Context
The second phase ofGiles’ political thought developed as he became enmeshed in the controversies that marked the pontificate of Boniface VIII (r. 1294-1303), the man responsible for his promotion to the archbishopric of Bourges. Giles’ initial exploration of the nature of the papal office came in his On the Abdication of the Pope where he set out to defend Boniface against the claims of the Colonna cardinals that he had unjustly usurped the position of his predecessor, Celestine V. Giles sought to establish both the legitimacy of papal resignation and also that the nature of the papal office, whose incumbent was responsible to God alone, meant that a pope could not be removed except of his own free will (Eastman 1990). John of Paris later adapted and reinterpreted elements of this work in his On Royal and Papal Power (Depotestate regia et papali). In the opening years of the fourteenth century Giles was led to develop his concept of the papal office more fully and to incorporate it into a much broader study of the relationship between spiritual and temporal power in the treatise On Ecclesiastical Power (De ecclesiastica potestate).
Although Giles’ authorship of On Ecclesiastical Power was questioned in the early-twentieth century, it has been since established convincingly (Kuiters 1958). The precise date of the treatise is unknown but it was certainly written before November 1302 and probably composed either in the first half of that year or in the latter part of 1301. It is generally accepted that the work was produced as a defense of papal authority in the wake of the conflict that arose between Philip IV and Boniface VIII after Philip’s officers arrested the bishop of Pamiers in July 1301. While Giles’ assertion that he was writing because of the hostility of much of the laity toward the church’s exercise of authority in temporal matters (1.1) tends to support this, one alternative theory suggests that the treatise was part of a broader papal response to Thomist-Aristotelian trends that were considered threatening to the traditional cosmology (Ullmann 1976).
Structure
On Ecclesiastical Power is formally divided into three parts. It is loosely organized and includes a great deal of repetition, features that suggest the work may have been composed in haste (Dyson 2003). Nominally, the first part concerns the relationship between the temporal and the ecclesiastical powers and the second the relationship between the ecclesiastical power and property. The first three chapters of the latter may have originated as a separate treatise in defense of the right of the church to own property against the extreme claims of the Spiritual Franciscans (Dyson 2003). In the third part Giles foresees and seeks to address possible objections to parts one and two based, primarily, on the decretals of Popes Alexander III and Innocent III.
Key Concepts
The second phase of Giles’ political thought is marked by three key ideas, which when combined offer the ultimate hierocratic theory embodying the most extensive claims on behalf of papal authority to emerge in the Middle Ages. Firstly, Giles argues that the exercise of temporal authority is only legitimate when it is sanctioned by the ecclesiastical power and, indeed, such authority is ultimately derived from the church. The temporal and spiritual powers remain separate - there remain, in Bernard of Clairvaux’s terms, two swords as Giles is keen to emphasize (1.7-9; 2.13-15) - but the temporal is completely subordinate to the spiritual power, just as the body is, of right, subordinate to the soul (1.7). Secondly, it is not only possible for the church to own property but legitimate ownership of all property, even lay property, is ultimately dependent upon the church. The man who inherits property from his father possesses it only imperfectly; to possess it justly his possession must be perfected by the church via baptism and penance (2.7). Finally, all the power that exists in the church is vested in the person of the pope as Peter’s successor.
The pope possesses a fullness of power (plenitudo potestatis) that effectively makes him the spiritual equivalent of the regal king described in On the Rule of Princes. In common with that king, the pope is unshackled by the requirement that he obey the law but, again in common with his portrait of the ideal secular ruler, Giles does not expect the pope to exercise his power in an arbitrary manner. While God possesses the power to suspend the rules governing the natural operation of the Universe, He chooses to do so only in exceptional circumstances. Giles contends that the pope should act similarly with regard to temporal affairs. The pope, while possessing a ‘‘superior and primary’’ lordship (dominium), will normally impose a bridle and halter on himself and refrain from its exercise (3.7). He will only suspend the ‘‘immediate and executory’’ power of the temporal ruler in exceptional cases. While in theory such cases may encompass virtually anything (3.5-8), Giles believes it is those which threaten peace that should be the pope’s particular concern (2.10).
While Giles is not concerned with relations between temporal powers in either phase of his political thought, he does express a clear preference for the ultimate subordination of all temporal power to that of the Roman emperor in On Ecclesiastical Power (2.13). At the same time, somewhat paradoxically, the treatise does, at certain points, appear to accept the existence of multiple independent temporal rulers as of right (e. g. 1.5).
Foundations
Giles’ theory of the relationship between ecclesiastical and temporal power is rooted in his acceptance of a thoroughly Augustinian analysis of man, one that implicitly rejects Aristotelian arguments in favor of the naturalness of political organization and property. Lordship for Giles, either over people or over property, is essentially unnatural to man and a consequence of the Fall. In order for either rulership or property to be legitimized man must be reconciled to God and such reconciliation is only possible through grace administered via the church. The total subordination of the temporal to the spiritual is reinforced by Giles’ view that, following principles drawn from Aristotle’s natural philosophy, in a properly ordered universe inferiors must be subject to superiors. The order, hierarchy, and relationships that underpin Giles’ model are reminiscent of the feudal structures of contemporary society (Dyson 2003).
The arguments of On Ecclesiastical Power are drawn primarily from scriptural sources and the Fathers. Giles is particularly keen to find historical precedents in Scripture that support the preeminence of the spiritual power both in terms of dignity and in terms of precedence. He relies heavily on Aristotelian reasoning to argue his case, but few of the points he makes could be considered novel. The argument that the spiritual precedes the temporal in time and dignity, for example, is drawn from Hugh of Saint-Victor, while his case for the subordination of the temporal to the spiritual originates in Bernard of Clairvaux and
G
His argument in favor of the pope as the pinnacle of society is ultimately derived from the canonists. Giles’ theory of property is rooted in Augustinian thought (Dyson 2003), although it is possible that this, and his broader conception of papal power, have more specific origins in ideas developed by John Pecham (Coleman 1987). While Giles is not entirely in agreement with his sources - he departs, for example, from the position of both Pope Innocent IV and Aquinas when he declares that infidels can never legitimately own property (Mcllwain 1932) - the novelty of Giles’ position is founded primarily upon his ability to synthesize a consistent theory of ecclesiastical and papal power from his sources.
Influence
Giles’ claim that his work was intended for the education of all Christian people (2.12) is reminiscent of the approach he adopted in On the Rule of Princes. The treatise’s style and complexity, however, appear to have resulted in a much more restricted audience and only six manuscripts remain extant from the period before 1500. The treatise provided a source for those who drafted the papal bull Unam sanctam (November 18, 1302) (Riviere 1926). It was also employed in future defenses of papal power written by the Augustinian Hermits James of Viterbo anD Augustinus Triumphus and the Franciscan Alvarus Pelagius, although James, Giles’ former student, deviateD from his master’s position on several points (Boase 1933; Dyson 2003).
World History
