569 Pr egledni znans tv eni članek/ Article (1.02) Bogoslovni vestnik/Theological Quarterly 81 (2021) 3, 569—582 Besedilo pr eje t o/R eceiv ed:03/2021; spr eje t o/ Accep t ed:05/2021 UDK/UDC: 141.31Cano M. DOI: 10.34291/B V2021/03/Con tr er as © 2021 Con tr er as–Aguirr e, CC B Y 4.0 Sebastián Contreras-Aguirre Speculative and Practical Theology in the Second Scholasticism: Melchor Cano (c. 1507–1560) 1 Spekulativna in praktična teologija druge sholastike: Melchor Cano (ok. 1507–1560) Abstract : This article r e vie w s the principal theologic al doctrines of Melchor Cano , perhap s the gr ea t es t dogma tic theologian of the Sec ond Scholas ticism. His De locis theologicis mark ed a w a t er shed in the de finition of theology as the ‚funda- men t al science, ‘ and his writings on mor als a tt es t t o the pr actic al sense of the Salamanc a theologic al school. Since theology is both specula tiv e and pr actic al, this paper deals with the main aspects of Cano’ s theor e tic al and mor al theology , namely , his doctrine of theologic al places, his vindic a tion of the Indian’ s fr eedom and politic al pow er , his t eaching about the dis tinction be tw een na tur al and po- sitiv e la w , and Cano’ s c onception of the righ t of w ar . Keywords : Sec ond Scholas ticism, Melchor Cano , theor e tic al theology , pr actic al the- ology , Spanish Scholas ticism, loci theologici Povzetek: Članek ponuja pr egled gla vnih t eoloških nauk ov Melchorja Cana, v erjetno najv ečjeg a dogmatičneg a t eolog a obdobja druge sholas tik e. Njegovo delo De locis theologicis je bilo pr ebojno pri opr edelitvi t eologije k ot , t emeljne znanos ti', njego- vi spisi o mor ali pa pričujejo o pr aktičnem smislu salamanšk e t eološk e šole. K er je t eologija t ak o spek ula tivna k ak or tudi pr aktična, članek obr a vna v a gla vne vidik e Canov e t eor etične in mor alne t eologije, to je: njegov nauk o t eoloških mes tih (vi- rih), njegov z agovor s voboščin in politične moči Indijancev , njegov nauk o r azlik o - v anju med nar a vnim in pozitivnim z ak onom in njegovo dojemanje pr a vice do vojne. Ključne besede : drug a sholas tik a, Melchor Cano , t eor e tična t eologija, pr ak tična t e- ologija, špansk a sholas tik a, loci theologici The r ene w al of scholas tic theology in E arly Modernity sa w Melchor Cano 2 – 1 The au tho r is gr a t e ful f or the sponso r ship of F ONDE CYT -Chile, pr oject 11805 10. 2 Melcho r Cano en t er ed the Dominic an or der in 1523 and s tudied arts and theolo gy in Salamanc a, whe - r e he a tt ended Fr ancisc o de Vit oria’ s lectur es. He has been acclaimed as Vit oria’ s f a v orit e disciple, but the same has been said of Doming o de Sot o and Alonso de la V er acruz. 570 Bogoslovni vestnik 81 (2021) • 3 Melchor de San t a Mart a – as one of its pr ot ag onis ts: he inau gur a t ed a ne w the- ologic al me thod, s y s t ema tised and or der ed the insigh ts of pr eceden t theologians, and elabor a t ed the fir s t gr ea t dogma tics of modern Scholas ticism (Lang 1962; Vilano v a 1 9 91 ; Be lda 2 0 00 ). Cano , k no w n as , the Cic e r o of the sc hools ‘ , 3 w r it e s a t a challe nging time f or the Chur ch. In Cano’ s w or ds, the disin t egr a tion of Chris tia- nity s t emming fr om the ,Luther an disease ‘ , as w ell as fr om the poor or null f or - ma tion of Chris tians, wr eak ed ha v oc and br ough t upon a t errible doctrinal disper - sion both inside and outside the Chur ch (Cano 1871, 514). Cano articulat es Thomis tic and Salamancan theology with Aris tot elian philosoph y , shaping it acc or ding t o the classic al scheme of the , t opics ‘ . These ,new t opics ‘ , which the tr adition c alls , theologic al places ‘ , f orm a c omple x s y s t em tha t inc orpor a t es the Holy F a ther ’ s t eachings, the ideas of the medie v al theologians, the science of the c anonis ts, and the theses of the other Salamanc an theologians. Cano does not shut his mind t o an y curr en t of though t (pr ovided tha t the adher ence t o other ’ s ideas is critically legitima t ed) since, accor ding t o the principles of the scholas tic method, sci - ence is about truth, and truth c an be f ound an ywher e. Now , Cano r espects and f ol- low s St. Thomas and Fr ancisc o de Vit oria and the gr ea t scholas tics, whose doctrines he e xpands on (1900a, l. 12 c. 1). F or this r eason, some scholar s ha v e ar gued tha t Cano is both a c onser v a tiv e and modern writ er , since, on the one side, he belongs t o a particular school of thought and, on the other side, he independently ar gues f or his position in dogma tic and pr actic al theology (Belda 2013, 102; Lang 1925, 242). This paper sur v e y s the theologic al s yn thesis of , the t errible Cano‘ , , the admir a- tion of T r e n t ‘ (T e lle c he a 2 0 0 3 –2 0 0 7 ; Me né nde z P e la y o 2 0 0 6 –2 0 0 7 ). 4 A ft e r a br ie f descrip tion of theology as the fundamen t al science, the main aspects of Cano’ s specula tiv e and mor al theology ar e e xposed, specific al ly hi s theor y of the theo- logic al places, his ideas on the fr eedom of the Na tiv e Americ ans and the r ela tion- ship of na tur al la w with positiv e la w , and Cano’ s t eaching on the la w of w ar . T o c onclude, this article r e f er s t o Cano’ s de f ence of politic al po w er . 1. The Theological Science Acc or ding t o Scholas ticism, theology is a r a tional disc our se about God. Na tur al theology is the me t aph y sics of God as the las t c ause, and sup erna tur al theology is the science of God s t arting fr om r e v ela tion. Acc or dingly , the kno wledg e c oming 3 Also kno wn as the ‚ Quin tilian of the theologians ‘ . See Menénde z P ela y o 1994; Menénde z P ela y o 2006– 2007; Caballer o 1871. 4 Besides his in t ellectual merit, Cano is r emember ed f or his brut al per secution of Bart olomé Carr anz a and the Socie ty of Jesus. He w as c on vinced tha t the Jesuits ar e »harm ful t o the Chris tian r eligion.« Cano deemed her e tic al bo th them and Carr anz a. Witnesses of tha t per secution abound among the Jesuits; the accusa tions Cano pr esen t ed t o the Inquisition c oncerning Carr anz a’ s c a t echism ar e also documen - t ed. Altho ugh some pr esen t -da y his t orians tr y t o do wnpla y this per secution, the f act is tha t Cano w as particularly har sh t o the Igna tians and Carr anz a de Mir anda. T w o e x amples should suffice. About the Jesuits he wr ot e: »Wha t do I f eel about tha t f amily? Some thing v er y serious, t oo gr a v e t o sa y it in a le tt er . I do not writ e about it, but I f ear gr ea t er damag e than in German y;« and about Carr anz a he sa y s tha t man y of his ideas »sounds lik e her es y .« 571 571 Sebastián Contreras-Aguirre - Speculative and Practical Theology... fr om r e v ela tion surpasses na tur al human c apacities. (Cano 1900a, l. 12 c. 2) The f ormal r eason f or superna tur al theology is the r e v ela tion c ommunic a t ed dir ectly b y God or thr ough His gr ace in fused in men. This science r equir es a ligh t superior t o the ligh t of na tur al r eason. My s tic al theology in v es tig a t es a double obje ct: pr imar ily God him se lf , His na tur e and His a ttr ibut e s, and se c ondar ily me n r eg ar ding God. Theology e x ceeds an y other science bec ause it is based on divine authority , the sa f es t sour ce of kno wledg e. (l. 12 cc. 2–3) L i k e an y sci en ce, th eo l o gy r eq u i r es e vi d en t p ri n ci p l es an d sa f e c o n cl u si o n s d e- duced from principles. Theological principles are hierarchically ordered. First come the mos t g ener al and fundame n t al principles, such as »God e xis ts« and »God r e - w ar ds those who seek him.« The f ollo wing principles ar e mor e de t ermined, as in the articles of f aith. Thir d, some principles ar e not sough t f or their o wn sak e but to explain the previous ones. Finally, theology picks some principles from the hu- man sciences. The tw o fundamen t al principles, tha t »God e xis ts« and tha t »God r e w ar ds those who seek him,« ar e true a xioms: if the theologic al science does not s t art fr om them, it c annot un f old. Cano a ffirms tha t whoe v er wishes t o acqui - r e superna tur al kno wledg e mus t ha v e gr asped these principles. (l. 12 c. 2) Not e v e r y theol ogic al principle is writt en in the Scrip tur e. Some ha v e been in - herit ed or ally thr ough apos t olic tr aditions, pr o viding the bes t e xplana tion f or spe- cific scrip tur al passag es. Concerning the principle »God r e w ar ds those who seek him« (Heb 11:6 ), it declar es the na tur e of God as God. Tha t is, if God did not r e - w ar d g ood men, he w ould not be God bec ause tha t w ould mean tha t he is blind and unjus t. (Cano 1900a, l. 12 c. 3) Theology also s tudies man, f or it is the ma t erial cr ea tur e mos t similar t o God. Fr om the theologic al per spectiv e, man is a »c omposit e of flesh and spirit, as a mid- poin t be tw een beas ts and ang els,« who seek s God as his end and hopes t o please him with his acts and decisions (1972, c. 1). Thus, Cano claims tha t man belongs t o theology , a char act eris tic f ea tur e of the School of Salamanc a (Belda 2013, 104). Las tly , theology is pr actic al and specula tiv e, although it is mainly theor e tic al bec ause the end of man is the vision of God. 2. Theoretical Theology and the so-called Theological Places Cano’ s principal c on tribution t o Sec ond Scholas ticism —undoub t edly his master- piece— is the De locis theologicis, a classic w ork in fundamen t al Ca tholic theology and scholar s’ opinion, the e sse n tial m e thodolog ic al w r iting of m ode r n the olog y (Gr abmann 1933, 152–153). Cano c ould not c omple t e his original pr oject; e v en so , he though t his w ork w as necessar y f or theology (»/…/ nobody , as f ar as I kno w , has c arried out some thing lik e this«). 5 5 See Cano 1900a, pr oœmium. With this w ork, the independence of the theologic al me thod w as es t abli - shed f or the fir s t time (Humbert 1911). 572 Bogoslovni vestnik 81 (2021) • 3 The w ork origina t es fr om the Vit orian r e f orming in t en tion t o ov er c ome the ,v erbosity ‘ of La t e-medie v al Scholas ticism. It outlines the par adigm f or theology un til the middle of the 20th cen tur y and r e v olutionises theologic al epis t emology . 6 It is s till use ful t oda y . Furthermor e, as Schmutz poin ts out, »it is the fundamen t al writing f or unde r s t anding the diff er ence be tw een medie v al and modern theolo - gy« (2010, 117). Cano di d not in v en t the notion of theologic al places. Aquinas and Vit oria had al r ead y adv anced a si mi l ar doctri n e. Be f or e Cano , Carr anz a used the e xpr essi on , theologic al places ‘ . The same mus t be said of Sot o. Cano posits t en theologic al places: the authority of Scrip tur e, of the tr aditions, of the univ er sal Chur ch, of the c ouncils, of the R oman Chur ch, of the Holy F a ther s, of the scholas tic theologians and canonists, of natural reason, of the philosophers and human history. , Theol ogi c al pl aces ‘ ar e l i k e the Aris t ot el i an t opi cs: jus t as phi l osophi c al ar gu- ments stem from the topics, every theological argument is based on theological places. Ho w e v er , the diff er en t theologic al places ha v e unequal import ance: the fir s t se v en ar e c alled ,pr oper places ‘ and the other thr ee ar e c alled ,f or eign places ‘ . Within the pr oper places, the fir s t tw o ar e »c ons titutiv e places of theology« since the y designa t e »the leg acy of the f aith« (Hünermann 2003b, 165). On the other hand, f or eign places ar e c omplemen t ar y (Cano 1900a, l. 1 c. 3). The theological places are domicilia omnium argumentorum theologicorum, in the w or ds of Cano (l. 1 c. 3). The y ar e the principles tha t epis t emologic ally support th eo l o gi c al d i scu ssi o n s ( Hü n erman n 2003b ) . T h e y ar e i n s t an ces f o r d e fi n i n g th e f aith and sour ces of Chris tian truth. The y include »all e xis ting w a y s of ar guing in theology« (Cano 1900a, l. 1 c. 3). 7 3. The Ten Theological Places 3.1 The Authority of Holy Scripture Divinely inspir ed author s wr ot e the Holy Scriptur es. These book s ar e the mos t secur e sour ce of theology . Since God, the author of the sacr ed book s, c annot lie t o us, their truth is fundame n t al t o the Chris tian lif e. These book s ar e lik e the principles of theological science, for they are necessary for any discourse about the r e v ela tion of God t o men. (l. 2 c. 1) The deba t e about the authority of Scrip tur e r ela t es t o the Ch ur ch’ s r ole in de- t ermining the c anonicity of the sacr ed book s. Martin Luther and the Pr ot es t an ts de n y t ha t t his po w e r r e side s in t he e c c le sias tic al author itie s be c ause t he Sc r ip t u- r es do not r equir e an y kind of appr o v al (l. 2 c. 6). Cano r eports the writings of John 6 See Be lda 2013, 35; K örner 2017, 92 4–925; K örner 2000, 257–269; Hünerma nn 2003a, 1–21. 7 Can o’ s e xp osi tio n o f th e th eol o gi c al p l aces r emai n s v al i d i n c on t emp o r ar y r esear ch . F o r i n s t an ce, th e Sec ond V a tic an Council has insis t ed on the import ance of his t or y and philosoph y , and has c oncluded tha t tr aditions ar e a firm sour ce of truths of f aith. 573 573 Sebastián Contreras-Aguirre - Speculative and Practical Theology... Calvin, f or whom the po w er t o judg e on the Scrip tur e c annot r eside in an y one but God. Ho w e v er , Cano r emark s tha t the Scrip tur es c annot be judg ed b y themselv es; thus, ther e mus t be an adequa t e judg e. (l. 2 cc. 6–7) Unlik e Luther , Cano belie v es tha t men, as particular individuals, c annot judg e the c anonic ity of the sac r e d book s. N ot e v e n in se c ular r e public s do c itiz e ns e x e r - cise a similar f aculty . The only possible c ourt of la w is the R oman Chur ch, de fining a book as inspir ed or not r e v ealed. The pr eceding deriv es fr om 1 Tim 3:15, wher e it is a ffirmed tha t the Chur ch is the f ounda tion of truth (l. 2 cc. 7–8). Cano writ es tha t ev en Pr ot es t an ts admit tha t, in De captivitate babylonica Ecclesiæ , Luther r ec ognises tha t only the Chur ch c an dis tingu ish human fr om di - vine w or ds. Ther e f or e, »ag ains t their will, the Luther ans accep t tha t the ecclesi- as tic al authority has the pow er t o r esolv e which ar e and which ar e not sacr ed book s« (l. 2 c. 7). Cano clo ses his analy sis b y poin ting out tha t the fir s t r esponsible f or r esolving the canonicity of the sacred books are the apostles. Indeed, »there are no other sacr ed book s in the Old and Ne w T es t amen ts than those which the apos tles de- t ermined as r e v ealed« (l. 2 c. 7). Cano adds tha t the Chur ch c annot err and tha t »if w e f ollo w the de t ermina tions of the Chur ch, w e will not be wr ong« (l. 2 c. 18). Acc or dingly , when the Chur ch es t ablishes tha t a book should be c onsider ed c a- nonic al, e v er y one mus t accep t it as legitima t e. If the Chur ch does not hold tha t po w er , f aith c ould har dly adv ance. The Chur ch de t ermines the c anonicity of the sacr ed book s thr ough the c oun - cils. The c onclusions of a c ouncil, as w e will see la t er , ar e firm rules of f aith. Ho w e- ver, disagreements may arise among the council fathers. The Pope is in charge of resolving such disagreements. Cano ob ser v es tha t human demons tr a tions ar e not decisiv e in ma tt er s of f aith. The y support f aith, but the y c annot se ttle b y themselv es superna tur al pr oblems. W e should bear in mind tha t the Chur ch’ s binding decisions ar e legitima t e not bec ause the y c ome fr om the Chur ch but bec ause God has w an t ed them t o be le- gitima t e. F or e x ample, the Gospel of Ma tthe w is not true bec ause the Chur ch has willed it, but bec ause God has r e v ealed it as accur a t e. Cano , then, c oncludes the f ollo wing: »w e belie v e tha t the Holy Spirit has inspir ed the Chur ch t o de fine the books that should be considered as canonical, but not to determine their veraci- ty or authority .« (l. 2 c. 8) 3.2 The Authority of Traditions Cano’ s elucida tion about this theologic al place s t arts e x amining the Luther an objection of the fr agility of tr aditions. Acc or ding t o the t es timon y of Thomas of W alden, the same criticism w as pr oposed b y Er asmus and, be f or e him, b y W y cle f . Cano deems it a s t andar d her e tic al err or . Simult aneously , Cano r emark s tha t much in the sacr ed bo ok s is difficult t o under s t and, as seen in the man y ob scur e passa - g es which ha v e been v ariously in t erpr e t ed. If div er se r eadings of a t e xt ar e off er ed, which one shou ld w e f ollo w? If each r eader s tick s t o his r eading as the true one, 574 Bogoslovni vestnik 81 (2021) • 3 w ouldn’t gr ea t chaos ensue? Mor eo v er , without agr eemen t on the meaning of r e v ela tion, under which crit erion ma y w e de t ermine wha t belongs t o the f aith? Only the autho rity of the T r adi tion discloses the pr ecise meaning of the Scrip tu- r es. (l. 3 cc. 2–3) 8 Chris t and other s ins titut ed some tr aditions b y the apos tles. The tr aditions in - herit ed dir ectly fr om Chris t ar e c alled perpe tual. Nobody ma y abr og a t e them, and the y ar e immut able. How ev er , if the apos tles ha v e ins titut ed the tr aditions as ecclesias tic al pas t or s, those tr aditions c an be chang ed or le ft without e ff ect. (l. 3 c. 5) 3.3 The Authority of the Universal Church Cano e xplains tha t ecclesia is a Gr eek w or d tha t means ,c on v oc a tion ‘ , ,assembly ‘ . In the Chur ch, e v er y one is g a ther ed t og e ther b y f aith in Chris t. The Chur ch is not a ph y sic al place. It is the c ommunity of Chris tian f aith ful, the mee ting of all the bap tised, be the y sain ts or not. (l. 4 c. 2; l. 4 c. 6) The Chur ch is a visible ins titution. Tha t is a typic al thesis of the Spanish scho - las tics ag ains t Luther an theolo gy , which under s t ands the Chu r ch as a pur ely spi - ritual en tity . The f aith of the Chur ch c annot err . God endor ses e v er y thing tha t the Chur ch belie v es t o be true. Whoe v er denies the inerr ancy of the Chur ch in ma tt er s of f aith denies ther eb y the assis t ance of the Holy Spirit and the po w er of binding and loosing deliv er ed b y Chris t t o P e t er and the apos tles. (l. 4 c. 4) 3.4 The Authority of Councils Cano de fines c ouncils as meetings of bishops and pries ts tha t de fine the f aith and cus t oms of the Chur ch. Or dinar y men should not solv e the pr oblems of f a- i th . Ch ri s t g a v e th e k e y s o f th e Ki n g d o m t o th e ap o s tl es an d n o t t o th e o r d i n ar y people. (l. 5 c. 2) The acts of a c ounci l ar e juri sdi ctional. Ther e ar e thr ee kinds of c ounci ls: g ene- r al, pr o vincial and diocesan. Gener al c ouncils c all t og e ther all bishop s. A g ener al council convoked by the Pope does not lose validity due to the absence of some bishop s; it suffices tha t e v er y one is summoned. Pr o vincial c ouncils g a ther the bi - shop s of an ecclesias tic al pr o vince. Finally , diocesan c ouncils ar e s ynods of pries ts fr om a particular chur ch tha t ar e pr omot ed b y the diocesan bishop. (l. 5 cc. 2–3) Gener al c ouncils not c on v ok ed or c on firmed b y the P ope and pr o vincial c oun - cils not c on firmed b y the P ope c an err (but their c onclusions c an be c orr ect ed). Without the P ope’ s assen t, the jurisdictional acts of a c ouncil lose v alidity . Acc or - dingly , g ener al and pr ovincial c ouncils c onfirmed by the P ope pr ovide cert ain doctrines in ma tt er s of f aith. The c on tr ar y c onclusion, Cano main t ains, is her es y . 8 T h e f ai th o f th e earl y C h u r ch w as n o t f o u n d ed o n th e S cri p tu r e — a t th e b egi n n i n g , th er e w as n o c an o n of the Scrip tur es! Furthermor e, »not everything belonging to the faith is in the Scripture.« Cano giv es the e x ample of the perpetual vir ginity of Mary , which, he writ es, is not f ormally f ormula t ed in the biblic al t e x ts. The same mus t be said of the cult of the martyr s and of the cult of imag es, tr aditions tha t the Chur ch c onsider s as r e v ealed b y God. 575 575 Sebastián Contreras-Aguirre - Speculative and Practical Theology... If c ouncils endor sed b y the P op e c ould err , ther e w ould be no w a y t o r esolv e the pr oble m s of f a it h. Fina lly , t he dioc e san c ounc ils c on fir m e d b y t he P ope off e r sur e ar gumen ts. (l. 5 c. 4) 3.5 The Authority of the Roman Church Cano c on t ends tha t the Chur ch of R ome c annot err in ma tt er s of f aith bec ause P e t er , who c annot err as a pas t or , w as c ons titut ed as the head and f ounda tion of the Chur ch. When P e t er dies, the Chur ch look s f or a ne w head bec ause, as in an y soci e ty , authorities ar e r equir ed t o achie v e social g oals. Ther e f or e, if it is r e - asonable t o sus t ain the Chur ch’ s unity and in t erior harmon y , a ruler with enough po w er t o solv e the doub ts and discussions tha t ma y arise a t the in tr a and e x tr a- -ecclesial le v el is necessar y . (l. 6 c. 3) The P ope is the highe s t author ity in the Chur ch. N o norms ma y be dict a t e d wi- thout his appr o v al. Acc or dingly , the Chur ch of R ome has alw a y s pr e v ailed o v er the r es t. This is so es t ablished b y divine la w , which c ommands tha t the R oman Chur ch be the f ounda tion of the Univ er sal Chur ch. (l. 6 c. 7) In the e x er cise of his functions, the P ope c annot err . Tha t is, the P ope is in f allible when he decr ees on ma tt er s of f aith. The ideas of De locis are complemented by Cano’ s handwritt en lessons on the art. 8 of the quæ. 1 of the Prima Pars: »the P ope c annot err . If he did, w e c ould not turn t o him as a firm judg e. It w ould be neces- sar y t o r esort t o somebody mor e learned and holier than him. In addition, the Chur ch is built on the P ope, and the Chur ch c annot f all. Consequen tly , its f ounda- tion c annot f all either . Other wise, the whole building w ould c ollap se.« The in f alli- bility of the P ope e xis ts bec ause »the Supr eme P on tiff , when de fining ma tt er s of f aith, does not use human po w er , but is led b y the Holy Spirit« (1982a, ff . 13–14). 3.6 The Authority of the Holy Fathers In dogma tic theology and the Holy Scrip tur es, the opinion of the Holy F a ther s is classed as pr obably accur a t e. T o o v er es tima t e their opinion is imprudence, and t o r eject it, daring. Cano f os t er s the r espectful r eading of the Holy F a ther s, altho - u gh wi th cri tic al ju d gmen t an d a cert ai n d e t ach men t. Th e y sh ou l d b e f o l l o w ed as teachers, not as lords. Cano criticises the Pr ot es t an ts sa ying tha t »Luther ans ha v e the habit of oppo - sing the c ommon opinion of the F a ther s of the Chur ch« Con tr ar y t o them, the author c onsider s tha t the an tiquity of the F a ther s’ ideas is a guar an t ee of their v er acity (1900a, l. 7 c. 3). 3.7 The Authority of the Scholastic Doctors and Canonists Acc or ding t o Cano , the ne w Pr ot es t an ts t end t o r eject the authority of scholas tic theologians. Luther , f or e x ample, holds tha t Scholas ticism only en t angles us in ignor ance r eg ar ding f aith. Ho w e v er , w e should r emark tha t Luther ’ s criticism of Scholas ticism does not poin t t o Aquinas —c on tr ar y t o wha t Cano think s–but t o Gabriel Biel’ s nominalis t theology , in which Luther w as educ a t ed (l. 8 c. 1). 576 Bogoslovni vestnik 81 (2021) • 3 Cano ar gues tha t man y her esies ar e born fr om the r ejection of Scholas ticism and sug g es ts tha t opposing it endang er s f aith. Cano w arns tha t not all v er sions of scholas tic theology should be f ollo w ed. It is only bene ficial t o f ocus on Scholas ti- cism f ou nded upon the Scrip tur es. In this c on t e x t, Cano e xplains tha t the schola - s tic theologians de f end truth and r eject err or »bec ause the err or tha t is not e xplai- ned is accep t ed,« wha t is a se v er e e vil. The y r eason with pr ecision and discipline and c on firm the t eachings of Chris t with the kno wledg e pr o vided b y human sci- ences. Among the scholas tic theologians, the majority c onsensus is not an ar gu- men t. If the thesis of the minority is solid, it c an be de f ended. In this c on t e xt, Cano writ es: »the School allo w s us t o de f end an y doctrine fr eely .« (l. 8 cc. 2–4) T og e ther with the scholas tic theologians, w e mus t c onsider the c anonis ts. Ca- non la w and theology ar e lik e ‚sis t er sciences ‘ since the cur e of souls r equir es k no w le dg e of e c c le sias tic al la w , and the w or k of c anonis ts is or de r e d t o the tr uth about God. No w , God has w an t ed c anonis ts t o e xis t. The Holy Spirit has inspir ed the ecclesias tic al la w s, and as God does not lack in wha t is necessar y , He put the c anonis ts and theologians side b y side (l. 8 c. 7). 3.8 The Authority of Natural Reason Jus t as it is a mis t ak e not t o c onsider the ar gumen ts pr o vided b y theology when e x amining na tur al subjects, it is wr ong t o ignor e the ar gumen ts of na tur al r eason: neither should r eason be w or shipped nor banished fr om theologic al disc our se. R eason and f aith ar e c omplemen t ar y pa ths (l. 9 cc. 1–2). T o suppose tha t theologic al ar gumen ts c an dispense with r eason is t an t amoun t t o belie ving tha t a man c an liv e without in t ellectual c apacity . Humanity and r ea - son c oe xis t (»b y despising r eason men cease t o be men«). Theology c annot e xis t without g enuin e r eason. Man y t ene ts of f aith ar e inc ompr ehensible without r e - c our se t o it (l. 9 c. 4). Without na tur al r eason, as e xpr essed in diff er en t sciences, f aith c annot be pr o- tected or interpreted. This ratio naturalis is m ultif or m . Fir s t, it is e xpr e sse d in the unpr o v able principles of human kno wledg e and then in the c onclusions dr a wn fr om the principles (Hünermann 2003b). 3.9 The Authority of Philosophers Philosopher s e xpr ess the authority of na tur al r eason. Luther , an an ti-Aris t ot elian, acc or ding t o Cano , had sown doub ts about the authority of philosoph y . In Luther ’ s opinion, the Scrip tur es acc oun t f or themselv es and the only science tha t ma tt er s is the e xperience of the Chris tian lif e. It is w orth sa ying a f e w w or ds about Luther ’ s criticism of Aris t ot elianism. As a g ener al rule, scholar s c onceiv e of Luther as a think er who br eak s with the pr e vi- ous T r adition —MacIn tyr e, f or e x ample, speak s of the Luther an r ejection of the classic al c once p tion of man (2007, 165–180). The br e ak w ould be mar k e d b y s t a- t emen ts such as »the ethics of Aris t otle is the enem y of gr ace« (Luther 1883, 1:226) and »the Holy Spirit ma tt er s mor e than Aris t otle« (6:5 11). An ina tt en tiv e 577 577 Sebastián Contreras-Aguirre - Speculative and Practical Theology... r eading c ould lead us t o tha t c onclusion. Ho w e v er , ther e ar e g ood r easons t o su- ppose tha t the r e f ormer is closer t o classic al philosoph y than it seems: Luther ’ s s t a t emen t tha t the Holy Spirit ma tt er s mor e than Aris t otle is under s t ood when w e bear in mind tha t Luther is discussing not with the gr ea t medie v al scholas tic in t erpr e t a tion of Aris t otle, but with polemicis ts lik e Prierias, who wr ot e tha t the t eaching of Aris t otle dazzles mor e than the sun (S v ensson 2016a). 9 Some think that Luther ’ s ruptur e with Aris totle is due t o his criticism of the power of reason, such as it is found in De servo arbitrio. How ev er , Luther poin ts out elsew - her e tha t »a ft er sin, God did not r emov e the gr ea tness of r eason, but c onfirmed it« (Luther 1883, 39/1:175). E v en mor e, he sa y s tha t in t ellig ence »… is s till a g ood in- s trumen t« (Luther 1883, TR 3, 2938b, 105, 15). Thus, the r eason is a kind of ligh t, some thing lik e a g od tha t illumina t es the things of our t empor al w orld. Its appr e- hensiv e c apacity has not been wholly los t (S v ensson 2016b, 102–106; 2019, 1–15). Despit e this, Luther emphasises the e ff ects of sin in w eak ening our in t ellectual c a- pacity much mor e than the author s of La t e Scholas ticism (Con tr er as 2018). R e turning t o the ques tion of the authority of philosoph y , it should be not ed tha t not all phil osopher s ar e r ec ommendable. On the c on tr ar y , only a f e w philo - sopher s aid theologians. One should only s tudy those who wr ot e on na tur e’ s c a- uses and the essence of mor al lif e (Cano 1900a, l. 10 c. 3). P ar aphr asing Aris t otle, Cano poin ts out tha t those who ar e driv en b y the old doctrines do w ell. He so highligh ts the truth fulness of an idea based on its an- tiq u i ty . B y th e w a y , Can o d ed i c a t es some sectio n s o f b o o k X o f De locis to analyse the philosoph y of Aris t otle. Acc or ding t o Cano , Aris t otle, »wise mos t of the time,« does not own the truth. Consequen tly , he ar gues tha t the Scriptur es mus t be mor e pr ofusely r ead and pr e f err ed than Aris t otle’ s doctrine, whose philosoph y , an yhow , brings clarity and pr ecision t o theologic al disc our se. (l. 10 cc. 4–5) 3.10 The Authority of Human History Theologians who do not know about his t ory ar e ignor an t (l. 11 c. 2). Secular his t ory is essen tial f or under s t anding the Scrip tur es bec ause men mus t belie v e tha t other men do not w an t t o bec ome li k e beas ts, and f aith in r eports of his t oric al f acts is similar t o r eligious f aith. Socie ty w ould be des tr o y ed if friend s did not trus t each other or if childr en did not belie v e their par en ts. The bond of friendship w ould be ruined, and nothing c ould sa v e in t erper sonal r ela tionship s. (l. 11 c. 4) In this c on t e x t, Cano not es tha t God implan t ed in men a na tur al t endency t o believe, trying to prove so that trust is most necessary for life. Therefore, those who oppose this na tur al inclina tion ar e f ools and figh t ag ains t the g ods as if the y had the s tr eng th t o do so. (l. 11 c. 4) 9 According to the actual stand of research, Aristotle is not a concern for Luther. He is rather interested in the puri fic a tion of theology , lik e Cano . Hence, »Luther ’ s an ti-Aris t ot elianism is not e v en par adigma - tic /… / f or his immedia t e surr oundings. Ne xt t o him is Melanch thon, who , although he yields f or a brie f time o wing t o the impr ession c aused b y Luther , la t er pr ofusely c ommen ts on Aris t otle, pr esen ting his philosoph y as the less sophis tic one tha t the nascen t Pr ot es t an t univ er sities had a t hand« (S v ensson 2016a, 56). 578 Bogoslovni vestnik 81 (2021) • 3 4. Practical and Legal Questions Although theology is primarily a theor e tic al science, the Sec ond Scholas ticism pr ofusel y enri ched pr actic al theology . Pr oof of thi s ar e the monumen t al tr ea tises De iure and De legibus wr itt e n, among othe r s, b y Doming o de Sot o , Luis de Le ón, Doming o Báñe z and Fr ancisc o Suár e z. Cano , t oo , r eg ar ds theology as a science c oncerned with c oncr e t e social and politic al pr obl e ms. The De locis pr e sen ts his incipien t le g al theor y in the section wher e he ar gues f or the leg al f orma tion of theologians and c on f essor s. Thus, he mak es a c ase f or la w as a theologic al place. His leg al theor y will be further de v e- loped b y writings which, in g ener al, the c on t empor ar y scholar s ha v e not c onside - r ed, such as his lessons on the fr eedom of the Na tiv e Americ ans or the la w of w ar . W e will sk e t ch, ther e f or e, the main thrus ts of his pr actic al theology and his the- ology of la w . 4.1 Native Americans’ Freedom Cano r e f er s t o the Na tiv e Americ ans’ righ ts in De dominio indorum (1982b, ff . 28–40). It aims t o sho w tha t Americ ans ar e not sla v es b y na tur e, unlik e the bar - barians of whom Aris t otle speak s in the Politica. Since they are free, neither the Emper or nor an y human authority ma y depriv e the Na tiv e Americ ans’ of their goods or enslave them. A c c or ding t o Ca no , sla v e r y c onsis t s of be ing subje c t t o t he w ill of a m as t e r and acc or dingly losing po w er o v er one’ s actions. Cano belie v es tha t no man is subject t o anothe r b y na tur al r ig h t, e x c e p t c hildr e n t o par e n ts and w om e n t o the ir hus- bands. F or this r eason, no one ma y subjug a t e the Na tiv e Americ ans. Na tur al la w pr o v es tha t ther e is no dis tinction be tw een one man and another . All ar e equal. Lik e wise , no one is b y na tur e a pr ince but is c ons titut e d as such b y me n. The r e - fore, no one is subject to another by nature. Despit e the abo v e, ther e is a r eason wh y a man ma y rule o v er another one: his gr ea t er in t ellectual c apacity . Acc or ding t o the na tur al or der of things, those who e x ceed in r e ason mus t g o v ern the less wise . Tha t is wh y man g o v erns beas ts, and ang els pr eside o v er men. F or the same r eason, Cano poin ts out, brut e men should be g o v erned b y the mos t prud en t. Furthermor e, f ools should be led b y the wise. Cano , so , pr oposes the f ollo wing c onclusion: »When it is necessar y f or the pr e- se r v a tion of the r e public , I g r an t tha t it is of na tur al la w tha t the w e ak of m ind be g o v erned b y other s who e x cel, and if the wise do not do so , the y sin ag ains t na- tur al la w . How ev er , the w eak -minded c annot be f or ced t o do so an y mor e the pr odig al ma y be f or ced t o hand o v er his pr operty .« 10 10 If a prince w an ts t o bene fit the Na tiv e Ameri c ans, ma y he subdue them? Cano r emark s tha t bene ficen - ce belongs t o charity and not t o jus tice, unless it is a duty ensuing fr om the office. Ther eb y , a prince ma y legitima t ely use f or ce when, f or ins t ance, the innocen t is harmed in the c ommunity of the Na tiv e Americ ans. Only in c ases lik e this is the authority allo w ed t o in t er v ene, bec ause »it is la wful f or an y per son t o help those who ar e driv en t o dea th as a c onsequence of a possible crime. W e mus t kno w , ho w e v er , tha t it is not a ques tion of a title of jus tice, but of charity , hence it only authoriz es t o de f end, not t o c onquer them.« (Cano 1982b, ff . 28–40) 579 579 Sebastián Contreras-Aguirre - Speculative and Practical Theology... 4.2 The Distinction between Natural Law and Positive Law Melchor Cano posits a bipartit e division of la w lik e Aris t otle and other Spanish scholas tics: the la w is either na tur al or positiv e. La w s tha t deriv e fr om man’ s na- tur e and e xpr ess the per son’ s social-r a tional char act er ar e c alled na tur al. Such rules c annot be abr og a t ed and ar e perpe tual (1973, ff . 3–4). On the other hand, the norms of positiv e la w ar e c on ting en t, and each r epublic dict a t es diff er en t pr e - cep ts bec ause social cir cums t ances ar e div er se in diff er en t places. Na tur al la w c on t ains primar y or self -e viden t principles and deriv ed principles. The primar y principles ar e kno wn t o e v er y one with the use of r eason. These ar e rules common to all peoples, and each person recognises them thanks to the light of the ag en t in t ellect, which r e v eals t o us wha t is c onc or dan t with na tur e. These principles, which ar e immedia t ely kno wn, i.e. without the need of r a tional disc o- ur se, ar e f ounda tions of pr actic al kno wledg e; hence, whoe v er denies them r ejec- ts the possibility of pr oper kno wledg e in the field of praxis. In t ellectual ligh t is the participa tion of divine r eason in our mind. Tha t ligh t is the same in e v er y man. It illumina t es e v er y one with the same in t ensity t o sho w the fundamen t al principles of mor ality . Dir ecting one’ s lif e b y tha t ligh t c ould sa v e us, e v en without e xplicit f aith (1900b, par s II num. 17). The na tur al pr inciple s ar e a ffi r ma tiv e and ne g a tiv e . Those who c ommand acti- ons ar e c alled a ffirma tiv e, and those who impose omissions ar e neg a tiv e. Within the opp osing principles, some ar e ab solut e and pr ohibit acts tha t ar e alw a y s un - la w ful. Cano tries t o r ec oncile this doctrine with the pr oblem of so-c alled na tur al l a w ’ s e x cep tions: ho w c oul d the ft be wr ong i f God or der ed the Je w s t o t ak e the Egyp tian v essel s? No on e d oes e vi l i f h e acts acc or d i ng t o the d i vi n e wi l l . Con si - dering this sing le f act, it seems tha t t aking the Egyp tian v essels is jus tified bec a- use God has de t ermined it. The ans w er , ho w e v er , is not t o suppose tha t God has w an t e d some thing ar bitr ar ily . Ins t e ad, this act is la w ful be c ause its mor al spe cie s is no t tha t of the ft: ther e is no the ft if God o wns e v er y thing and giv es the v essels t o the Je w s. Th is act is legitima t e bec ause »the Egyp tians had not paid the Je w s f or their ser vice and had har shly oppr essed them with f or ced labour /…/ and with e v er y kind of ser vitudes. F or this r eason, e v en in times of peace, Je w s had the righ t t o k eep their o wn /…/ bec ause ther e w as no other w a y t o claim wha t the y w er e o w ed.« (1900a, l. 2 c. 4) Ther e f or e, Cano implies tha t the r obber y is not jus tified e v en if God allo w s it. Cano think s tha t God’ s tr ans f er of the Egyp tian v essels t o the Je w s c annot be de- fined as the ft. The act of appr opria tion of the Je w s and r obber y only ha v e in c om- mon their biological or natural species. Cano g oes further than St. Thomas. Wher e the medie v al sa y s tha t the pr oblem of the Egyp tian v essels is r esolv ed b y appealing t o the in finit e po w er of God, Cano pos tula t es a v alid r eason of jus tice t o legitimise the beha viour of the Je w s. Thus, he esc apes fr om the ,decisionism ‘ tha t usually char act erises the scholas tics’ so- lutions and other e x cep tional c ases. 580 Bogoslovni vestnik 81 (2021) • 3 Na tur al la w is necessar y b y itself; tha t is t o sa y , r epublics c annot sub sis t without na tur al la w . P ositiv e la w , on the c on tr ar y , is deriv a tiv ely necessar y , acc or ding t o the cir cums t ances of civil socie ty . This la w depends on a v arie ty of places, and it is coercive. It obliges in conscience and orders social life in every point not regu- la t ed b y na tur al la w . (1982b, ff . 28–40) 11 Book VIII of De locis r eads tha t mos t of the norms of lif e ar e tr ansmitt ed in the Scrip tur es. I think this s t a t emen t mus t be qualified. The Scrip tur es c on t ain se v er al mor al norms and an abundan t number of pr ecep ts of positiv e la w , but the y do not c on t ain or tr ansmit all the norms r equir ed f or achie ving a whole social lif e. The y c annot c on t ain them bec ause the adequa t e norms f or each r epublic ar e — f or the mos t part— c on ting en t and c annot be an ticipa t ed since the pr oblems tha t will r equir e these la w s c annot be an ticipa t ed. 4.3 The Law of War W ar is a f orm of legitima t e de f ence be tw een politic al socie ties. The author s of the Sec ond Scholas ticism discuss the la w of w ar s t arting fr om the dis tinction be twix t the ius ad bellum and the ius in bello, tha t is, fr om the diff er ence be tw een the ri- gh t t o declar e w ar and the jus tice during the w ar . The main ques tion in the ius ad bellum is t he jus t c a use t o w a g e w a r . Only a se v e r e a tt a c k on t he c om m on g ood ma y legitima t e w aging w ar . It mus t be e ff ectiv e damag e, not futur e, bec ause ac- c or ding t o the g ener al rules of self -de f ence, the de f ensiv e action is only jus tified ag ains t curr en t or imminen t ag gr essions. (1981, q. 1) Cano tries t o c on fr on t Luther and the pacifis t author s. Luther and his f ollo w er s think tha t w ar is alw a y s immor al bec ause it c auses irr epar able damag e t o the liv es o f men . Ho w e v er , L u th er d o es n o t r eal i se th a t th e d e f en ce o f th e i n n ocen t o r th e c ommon g ood c an be a legitima t e c ause t o initia t e an armed de f ence: some times w ar is the only w a y t o pr eser v e social peace. Neither the disparity of r eligion nor the w ar c arried out f or the sak e of the ru- ler s’ use fulness or under the pr e t e x t of e xpanding the Chris tian f aith jus t c auses f or w aging w ar . For the ius in bello , the means deplo y ed r equir e c ar e ful analy sis. These means mus t be pr oportiona t e t o the end of the de f ence, and the y ma y not imply the e xt ermina tion of innocen t civilians. Cano , lik e Vit oria, c ondemns the v olun t ar y killing of innocents. The innocent may only die per accidens, as a c olla t er al e ff ect of the de f ence. (1981, q. 1) 4.4 Political Authority and Natural Law A lthough na tur al la w ne ithe r subdue s me n t o e ach othe r (f or »…the y ar e all bor n eq u al ,« as Can o wri t es) n o r d i r ectl y d esi gn a t es th e p ri n ces, au th o ri ties wi th th e po w er t o dict a t e la w s and en f or ce them ar e necessar y (1982b, ff . 28–40). 11 In Cano’ s view , positive law includes the ius gentium. If the law of nations wer e natur al, »no r epublic could be e x empted fr om it, since it would compel everyone. Now , it is evident that some r epublics can e x empt them - selves fr om this right, lik e the Christian r epublic, which /… / e x empts itself fr om priv ate pr operty , because in the primitive Chur ch all things wer e common, and even now among the r eligious.« (Cano 1973, ff . 3–4) 581 581 Sebastián Contreras-Aguirre - Speculative and Practical Theology... In Cano ’ s opinio n, Aris t otle’ s op timal s t a t e of na tur e s t a t es tha t the cle v er do - mina t e and the s tr ong obe y once the politic al socie ty is f ormed. Such or g anisa ti- on is the most convenient for the republic. Those governing must seek the social good and the temporal peace of the re - public (1981, q. 1). Cano r e f er s t o the na tur e of authority in the Parecer sobre la guerra contra el papa Paulo IV, wher e he writ es tha t authorities o w e their lo y al- ty t o their c ommunities (1871, 515). The y s w or e t o pr ot ect and de f end the lands tha t ar e under their g o v ernmen t »fr om an y per son who tries t o f or ce and harm them«. The de f ence of socie ty is a solemn oblig a tion, so not doing so c ould c ause gr ea t social e vils (515–517). 5. Conclusion Cano has elabor a t ed a superla tiv e, perhap s sec ond t o none, s yn thesis of schola - s tic theology . Cano’ s writings harmonise the Ca tholic T r adition —the pa tris tic and medie v al theologians in t erpr e t ed thr ough the doctrines of ancien t philosopher s— with the ideas of the flourishing Salamanc a scholas tics, mor e c oncerned with the social r eality than with emp ty disput a tions, tha t ‚sophis tic scholas ticism ‘ so criti- cised b y Er asmus and e v en b y Cano himself (1900a, l. 9 c. 1; l. 9 c. 7). An issue tha t especially c oncerned Cano w as the pr ot ection of the na tiv e Ame- ric ans’ righ ts. Acc or ding t o Cano , who deemed tha t the Amerindians w er e per sons lik e the Spaniar ds, na tur al la w w as an e x cellen t t ool f or in t er cultur al dialogue and the jus tific a tion of the r a tionality and aut onom y of the indig e ne s. Fur the r mor e , man y of Cano’ s doctrines outlined in the De locis theologicis remain valid – for ins t ance, his t eaching on na tur al jus tice – but man y other s s till lack a tt en tion in c on t empor ary r esear ch. Ther eupon is a pending challeng e t o e x amine Cano’ s w ork and c on tributions t o dogma tic theology , philosophic al and theologic al e thics, spi - ritual theology, and legal theory in detail. References Belda, Juan. 20 0 0 . M e l c h o r C a n o ü b e r K r i e g u n d Fr i e d e n . I n : N o r b e r t B r i e s ko r n a n d M a r k u s Riedenauer, eds. Suche nach Frieden: Politische Ethik in der frühen Neuzeit . V o l . 1, 1 39 – 1 6 6 . S tu tt g a r t : K o hlh am m e r . – – – . 201 3 . Melchor Cano . Ma dr i d : L ar r am e n di. Caballero, Fermín. 1 87 1 . Conquenses ilustres: Melchor Cano . M a d r i d : I m p r e n t a d e l C o l e g i o N a c i o n a l d e S o r d o m u d o s y d e C i e go s . Cano, Melchor . 1 87 1 . Conquenses ilustres: Parecer sobre la guerra contra el papa Paulo IV . Ma - d r i d : I m p r e n t a d e l C o l e g i o N a c i o n a l d e S o r d o - m u d o s y d e C i e go s . – – – . 1 9 0 0 . De locis theologicis . R o m e : L i b r e r i a Ed i t r i c e d e l l a V e r a R o m a d i En r i c o F i l izi a n i . – – – . 1 9 0 0 . Relectione de sacramentis in genere. R o m e : L i b r e r i a Ed i t r i c e d e l l a V e r a R o m a d i E nr i c o F i li z ian i. – – – . 1 97 2. Tratado de la victoria de sí mismo. M a d r i d : B AC . – – – . 1 97 3 . An ius gentium distinguatur a iure naturali . C H P 1 4 . M a d r i d : C o n s ej o S u p e r i o r d e I n v es ti g a c i o n es C i entí fi c a s . – – – . 1 9 8 1 . De bello . C H P 6 . M a d r i d : C o n s ej o S u p e r i o r d e I nv e s ti g a c i o n e s C i e n tí fi c a s . – – – . 1 9 8 2 a . De dominio indorum . C H P 9 . M a d r i d: C o n s ej o S u p e r i o r d e I nve s ti g a c i o n e s C i e n tí fi c a s . 582 Bogoslovni vestnik 81 (2021) • 3 – – – . 1 9 8 2b. In primam partem S. Thomæ. Pam - p l o n a : E u n s a . Contreras, Sebastián . 201 8 . L u t e r o e n S a l a m a n c a . I n : I n m a c u l a d a D e l g a d o a n d M i g u e l - A n x o Pena, eds. Humanismo cristiano y Reforma protestante (1517–2017) , 1 5 9 – 1 7 3 . S al am an c a : U n i v e r s i d a d Po n ti fi c i a d e S a l a m a n c a . Grabmann, Martin . 1 93 3 . Die Geschichte der katholischen Theologie . W i e n : H e r d e r . Humbert, August . 1 9 11 . Les origines de la théolo- gie modern . P a r i s: L e c o f r e. Hünermann, Peter . 20 0 3 . N e u e , l o c i t h e o l o g i c i ‘ : Ei n B e i t r a g zu r m e t h o d i s c h e n Er n e u e r u n g d e r Theologie. Cristianesimo nella storia 24:1–2 3 . – – – . 20 0 3 . Dogmatische Prinzipienlehre . Müns t e r: A sch e n dor ff . Körner, Bernhard. 20 0 0 . D i e G e s c h i c h t e a l s , l o c u s t h e o l o g i c u s‘ b e i M e l c h i o r C a n o. Rivista teologi- ca di Lugano 5, n o. 2 :2 5 7 – 2 6 9 . – – – . 201 7 . M e l c h i o r C a n o. I n : Lexikon für Theolo- gie und Kirche . Ed i t e d b y W a l t e r K a s p e r , Ko n - r a d B a u m g a r t n e r , H o r s t B ü r k l e , K l a u s G a nze r , K a r l Ke r t e l ge , W i l h e l m Ko r ff , a n d Pe t e r W a l t e r . V o l . 2, 92 4 – 92 5. V i e n n a : H e r d e r . Lang, Albert . 1 92 5. Die ,Loci theologici‘ des Mel- chior Cano und die Methode des dogmatischen Beweises. M ü n c h e n : Kö s e l u n d P u s t e t . – – – . 1 9 62. Fundamentaltheologie . Mün c h e n : Ma x Hueber. Luther, Martin . 1 8 8 3 . Werke. Weimarer Ausgabe. W e i m ar: B ö hl a u . Menéndez Pelayo, Marcelino . 1 9 9 4 . Historia de las ideas estéticas en España . M a d r i d : C S I C . – – – . 20 07 . Historia de los heterodoxos españoles. M a d r i d : B AC . Schmutz, Jacob . 2010 . M e l c h o r C a n o : L a p h i l o s o - p h i e c o m m e l i e u t h é o l o g i q u e. I n : J ea n - C h r i s - t o p h e B a r d o u t , e d . Philosophie et théologie à l’époque moderne . V o l . 3, 11 7 – 1 2 8 . P a r i s: L e s é d i ti o n s d u C e r f . Svensson, Manfred. 201 6 . Reforma protestante y tradición intelectual cristiana . B a r c e l o n a : C l i e. – – – . 201 6 . U n c a s o d e a n ti a r i s t o t e l i s m o a g u s ti n i - a n o : L u t e r o y l a r e c e p c i ó n d e A r i s t ó t e l e s e n l a Reforma protestante. Tópicos 5 0 :4 1 – 5 9 . – – – . 201 9 . A r i s t o t e l i a n Pr a c ti c a l Ph i l o s o p hy f r o m M e l a n c h t h o n t o Ei s e n h a r t: Pr o t e s t a n t C o m - m e n t a r i e s o n t h e N i c o m a c h ea n E t h i c s 1 5 2 9 – 16 8 2 . Reformation & Renaissance Review 21, n o . 3:1–21 . Tellechea, José Ignacio . 20 07 . El arzobispo Carran- za, tiempos recios . S al am an c a : U n i v e r s i d a d P o n ti fi c ia d e S al am an c a . Vilanova, Evangelista. 1 9 9 1 . Historia de la teolo- gía cristiana: Prerreforma, Reformas, Contrar- reforma . B a rce lon a : He rde r .