Consent and the Social Contract in Suárez’s Political Thought
In: VivariumSearch for other papers by Valentin Braekman in
Current site
Google Scholar
Abstract
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.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
-
Aristotle, Politics, trans. C. D. C. Reeve (Indianapolis, Cambridge, 2017).
-
Thomas Aquinas, Summa theologiae I, qq. 50–119, eds. Fratres Praedicatores. Opera omnia 5 (Rome, 1889).
-
Thomas Aquinas, Summa theologiae I–II, qq. 71–114, eds. Fratres Praedicatores. Opera omnia 7 (Rome, 1892).
-
Bach, O., N. Brieskorn S.J., and G. Stiening. “Quia et homo non fert legem nisi ut minister Dei: Das Staatsrechtsdenken des Francisco Suárez.” In Die Staatsrechtslehre des Francisco Suárez, eds. O. Bach, N. Brieskorn and G. Stiening (Berlin, 2020), 3–20.
-
Braekman, V. “La liberté de la volonté dans la vision béatifique. Suárez critique d’Ockham.” Lo Sguardo. Rivista di filosofia 33 (2021), 227–245.
-
Brito Vieira, M. “Francisco Suárez and the Principatus Politicus.” History of Political Thought 29 (2008), 273–294.
-
Canning, J. A History of Medieval Political Thought, 300–1450 (London, New York, 1996).
-
Fabre, C. “Social Contract.” In The International Encyclopedia of Ethics, ed. H. LaFollette (Oxford 2013), 4940–4949.
-
Faraco, C. “El tirano y el derecho de resistencia: la libertad y la defensa del corpus politicum en Francisco Suárez.” In Entre el Renacimiento y la Modernidad: Francisco Suárez (1548–1617), eds. J. L. Fuertes Herreros, M. L. Pulido, Á. Poncela González and M. Idoya Zorroza (Madrid, 2019), 181–198.
-
Font Oporto, P. El derecho de resistencia civil en Francisco Suárez. Virtualidades actuales (Granada, 2018).
-
Forsyth, M. “Hobbes’s Contractarianism.” In The Social Contract from Hobbes to Rawls, eds. D. Boucher and P. Kelly (London, New York, 1994), 37–43.
-
Gierke, O. Natural Law and the Theory of Society 1500–1800 (Cambridge, 1958).
-
Hampton, J. Hobbes and the Social Contract Tradition (Cambridge, 1986).
-
Hobbes, T. Leviathan, ed. J. C. A. Gaskin (Oxford, 1996).
-
King James i, An Apologie for the Oath of Allegiance (London, 1609).
-
Krueger, P. and T. Mommsen. eds. Corpus juris civilis, vol. 1: Institutiones, Digesta (Berlin, 1889).
-
Kuiper, C. S. “Francisco Suárez and John Locke on Rights and Alienability: A Critical Conversation.” In Francisco Suárez (1548–1617). Jesuits and the Complexities of Modernity, eds. R. A. Maryks and J. A. Senent de Frutos (Leiden, 2019), 439–467.
-
Locke, J. Second Treatise of Government, ed. M. Goldie (Oxford, 2016).
-
Pink, T. “Suárez on Authority as Coercive Teacher.” Quaestio 18 (2019), 451–486.
-
Rawls, J. A Theory of Justice. Revised Edition (Cambridge, MA, 1999).
-
Rousseau, J.-J. The Social Contract, trans. S. Dunn (New Haven, 2002).
-
Santos Campos, A. “Francisco Suárez’s Conception of the Social Contract.” Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia 75 (2019), 1195–1218.
-
Santos Campos, A. “The Idea of the Social Contract in the History of ‘Agreementism.’” The European Legacy 24 (2019), 579–596.
-
Schaffner, T. “Is Francisco Suárez a Natural Law Ethicist?” In D. Simmermacher, K. Bunge, M. J. Fuchs and A. Spindler (eds.), The Concept of Law (lex) in the Moral and Political Thought of the ‘School of Salamanca’ (Leiden, 2016), 150–171.
-
Schrock, T. “Anachronism All Around: Quentin Skinner on Suárez.” Interpretation 25 (1997), 91–123.
-
Schwartz, D. “Francisco Suárez on Consent and Political Obligation.” Vivarium 46/1 (2008), 59–81.
-
Scorraille, R. François Suarez de la Compagnie de Jésus: d’après ses lettres, ses autres écrits inédits et un grand nombre de documents nouveaux. 2 vols. (Paris, 1912–1913).
-
Skinner, Q. The Foundations of Modern Political Thought. 2 vols. (Cambridge, 1978).
-
Stiening, G. “Ipse autem princeps non est subditus: Suárez über den Grundsatz des princeps legibus solutus (DL, III. 35).” In Die Staatsrechtslehre des Francisco Suárez, eds. O. Bach, N. Brieskorn and G. Stiening (Berlin, 2020), 283–306.
-
Stiening, G. “Suprema potestas […] obligandi – Der Verbindlichkeitsbegriff in Francisco Suárez’ Tractatus de Legibus.” In Kontroversen um das Recht: Beiträge zur Rechtsbegründung von Vitoria bis Suárez, eds. K. Bunge, S. Schweighöfer, A. Spindler and A. Wagner (Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt, 2013), 341–367.
-
Suárez, F. Defensio fidei Catholicae et apostolicae adversus Anglicanae sectae errores, ed. C. Berton. Opera omnia 24 (Paris, 1859).
-
Suárez, F. De fine hominis, ed. D. M. André. Opera omnia 4 (Paris, 1856), 1–156.
-
Suárez, F. De legibus ac Deo legislatore, ed. C. Berton. Opera omnia 5 (Paris, 1856).
-
Suárez, F. De opere sex dierum, ed. D. M. André. Opera omnia 3 (Paris, 1856), 1–447.
-
Suárez, F. De voluntario et involuntario, ed. D. M. André. Opera omnia 4 (Paris, 1856), 159–274.
-
Suárez, F. “What Kind of Corporeal or Political Life Men Would Have Professed in the State of Innocence,” trans. M. T. Gaetano, Journal of Markets & Morality 15 (2012), 527–563.
-
Tattay, S. “Francisco Suárez: Absolutist or Constitutionalist?” In Francisco Suárez (1548–1617). Jesuits and the Complexities of Modernity (Leiden, 2019), 300–321.
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 223 | 223 | 57 |
| Full Text Views | 23 | 23 | 1 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 48 | 48 | 0 |
Consent and the Social Contract in Suárez’s Political Thought
In: VivariumSearch for other papers by Valentin Braekman in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Abstract
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.
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 223 | 223 | 57 |
| Full Text Views | 23 | 23 | 1 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 48 | 48 | 0 |
