Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-mp689 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T15:11:41.416Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Cardinal Cajetan and Fra Ambrosius Catharinus in the Controversy over the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin in Italy, 1515–51

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 March 2016

Patrick Preston
Patrick Preston*
Affiliation:
University College, Chichester
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The development of the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin has a long history. This article deals with a small but important segment of this development, by providing some account of what was at stake and of the main stages by which the contest was fought out, principally within the Dominican Order, between 1515 and 1551.

The development here considered is really sandwiched between two Councils, the Fifth Lateran on the one hand, and Trent on the other, at which the thought of settling a very contentious issue was first entertained and then dismissed. The need for a settlement became apparent in the fifteenth century when the increasing popularity of the doctrine exacerbated the longstanding rivalry between the Franciscans, its principal devotees, and the Dominicans, its traditional opponents. Pope Sixtus IV went some way towards satisfying the Immaculists by the constitution Cum praeexcelsa of 1476, but the constitution Grave nimis of 1483 gave some satisfaction to their opponents, because it explicitly stated that, in the case of this doctrine, the Church had not yet made up its mind.

Type
Research Article
Information
Studies in Church History , Volume 39: The Church and Mary , 2004 , pp. 181 - 190
Copyright
Copyright © Ecclesiastical History Society 2004

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Giacinto Bosco, P. O.P., ‘Intorno a un carteggio inedito di Ambrogio Caterino’, Memorie Domenicane, 67 (1950), 142 Google Scholar.

2 Tommaso de Vio Gaetano, Tractatus de conceptione Bealae Mariae Virginis ad Leotiem X, in idem, Opiiscula omnia (Lyons, 1575), 2. tract. I.137-142. I have used The Judgement of Tlwmas de Vio Cajetan against the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary, trans. R.C. Jenkins (1858); allquotations are from this version.

3 Chabod, F., Storia religiosa dello stato di Milano durante il dominio di Carlo V (Bologna,1938), 189 Google Scholar.

4 In Bosco, ‘Intorno’, 107-153.

5 Ibid., 154-5.

6 Ambrosius Catharinus Disputatio pro veritate Immaculatae Conceptions Beatae Virginis Mariae ad Patres ac Fratres Ordinis Praedkatorum (Siena, 1532).

7 Bosco, ‘Intorno’, 159.

8 Catharinus, Ambrosius, Annotationes in excerpta quaedam de commentariis Reverendissimi Cardinalis S. Xisti dogmata (Paris, 1535)Google Scholar.

9 Spina, Bartolomeo, Tractatus contra opusculum Caietani de conceptione Beatae Virginis (Venice, 1535)Google Scholar.

10 Bosco, ‘Intorno’, 148.

11 Spina, Bartolomeo, De universali corruptione generis humani ab Adam seminaliterpropagati (Venice, 1535)Google Scholar. See Bosco, ‘Intorno’, 159.

12 Catharinus, Ambrosius, Disputationispro immaculate divae Virginis conceptione libri tres, in idem, Opuscula (Lyons, 1542), pt III, 1–103 Google Scholar.

13 Catharinus, Ambrosius, Annotationes in commentaria Cajetani (Lyons, 1542)Google Scholar.

14 Jedin, H., A History of the Council of Trent, 2 vols (1957-61), 2:139 Google Scholar.

15 Catharinus, Ambrosius, Disputatio pro veritate immaculatae conceptionis Beatissimae Virginis et eius celebranda a cunctis fidelibus festivate, in his Enarrationes in quinque priora capita libri Geneseos (Rome, 1551-2)Google Scholar, the tract occupies pp. 1-115 in the 3rd set of pagination in the volume.

16 Ibid., 3.

17 For example, Mullett, M., The Catholic Reformation (1999), 5 Google Scholar.

18 Schroeder, H.J., Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent, (Rockford, IL, 1979), 23 Google Scholar; see also Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils, ed. Norman P. Tanner, 2 vols (London and Washington DC, 1990), 2:*667.

19 Bosco, ‘Intorno’, 165.

20 Cajetan, Judgement, 53-4.

21 Ibid., 56.

22 Ibid., 54.

23 Ibid., 60.

24 Ibid., 64-5.

25 Ibid., 65.

26 Ibid., 65-6.

27 Ibid., 68.

28 Ibid., 69.

29 Ibid., 76.

30 Ibid., 77.

31 Ibid., 81.

32 Ibid., 82.

33 Ibid., 86.

34 Catharinus, Disputatio (1551), 16.

35 Ibid., 39.

36 Ibid., 115.

37 Ibid., 94.

38 Ibid., 94.

39 Ibid., 113.

40 Ibid., 102.

41 Ibid., 95.

42 Ibid., 96.

43 Ibid., 114-15.

44 Ibid., 99.

45 Ibid., 95, 109.

46 Ibid., 99, 100.

47 Ibid., 95.

48 Ibid., 111.

49 At least one Dominican, Padre Michelozzi, had asserted during the troubles in 1527-30 that the Church could still err in accepting a feast day, and was not infallible in its approval of liturgical festivities and canonization of saints. See Bosco, ‘Intorno’, 159.