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. XLIIV

Chapter 44

Student: You have said that in my response to the principal argument I proposed three points, which appeared false to some, and in fact you have dealt with the first of these. Now discuss the second.

Master: The second point which your response seemed to suggest is that a heretic pope should in no way be destroyed so long as he is tolerated by the church. This appeared to some to be false because of an erroneous implication. For if a heretic pope is tolerated by the church, either he is tolerated by the catholic church or by a church which is heretic and schismatic. If by a church heretic and schismatic, it is manifest that on account of its toleration one must not forego the elimination of a heretic pope. If, on the other hand, the catholic church tolerates him, this can only happen because the catholic church is unaware that the pope is a heretic. For if it knew that he was a heretic it would in no way tolerate him. But because of the ignorance of the catholic church one must not desist from the destruction of a heretic pope when it can be demonstrated that he is a heretic. For those who know that the pope is a heretic must reveal this to the catholic church if they can prove him to be a heretic. After the church has diligently inquired and discovered the truth, it will in no way tolerate a heretic pope. And those who have the duty of announcing to the catholic church the treachery of a heretic pope must also condemn him with effect if they possess a teaching responsibility. Therefore even if an uninformed catholic church tolerates a heretic pope, the preachers and doctors who know that he is a heretic must not stop attacking him. And thus even if a heretic pope is tolerated by the catholic church, that is to say by the multitude of the Christian people, he must nevertheless be vigorously assaulted by those who know that he is a heretic.

Student: Here two things would need to be proved. The first of which is that the catholic church would never knowingly tolerate a heretic pope. The second is that they who knew that the pope was a heretic would be obligated to reveal this to the catholic church when they could advance corroborative evidence. Attempt if you will to demonstrate both points.

Master: The first is proved as follows. Although the catholic church may err as to matters of fact (whence the universal church did commit a factual error when it venerated a woman as pope ['Pope Joan': cf. Ockham OQ 1.17.22-24], and it might likewise err in this fashion if some unbaptized individual who was believed to be baptized or some secret heretic were to be elected pope and recognized as pope by the universal church), nevertheless the universal church cannot be in error as to matters which pertain to divine and natural law. But were the universal church to tolerate a heretic pope, it would err as to matters of divine law, because it would knowingly recognize as pope one who would have been deprived of the papacy by divine right, a recognition which would not avoid an error of divine law, since to reckon a heretic to be a true pope is against Holy Writ, in that one evidently concludes from Divine Scripture that a heretic pope is not a true pope, as was shown in the 68th chapter of Book Six [1 Dial. 6.68]. Therefore the catholic church will never knowingly tolerate a heretic pope.

Student: This is not an effective argument, because the catholic church by tolerating a heretic pope would not err as to matters of divine law unless it reckoned a heretic pope to be a true pope. But the catholic church might tolerate a heretic pope without reckoning him to be a true pope, because many things are tolerated which are hardly approved, witness Innocent III who states (as we find in Extra, De prebendis, Cum iam dudum)[col. 471]: " since many things are patiently tolerated which if taken to court a rigorous justice would not allow to be tolerated". From these words one gathers that many things are tolerated which are hardly approved, and thus the catholic church may tolerate a heretic pope without falling into error.

Master: The answer is that just as the universal church will never be in error as to matters of divine law, so will the universal church never lack for justice and love to the end of time, according to the statement of the Apostle in Ephesians 5: "Christ also hath loved us" (i.e. the church) "and hath given himself" [Ephesians 5:2] for her, that he might make her holy, cleaning her as a bath of water in the Word of life, that he might create for himself a glorious church, one holy and immaculate, having neither stain nor wrinkle nor anything of the sort. Yet the church would not be holy and stainless or founded in love and justice if it knowingly tolerated a heretic pope. Therefore never will the universal church knowingly tolerate a heretic pope if it has the power to punish him. And should it not be able to punish him physically it will at least condemn him spiritually, by words. As confirming proof of this, it must be known that while there are some evils which are tolerated by the church since they are hardly punished, there are nevertheless other evils which should not be tolerated by the church if it has the power to punish them. Indeed just as we have it from Gregory in dis. 28 c. Quia sunt [col. 103] that "there are some sins concerning which it is a sin to weaken retribution", so are there certain sins which must hardly be tolerated, since it is a matter of public interest that crimes not remain unpunished (Extra, De sententia excommunicationis, Ut fame)[col. 904]. Such sins however are above all those which are committed against God and against the common good (23 q. 4 c. Si is and c. Si ea)[col. 912]. But the treachery of heresy in a heretic pope is committed against god and in damage to the faith, which is common to all. Therefore the universal church will never tolerate the treachery of heresy in a heretic pope, since by knowingly tolerating heretical wickedness in the pope it would become a schismatic church, because a church, which knowingly supports a schismatic, is a schismatic church. But a schismatic church is not the catholic and universal church. And so the universal and catholic church will never knowingly tolerate the treachery of a heretic pope (for by the very fact that he is a heretic he is also a schismatic) by recognizing him as a true pope. Although the multitude of Christians will perhaps tolerate a heretic pope, and true Catholics will suffer the harshest persecution from him, the latter will even so hardly tolerate him by obeying him as they would a true pope.

Student: You have recited how one proves that the catholic church would never knowingly tolerate a heretic pope. Now attempt to prove the corollary, namely that those knowing the pope to be a heretic would be obligated to reveal this to the catholic church.

Master: It appears this can be proved as follows. Catholics have the duty to reveal or to announce to other uninformed Catholics a matter, which, if concealed, would involve the diminution of God's honour as well as a common and conspicuous harm to believers. But the treachery of a heretic pope attempting to corrupt orthodox faith would involve the diminution of God's honour as well as a common and conspicuous harm to believers. Therefore Catholics who know that the pope is a heretic must reveal this to others if they can actually prove it.