Vox Populi, vox Dei
"The voice of the people is the voice of God."
- Walter Reynolds, Archbishop of Canterbury. Text of Sermon when Edward III ascended the throne, Feb. 1, 1327
Q: Do you agree or not with this 14th century Archbishop of Canterbury? If you are an atheist or non-believer, do you concur with the sentiment behind it or not?
Alexander Pope certainly didn't agree during the 18th century:The people's voice is odd,
It is, and it is not, the voice of God.
It is, and it is not, the voice of God.
- Alexander Pope, To Augustus, Book II, Epistle I, line 89.
Even during the height of the Enlightenment of the 18th century, Voltaire condemned this idea:
Les préjugés, ami, sont les rois du vulgaire.
- Prejudices, friend, govern the vulgar crowd.
- Voltaire, Le Fanatisme, II. 4.
The intellectual roots of this widespread adage or proverb vox populi, vox dei in Christian countries goes back to the Old Testament, namely 1 Samuel 8:7 -
And the Lord said unto Samuel, Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee:
And Isaiah 66:6 -
A voice of the people from the city, a voice from the temple, the voice of the Lord
Christianity universalized this concept, interpreting it to encompass all humankind rather than just the people of Israel but it was originally Jewish in origin.
In its medieval, latinate formulation it first arose from "an early tradition that the community of Rome had the right to elect the Pope" (The Vacant See in Early Modern Rome: A Social History of the Papal Interregnum, p.18). See:
The American Spectator
In the first millennium of the Christian era, when popes were chosen by popular acclaim...the people expressed the overwhelming will of the Catholic Church: vox populi, vox Dei ("the voice of the people is the voice of God").
Thus Pope Leo the Great emphatically affirmed that right in 440 A.D. when he declared
Letter x. To the Bishops of the Province of vienne. In the Matter of Hilary, Bishop of Arles .
"The consent of the clergy, the testimony of those held in honour, the approval of the orders and the laity should be required. He who is to govern all, should be elected by all...
When the election of the chief priest is being considered, the one whom the unanimous consent of the clergy and people demands should be preferred. ... No one who is unwanted and unasked for should be ordained, lest the city despise or hate a bishop whom they did not choose."
Another paradigmatic example is the 991 A.D. letter of the bishops of Reims (quoted in Raiding Saint Peter p.26 by Joelle Rollo-Koster), which stated that they had named a bishop at the behest of the crowd's "clamour", listening in the latter instance because the scriptures read that "the voice of the people is the voice of God" while the Holy Canons state that the episcopal election reflects the wishes and desires of both the clergy and the people, with the aforementioned scholar opining that:When the election of the chief priest is being considered, the one whom the unanimous consent of the clergy and people demands should be preferred. ... No one who is unwanted and unasked for should be ordained, lest the city despise or hate a bishop whom they did not choose."
"the texts imply a general involvement of the population, regardless of social hierarchy, and it is the openness of the process that offered consensus - hence divine intervention. When reading these early Christian hagiographic texts, it is not implausible to infer that divine intervention emanated from democratic consensus - in the modern sense. The early medieval church was willing to antagonize 'Caesar' and open itself to the 'masses' for the sake of its independence"(ibid. p.27)
The strong distaste in which secular rulers held this doctrine, courtesy of its subversive appeal to the common people, is made abundantly clear from the scorn of Holy Emperor Charlemagne's advisor Alcuin, when he wrote to him:
Nec audiendi sunt qui solent dicere vox populi, vox dei; cum tumultus vulgi semper insaniæ proxima sit.
- We would not listen to those who were wont to say the voice of the people is the voice of God, for the voice of the mob is near akin to madness.
- Alcuin, Epistle to Charlemagne. Froben's Ed, Volume I, p. 191. (Ed. 1771)
As noted by the above historian, there was certainly an element of cynical calculation in the early church's rhetoric of egalitarian populism during the first millennium but it still, nonetheless, provided theological sanction for this idea in both theory and in practice until 1052 (when the papacy restricted papal electors to an elite college of cardinals), than it otherwise would have enjoyed.
And by jove, has this idea proved to have a long-shelf life in the political history of the West, once it had outlived its usefulness for the Catholic Church!
But the legacy of this doctrine has not been invariably positive.
Since Rousseau hailed the “general will” in the mid-18th century, the history of those who have declared themselves its authentic voice has been, shall we say, murky. The 20th century was an abject lesson in the perils of populism and demagoguery. To be declared an "enemy of the people" was a convenient way of disposing of political miscreants, as Rousseau himself implied:
"When the entire nation is in danger . . . a thing which is a crime at other times becomes a praiseworthy action. Lenience toward conspirators is treason against the people...The state, in regard to its members, is master of all their goods. The sovereign — that is to say the people — may legitimately take away the goods of everyone, as was done at Sparta in the time of Lycurgus’..."
- Rousseau
- Rousseau
His disciple Robespierre, during the French Revolution, embarked upon a campaign of systematic repression and terror directed against fellow citizens - defamed as "saboteurs" and "traitors" - who dared to question the supposed indivisible "will of the people".
Once properly recognised, there was no longer any reason for checks and balances on power in the political system, because it emanated from the general will, which would lead to universal happiness of the people - once society was cleansed of the traitors.
Indeed, Rousseau recommended that:
"whoever refuses to obey the general will shall be constrained to do so by the whole body, which means nothing else than that he shall be forced to be free".
He had absolutely no conception of minority rights, or even the freedom of conscience to think, speak and act in opposition to the general will.
So the concept, while noble and powerful, can also be horribly abused. Edmund Burke is famous for having criticised the concept accordingly:
The tyranny of a multitude is a multiplied tyranny
Classical pagan authors such as Plato, Aristotle, Suetonius, Juvenal, Virgil, Horace and Cicero had also expressed grave opposition to ideas akin to it in their time:- Edmund Burke, to Thomas Mercer (Feb. 26, 1790).
- Qui ex errore imperitæ multitudinis pendet, hic in magnis viris non est habendus.
- He who hangs on the errors of the ignorant multitude, must not be counted among great men.
- Cicero, De Officiis (44 B.C.), I. 19.
- Qui ex errore imperitæ multitudinis pendet, hic in magnis viris non est habendus.
- Vulgus ex veritate pauca, ex opinione multa æstimat.
- The rabble estimate few things according to their real value, most things according to their prejudices.
- Cicero, Oratio Pro Quinto Roscio Comœdo, X. 29.
- Grex venalium.
- A flock of hirelings (venal pack).
- Suetonius, De Clar. Rhet. I.
- Odi profanum vulgus et ardeo.
Favete linguis.- I hate the uncultivated crowd and keep them at a distance. Favour me by your tongues (keep silence).
- Horace, Odes, Book III. 1. ("Favete linguis" also found in Cicero, Ovid.
- Sævitque animis ignobile vulgus,
Jamque faces et saxa volant.
- Vulgus ex veritate pauca, ex opinione multa æstimat.
Last edited:
