WHAT IS A HERESY? BOOK 2 CHAPTER 30 IS A POPE TO BLAME IF HE DOES NOT CONDEMN THE HERESIES OF WELL-INTENTIONED THEOLOGIANS? ~ WILLIAM OF OCKHAM
CHAPTER 30
IS A POPE TO BLAME IF HE DOES NOT CONDEMN THE HERESIES OF WELL-INTENTIONED THEOLOGIANS?
Student Those examples greatly distress my mind and so I want to know whether some people try to excuse the said highest pontiffs in some other way.
Master Some people excuse them by their simplicity and ignorance of the scriptures, saying that since the time of Innocent III there have been no highest pontiffs who excelled in knowledge of sacred letters, and so they have not wanted to involve themselves in perplexing and difficult questions but have left such matters to be discussed by theologians, contenting themselves with those matters that are known to have been explicitly approved. About new opinions, however, they have wanted rather to doubt them piously, in accordance with the advice of blessed Jerome {actually Peter Comestor, Historia Scholastica, PL 198, col.1643], than to define something rashly.
Student That opinion seems to agree with those who say that it pertains chiefly to theologians not to canonists to judge between heretical and catholic assertions. For there have been many highest pontiffs after the times of Innocent III who have been very learned in canon law, although they have not been outstanding in theology. If it were chiefly to pertain to canonists, therefore, to judge between catholic and heretical truths they would not be able to be excused in the aforesaid way for not condemning heresies taught among theologians as doctrine. But would they have been able to be excused if they had been masters in theology?
Master They say 'yes', because there are many people, they affirm, who have the name of doctor in theology who have been raised to the position of master through human favours, undue patronage and devilish ambitions and who are wholly ignorant of sacred letters.
Comments
Post a Comment