Search

Francisco Suárez (1548-1617) lived in the period after the Council of Trent when there was much discussion over religious freedom for non-Christians as well for as non-Catholics living in Catholic territories. This essay examines Suárez's view of the different types of unbelievers and the possibility of their salvation. It explores Suárez's belief that Non-Christians can enjoy freedom of religion in Catholic territories as long as their practices do not violate the natural law. The essay also examines Suárez's attitude toward Non-Catholic Christians. Although these Christians enjoy freedom from coercion to join the Catholic Church, they can be subject to certain restrictions. Suárez lived during a time when there was much discussion over the natural rights of unbelievers. In the 1500s, the Dominicans, Bartolomé de las Casas (1474-1566) and Francisco de Vitoria (c.1483-1546) had already defended the natural rights of the American Indians who suffered abuse on the part of some of the Spanish conquistadors. Suárez likewise defended the natural rights of the Indians, and he strongly opposed any attempts to enslave them or force them to convert to the Catholic faith. Suárez, though, also considered the rights of non-Christians such as Jews and Muslims living under Christian rule. This article examines what Suárez says about human freedom and the universality of the natural law in De legibus, book III. Then it will consider how in De fide, tract. I, Suárez applies human freedom and the natural law to the rights of non-Christians living under Christian rule and the rights of Christians living under non-Christian rule. This essay attempts to understand what obligations to religion are demanded by the natural law and how violations of the natural law (e.g. blasphemies, persecutions) can result in limits to religious freedom. It will be argued that Suárez, in some respects, anticipates the teaching of Vatican II on religious freedom. The Council recognized both freedom from religious coercion in civil society as well as the demands of the moral law regarding the rights of others and the duties toward them (Dignitatis humanae, 7). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We study the Relectio c. Novit de Iudiciis of Martín de Azpilcueta (1548) by exploring fundamental questions such as the initial sovereignty of the people and the reconciliation between the divine and natural origin of secular power; the criticism of the decretalist tradition of hierocracy and the consequent limitation of the direct power of the Church to the sphere of spiritual affairs among Christians; the indirect power of the pope over temporal matters among Christians ordered to the spiritual purpose; the affirmation of the supreme (but not absolute) power of temporal princes, limited by natural law; the denial of the thesis of the immediate divine origin of the power of kings, barring the way to expressions of absolute power, as well as to the claims of the defenders of hierocracy. Around these issues, others arose that we will also analyze here, as the right of active resistance against tyranny; the just war and the legitimacy of indigenous sovereignties in the empires of the peninsular kingdoms, within the framework of relations between Indians and Christians; the natural equality between men and between the communities formed by them; the relationship between the autarchy of cities and kingdoms, on the one hand, and the empire or the universal community, on the other. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]