ANOTHER OBJECTION TO THE PROPOSED DESCRIPTION OF A HERETIC CHAPTER 11 ~ WILLIAM OF OCKHAM

CHAPTER 11

ANOTHER OBJECTION TO THE PROPOSED DESCRIPTION OF A HERETIC  

Student I want the reply to one further objection which seems to shatter the whole preceding description of a heretic. For as we find in 24, q. 3, c. Haereticus [col.998], blessed Augustine defines a heretic in this way, "A heretic is someone who either generates or follows false and new opinions for the sake of some temporal advantage and especially for the sake of his own glory and rule." We gather from this definition that those who only imitate old heresies should not be regarded as heretics even if they are pertinacious. And so the earlier description of a heretic was not suitably ascribed because it applies to many people, namely those who only imitate old heresies, who should nevertheless not be judged as heretics according to Augustine's definition in that they neither generate nor follow new opinions.

Again, many who are baptised err pertinaciously only because of credulity or deception, not for the sake of any temporal advantage nor for the sake of vain glory or their own rule. And, consequently, they should not be judged as heretics according to Augustine's definition. And yet that oft-cited description applies to them. Therefore it is not a true description.

Again, someone certain about the faith who doubts nothing can generate and follow new and false opinions against his own conscience for the sake of some temporal advantage and especially for the sake of vain glory and his own rule. Therefore someone who is certain about the faith and doubts nothing can be a heretic according to Augustine's definition. A heretic is badly described, therefore, when it is asserted that every heretic doubts or errs pertinaciously against catholic truth.

Master They reply to these by saying that Augustine did not intend to define a heretic in the above words, but intended to mark out one way of knowing a heretic, that is that anyone who generates or follows false and new opinions for the sake of some temporal advantage and especially for the sake of vain glory and his own rule is considered a heretic. Hence although in the proposition which Augustine puts, if it is understood universally, the word "heretic" is verbally placed first before the copula, and someone can form the opinion from this that "heretic" is the subject, yet the truth of the matter is, they say, that "heretic" ought to be the predicate and what follows ought to be the subject. And in that way, under a sound understanding, the following universal formed from Augustine's words should be granted, that is, anyone who generates or follows new and false opinions against the faith for the sake of some temporal advantage and especially for the sake of vain glory and his own rule with the intention of defending them pertinaciously should be regarded as a heretic, although if he were to generate or follow heresies in that way against his conscience, not doubting in his heart anything pertaining to the faith, he would not be a heretic before God, who sees his heart, though he would sin most mortally in God's eyes.

Student How should someone be regarded as a heretic if he is not a heretic in God's eyes?

Master This is easily replied to because we have the power to judge only about externals, while hidden matters belong to divine judgement. And therefore such a person should be considered a heretic by us because of those things that appear to us externally even if he is not a heretic in God's eyes, just as we should often think many men to be good because there seems to us to be no evil in them who are nevertheless very evil in God's eyes.

Student Run through the objections that I made.

Master The reply to the first of them is that those who pertinaciously imitate old heresies should be considered heretics. And therefore not only those who generate or follow new and false opinions for any reason at all are heretics, but also others. For he who would now defend Arius's heresy, condemned from of old, should be adjudged a heretic. And Augustine's words do not oppose this because, as has been said, he did not intend to ascribe a definition or description of a heretic by those words. Hence they say that many people are often misled by the propositions of saints and writers thinking that they want to give definitions or descriptions of things or words when sometimes they only intend to affirm propositions as particularly true.

The reply to the second is that those erring pertinaciously only because of credulity or deception should be adjudged heretical because not only those of whom Augustine speaks in the afore-mentioned words should be considered heretics but also others.

To the third they say that those who do not doubt in their heart and yet follow heretical assertions for the sake of some temporal advantage or perhaps in order to avoid some temporal danger short of death, (of whom they say there are many in these days, and especially from the Order of Friars Minor who follow new opinions about the poverty of Christ and the apostles and also about the souls of the damned and of the saints which in their hearts they think are heretical and which they nevertheless defend with pertinacious ill will) are not in truth of fact heretics, and yet they should be regarded as heretics by believers, who do not have the power to judge the hidden movements of the soul, and they should be smitten as heretics. And if they were to say afterwards that they had not held the said heresies in their mind but had feigned to hold them in order to obtain some temporal advantage or to avoid some danger, no trust should be offered to them but they should be repulsed as false and duplicitous from [giving] any assertion in testimony.

Student I will question you carefully elsewhere about those whom they adduce as an example, and I will strongly bring points forward to prove that those who are followers of Pope John XXII are not heretics or errants but are believing catholics.

Master So do you want this to be the end of this [part of] the work?

William of Ockham, Dialogus
part 1, book 3, chapters 6-11.

Text by John Kilcullen and John Scott,
Translation by John Kilcullen.

Comments