Le cardinal Annibal de Ceccano et la Vision Béatifique (1331-1336)
Theologians recall that the question of the beatific vision was quite burning at the end of John XXII's reign. This is the first attempt to determine the role that Cardinal Annibal de Ceccano, a former professor at the Sorbonne, played in this controversy. The arguments, which are refuted in th...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | French |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Ed. Pontificia Univ. Gregoriana
1969
|
| In: |
Gregorianum
Year: 1969, Volume: 50, Issue: 2, Pages: 343-382 |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Summary: | Theologians recall that the question of the beatific vision was quite burning at the end of John XXII's reign. This is the first attempt to determine the role that Cardinal Annibal de Ceccano, a former professor at the Sorbonne, played in this controversy. The arguments, which are refuted in the famous sermon of Thomas Waleys, are those of the Cardinal as well as those of the Pope. The benedictine and the cistercian, who preached at Avignon in 1333 and 1334 in favor of the opinion favored by the Pope, are his chapelains. It is he, the adversary of the English Dominicain, who was encharged by the Pope to censure Durand de Saint-Pourçain. The commission of judges sat in his palace. Against Waleys who attacked him, he designated some supplementary judge. He acted on behalf of the Pope to obtain the advice of theologians, such as the Master of the Holy Palace, Armand de Belvézer. Annibal is also the lecturer, who gave the explanations before the doctors of both camps. He was the president of the commissions and the author of the written counsels in the last year of John XXII. It is proved also that the final retraction of the Pope was done with a formula elaborated in his palace. This formula was certainly pronounced again by the dying Pope with it's restrictions, then left in general terms. After which the Cardinal, who had rallied John to his own formula, did not have to submit to the new Pope. These events are known only by circumstantial evidence, and that is why the author examines them in their context, giving a complete survey of the facts in their chronological order, putting in relief those events that touch Popes John XXII, Benedict XII, and Clement VI. Citations are made of theological and other works, a great many of which are unedited. |
|---|---|
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Gregorianum
|