Heretic Pope & Democratically Elected Italian Head Of State Giorgio Napolitano
Dare Not Judge The Pope

Chapter 6

Student: I think you have produced rather strong arguments for the aforementioned opinion. Apply yourself therefore to the contrary assertion, and try to show that neither the emperor nor any secular person would be the pope's normal judge, for I believe this assertion is consonant with the truth.

Master: Many attempt to prove by authorities and arguments that neither the emperor nor any secular person would be the pope's normal judge. And this is the first argument: the emperor is not the normal judge of one who has no superior on earth; but the pope has no superior on earth, therefore etc. The major requires no proof because a judge is superior to the person who's judge he is. The minor was proved above[1 Dial. 6.1] by many authorities and arguments.

Student: Earlier it was declared in general that the pope has no superior judge on earth. Now however demonstrate specifically that the emperor, or some layman or people, is not the normal judge of the pope.

Master: That the emperor specifically would not be the normal judge of the pope is shown first of all in this manner: an inferior is not the normal judge of his superior; but the emperor is inferior to the pope and subject to his jurisdiction, therefore etc. The major is obvious whence Pope Nicholas states (we have it in dis. 21 ch. Inferior)[col. 70]: "We have shown with more clarity than the light of the sun that one of lesser authority cannot sentence by his judgments or bind by his own definitions someone who is of greater power." The minor on the other hand is confirmed by the authority of saints. For Gregory of Naziance says, writing to the Constantinopolitan emperors (we have it in di. 10 c. Suscipitis )[col. 20]: "Do you not acknowledge the freedom of the Word ? Accept freely that the law of Christ places you under priestly power, and subjects you to these tribunals. For he also granted a power to us, granted a rulership far more perfect than your own." Again: Pope Felix states (we have it in the same di. c. Certum )[col. 20]: "When God's causes are broached it is certainly advantageous to your interests that, in accordance with His command, you strive not to make the royal will paramount but to subject it to the priests of Christ", and further down: "nor should there be a wish to override the sanctions of one to whose clemency God willed to subordinate the neck of your pious devotion." The same point is made in di. 96 c. Duo sunt[col. 10] and in c. Si imperator[col. 11]. From these canons and many others we have it that the emperor is inferior to the pope.

And some attempt to prove this by numerous arguments [OP II, 687. John of Paris, De potestate regia et papali, ch. 11]. First: because he who swears fealty to another is inferior to the one he swears to; but the emperor provides an oath of fealty to the pope (di. 63 c. Tibi domino)[col. 246], therefore etc. Second: because the emperor is inferior to one who has the power of transferring the empire from nation to nation; and this power the pope possesses (Extra, De electione c. Venerabilem)[col. 79], therefore etc. Third: because the emperor is inferior to one who can bind him by a sentence of excommunication; and this the pope can do (di. 96, c. Duo sunt)[col. 10], therefore etc. Fourth: because he who can be deposed by another is that person's inferior; but the emperor may be deposed by the pope (15 q. 6 c. Alius)[col. 756], therefore etc. Fifth: because the emperor is inferior to one who can legitimize the subjects of emperors and kings in temporal and spiritual affairs; and this the pope can do (Extra, Qui filii sint legitimi c. Per venerabilem)[col. 714], therefore etc.