A Gift Half Understood: Rediscovering an Incarnational View of Political Authority

Augustine's ‘Sacred Reign‐Secular Rule’ Conception of the State; a Bridge from the West's' Foundational Roots to its Post‐Secular Destiny, and between ‘the West’ and ‘the Rest’

“…(As we shall see in the concluding section, Habermas takes a similar view.) Alexander D'entreves contrasts the way in which Aquinas endeavored to reconcile the realms of nature and grace with the way in which Marsilius draws between them 'a clear-cut and impassable line of demarcation' 20 and David Henreckson is likewise convinced that Marsilius advanced 'the most pronounced argument for the divorce between politics and the supernatural', that he 'developed a concept of political authority which explicitly rejected any connection to the supernatural realm of grace', 21 that 'the priest should help his flock toward eternal salvation and not confuse them by meddling in earthly affairs' and that he embraced the voluntarism of his contemporary William of Ockham in claiming that 'will' is the essence of law. 22 In contrast, however, and in broad terms, I would suggest that what D'entreves and Henreckson have to say concerning Marsilius's understanding of the relation between nature and grace (the secular and the sacred) is 'formally true but substantively false'.…”

“…I suggest that we should characterize Marsilius's theory of political authority as 'radically formalized' rather than as, to use Henreckson's expression 'radically naturalized'. 25 We may even say that Marsilius would not take exception to the 'essentially Platonic view of authority' as hierarchically descending from above, 26 even when pressed as far as the hierocratic monism of the papalists, on the important proviso that political authority be understood as 'the sacred inchoately descending', as 'would be' spiritual substance in quest of a definiteness that only the civil law of the sovereign can provide, as God's reign and general intent being transmuted by the secular authority -and only by the secular authority, thereby sweeping aside papalist sacerdotalism -into Godly civil rule. The 'will' that Marsilius regarded as essential to law was discretionary rather than arbitrary, oriented to and subject to the guidance of the 'authority of truth' (hence genuinely authoritative), rather than 'authoritative' in its own right (hence, for St. Augustine, St. Bernard and Marsilius, not authoritative at all or falsely authoritative); hence it has nothing in common with the view that the highest standard of justice in a commonwealth is the will and convenience of the ruling power.…”

Augustine's ‘Sacred Reign‐Secular Rule’ Conception of the State; a Bridge from the West's' Foundational Roots to its Post‐Secular Destiny, and between ‘the West’ and ‘the Rest’

“…Likewise, during the era of the Gregorian reforms in the late 11 th century, the key papalist claim that 'spiritual rule' must have primacy over or be acknowledged as higher than 'secular rule' would -viewed in terms of this conception -be acceptable if by 'spiritual rule' was meant 'sacred reign' or 'spiritual reign', for king and bishop are both subject in their respective realms to this 'reign from above' and both need to be informed, guided and enriched by the eternal font of righteousness. Alexander D'entreves contrasts the way in which Aquinas endeavored to reconcile the realms of nature and grace with the way in which Marsilius draws between them 'a clear-cut and impassable line of demarcation' 20 and David Henreckson is likewise convinced that Marsilius advanced 'the most pronounced argument for the divorce between politics and the supernatural', that he 'developed a concept of political authority which explicitly rejected any connection to the supernatural realm of grace', 21 that 'the priest should help his flock toward eternal salvation and not confuse them by meddling in earthly affairs' and that he embraced the voluntarism of his contemporary William of Ockham in claiming that 'will' is the essence of law. Secular rule, then, is in a special sense spiritual/sacred; as the ruling instrument (and relatively autonomous 'means') of the divine reign, it is intrinsically spiritual/sacred, or at least intrinsically oriented to the spiritual/sacred, so that to regard 'spiritual rule' and 'secular rule' as separate and distinct and in such a way that one might be deemed to be higher or lower than the other, is to separate the inseparable.…”

“…25 We may even say that Marsilius would not take exception to the 'essentially Platonic view of authority' as hierarchically descending from above, 26 even when pressed as far as the hierocratic monism of the papalists, on the important proviso that political authority be understood as 'the sacred inchoately descending', as 'would be' spiritual substance in quest of a definiteness that only the civil law of the sovereign can provide, as God's reign and general intent being transmuted by the secular authority -and only by the secular authority, thereby sweeping aside papalist sacerdotalism -into Godly civil rule. 25 We may even say that Marsilius would not take exception to the 'essentially Platonic view of authority' as hierarchically descending from above, 26 even when pressed as far as the hierocratic monism of the papalists, on the important proviso that political authority be understood as 'the sacred inchoately descending', as 'would be' spiritual substance in quest of a definiteness that only the civil law of the sovereign can provide, as God's reign and general intent being transmuted by the secular authority -and only by the secular authority, thereby sweeping aside papalist sacerdotalism -into Godly civil rule.…”