Right and Nature in the First and Second Scholasticism. Derecho y Naturaleza en la primera y segunda escolástica

494 Pages·2014·2.04 MB·English

by  Roberto Hofmeister Pich

Société Internationale pour l’Étude de la Philosophie Médiévale
— Rencontres de Philosophie Médiévale, 16 —
General Editor: Kent EMERY, Jr. (University of Notre Dame)

RIGHT AND NATURE IN THE FIRST
AND SECOND SCHOLASTICISM
Derecho y Naturaleza en la primera
y segunda escolástica

Acts of the XVIIth Annual Colloquium of the Société
Internationale pour l’Étude de la Philosophie Médiévale
Porto Alegre, Brazil, 15-18 September 2010

edited by

ALFREDO SANTIAGO CULLETON
and ROBERTO HOFMEISTER PICH

F
2014
The XVIIth Annual Colloquium of the SIEPM was sponsored and funded by
the Universidade do Vale do Rio dos Sinos (UNISINOS), Banrisul,
FAPERGS, Capes, Editora Unisinos, Faculdade IDC.

All of the essays published in this volume have been reviewed by members
of the Bureau of the SIEPM.

© 2014, Brepols Publishers n.v., Turnhout, Belgium.
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced stored in a
retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic,
mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior
permission of the publisher.
D/2014/0095/227
ISBN 978-2-503-55458-7
Printed on acid-free paper
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acknowledgements ..................................................................................vii
Roberto Hofmeister PICH, An Index of ‘Second Scholastic’ Authors ....... ix
Ludger HONNEFELDER, Natural Law as the Principle of Practical
Reason: Thomas Aquinas’ Legacy in the Second Scholasticism ............... 1
Pedro ROCHE ARNAS, El anónimo Quaestio in utramque partem so-
bre la autonomía del poder real in temporalibus ...................................... 13
Alessandro GHISALBERTI, Legge naturale e fondazione dell’etica in
Guglielmo di Ockham .............................................................................. 39
José Luis FUERTES HERREROS, El discurso de los saberes en la se-
gunda escolástica ...................................................................................... 55
Marco TOSTE, Unjust Laws and Moral Obligation in Sixteenth-
Century Salamancan Commentaries on Thomas Aquinas’ De legibus .... 93
Ángel PONCELA GONZÁLEZ, Filosofía del derecho en sentido prag-
mático: Francisco de Vitoria y la escuela de Salamanca ........................ 125
Paula OLIVEIRA E SILVA, The Sixteenth-Century Debate on the
Thomistic Notion of the Law of Nations in Some Iberian Commen-
taries on the Summa theologiae IIaIIae q.57 a.3: Contradiction or
Paradigm Shift? ...................................................................................... 157
António MARTINS, Natural Law and the Law of Nations: A Case
Study ....................................................................................................... 187
Giuseppe TOSI, Sins Against Nature as Reasons For a ‘Just War’:
Sepúlveda, Vitoria and Las Casas .......................................................... 199
Jörg Alejandro TELLKAMP, Francisco de Vitoria and Luis de Molina
on the Origin of Political Power ............................................................. 231
Roberto Hofmeister PICH, Revisiting the Topic of the ‘Law of War’:
The Comments on Thomas Aquinas’ Summa theologiae IIaIIae q.40
aa.1-4 by Fernando Perez (16th Century) ............................................... 249
Laura CORSO DE ESTRADA, Tesis helenísticas en exégesis escolásti-
cas: “Conformidad con la naturaleza” según Alberto Magno, Tomás
de Aquino y Domingo de Soto ............................................................... 271
Manuel LÁZARO PULIDO, La ley natural en Alfonso de Castro, OFM .. 285
Alfredo Santiago CULLETON, Mutability and Immutability of the ius
gentium according to Suárez................................................................... 301
Francisco BERTELLONI, Francisco Suárez, crítico del monismo de
Marsilio de Padua ................................................................................... 319
v i
Giannina BURLANDO, Defensas históricas del poder político: F. Suá-
rez y J. Locke teóricos de la moralidad por el acuerdo .......................... 339
Luis Alberto DE BONI, Grotius and Scholasticism ................................. 351
Alfredo STORCK, Molina in a Spanish Treatise against Machiavelli ..... 389
Celina A. LÉRTORA MENDOZA, El tratado De iure y sus migraciones
sistemáticas en la escolástica (siglos XIII a XX).................................... 403
Marco FORLIVESI, Filippo Fabri (1564-1630) on the Nature of Meta-
physics: A Paduan Scotistic-Aristotelian Counter-Attack on Rival
Doctrinal Traditions ................................................................................ 423
Jorge J.E. GRACIA y Daniel D. NOVOTNÝ, Trascendentales y catego-
rías en la metafísica de Suárez ................................................................ 449
Index of Manuscripts .............................................................................. 459
Index of Ancient and Medieval Names .................................................. 461
Index of ‘Second Scholastic’ Authors .................................................... 465
Index of Modern and Contemporary Authors ........................................ 469
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The articles collected here were originally delivered at the XVIIth Annual
Colloquium of the SIEPM (Porto Alegre, 15-18 September 2010). We want
to thank in the first place the Bureau of the Société Internationale pour
l’Étude de la Philosophie Médiévale for trusting and encouraging us to or-
ganize the Annual Colloquium in Porto Alegre, Brazil. It was the first time
in the history of the Société that this event occurred in the Southern Hemi-
sphere. We wish to express our gratitude to the SIEPM as well for provid-
ing several stipends enabling young scholars to attend the meeting. We also
thank the Brazilian agencies Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal
de Nível Superior (CAPES) and Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Rio
Grande do Sul (FAPERGS), the Banco do Estado do Rio Grande do Sul
(BANRISUL) and the Universidade do Vale do Rio dos Sinos
(UNISINOS), a Jesuit university in the South of Brazil, for their financial
support of the event, without which it would not have been possible.
Thanks are also due to Professor Luis Alberto De Boni for sharing his ex-
pertise and experience with the organizers of the Colloquium, and to
Grêmio Foot-Ball Porto Alegrense for kindly offering lounges for partici-
pants of the meeting and members of the Bureau of the SIEPM, in a short
break from the work of the Colloquium, to watch the match between
Grêmio and Palmeiras on 15 September 2010 at the Olímpico Stadium, in a
short time of leisure. Finally, we thank Adriano Naves de Brito and Fr.
Marcelo Fernandes de Aquino, SJ for diverse and fundamental support dur-
ing various moments of the event. To all of them we express our most sin-
cere gratitude. Finally, we thank the General Editor of the series « Rencon-
tres de philosophie médiévale », Professor Kent Emery, Jr., his former as-
sistant, Dr. Stephen M. Metzger, and his current assistant, Dr. Joshua M.
Robinson, for preparing this volume for the press.
Alfredo S. CULLETON (São Leopoldo)
and Roberto H. PICH (Porto Alegre)

AN INDEX OF ‘SECOND SCHOLASTIC’ AUTHORS
F
or this volume in the series « Rencontres de philosophie médiévale » it
is appropriate to establish a separate Index of ‘Second Scholastic’ Au-
thors. The index in this volume, in turn, may serve as a model for the same
index in future volumes of the Publications of the SIEPM that are devoted
to the study of ‘Second Scholasticism’. To establish such an index, it is
necessary to define the term ‘Second Scholasticism’ and to specify the cri-
teria for inclusion and exclusion in the Index.
What we call ‘Second Scholasticism’ in the specialized scholarly litera-
ture is sometimes called ‘late Scholasticism’, ‘post-Medieval Scholasti-
cism’, ‘early-modern Scholasticism’ or ‘Baroque Scholasticism’.1 I consid-
er these terms to be equivalent with the term ‘Second Scholasticism’, with
this exception: the term ‘Second Scholasticism’ makes clear that early-
modern Scholasticism follows upon, and is continuous with, a ‘First Scho-
lasticism’, namely the Scholastic philosophy and theology of the Middle
Ages (thirteenth through fifteenth centuries).
Chronologically the ‘Second Scholasticism’ began at the dawn of the
sixteenth century with the practice of commenting on Thomas Aquinas’
Summa theologiae instead of Peter Lombard’s Liber Sententiarum as the
standard textbook in theology. From this perspective, one may justly con-

1 So, for example, J.A. TRENTMAN, “Scholasticism in the Seventeenth Century”, in The
Cambridge History of Later Medieval Philosophy. From the Rediscovery of Aristotle to the
Disintegration of Scholasticism 1100-1600, ed. N. KRETZMANN, A. KENNY and J. PINBORG,
Cambridge 1982, 822-28, refers to the Catholic Scholasticism of the sixteenth and seven-
teenth centuries as “late scholasticism” or “post-medieval scholasticism”; U.G. LEINSLE,
Introduction to Scholastic Theology, Washington, D.C. 2010, speaks of a “scholasticism in
the early modern period.” However, I do not use the term ‘Second Scholasticism’ to refer to
specific trends in Protestant theology and philosophy (see, n. 10, below). One could say that
‘Protestant Scholasticism’ is a form of ‘early-modern Scholasticism’, but it surely should
not be called a ‘Second Scholasticism’ for it certainly is not based on the teaching of medie-
val Catholic doctors. In this respect I disagree with LEINSLE, Introduction to Scholastic Phi-
losophy, 277: “‘Baroque Scholasticism’ or the ‘Second Scholasticism’ is the name usually
applied to the period of Catholic (and in a qualified sense Protestant) theology and philoso-
phy between humanism and the Reformation on the one hand and the Enlightenment on the
other. This ‘second’ Scholasticism developed, however, out of the ‘first’ of the late Middle
Ages. Thus, the altercations between nominalists and realists in Paris prompted Petrus
Crockaert, OP (†1514) and his student Francisco de Vitoria (1483/93-1546) to put Thomism
on a new foundation, an endeavor that we have already encountered in Cajetan. In its meth-
od and manner of framing questions, the Scholasticism of the early modern period neverthe-
less adopted critically the issues and solutions of its time.”
Right and Nature in the First and Second Scholasticism (Rencontres de philosophie médiévale 16),

Turnhout 2014, pp. ix-xvii. DOI: 10.1484/M.RPM-EB.5.103142 © 2014, Brepols Publishers, n.v. All rights reserved.
x Roberto Hofmeister Pich
sider Thomas de Vio (Cardinalis) Caietanus, OP (1469-1534), to be the first
‘Second Scholastic’ thinker and author in the full meaning of the term, for
besides writing commentaries on Aristotle’s works and on Thomas Aqui-
nas’ De ente et essentia in 1495,2 he wrote a complete commentary on
Thomas’ Summa theologiae, establishing that work as the starting point and
fundamental guide in Catholic theology. Cajetan concluded his commen-
tary on the Summa Ia in 1507,3 on the Summa IaIIae in 1511, on the Summa
IIaIIae in 1516, and finally his commentary on the Summa IIIa in 1522.4

2 THOMAS DE VIO CAIETANUS, OP, In De ente et essentia D. Thomae Aquinatis Commen-
taria, cura et studio M.-H. LAURENT, Torino 1934; see also M-H. LAURENT, “Editoris Prae-
fatio”, in THOMAS DE VIO CAIETANUS, OP, In De ente et essentia D. Thomae Aquinatis
Commentaria, cura et studio IDEM, XI-XIII; see L.H. KENDZIERSKI and F.C. WADE, “Transla-
tors’ Introduction”, in Cajetan, Commentary on Being and Essence (In De Ente et Essentia
d. Thomae Aquinatis), trans. L H. KENDZIERSKI and F.C. WADE (Mediaeval Philosophical
Texts in Translation 14), Milwaukee 1964, 1-3.
3 This was when Cajetan was still teaching in Rome. In 1508 he became the Master Gen-
eral of the Dominican Order; see W.A. HERR, Catholic Thinkers in the Clear: Giants of
Catholic Thought from Augustine to Rahner (Basics of Christian Thought 2), Chicago 1985,
154-55.
4 See the words of B. HALLENSLEBEN, “Cajetan, Thomas”, in Lexikon für Theologie und
Kirche 2, Freiburg i.Br.-Basel-Roma-Wien 1994, 884: “In Methode und Inhalt prägte er
[i.e., Thomas Cajetan] die Thomas-Rezeption und trug wesentlich dazu bei, dass die Summa
theologiae als theologisches Unterrichtswerk die Sentenzen des Petrus Lombardus ablöste.”
See also E. ISERLOH und B. HALLENSLEBEN, “Cajetan de Vio, Jakob (1469-1534)”, Theolo-
gische Realenzyklopädie 7, hrsg. v. G. KRAUSE und G. MÜLLER, Berlin-New York 1981,
538-46, esp. 538-39; also LEINSLE, Introduction to Scholastic Theology, 272-76. In fact one
should recall that the Italian Dominican Francis Sylvester de Ferrara (ca. 1474-1528) com-
mented in 1516 on the Summa contra gentiles, but this work never became a major text for
theological education based on the teachings of Thomas Aquinas; see, for example, H. LAIS,
Die Gnadenlehre des heiligen Thomas in der Summa Contra Gentiles und der Kommentar
des Franziskus Sylvestris von Ferrara, München 1951, 7-10. Some scholars argue, however,
that the German Konrad Köllin, OP (1476-1536), who before 1510 at the University of Hei-
delberg began to write a line-by-line commentary on the Prima secundae of Thomas’ Sum-
ma, which was published in Cologne in 1512 under the title Expositio commentaria prima,
subtilissima, simul ac lucidissima cunctisque theologicae facultiatis secundum quamcumque
opinionem studiosis, maxime necessaria, in Primam Secundae Angelici Doctoris Sancti
Thomas Aquinatis, should be considered the first ‘Second Scholastic’ thinker. Köllin’s
commentary depends heavily on the Defensiones theologiae Divi Thomae Aquinatis by Io-
annes Capreolus, OP. For this reason, some scholars judge that his thought lacked originali-
ty, and therefore cannot be considered the source of a new movement; see E. MEUTHEN,
“Köllin, Konrad OP”, in Lexikon für Theologie und Kirche 6, Freiburg i.Br.-Basel-Roma-
Wien 1997, 184. Another candidate for the first ‘Second Scholastic’ thinker is the Belgian
Pieter Crockaert, OP (ca. 1465-1514), who was the master of Francisco de Vitoria, OP, at
the Univertsity of Paris, and who adopted for his university courses in the first decade of the
sixteenth century (apparently beginning 1509) the Summa theologiae in place of the Liber