Edward Bellarmine grapples with the problem of a subject’s obedience to kings or popes (1610)

In the early 17th century the issue of just rulership by both Kings and the leaders of the Church (whether Catholic or Protestant) occupied theorists like Bellarmine who tied himself up in knots trying to define the lines which separated “secular” matters from “spiritual” matters, and where the power of a King stopped and the power of a Pope began. In his controversial pamphlet “On the Temporal Power of the Pope. Against William Barclay” (1610) Bellarmine inserts an interesting dialog between a representative of “The People” who has the audacity to argue about matters of political and moral theory with the Pope (Paul V was Pope from 1605 to 1621). This ordinary person wants to know why he should or should not obey his King if the Church commands him otherwise. The Pope’s answer reveals something very interesting about early modern political thinking (i.e. before the English Revolution inroduced notions of individual rights and political representation), namely that the people were at the bottom (the little sheep) and that control of them was being fought over by Lords, shepherds, rams, and wolves. It would take a revolution like that of the English (1647) and the American (1776) to get people thinking about not having any “Lords, shepherds, rams, and wolves” ruling them at all.