POPE FRANCIS - A HERETIC? ON THE PUNISHMENT OF HERETICS AND ESPECIALLY OF THE POPE WHO HAS BECOME A HERETIC WILLIAM OF OCKHAM Dial. 7 CHP. XLII

Pope Francis
Caserta

Chapter 42

Student: Let us now see about doctors and masters, whether those who teach and hold the heretical doctrine of a heretic pope would be collaborators in heretical depravity.

Master: Whom do you include in the expression 'doctors and masters'.

Student: By 'doctors and masters' I understand all those who are charged with the duty of preaching or reading catholic doctrine.

Master: Therefore you reckon that among doctors and masters should be included not only masters of theology but also all readers and bachelors of theology, and likewise canonists who read the books of decrees and decretals in which are contained many matters pertinent to catholic doctrine, and also parish priests and those who possess the office of preaching by authority of the pope or of another prelate.

Student: Just so. For all the aforementioned have the task of teaching catholic truth. Wherefore proceed to discuss whether they would be collaborators in heretical wickedness or should even be numbered among the heretics if they were to publicly preach or hold the heretical doctrine of a heretic pope.

Master: The discussion requires distinctions. For either the erroneous doctrine of the pope is such that the aforementioned doctors and masters are bound to believe explicitly the contrary truth, or it is such that they are not bound to explicitly believe the contrary truth. Again, either they previously knew that the pope's doctrine was wrong, or they did not know this. Further, either the pope's erroneous doctrine is solemnly defined or determined by him, or it is not solemnly defined but merely pertinaciously preached or asserted.

If accordingly the heretical doctrine of the pope is such that doctors and masters are obligated to explicitly believe the opposite truth, because it is common knowledge among all Catholics, or if they previously learned the opposite truth to be catholic truth, and the doctors and masters who teach this erroneous doctrine of a heretic pope publicly (in whatever fashion) or privately have not forgotten this prior learning, they are to be reckoned collaborators in heretical wickedness and heretics, because every one who teaches or maintains a heretical statement whose contrary truth he is bound to believe explicitly is to be considered a heretic.

But if the pope's erroneous doctrine is such that doctors and masters are not bound to explicitly believe the opposite truth, nor has the erroneous doctrine been solemnly defined or determined by the pope, one who teaches it publicly or privately is not by this single fact to be considered a collaborator in heretical wickedness or a heretic. He is rather to be diligently and scrupulously examined as to his readiness to be corrected. If on the one hand he is ready to be corrected, so that he can in no way be convicted of pertinacity, then he is not to be considered guilty. If on the other hand he is not ready to be corrected, but continues to pertinaciously hold the erroneous doctrine of a heretic pope, then he is to be reckoned a collaborator in heretical wickedness and a heretic.

If, finally, doctors and masters publicly teach a false doctrine of the pope which they know to have been solemnly defined by him, and if they teach that such a definition of the pope is obligatory, they are to be reckoned collaborators in heretical wickedness and also heretics, whether they are bound to explicitly believe the contrary truth or whether they are not bound to believe it explicitly. Here is the proof of this statement. Whoever pertinaciously supports a doctrine which is against the faith is to be reckoned a heretic. But doctors and masters who teach that a false definition of the pope is obligatory pertinaciously support a falsely defined doctrine, because he who asserts that one must support a false doctrine irrevocably and no matter what is to be considered as pertinaciously supporting this doctrine, and therefore is to be thought pertinacious, and consequently is to be reckoned a heretic. Again, a doctor or master who publicly teaches that a heretical definition of the pope is obligatory sins no less than if he had consented that the pope should solemnly define such a doctrine. But if a doctor or master had consented that the pope should define such a doctrine, he would have been a collaborator in heretical wickedness. Therefore by teaching that the pope's false definition is obligatory he is to be reckoned a collaborator in heretical wickedness.


Comments