Chapter 30
Miliam of Ockham Master That argument seems to be based on the premise that without riches, which the head of the faithful should not have, no one can effectively and usefully rule subjects. To this it is answered that the power of ruling Christians in the matters that pertain to the Christian law was established by God alone in such a way that Christians have by no means been exernpted by the Christian law and by Christ's ordinance alone from secular power and jurisdiction; thus from the time of the apostles and long afterwards Christians were subject, in secular crimes and other matters that in no way pertained specifically to the Christian law, to the power and jurisdiction even of unbelicvers. For this reason the head of Christians does not as a mule have power to punish secular wrongs with a capital penalty and other bodily penalties, and it is for thus punishing such wrongs that temporal power and riches are chiefly necessary; such punishment is granted chiefly and as a rule to the secular power.
The pope, therefore, can as a rule correct wrongdoers only with a spiritual penalty. It is therefore not necessary that he should excel in temporal power or abound in temporat riches, but it is enough that Christians should willingly obey him.
Chapter 30 Student I will hold disputation with you about this matter later; therefore pass over it, and relate carefully how answer is made, according to the opinion holding that it is not beneficial for the community of the faithful to be under one head under Christ, to the arguments brought forward above in the frst chapter of this second book.
Master {1| To the first of them it is answered, as was touched on in the same place,''* that Christ is the head of the faithful, and therefore Christians are not under one head under Christ. To the argument to the contrary it is answered that it is not necessary that there should be under Christ one rector of the whole Church, but it is enough if there are several ruling various provinces, just as there are several kings governing several kingdoms.
[2] To the next it is said that it is beneficial for one fold in which the sheep live together to be ruled and fed by one mortal
4 Smdent's objection, above, p. 122.
A Dialogue, Part un, Tract 1 shepherd, but for one fold in which all the sheep do not live together it is enough to be ruled by the chief of the shepherds, namely Christ.
[3} To the third i1 is answered by the same [distinction] that it is beneficial for a whole people living together to be under one mortal rector, but not for one people that includes many peoples living in separate places. For such a people it is enough to be under Christ.
(4] To the fourth it is answered that to be under one supreme rector is not beneficial for every community that cannot be ruled without a multitude of judges who can have conflicting opinions about causes and cases, because such a community can be so great that no one man, mortal and in many things deficient, is equal to conducting and deciding all cases about which the other judges can disagree. Therefore, since the community of the faithful can be in that way so great that no mortal man can carry all such cases, it is beneficial for the community of the faithful to be ruled by several, not by one.
[5] To the fifth it is answered in a similar way that because one man is not enough to compel the whole of the faithful to preserve unity of faith and of the rites and observances thar all Christians are obliged to observe, it is therefore beneficial for the community of the faithful to be ruled by several who may compel all to such unity.
_ [6] To the sixth it is answered that it is beneficial for those able to err about major cases to have one hcad when one man is enough to settle all such cases. But no one is enough for the settling of all such cases as can arise among worshippers of Chrisz, it is therefore beneficial for them not to have one head under Christ, but many.
[7] To the seventh it is answered that it is not beneficial for the community of the faithful that many among them, and especially prelates, should be able to do wrong insolently when a remedy can be furnished against such a danger without a greater danger. But a greater danger would threaten the community of the faithful if it had one head than if it had several, because, since one is more easily infected by evil than several, it is more to be feared that one man ruling the whole of the faithful may be infected by evil than that several ruling it may be. But according to the opinion
William of Ockham ef the wise man in Ecclesiasticus :o0/:2], "As the judge of the people is himself, so also is his minister: and what kind of man the ruler of a city is, such also are those who live in it." Pope
Anterus agrees with this. As we read in 6, g.
1, c. Ex mente, he says, "When the head becomes weak the other members of the bady are infected." The gloss there says, "The king's realm conforms to his example"; and consequently, when the head of any body of Christians is corrupted, it is reasonable to fear the corruption of his subjects. Therefore, the general, or almost general, corruption or infection of Christians should more be feared if they alt have ane head than if they bave several, although some particular corruption of one or other part of Christians is more ta be feared if Christians have many heads; therefore the greater danger threatens
Christians if they all have one head, who can infect ali or nearly all Christians, than if they have several, none of whom can infect all or nearly all but only those subject to them, for the simultaneous corruption of several heads is not so much to be feared as the corruption of one only.
Student Why does this opinion add "almost," when it says that "general or almost general corruption" should more be feared?
Master "Aimost™ is added because of Christ's promise, when he said, in Matthew, jast chapter, "I am with you all days, uncl the end of the world."'® Because of this it is not at all to be feared that because of the wickedness ef one head there will ever be a general corruption or infection of all Christians, because such a corruption of Christians would conflict with that promise of Christ; but an almost general corruption of Christians would in no way conflict with that promise. Christ's promise wouid stand if, under one perverted or infected head of ail Christians, ail were infected except two or three. Therefore, it need not in any way be feared that one head of all Christians would infect all Christans, but it must be feared that, if he were infected, he would infect a/mest all. Accordingly, if a pope becamea heretic, especially a pope with temporal power or temporally powerful adherents, it must be feared that he would infect atmost all Christians with heretical wickedness.
But if there were severaf heads of Christians, all would not so easily be infected at the same time, but when one had been infected in morals or by heretical wickedness, often another would remain sound in morals and in faith, together with his subjects.