<Articles>Papal Power and Secular Power in the Political Theory of Pope Innocent IV

個人情報保護のため削除部分あり一三世紀半ばの教皇インノケンティウス四世は、教皇による世俗支配の理論において決定的な一歩を踏み出したとされる教皇である。たしかに彼は、教皇権の優位を主張し、またリヨン公会議で皇帝フリードリヒ二世の廃位を宣言した。しかし、他方、彼は聖俗両権の並立をも承認していることが認められる。これらの一見相反する主張は、どのように両立するのであろうか。本稿では、彼の著作である『教皇令集五巻註解』や書簡を検討して、この教皇が教会法令、とくにインノケンティウス三世の教皇令を整理して霊的権力の世俗的領域への介入を一一のケースに限定し、また介入の根拠を教皇の世俗権力ではなく、霊的な義務に基づかせることによって、二つの主張を両立させたことを明らかにする。教皇による皇帝の廃位も、この理論を踏まえたものである。それは、教皇権の優位をはっきりと示すが、世俗権の一定の自律性をも保っていうのである。Pope Innocent IV (1243-54) is generally considered to be the pope who took the decisive step in the direction of papal temporal lordship. He ordered the dethronement of Emperor Frederik II at the Council of Lyon, a clear assertion of the superiority of papal power. However, he is also recognised as having held a dualistic theory of power. In this paper, I will attempt to show how these two claims, which appear to be opposed, can be compatible. I have made use of Innocent IV's "Apparatus super quinque libros", his letters and the dethronement order, but not the encyclical letter "Eger cui lenia", because it does not reflect his thought. I conclude that Innocent IV believed in the superiority of papal power, and that as the holder of spiritual authority, he could intervene in secular affairs. However, he restricted such intervention to eleven cases, basing it not on papal temporal authority, but on his spiritual responsibility. He, therefore, guaranteed a degree of autonomy in the secular power. His. intervention in the eleven cases was based on Gratian's Decretum and, in particular, on the decretals of Innocent III. Christ's Vicariate and "plenitudo-potestatis " were cited as justification for intervention in these particular cases, but not for unlimited intervention in secular matters. Continuity can clearly be seen between his position and previous theories of papacy. The reasons given for the dethronement of Frederik II were perjury, violation of the peace, sacrilege and heresy. Each of these was a factor in the above mentioned cases in which the ecclesiastical judge was deemed competent to intervene in secular matters. The right to do dethrone was based on the Pope's position as Christ's Vicar, the right of binding and loosing, and "plenitudo potestatis", not on papal conferment of imperial power, nor the Pope's right to confirm, anoint and crown the emperor. Thus, while the act of dethronement strongly demonstrates the supriority of papal power, this act, being based on the above theories, does not deny a degree of autonomy of secular power