative; that is to say, the Council was Ecumenical in so far as it supported the absolutism of the Pope and not Ecumenical in so far as it declared for government by the consent of the governed. Pope Martin V confirmed that part of the proceedings that related to his election, but refrained from confirming that part which pronounced in favor of government by consent of the governed.51

The effort of the Church in its own General Council to assert its supremacy over the Pope, and to secure some recognition that government in the Church de

50 Ibid., p. 289 a.

51 C. E., vol. iv, p. 291 b, c. See Woywod, vol. i, pp. 86-87 (Canons 222-229); vol. ii, p. 199 (Canon 1556).

rives its just powers from the consent of the governed, was thus wholly nullified, and the Papacy took another step toward the decrees of the Vatican Council of 1870.

Absolutism is the negation of that law of States that has immutability except as it changes constitutionally by the consent of the governed. That such law is unknown in the Roman Church its authorities admit. The reason for it is clear: its law is not derived from the consent of the governed nor administered with any right of appeal to them. We would now ask: whence is it derived and what is its nature? This brings us to the vast and erudite subject of the Canon Law-the Corpus juris canonici,52 of which only the initiated can speak, and to them we must entirely defer.

We refer to the statements of the Catholic Encyclopedia:

"Canon law is the body of laws and regulations made by or adopted by ecclesiastical authority, for the government of the Christian organization and its members." 53

"Canon law may be divided into . . . Divine law based on the nature of things and on the constitution given by Jesus Christ to His Church; and human

52 By the Bull Providentissima Mater Ecclesia Pope Benedict XV in 1918 promulgated the "Code of the Canon Law," a compilation intended as a step toward reducing to human comprehension the vast Corpus juris canonici of the ages. In considering that law it is necessary in strict accuracy to refer to the Code with a view to ascertaining whether any change has been made. The foundations of Papal power involved in our discussion would seem to be quite unmodified by the Code, which by Canons 5 and 6 makes express repeal of the existing law, or obvious conflict between it and the new Code, necessary to its nullification. See Woywod, vol. i, pp. 3–4.

53 C. E., vol. ix, p. 56 d.

or positive law, formulated by the legislator, in conformity with the Divine law." 54

"This Christian Divine law . . . is found in the Gospels, in the Apostolic writings, in the living Tradition, which transmits laws as well as dogmas. On this positive Divine law depend the essential principles of the Church's constitution . . ."955

66

The Divine law "based on the nature of things,” is the "natural law," and this is later defined as the rule of conduct which is prescribed to us by the Creator in the constitution of the nature with which He has endowed us." 56 Such law is obviously a matter of human inference and reason, on which opinion will differ unless bound to unanimity in the decision of some ultimate authority. It is without volume or page; it inheres in the consciousness of man. The Roman Catholic in the ultimate determination of the law accepts the conclusion of the Pope.57

"The Divine law based . . . on the constitution given by Jesus Christ to His Church" has at least verbal expression. It is the positive Divine law contained in the Gospels, in the Apostolic writings and in the living Tradition, and "on this positive Divine law depend the essential principles of the Church's constitution." While those "essential principles" may be contained in the sources alluded to, there is and always has been a wide and emphatic difference of opinion throughout the Christian world as to what those principles are. It is