IS IT FOR CANONISTS, OR FOR THEOLOGIANS, TO DECIDE WHAT IS HERESY? - WILLIAM OF OCKHAM Dial. 1 CHP. I

Pope Francis At The Ankara Mausoleum of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, The Founder And First President Of The Republic Of Turkey

Book 1
Chapter 1

Student: SINCE my investigation into very many matters is occasioned by the dissension I see among Christians about heretical and catholic assertions, and also about heretical and orthodox persons, I have considered that it should first be asked to whom does it chiefly belong, to theologians or to canonists, to define which assertion should be considered catholic, which heretical. [See Scott, "Theologians vs Canonists on Heresy".]

Master: The reply to the question you put forward is that the word "define" has several meanings, two of which seem relevant to the point at issue. For it is possible to define something by the authority of one's office, and to define in this way which assertion should be considered heretical and which catholic pertains to the highest pontiff and a general council. In another way, it is possible to define by means of teaching, in the way masters in the schools define and determine questions. With the word "define" taken in this latter way, the learned have different opinions about the question put forward.

Student: At present I am taking the word "define" in the second way. And with the word taken thus, I want to hear the different opinions and the arguments for them.

Master: It is the opinion of some that it pertains chiefly to canonists to judge which assertion is catholic, which heretical. It seems possible that they are moved to this opinion by three arguments, the first of which is this. To discern which assertion should be considered catholic, which heretical, pertains chiefly to that science which principally treats of the approval of catholic truths and the disapproval of condemned heresies. This is the science of the canonists and not theology. Therefore, etc.

The second argument is this. To define which assertion should be considered catholic, which heretical, pertains to the science to which trust in matters of belief is more chiefly given. But with respect to matters of faith the science of the canonists should be believed more than theology, because the Church, through which the science of the canonists is produced, should be believed more than the gospel, as Augustine attests , who seems to assert that the authority of the Church is greater than that of the gospel, since he says, "I would not believe the gospel unless the authority of the Church had compelled it." To define which assertion should be considered catholic and which heretical, therefore, pertains more to the science of the canonists than to theology.

The third argument is this. To determine which assertion should be considered catholic, which heretical, pertains chiefly to the science whose author has the task of appointing the creed of the faith and duly distinguishing the articles of faith. But this pertains to the highest pontiff, who is the author of the science of the canonists. It pertains to the science of the canonists, therefore, and consequently more chiefly to them than to theologians, to define which assertion should be regarded as catholic, which heretical.