[Objection:] A Pope can be judged and deposed by the Church in the
case of heresy; as is clear from Dist. 40, can. Si Papa: therefore, the
Pontiff is subject to human judgment, at least in some case.
I respond: there are five opinions on this matter.
[…]
...it would be the most miserable condition of the Church, if she
should be compelled to recognize a wolf, manifestly prowling, for a
shepherd.
The fourth opinion is of Cajetan. There, he teaches, that a
manifestly heretical Pope is not ipso
facto deposed; but can and ought to be deposed by the Church.
Now in my judgment, such an opinion cannot be defended. For in the first place,
that a manifest heretic would be ipso
facto deposed, is proven from authority and reason. The
Authority is of St. Paul, who commands Titus, that after two censures,
that is, after he appears manifestly pertinacious, an heretic is to be shunned:
and he understands this before excommunication and sentence of a judge. Jerome
comments on the same place, saying that other sinners, through a judgment of
excommunication are excluded from the Church; heretics, however, leave by
themselves and are cut from the body of Christ, but a Pope who remains the Pope
cannot be shunned. How will we shun our Head? How will we recede from a member
to whom we are joined?
Now in regard to reason this is indeed very certain. A
non-Christian cannot in any way be Pope, as Cajetan affirms in the same book,
and the reason is because he cannot be the head of that which he is not a
member, and he is not a member of the Church who is not a Christian. But a
manifest heretic is not a Christian, as St. Cyprian and many other Fathers
clearly teach. Therefore, a manifest heretic cannot be Pope….
[…]
Next, the Holy Fathers teach in unison, that not only are heretics
outside the Church, but they even lack all Ecclesiastical jurisdiction and
dignity ipso facto.
… Pope Celestine I, in an epistle to John of Antioch, which is contained
in Volume One of the Council of Ephesus, ch. 19, says: “If anyone who was
either excommunicated or exiled by Bishop Nestorius, or any that followed him,
from such a time as he began to preach such things, whether they be from the
dignity of a bishop or clergy, it is manifest that he has endured and endures
in our communion, nor do we judge him outside, because he could not remove
anyone by a sentence, who himself had already shown that he must be removed.”
And in a letter to the clergy of Constantinople: “The Authority of our See has
sanctioned, that the bishop, cleric or Christian by simple profession who had
been deposed or excommunicated by Nestorius or his followers, after the latter
began to preach heresy, shall not be considered deposed or excommunicated. For
he who had defected from the faith with such preaching, cannot depose or remove
anyone whatsoever.”
Nicholas I confirms and repeats the same thing in his epistle to
the Emperor Michael. Next, even St. Thomas teaches that schismatics soon loose
all jurisdiction; and if they try to do something from jurisdiction, it is
useless. Nor does the response which some make avail, that these Fathers speak
according to ancient laws, but now since the decree of the Council of Constance
they do not lose jurisdiction, unless excommunicated by name, or if they strike
clerics. I say this avails to nothing. For those Fathers, when they say that
heretics lose jurisdiction, do not allege any human laws which maybe did not
exist then on this matter; rather, they argued from the nature of heresy.
Moreover, the Council of Constance does not speak except on the excommunicates,
that is, on these who lose jurisdiction through a judgment of the Church. Yet
heretics are outside the Church, even before excommunication, and deprived of
all jurisdiction, for they are condemned by their own judgment, as the Apostle
teaches to Titus; that is, they are cut from the body of the Church without
excommunication, as Jerome expresses it.
Next, what Cajetan says in the second place, that a heretical Pope
who is truly Pope can be deposed by the Church, and from its authority seems no
less false than the first. For, if the Church deposes a Pope against his will,
certainly it is over the Pope. Yet the same Cajetan defends the opposite in the
very same treatise….
[…]
Now the fifth true opinion, is that a Pope who is a manifest
heretic, ceases in himself to be Pope and head, just as he ceases in himself to
be a Christian and member of the body of the Church: whereby, he can be judged
and punished by the Church. This is the opinion of all the ancient Fathers, who
teach that manifest heretics soon lose all jurisdiction…. The foundation of
this opinion is that a manifest heretic, is in no way a member of the Church;
that is, neither in spirit nor in body, or by internal union nor external….
(St. Robert Bellarmine, On the Roman Pontiff, Vol. 1, Book II, Chapter 30, trans. Ryan Grant
[Mediatrix Press, 2015], pp. 304-310.)
This is, my opinion, how these popes became excommunicated https://www.papalencyclicals.net/pius10/p10prasc.htm
ReplyDeleteSpecifically the last two paragraphs.