Show POLITICAL BREVITIES From Sir Freeerick Pollocks History of the Science of Politics C Only one great question came into I prominence in the thirteenth and fourteenth four-teenth centuries and drew to itself whatever what-ever power or interest mens minds then had in the theoretical treatment of affairs of state This was the controversy between be-tween the temporal and spiritual power It was the common ground of the disputants I dis-putants that the papacy and the empire were both divinely ordained and each in its own sphere had universal jurisdiction jurisdic-tion over Christendom The point of difference was as to the relation of these two jurisdictions to one another Was the temporal ruler in the last resort subordinate sub-ordinate to the spiritual as the lesser to the greater light or were their dignities coordinate and equal r For a perverted Commonwealth the good man is a bad citizen but in a rightful right-ful one good man and good citizen are convertible terms DANTE Jean Bodin distinguished legal obligation obliga-tion in the strict sense from the purely moral and honorable duties on the one hand and from the duties created by convention between independent powers on the other He has made a great step toward the clear separation of the legal from the ethical sphere of thought within political science itselfa thing only less in importance than Aristotles original I separation of politics from ethics FREDERICK POLLOCK Marsilio of Padua distinctly marked the separation of the executive power which he calls by its modern name from the legislative moreover he advocated advo-cated a complete separation of temporal from spiritual authority and would have the temporal laws and magistrates make I no difference of persons on the score of I religious opinions I We find the separation of ethics and politics which had fallen into neglect not only restored but forming the groundwork ground-work of all of Machiavellis reasoning and made prominent even to the point of apparent paradox and scandal J Religion and morality are in his assumed point of view simply instruments ments in the hands of the ruler not masters not always even safe guides but useful servants and agents S j |