POPE FRANCIS - A HERETIC? ON THE PUNISHMENT OF HERETICS AND ESPECIALLY OF THE POPE WHO HAS BECOME A HERETIC WILLIAM OF OCKHAM Dial. 6 CHP. XXXVIII

Chapter 38

Student: One might prove by this reason that opponents of catholic truth must be defended, because it is appropriate for catholics to extend works of mercy not only to the good but also to the bad.

Therefore since defense is a work of mercy, it is proper for catholics to defend heretics who oppose catholic truth. Again, works of mercy are in no way obligatory for in that case he who did not give alms or did not redeem captives would sin mortally. Therefore if defense is a work of compassion, catholics are not bound to such defense by necessity of salvation. More, just as the punishment of delinquents pertains solely to secular or ecclesiastical judges, so is the defense of law-abiding people known to be the preserve of political superiors and of public authorities. Therefore it is not the business of all catholics to defend opponents of a heretic pope.

Further, a defense of the oppressed is displayed when injuries committed or yet to be inflicted are warded off. But the repulsing of such wrongs is not the business of perfect individuals. For Truth itself states in Matthew 5: "But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil". [Matthew 5:39] And weapons ward off wrongs, but perfect individuals, such as clerks, are not allowed to wield arms. Therefore it does not pertain to perfect individuals (at least) to defend opponents of a heretic pope. These objections, it seems to me, restrict the validity of the point you have made, as well as that of some other arguments. Therefore I would like to know how one replies to them.