23 April 2024: We are investigating problems with ecommerce on Cambridge Core. We apologise for any inconvenience and hope to have full functionality restored shortly.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 July 2009
On 11 November 1417 the Great Western Schism ended with the election of one pope accepted by almost all of western Christendom. The thirty-nine terrible years of disunity were over, and the members of the Council of Constance had good reason to rejoice. Among those at Constance who did not live to see this happy day was Cardinal Franciscus Zabarella, who had died in late September and who up to his death had been considered a leading candidate for the papacy. During the council he had indicated in several sermons and addresses how much the unity which they had sought for so long meant to him and his contemporaries. He expressed these ideas and sentiments on the occasions when, little by little, various groups were united with and took their places at the Council at Constance in the years 1415–1416, reintegrating the fragmented western church. These sermons reflected the hopes and dreams of the members of the council.
1. The Avignon pope, Benedict XIII, isolated at Pensicola, refused to accept the verdict of Constance and until his death in 1423 remained convinced that he was the rightful pope; see Salembier, Louis, The Great Schism of the West, trans. by M.D., (London, 1907), pp. 350–356.Google Scholar
2. Holmes, George, The Florentine Enlightenment, 1400–1450 (London, 1969), pp. 61–62,Google Scholar expressed the hopes of the humanist circles for Zabarella's election. Cardinal Fillastre, who worked long and closely with Zabarella, praised him in his diary as a “man of great and singular knowledge” (vir magne et singularis scientie), Heinrich, Finke et al. , eds., Acta concilii Constanciensis, 4 vols. (Münster, 1896–1928), 2:226Google Scholar (henceforth cited as Finke, ACC). The eminent humanist Poggio delivered the official funeral oration at Constance for Zabarella; see Hermann von der, Hardt, ed., Magnum oecumenicum Constantiense concilium, 7 vols. (Frankfort and Leipzig, 1696–1742), 1:9:537–546Google Scholar (henceforth cited as vdHardt). Other eulogies for Zabarella were composed by Pierpaolo Vergerio, Gasparinus Barzizza, and Pietro Donato, and an anonymous eulogy is found in vdHardt, 1:9:546–552. VdHardt records the judgment from the council that Zabarella was deemed most worthy of the papacy: “papatu dignissimus iudicatus,” 4:1:Prologus.
3. For the career and significance of Zabarella, especially in relation to the Council of Constance, see Ullmann, Walter, The Origins of the Great Schism: A Study in Fourteenth-Century Ecclesiastical History (London, 1948),Google Scholar esp. “Appendix: Cardinal Zabarella and His Position in the Conciliar Movement,” pp. 191–231; Tierney, Brian, Foundations of the Conciliar Theory (Cambridge, 1955; 1968), esp. pp. 220–237;Google ScholarMerzbacher, Friedrich, “Die ekklesiologische Konzeption des Kardinals Francesco Zabarella (1360–1417),” in Festschrift Karl Pivec eds. Haidachers, Anton and Mayer, Hans Eberhard, Innsbrucker Beiträge zur Kulturwissenschaft (Innsbruck, 1966), pp. 279–287.Google Scholar I studied Zabarella's career in my Ph.D. dissertation, “Franciscus de Zabarellis (1360–1417) and the Conciliarist Traditions” (Cornell University 1973),Google Scholar and in “Franciscus Zabarella (1360–1417): Papacy, Community, and the Limitations upon Authority,” Reform and Authority in the Medieval and Reformation Church, ed. Guy F. Lytle (Washington, D.C., 1981), pp. 37–54;Google Scholar“Cardinal Zabarella on Papal and Episcopal Authority,” Proceedings of the Patristic, Medieval, and Renaissance Conference 1 (Villanova University, 1976): 39–52;Google Scholar and “The Decree ‘Haec Sancta’ and Cardinal Zabarella: His Role in its Formulation and Interpretation,” Annuarium Historiae Conciliorum 10 (1978): 145–176.Google Scholar There are also older studies by Zonta, Gasparo, Francesco Zabarella, 1360–1417 (Padua, 1915)Google Scholar and Kneer, August, Kardinal Zabarella (Franciscus de Zabarellis, Cardinalis Florentinus, 1360–1417 (Inaugural Dissertation, Münster, 1891).Google Scholar
4. Ullmann, The Origins of the Great Schism, treats the outpouring of conflicting legal opinions (pp. 143–160) and he concentrates on two scholars, Baldus de Ubaldis and Johannes de Lignano; he notes that both were teachers of Zabarella (pp. 145, 148).
5. The French king first accepted Urban VI and then supported his own relative, Cardinal Robert of Geneva, as Clement VII in Avignon. Since England supported Urban VI and his successors, Scotland, in opposition, became staunchly Avignonese. The kingdom of Naples at first sided with its native son Urban but then broke with him to follow his opponent. In the different Italian cities, factions chose sides according to political interests and possible gains. More than once, for example, in the Low Countries, military might rather than religious conviction decided the question of loyalty. An excellent study of the politics of France as they were involved in the stances the French government took during the schism is the recent book by Kaminsky, Howard, Simon de Cramaud and the Great Schism (New Brunswick, N.J., 1983).Google Scholar
6. Sartore, Terenzio, “Un Discorso Inedito di Francesco Zabarella a Bonifacio IX sull' Autorita' del Papa,” Revista di Storia della Chiesa in Italia 20 (1966): 375–388.Google Scholar
7. This tract, De scismate, was printed by Schardius in his De Iurisdictione, auctoritate et praeeminentia imperiali (Basel, 1566), pp. 688–711Google Scholar and as an appendix to Zabarella's commentary on the Gregorian decretals. His commentary was the product of some twenty-five years of teaching, and his tract is in Commentarium seu lectura Domini Francisci de Zabarellis Cardinal is super primo-quinto decretalum (Venice, 1502)Google Scholar, 1.6.6., fol. 117r-120v.
8. The disputes and events of the first part of the council are presented By Lenne, Albert, “Der erste literarische Kampf auf dem Konstanzer Konzil im November und Dezember 1414,” Römische Quartalschrift 28 (1914): 3–40, 61–86;Google Scholar Julius Hollerbach, “Die gregorianische Partei, Sigismund und das Konstanzer Konzil,” Ibid., 23 (1909): 127–165, 24(1910): 3–39, 121–140; Bernhard Fromme, “Die erste Prioritätstreit auf dem Konstanzer Konzil,” Ibid., 10 (1896): 509–518; Sauerland, Heinrich V., “Kardinal Johann Dominici und Papst Gregor XII. und deren neuester Panegyriker P. Augustin Rösler: Em kritische Studie,” Zeitschrift für Kirchengeschichte 15 (1898): 387–418.Google Scholar The texts and documents from the council are found in Mansi, Johannes D., ed., Sacrorum conciliorum nova et amplissima collectio (Florence and Venice, 1757–1798; new ed.Paris and Leipzig, 1898–1927) 27:729–745;Google ScholarFinke, , ACC, 2:38, 221–223, 246–247, 3:306–366;Google Scholar vdHardt, 4:3:177–178, 192–193. A brief account is found in Creighton, Mandell, A History of the Papacy from the Great Schism to the Sack of Rome (new ed. in 6 vols., London, 1897; New York, 1969), 1:340–343.Google Scholar
9. Salembier, , Great Schism of the West, p. 354.Google Scholar
10. The death of the king of Aragon, Ferdinand, on 1 April 1416 caused a delay, but his successor, Alfonso, continued the commitment of his father; see vdHardt, 2:18:540, 4:9:853–856. I discussed these events in my dissertation (cited in note 3 above), chap. 9, part 2, “The Causa Unionis,” pp. 599–606.
11. Finke, , ACC, 3:302–303.Google Scholar
12. vdHardt, 4:8:788–789, and Finke, , ACC, 2:302–303.Google Scholar
13. vdHardt, 4:9:856–859. Zabarella spoke of: “ad bonum universalis ecclesie et reipublicae statum” see also Finke, , ACC, 2:76.Google Scholar
14. Fromme, Bernhard, Die spanische Nation and das Konstanzer Koazil (Münster, 1896), pp. 37–46.Google Scholar
15. vdHardt, 4:9:1012, “pulchram collationem.”
16. The Acta from Constance sometimes simply say of Zaharella's addresses “eleganter respondit” (Finke, , ACC, 2:302Google Scholar), or “brevem et pulchrum” (vdHardt, 4:9:799). A modern scholar of the sermons at Constance pointed out Zaharella's ability as an ex tempore speaker; see Arendt, Paul, Die Predigten des Konstanzer Konzils: Ein Beitrag zur Predigt- und Kirchengeschichte des ausgehenden Mittelalters (Freiburg, 1933), pp. 28–29,Google Scholar and n. 72. In his academic career, Zabarella had been called upon many times to give the formal addresses at the awarding of the doctorate to one of his students; many of these addresses survive only in manuscript form in Cod. lat. 5513 in Vienna in the Austrian National Library, in Stift Sankt Paul in Lavantthal, Austria, Hospital ad Pyrhum, Codex pap. 31(27.1.7).
17. Stuhr, Friedrich, Die Organisation und Geschäflsordnung des Pisaner und Konstanzer Konzils (Inaugural Dissertation, Berlin, Schwerin, 1891), pp. 70, 73.Google Scholar
18. Zonta, , Francesco Zabarella, p. 156.Google Scholar This sermon, which Zonta has edited, pp. 155–157, is also found in Finke, , ACC, 2:253–255,Google Scholar where it is dated to 24th July 1415.
19. Finke, , ACC, 2: 253,Google Scholar “senatus patrum sacri collegii cardinalium quod post summum pontificem in ecclesiastica policia totius ecclesie consensu primum retineat.” There are many references in Zabarella's canonistic writings to this duty of the pope to consult with the cardinals; see my “Papacy, Community and Limitations upon Authority,” in Reform and Authority in the Medieval and Reformation Church, ed. Guy F. Lytle (Washington, D.C., 1981), pp. 37–54, esp. pp. 44–45.Google Scholar
20. This idea was also stressed in Zabarella's treatment of the papal claimants, whom he noted should consider what they ought to do more than what they were allowed to do. In regard to the bishops, he had singled out their obligation to come to councils, and for the cardinals he emphasized their duty to take part in a conclave to elect a new pope and their responsibility to give guidance to the pope in serious matters. In this sense he designated the office-holder in the church as a servant and referred to the text from Matthew 23:11.
21. Finke, , ACC, 2:253:Google Scholar “opus unionis et reformacionis ecclesie.” Zabarella linked the two goals and problems, for the need for reform and the existence of the schism were both seen as the result of their sins.
22. Zonta, , Francesco Zabarella, p. 161:Google Scholar “Cum ergo hoc sacrum concilium universalem ecclesiam, que fidelium omnium est congregatio, representat.”
23. I have discussed Zabarella's relations with Sigismund at Constance and his quarrel with him in “Emperor Sigismund, Cardinal Zabarella, and the Council of Constance,” Catholic Historical Review 69 (1983): 353–370.Google Scholar
24. Finke, , ACC, 2:319–321;Google Scholar vdHardt, 4:9:795–796, 797–798, 799.
25. Finke, , ACC, 2:319.Google Scholar
26. The position that only the pope could call a council which would decide the validity of the papal election, because such a council derived its authority from the pope, was put forth at the very outset of the schism by Cardinal Peter Flandrin; see Jacobs, E. F., Essays in the Conciliar Epoch (Manchester, 1943; 1953; 1963), pp. 1–24.Google Scholar Flandrin's tract was published some decades ago by Bliemetzrieder, F., Literarische Polemik zu beginn des grossen abendländischen Schismas (Vienna, 1909), pp. 6–12.Google Scholar Zabarella took up this view that the authority of the council derived from papal authority and convocation but then attacked it; see his Comm. ad X, 1.6.4, fol. 114a and his De scismate in Schardius, p. 700. For the right of others to convoke the council in default of action by the pope, college of cardinals, and so on, see his De scismate in Schardius, pp. 693–694. Significantly, just before this, Zabarella had argued for the devolution of the right to convoke the council to deal with a crisis, and his argument had been generalized to apply to any society: “in defectu Magistratus, revertimur ad ius pristinum ante constitutos Magistratus” (“in the case where the magistrate is missing or deficient, we revert back to the pristine state of law and right before magistrates were established”) (Schardius, p. 691).
27. De scismate, fol. 117rb: “ipsam ecclesiam universalem que representatur per concilium generale;” Zabarella also expressed the view that as the majority of the community of faithful believed, so should the others believe that this came from the Holy Spirit; see De scismate, fol. 119ra-b.
28. Finke, , ACC, 2:321.Google Scholar
29. Ibid., p. 337.
30. This sermon is found in Cod. lat. 5513 in Vienna fol. 214v-216 and was printed by Zonta, , Francesco Zabarella, pp. 160–163.Google Scholar The next paragraph is drawn from this source.
31. Zonta, , Francesco Zabarella, p. 163.Google Scholar In this sermon Zabarella echoes both Unam Sanctam of Boniface VIII (with its stress on unity) and the decree of Constance Haec Sancta (with its assertion that the council has authority since it represents the church).
32. Brian Tierney discusses this bull, its context, and its significance in The Crisis of Church and State, 1050–1300 (Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1964), pp. 180–182;Google Scholar see also Zonta, , Francesco Zabarella, p. 163.Google Scholar In this sermon Zabarella echoes both Unam Sanctam of Boniface VIII (with its stress on unity) and the decree of Constance Haec Sancta (with its assertion that the council has authority since it represents the church).
32. Brian Tierney discusses this bull, its context, and its Zonta, , Francesco Zabarella, p. 163.Google Scholar In this sermon Zabarella echoes both Unam Sanctam of Boniface VIII (with its stress on unity) and the decree of Constance Haec Sancta (with its assertion that the council has authority since it represents the church).
32. Brian Tierney discusses this bull, its context, and its Ullmann, Walter “Die Bulle Unam Sanctam: Rückblick und Ausblick,” Römische Historische Mitteilungen 16 (1974): 45–77;Google ScholarFriedberg, E., ed., Corpus Iuris Canonici, 2 vols. (Leipzig, 1881), 2:1245–1246.Google Scholar
32. Brian Tierney discusses this bull, its context, and its Tierney, , Crisis of Church and State, pp. 188–189,Google Scholar has a translation of the bull.
33. Ullmann, , Origins of the Great Schism, p. 4.Google Scholar
34. Comm. ad X, 1.6.6, fol. 117r.
35. In his legal commentaries, Zabarella had earlier rejected the opinion of Pope Innocent IV, a famed canonist and predecessor of Boniface VIII, who had concentrated authority in the head of the body politic and not in the body itself (the community); see Comm. ad X, 1.4.11, fol. 94va and 1.6.6, fol. 110rb.
36. De scismate, in Schardius, p. 688: “Unitatem ecclesiae firmiter tenere;” Zonta, , Francesco Zabarella p. 155:Google Scholar “Ad unionem et reformacionem catholice et universalis ecclesie;” Friedberg, E., Corpus Iuris Canonici, vol. 2, col. 1245–1246,Google Scholar “Unam Sanctam.” The late Walter Ullmann devoted two extensive studies to Boniface VIII and the bull Unam sanctam; see his “Boniface VIII and His Contemporary Scholarship,” Journal of Theological Studies N.S. 27 (1976); 58–87,Google Scholar and “Die Bulle Unam Sanctam: Rückblick and Ausblick,” Römische Histonische Mitteilungen 16 (1974): 45–77.Google Scholar
37. While Boniface VIII in 1300 had ended his Unam Sanctam with a declaration that all were to be subject to the pope in order that there might be unity, Zabarella ended his sermon with a prayer to God that God might restore unity to the church, the one spouse of Christ, that it might be governed properly under one vicar of Christ; Zonta, , Francesco Zabarella p. 157.Google Scholar
38. Ibid., p. 160, in a sermon of thanksgiving for the unification of the envoys of the king of Aragon with the council.
39. Finke, , ACC, 2:319–321.Google Scholar
40. Ibid., 2:471–476.
41. Earlier, on 23 June 1415, Zabarella had addressed the council, and his opening words had stressed the reason for their coming together: “the union and reform of the Church” (“Ad unionem ac reformacionem catholice et universalis ecclesie”), Finke, , ACC, 2:253–255.Google Scholar On this theme see also Petry, Ray C., “Unitive Reform Principles in the Late Medieval Conciliarists,” Church History 31 (1962): 164–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
42. Finke, , ACC, 2:472–474.Google Scholar
43. When Sigismund returned to Constance after months of absence, Zabarella praised him and his efforts in a public address, vdHardt, 4:9:1090; for Sigismund's policies and actions at this time see Hollnsteiner, Johannes, “König Sigismund auf dem Konstanzer Konzil: Nach dem Tagebuchaufzeichnungen des Kardinals Fillastre,” Mitteilurigen des Instituts für oesterreichischen Geschichtsforschung 41 (1926): 185–200,Google Scholar and Engles, Odilo, “Der Reichsgedanke auf dem Konstanzer Konzil,” Historisches Jahrbuch 86 (1966): 80–106.Google Scholar See also the article cited in n. 26 above.
44. Finke, Heinrich, Bilder vom Konstanzer Konzil (Heidelberg, 1903), p. 67.Google Scholar
45. See Burne, Alfred H., The Agincourt War (London, 1956);Google ScholarBess, Bernhard, “Die Verhandlungen zu Perpignan und die Schlacht bei Agincourt (1415),” Historisches Jahrbuch 22 (1901): 688–709;Google ScholarSchoenstedt, Freidrich, “König Siegmund und die Westmächte 1414– 1415,” Die Welt als Geschichte 14 (1954): 149–164.Google Scholar
46. Powers, George C., Nationalism at the Council of Constance, 1414–1418 (Washington, D.C., 1927), pp. 131–133.Google Scholar
47. The Spanish issue involved the question of precedence between the Castilian and Aragonese envoys; see Finke, , ACC, 2:127.Google Scholar On other problems at the council, see Bernard, Paul P., “Jerome of Prague, Austria, and the Hussites,” Church History 27 (1958): 3–22,CrossRefGoogle Scholar and the studies by Paul DeVooght, R. R. Betts, and Matthew Spinka; also Springmann, Kurt, “Polen und der deutschen Orden zur Zeit des Konstanzer Konzils” (Dissertation, Freiburg, 1922)Google Scholar and the studies by Erich Weise, Hartmut Boockmann, and Stanislaus Belch on the Polish-Teutonic Knights dispute.
48. Engles, , “Der Reichsgedanke,” pp. 94–95;Google ScholarPowers, , Nationalism at the Council of Constance, p. 118;Google ScholarFinke, , ACC, 2:123–126.Google Scholar
49. If the cardinals had left Constance, what would have prevented them from going into a conclave and electing a new pope, which was their legal right and duty according to canon law? This act would then have reopened the possibility of once again having two popes, one chosen by the council, the other by the cardinals. Fortunately, Frederick of Brandenburg persuaded them to he patient and remain at Constance; see vdHardt, 4:9:1415–1416.
50. Numerous references are found in the Acta to Zabarella being ill or being absent because of illness or similar notes; see Finke, , ACC, 9:95, 3–21, 45–72;Google Scholar vdHardt, 4:11:1417; 4:10:1090, 1093–1099; 4:10:1206–1209, 1309–1318, 1331–1334, 1336–1354, 1347–1366. Still, Zabarella was called upon to serve on the commissions that had to deal with just about every major issue: the removal of the three papal claimants; the composition and proclamation of the council's authority in Haec Sancta; the negotiations to end the various wars and fighting that took place in those years; the dispute over Jean Petit and the theory of tyrannicide; the Polish-Teutonic Knights controversy; the cases of John Hus and Jerome of Prague; the many reform proposals; and so the list could go on.
