ALGERO of LIEGE. — Theologian and canonist (1060?–1131). Born in a region particularly attached to the emperor and consequently strongly wavering between imperial and papal policy, he experienced the entire drama of the Investiture Controversy. A scholasticus of S. Bartolomeo of Liege, in 1101 he was promoted to canon of S. Lamberto by Bishop Otberto, loyal to the emperor Enrico IV, who submitted to the Pope only in 1106, thereby bringing the schism to an end. At that point everyone, laity and clergy alike, joined the Gregorian party: it was precisely at this moment that A. wrote the De misericordia et iustitia in defense of the canonical provisions of Gregorio VII and to delineate the relations between Pope and Emperor. As his reputation spread in Germany, he was solicited by German bishops, but, a man without ambition, he preferred to remain in his homeland. At Otberto’s death (1119), a new division of minds arose over the election of his successor: A., by then weary of so many struggles, withdrew to Cluny, which at that very moment was enjoying peace and prosperity under the wise rule of Pietro il Venerabile. There he received priestly ordination and prepared himself for death, earning the high praise of his holy abbot. His biographer and fellow member of the chapter, Nicola di Liegi, portrays A. as follows: « Erat subtilis ingenio, facundus eloquio, in proposito stabilis et quod his omnibus est pretiosus existimabatur et erat tam fide quam doctrina catholicus » (Elogium Alg., Leod.: PL 180, 737).
Passing over the lost letters and the De dignitate Ecclesiae Cathedralis, as well as the De libero arbitrio and the Liber Sententiarum Magistri A., whose authenticity is doubtful, we must dwell on the two works that have given A.’s name to theology and law. The occasion on which he wrote the De misericordia et iustitia has already been indicated; it was published for the first time by dom Martène in 1717 and reproduced in PL 180, 857–968. The author begins by noting the marked antinomy among the canons: some are very severe, others excessively lenient, so that in their application they leave the mind wavering between condemnation and forgiveness. This contrast, A. explains, is due to ignorance of the circumstances in which the canonical laws were promulgated: the Church sometimes forgives, whereas at other times it punishes because it takes account of the particular circumstances in which the crime was committed. It is therefore not the letter but the spirit of the law that must be grasped from the texts, so as to harmonize them: « Ad haec elaboravi, ut in canonibus adeo intentionis, utilitatis, veritatis eluceret unitas, ut nullam contrarietatis discordiam pararet aliqua eorum diversitas » (col. 858). The work is divided into three parts (comprising 358 chapters): in the first he treats of mercy, that is, indulgence, indicating the cases in which it should be employed; in the second he speaks of justice, that is, of how to apply the « strictum ius »; in the third he addresses the burning question of heresies and the value of the sacraments administered by heretics. The book is practical rather than speculative in character, taking into account the special difficulties in which A. found himself after his submission to the Pope: many delicate cases involving excommunicated, simoniacal, and married priests had to be resolved. The work is of particular interest today as one of the earliest attempts at a theory of the interpretation of law. In order to resolve divergences of interpretation, A. followed in it a method derived from that of Abelardo, known as the « sic et non », which was later also followed by Graziano; it is moreover important as a collection of canonical legal sources, since A., making use also of various earlier collections, gathered in it many patristic texts, 125 decretals, and fragments of letters of S. Gregorio Magno (in the Decree of Graziano, about a hundred texts and 16 dicta are drawn from A.’s work).
As a theologian he will always be remembered for his De sacramentis corporis et sanguinis dominici, contained in many codices and first printed by Erasmo in 1530 at Friburgo in Brisgovia together with the analogous work of Guimondo di Aversa, with the aim of opposing the innovations of the Protestants with the doctrine of four centuries earlier. Many other editions followed, up to that of the Lovaniensis Ulimmer (1561), reproduced by Malou (1847), by Migne (PL 180, 737–856), and by Fr. Hurter (SS. Patrum opuscula selecta, XXIII, Innsbruck 1873, pp. 58–370). The work, composed between 1110 and 1121, is divided into three books: the first and most important treats de veritate et virtute corporis Christi in 22 chapters. After an introduction on the importance of the Eucharist in the divine economy (chapters 1–3), the two aspects of truth and figure in the Eucharistic mystery are studied in particular: the dominant idea is clear, though its development is less so; three concepts, however, follow one another with sufficient clarity: the body of Christ is present in the sacrament (chapters 4–8); the same body was born of Maria (chapters 9–16); sacramental presence does not impair the reality of the body born of the Virgin (chapters 17–22). The second book (10 chapters) consists of a series of quaestiumculae, from which valuable complementary clarifications can be drawn. The third (14 chapters) treats the value of the sacraments « extra Ecclesiam » and defends their validity through closely reasoned argument. In this work, besides a vigorous affirmation of the real presence, which is shown not to be impaired by the figurative character of the sacrament, the doctrines of transubstantiation and of the permanence of the accidents are sketched, as a prelude to the syntheses of the thirteenth century. On the question of sacrifice, the Augustinian line is followed with this felicitous formula: « Christus in sacramento quotidie non passus sed quasi pati repræsentatus » (PL 180, 787). Even more felicitous are the words expressing the participation of the faithful in the sacrifice of the Mass: « In altari Ecclesia concorporalis et consacramentalis est Christo » (ibid., 847).
The scholasticus of Liege worthily closes the ranks of the great opponents of Berengario di Tours (d. 1088) and deserves the praise of Pietro il Venerabile: if concerning the Eucharist Lanfranco wrote bene plene et perfecte, and Guimondo melius plenius et perfectius, Algero optime plenissime et perfectissime (Contra Petrobrusianos: PL 189, 788).