Chapter 8
A Dialogue, Part ut, Tract t Student Pursue the other arguments which follow.
Master (8] To the eighth it is answered that the same things are not always beneficial to the whofe and to the part, in great matters and tn small, and there is not the same right (either never or [only] with exceptions) in the whole and in the part, in great matters and in small: though this is true when there is the same reason concerning the whole and the part, concerning great matters and small.!!*
And therefore, although it will be beneficial for one bishop to be over one particular faithful people, it is, however, not beneficial that one person alone should be over the whole faithful people: first, because one man by himself can carry all the affairs of one particular people, but no one man can carry all the affairs, even the greater affairs, of all Christians; also, because it is less evil for a particular people, and a small one, to be infected by one bishop than for the whole (or almost the whole) Christian people to be infected by one head who is over all.
[g] To the ninth it is said that although kingship is the best constitution in one city, according to Aristotle (who speaks only of the constitutions that are observed in cities, as we gather from very many of his statements in the books of Politics}, kingship is neverthejess not the best constitution for the whole world or for every part of the world, because the whole world and various kingdoms are better ruled by several, none of whom is superior to another, than by one man alone, for the reasons touched on above.
{10} Through this [argument] the last argument is answered: it is not beneficial for the totality of mortals to be ruled by one monarch of the whole world, but it is, as a rule, beneficial for it to be ruled by several none of whom is superior to another; although in some case that can happen it would be more beneficial for the whole world co be ruled by one rather than by many. So much for the second book.
Book 3 Chapter 8 Student | think I perceive the meaning of the above opinion, which in many respects is bascd on the premise that a general "6 See below, 1 Dial, 1.1.9, first answer, op. 257-8.
. en et ee Paar emma, oot mmm William of Ockham counei] can err against the faith. The first opinion reported in chapter 1 above holds and tries to prove the contrary of this."
Relate how the last opinion tries to answer its arguments.
Master To the first argument, when it suggests that we should piously hold that the interpretations of a general council have been revealed to us by the same spirit as revealed the divine Scriptures,'* it is answered that it is not necessary, nor must all Christians always believe this. A general council often relies, or can rely, on human wisdom, which can deviate from what is true. Therefore it is not obligatory, of necessity for salvation, to believe that whatever a general council defines as necessary to hold concerning the faith, it defines as having been revealed to it by God, and that it is then relying on a spiritual revelation.
This seems provable in many ways. [1] For when it is hoped that something will be revealed by God, it is necessary to apply oneself, not to study and human thought, but only to prayer or other good works — or at least it is less necessary to apply onescif to study than to other good works. Thus when Daniel was hoping that Nabuchodonosor's dream and its interpretation would be revealed to him by God, he exhorted his companions to seek such a great mystery, not through study, though they were learned men, but through prayer and supplication from God. Afterwards Daniel asserted that he had obtained it through prayer, when he says in chapter 2, "To thee, O God of my fathers, I give thanks, and I praise you, because you have given wisdom and strength: and now you have shown me what we asked of you, for you have made known to us the king's discourse" [Daniel 2:23]. Thus also, because
Christ promised his apostles that he would reveal to them what they ought to say when they were led before kings and governors, he forbade them to occupy themselves then in study. He said to them, as we read in Matthew 10[:19}, "And when they deliver you up, think not how or what to speak, for what to speak will be given to you in that hour; for it is not you that speak, but the Spirit of my Father who speaks in you." When, therefore, something is to be hoped for anly through revelation, one must not devote oneself to study and human thought, but to prayer. But when there
"? Chapter t is drawn from Marsilus, U.19, DP. 274 if.
** Cf Marsilius, p. 274.
A Dialogue, Part i, Tract + is a question of faith ta be decided in a generaf council, effort is given to meditation on the Scriptures. It is therefore not necessarily through revelation that a question of faith should be decided in a general council, but such a question can be decided by a wisdom that is had, and can be had, through study and human meditation; although God can by a special grace reveai it, it must not be held as certain that it is had through revelation, unless God reveals this miraculously and openly.
(z] Further, when it should be held as certain that something is to be had through revelation, recourse must reasonably be had, m order to obtain it, not to those who are wiser, but to those who are better — whether they are learned or unlearned, clergy or laity, men or women — or to prophets, because commonly God reveals his secrets not to the wiser but to the better. Truth himself seems to testify to this, when he says in Matthew 11[:25], "I give thanks to you, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and prudent and revealed them to litte ones." Thus, as we read in 4 Kings 22[:r4], when that holy king Josias wished to know through revelation God's will concerning the words of the book found in the temple, he sent even the priests and experts in the divine law themselves to Holda the prophetess, the wife of Sellum; he did not seek the truth from those priests and experts in the law, even though it is said, in Malachias 2[:7], "The lips of the priest keep knowledge, and they seek the law at his mouth." For in respect of things in the law that can be had through effort and thought, the law of God must be sought from the mouth of the priest, wha is obliged to know the science and law of Ged explicitly, but in respect of things that must be had through revelation, recourse must be had chiefly to those who have the spirit of prophecy, if there are any, and to those who are more holy, whose prayers are more accepted by God. In respect of such things, the law is not necessarily to be sought from the mouth of a priest and the highest pontiff more than from the mouth of a widow or of a layman ignorant of letters.
But for deciding a question of faith in a generat council, recourse is had, even according to the common opinion of men, to the wiser land] more learned, whether they are beter or not. Therefore it should not be held necessarily that a question of faith is always settled by divine revelation.
William ofOckham From these [arguments] we gather that it is not necessary to hold that a question of faith is always settled in a general council by revelation, but it must be held, unless the opposite is revealed miraculously by God, that God permits those assembled in a general council, in defining a question of faith and in other matters, to proceed according to their own intelligence, assisted by the general divine influence. It is therefore conceded that it is not impossible for a general council to err.
This!' is further proved in accordance with the above as follows.
[1] Those present in a general council discussing, deliberating on, and deciding a question of faith rely either on divine revelation by itself or on human wisdom and virtue. The first cannot be said, because then, in accordance with the above, it would not be necessary in deciding a question of faith to consult those who are expert in sacred Scriprure or to turn the divine book over in the mind, nor would it be necessary to think how the question of faith should be settled, but instcad it would be appropriate to commit the whole to God, only calling on him through prayer who can alone reveal any Catholic truth whatever. However, this is not done when there is a question of faith to be decided in a general council, because the wise men in the general council deliberate about it and try to draw out the truth from sacred literature, to decide it in accordance with the divine Scriptures, We know that general councils so far have done this, because they have decided questions of faith arising out of the Scriptures by means of the sacred
Scriptures. Therefore, those present in a general council who wish to decide a question of faith do not commit the whole to God and ask him through prayer alone for the definition of the question of faith, but instead they rely on human wisdom and virtue, because they rely on the expertise concerning the Scriptures that they have and can have by careful thought. But error can be found in all things that rely on human wisdom and virtue; therefore members of a general council can err in deciding a question. of faith.
It is not necessary to hold that those assembled in a general council always and in all their discussions, even when they discuss a question of faith that has to be decided, are guided by the Holy
Spirit in any other way than the pope is when he discusses business "4 That a general council can err.