Jacques Almain’s teachings have not all received equally serious attention. His thought on political and ecclesiastical power has been studied extensively, and some attention has been given to his Moralia. Less attention has been given to the more abstract writings, especially the Embammata phisicalia, a discussion of propositions based on the first and third books of Aristotle’s Physics. One thing that should be noted is Almain’s willingness to critique the great names of the past. He can be found occasionally disagreeing with or qualifying the opinions of John Duns Scotus, William of Ockham, and Robert Holcot, even while basing his lectures on the Sentences upon them. Moreover, Almain rejected the teachings of Marsilius of Padua, who had denied the coercive power of the clergy. Almain was eclectic in his use of sources. He drew, among others, upon Thomas Aquinas, especially in his political writings.
Almain embraced, without detailed discussion or definition, the distinction between the absolute and ordained power of God. He used the distinction when discussing the theology of justification. Francis Oakley suggests that Almain leaned toward an “operationalized” understanding of the absolute power, contrasting what is possible by God’s absolute power with what happens ‘‘regularly and by the ordained power.. .excluding a miracle.’’ Almain, following Holcot, thought that God’s foretelling of events was contingent, able to turn out differently; but the believer could merit by trusting God’s pronouncements as received. The present ‘‘dispensation’’ permitted faith to be meritorious through conformity to God’s will, even under such circumstances. This made reward arbitrary - and punishment as well - in Almain’s theology.
Almain’s moral thought was rooted in Aristotelean ethics. He taught that virtue was a mean between extremes. He did, however, limit this to the virtues acquired by human effort, assigning the acquisition of the theological virtues, especially charity, to the spiritual realm, in which they were inspired by the Holy Spirit. The Moralia was popular, going through multiple editions. It was criticized, however, by Juan Luis Vives, who claimed that reading a single page of Seneca or Plutarch would instill a stronger desire to be virtuous than would digesting the whole of Almain’s Moralia.
The political thought of Almain also was rooted in Aristotelean doctrine. It required obedience to duly constituted authority, sacred or secular; but it placed limits on the exercise of power by pope or prince. Law, whether natural or positive, as Almain described it in De paenitentia, derived from a legislator. Human positive law was enacted for the common good, and it could vary with circumstances. Positive law could not abrogate the natural rights of communities, although it could bind the unwilling individual. Thus natural law permitted any community, including a kingdom or the church, to act in its own defense against a bad ruler. Almain’s argument drew parallels between a kingdom acting in self-defense and the church acting through a council against a bad pope. Cajetan was quick to deny this parallelism, arguing that Christ founded the church (but not lay regimes) as a monarchy. Both sides of this controversy survived the original controversialists.
See also: > Conciliarism > Ethics > John Duns Scotus
> John Mair > Marsilius of Padua > Political Philosophy
> Robert Holcot > Thomas of Vio (Cajetan) > Universities and Philosophy > William of Ockham