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. XLIX


Chapter 49

Student: It appears that these theorists do not understand by this suspension anything else except that the pope is obligated to honour such an appeal or demurrer. Therefore let us put aside the term "suspension", and attempt to prove that the pope is bound to honour this appeal or demurrer, namely by not disturbing the appellant or the person entering the demurrer on account of the appeal or demurrer prior to a decision of the case.

Master: It seems possible to prove that the pope is bound to honour such an appeal or demurrer. Here is the first proof. The pope must not exercise lordship or power against justice or mercy in those issues which affect the interests of others, in conformity with the statement of blessed Peter: "neither as being lords over God's heritage". [1 Peter 5:3] But if the pope did not honour such an appeal or demurrer he would be exercising neither justice nor mercy, but rather lordship and power towards the appellant or the person entering the demurrer. That he would not be exercising justice is clear, since it hardly pertains to justice not to honour an appeal or demurrer before its illegitimacy has been established. Nor does he exercise mercy, as is obvious, since he manifests none towards the appellant or the person entering the demurrer by not honouring the appeal or demurrer. Therefore he exercises power and lordship without reason, and indeed against reason. Therefore he sins grievously.

Here is the second proof. If the pope is not bound to honour such an appeal or demurrer, this is either because he is not bound to honour any appeal or demurrer issued or entered for cause of heresy, or because he knows this appeal or demurrer to be criminal and the cause alleged to be false. The first possibility does not fit, because if the cause alleged were true, that is to say if the pope were to maintain that the Christian faith was false, he would be obligated to honour the relevant appeal or demurrer. The second possibility also does not fit, because the falsity of a cause does not prevent one from being required to honour an appeal or demurrer, so long as this cause if proved would have to be considered legitimate. It remains therefore that the pope must honour such an appeal or demurrer.

Here is the third proof. A judge must honour an appeal or a demurrer, even if he knows it to be criminal and the cause alleged to be false, if it is an appeal or demurrer, which others must honour. But there are people other than the pope who must honour this appeal or demurrer. Therefore the pope likewise must honour it. The reasons provided earlier in chapter 45 may also be argued in support of this contention.


Comments