Consent and the Social Contract in Suárez’s Political Thought

This article examines Francisco Suárez’s views on consent and the social contract, challenging the interpretation that portrays him as a precursor to modern theorists like Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau. While Suárez’s political thought incorporates elements that may seem similar to contractarian princ...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Braekman, Valentin (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Interlibrary Loan:Interlibrary Loan for the Fachinformationsdienste (Specialized Information Services in Germany)
Published: 2025
In: Vivarium
Year: 2025, Volume: 63, Issue: 1, Pages: 47-71
Further subjects:B Francisco Suárez
B Social Contract
B Consent
B lex regia
B Political Authority
B divine right
B Political Obligation
Online Access: Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Description
Summary:This article examines Francisco Suárez’s views on consent and the social contract, challenging the interpretation that portrays him as a precursor to modern theorists like Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau. While Suárez’s political thought incorporates elements that may seem similar to contractarian principles, it fundamentally diverges from the modern social contract tradition. Rather than basing political legitimacy on individual consent, Suárez grounds it in the divine origin of power. He sees the community’s consent, expressed through a “virtual pact,” as a necessary condition for transferring power to a sovereign, but not as the foundation of political obligation or authority. For him, the duty to obey laws rests on humanity’s nature and God’s will. The article argues that Suárez rejects key premises of modern social contract theory, notably the ideas that political communities are artificial constructs and that political obligation stems from a contract.
ISSN:1568-5349
Contains:Enthalten in: Vivarium
Persistent identifiers:DOI: 10.1163/15685349-06301003