It's Just Unthinkable That God's Vicar On Earth, Pope Francis, Who Represents God Himself Before Men, Should Be Rebuked By Any Puny Mortal Or Disturbed By Any Sort Of Popular Outcry!

PETER: But were you the sort of man they said?
FRANCIS: What has that got to do with it? I was pope. Suppose I was a worse rascal than the Cercopes, stupider than a wooden statue or the log from which it was made, more foul than the swamp of Lerna; whoever holds this key of powermust be revered as the vicar of Christ and reverenced as the holiest of men.
PETER: Even if he's openly evil?
FRANCIS: As open as you like. It's just unthinkable that God's vicar on earth, who represents God himself before men, should be rebuked by any puny mortal or disturbed by any sort of popular outcry.
PETER: But common sense is outraged if we must feel warmly toward one whom we see to be evil, or speak well of one about whom we think ill.
FRANCIS: Let every man think as he will, as long as he speaks well or at least holds his tongue. The pope of Rome cannot be censured by anyone, not by a general council.
PETER: This one thing I know, that Christ's vicar on earth should be as much like him as possible, and lead his life in such a way that nobody can blame any part of it, or justifiably speak evil of him. Things go badly with popes when, instead of earning men's commendations by good deeds, they extort praises with threats. Such popes cannot be praised without lying; indeed, they can't expect anything more than the sullen silence of those who hate them. Tell me now truly, is there no way at all to correct a criminal, infectious pope?
FRANCIS: Absurd. Who is going to remove the highest authority of all?
PETER: That's exactly why he should be removed, because he's the highest figure; for the higher he is, the more pernicious his influence may be. If secular laws allow for a king who rules his land badly to be not only deposed but executed, why should the church be so helpless that it must put up with a pope who ruins everything, instead of expelling him as a public nuisance?
FRANCIS: If the pope is to be corrected, it ought to be by a council; but against the will of the pope a council can't be called; otherwise it would be a mere convention, not a proper council. Even if it were called, it couldn't issue any decrees if the pope objected. And finally, my last defense is absolute power, of which the pope possesses more, all by himself, than an entire council. In short, the pope can't be removed from office for any crime whatever.
PETER: Not for homicide?
FRANCIS: Not for parricide.
PETER: Not for fornication?
FRANCIS: Ridiculous! not even for incest.
PETER: Not for the sin of simony?
FRANCIS: Not for six hundred such sins.
PETER: Not for poisoning someone?
FRANCIS: Not even for sacrilege.
PETER: Not for blasphemy?
FRANCIS: No, I say.
PETER: Not for all these crimes poured together in a single sewer of a man?
FRANCIS: Add if you like the names of six hundred other vices, each one worse than any of these, and still the pope cannot be removed from his throne for any such reasons.
PETER: This is a new doctrine about the dignity of the pope that I've picked up here; he alone, it seems, is entitled to be the worst of men. I've also learned about a new misery for the church, that she alone is unable to rid herself of such a monster, but is forced to adore a pope with a character that nobody would endure in a stable-boy.
FRANCIS: Some say there is a single reason for which a pope can be removed.
PETER: What kind of good deed is that, please tell me-since he can't be removed for evil deeds, such as those I've mentioned.
FRANCIS: For the crime of heresy; but only if he's been publicly convicted of it. In reality, this is just a flimsy thread of an exception, that doesn't limit papal authority by a single scintilla. The pope can always repeal the law, if it bothers him in the least. And then who would dare to accuse the pope himself, entrenched as he is behind so many lines of defense? Besides, if he were hard pressed by a council, it would be easy to save face with a recantation if a flat denial didn't dispose of the matter. Finally, there are a thousand different deceptions and evasions by which he could get away, unless he were a plain wooden stock instead of a man.
PETER: But tell me on your papal authority, who thought up such splendid laws as these?
FRANCIS: Who else but the wellspring of all laws, the Roman pope? And by the same token, it's his privilege to abrogate the law, interpret it, expand it, or shrink it, just as suits his convenience. PETER: A happy pope he must be if he can propound a law by which he can get around Christ and even a council. Though as a matter of fact, against a pope of the sort you've just described-an open criminal, a drunkard, a murderer, a simoniac, a poisoner, a perjurer, a skinflint, a man befouled in every part of his life with the most atrocious and disgusting lusts, and completely shameless about it all-I wouldn't propose a general council but a public uprising: the people should arm themselves with stones and expel such an infectious plague forever from their midst.

With Liberties: Desiderius Erasmus, The Praise of Folly and Other Writings, trans. Robert M. Adams (New York and London: Norton Critical Edition:, 1989)