A Sovereign Act of Negation: Schmitt’s Political Theology and its Ideal Medievalism

Abstract

This article argues that Carl Schmitt’s political theology is premised on an idealised and totalising vision of the Middle Ages. That is, he casts modern political concepts as debased and corrupt in comparison to the proper politics of the Medieval Church, as he sees it. Drawing on a historically contextualised reading of the Fourth Lateran Council, which took place in 1215, the article’s author argues that Schmitt’s medieval comparison is much more complicated than he suggests. Schmitt’s historical vision is, thus, a wilful projection of unity onto a diverse and distant past.

Notes

¹ David Nirenberg, of Johns Hopkins University and the University of Chicago, provided my first experience of Carl Schmitt in his graduate seminar at Hopkins. I dedicate this article to him. Gaby Spiegel also from the Johns Hopkins Univerisity, read this in her customary generous and scouring manner, and made some very helpful suggestions. In addition, I would like to thank the School of Historical Studies at Monash University for listening to, and commenting upon, this paper. In particular, Jane Drakard, Constant Mews, Michael Hau and Barbara Caine provided useful comments in a gentle environment. And of course, many thanks to Dimitris Vardoulakis for his always sage advice.

² See Schmitt (1993). For one pertinent discussion of this work, see Thompson (2005).

³ Most famously, see Agamben (1998). See also Agamben (2005). Chantal Mouffe has also made significant use of Schmitt, see Mouffe (1999; 2000).

⁴ Alberigo (1972): ‘quia inter creatorem et creaturam non potest tanta similitudo notari, quin inter eos maior sit dissimilitudo notanda’. Translated in Rothwell (1975: 645).

⁵ On Lateran IV, see Mews and Monagle (2010). See also Robb (1997) and Marion (2002).

⁶ An excellent introduction to negative theology can be found in Milem (2007).

⁷ Alberigo (1972: 232): ‘claves ecclesiae, quas ipse concessit apostolis et eorum successoribus Iesus Christus’. Translated in Rothwell (1975: 644).

⁸ The standard edition of the Sententiae is Peter Lombard (1971–1981). On Lombard see Colish (1994). This work remains the most extensive and authoritative treatment of Lombard’s life and career in any language. The best general introduction is Rosemann (2004).

⁹ For a general introduction to the historiography of intellectual heresy between 1050 and 1150 see Southern (1995; 2001), Fichtenau (1992), and Le Goff (1985).

¹⁰ Peter Lombard (1971–1981: 72): ‘An Christus secundum quod homo est sit persona vel aliquid’. Translated in Rosemann (2004: 131).

¹¹ Alberigo (1972: 231): ‘sed quasi collectivam et similitudinarium esse fatetur, quemadmodum dicuntur multi homines unus populus, et multi fideles una ecclesia’. Translated in Rothwell (1975: 644).

¹² On Joachim see Reeves (1969), Wendelborn (1974), Daniel (1980), and Mottu (1977).

¹³ Alberigo (1972: 232): ‘Nos autem, sacro et universali concilio approbante, credimus et confitemur cum Petro, quod una quaedam summa res est, incomprehensibilis quidem et ineffabilis, quae veraciter est Pater et Filius et Spiritus Sanctus, tres simul personae ac sigillatim quaelibet earundum, et ideo in Deo Trinitas est solummodo non quaternitas’. Translated in Rothwell (1975: 644).

¹⁴ Alberigo (1972: 232): ‘quae sola est universorum principium, praeter quod aliud inveniri non potest’. Translated in Rothwell (1975: 644).

¹⁵ Alberigo (1972: 232): ‘quia inter creatorem et creaturam non potest tanta similitudo notari, quin inter eos maior sit dissimilitudo notanda’. Translated in Rothwell (1975: 645).

¹⁶ In Tanner (1990) cum petro, in this context, is translated as ‘with Peter Lombard’. An anonymous late thirteenth century treatise against Peter Lombard also reads cum petro as ‘with Peter Lombard’. See Ottaviano (1934).