Haec sancta

This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. Find sources:  –  ·  ·  · scholar · JSTOR (October 2020) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

The decree Haec sancta ("This holy [Synod]") was published by the Council of Constance on April 6, 1415. It contains a section on the question of whether the Pope is above an ecumenical council or, conversely, such a council is above the Pope. The question is related to papal primacy, papal supremacy and conciliarism.

Excerpt[]

The section concerned reads:^[1]

Et primo (declarat), quod ipsa in spiritu sancto legitime congregata concilium generale faciens, et ecclesiam catholicam militantem repraesentans, potestatem a Christo immediate habet, cui quilibet cuiuscumque status vel dignitatis, etiam si papalis existat, obedire tenetur in his quae pertinent ad fidem et extirpationem dicti schismatis, ac reformationem dictae ecclesiae in capite et in membris.

This Synod, rightly assembled in the Holy Spirit, which is a general council and represents the warring Catholic Church, has its authority directly from Christ; to you, everyone, whatever their rank or whatever their dignity, even if it should be papal, is bound to obey what concerns the faith, the eradication of the schism in question and the general reform of the head and members of this Church of God.

The decree played an essential role in shaping conciliarism.

Opinions on the decree[]

This section does not cite any sources. Please help by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (October 2020) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

In theology there are four views of this decree:

1. The council stands above the Pope: for those who support this view, the corresponding statement of the decree is a generally applicable dogma.
2. Due to the schism, the Council of Constance had a special position. The advocates of this view recognized the precedence of the Council, but only in the situation at that time when three people claimed the office of Pope at the same time: Gregory XII, John XXIII and Benedict XIII. The council was convened to resolve this conflict. It was extremely controversial which of the named was the rightful Pope. Gregory XII, later recognized by the Church, voluntarily abdicated the office and the two antipopes were deposed; only John XXIII eventually consented to his removal.
3. Irrelevance due to the wording. The advocates of this view point to the fact that "Everyone [...] is bound to obey" is a very cautious formulation. In addition, obedience is limited to the topics of the Council of Constance and is not a general requirement. The formulations used are also not clear enough for a dogma. Clearer language is necessary for its announcement in order to exclude any doubt - the controversial discussion shows that it is not a dogma. Otherwise, Pope Martin V, elected at the council, could have repeated the statement and made it clearer.
4. The Pope stands above the council. The proponents of this view hold that, in principle, no council has any power of disposal over the popes. The council was also only through the antipope John XXIII. and therefore not properly convened. Therefore the early documents of the council are invalid. The recognition of Gregory XII is necessary for this argument. as the only rightful of the three popes, since he voluntarily renounced the office and therefore the decree Haec sancta was not necessary for the deposition.^[2] The Council documents are only from the "subsequent legalization" of the Council by the recognized Pope Gregory XII and which Martin V accepted.

See also[]

• Frequens

References[]

Further reading[]

• Die Päpste – Herrscher über Himmel und Erde, Hans-Christian Huf (Hrsg.), Ullstein Buchverlage, Berlin, 2008, ISBN 978-3-550-08693-9
• Provvidente, Sebastián (2013-03-21). "The synodial practices of the Council of Constance (1414-1418): Between symbol and trace". Bulletin du centre d'études médiévales d'Auxerre (Hors-série n° 7). doi:10.4000/cem.12784. ISSN 1623-5770.

• Der Konziliarismus als Problem der neueren katholischen Theologie
• Decaluwe, Michiel (2004-09-01). "La position de la papauté mise en cause après le Grand Schisme : légitimation de part et d'autre". C@hiers du CRHiDI. Histoire, droit, institutions, société (in French). ISSN 1370-2262.
• Izbicki, Thomas M. (1986). "Papalist Reaction to the Council of Constance: Juan de Torquemada to the Present". Church History. 55 (1): 7–20. doi:10.2307/3165419. ISSN 1755-2613. JSTOR 3165419.