danger without or sedition within, those who amass wealth, and those who execute the office of religion and administer justice, – one, that of the priesthood (which, Marsiglio admits, has not been universally considered necessary to the existence of the state), presents special difficulties. For whereas the peculiar province of the clergy is to instruct the people according to the teaching of the Gospel with a view to their eternal welfare, – for which purpose it is well that they should arm themselves with all possible knowledge, as well in the departments of thought as of action, – they have so far abandoned this exclusively spiritual function as to usurp all manner of temporal claims over secular as well as spiritual persons, and in particular over the Roman emperor: and these pretensions of the papacy, Marsiglio holds, are the chief causes of discord in the world. Accordingly in his second book our author addressed himself to the examination of the real nature of the spiritual office, and of its relation to the civil state.
The name church Marsiglio would recall to its first and apostolical, its truest and most proper signification, as comprehending the entire body of Christian men: all, he says, are alike churchmen, viri ecdesiastici, be they laymen or clerks. It is intolerable that its prerogatives should be usurped by the sacerdotal order. Excommunication, for instance, cannot rightly be decreed by any single priest or any council of priests: they should doubtless be consulted as experts with reference to the charges alleged, but the actual decision belongs to the congregation in which the offender lives, or to its superior, or to a general council.[1] While moreover
- ↑ I have translated the last two alternatives as they stand in Marsiglio's text, although they have rather the appearance of being saving clauses not very naturally connected with the argument. 'Its superior,' which Dr. Riezler, p. 211, renders by 'repräsentant,' would seem to be the emperor; 'exilium generale' in Goldast is a mere misprint for 'concilium.' The passage occurs in Goldast 2. 207 and belongs to the seventh chapter of book ii, which in the edition has been accidentally united with chapter 6.
