Chapter 22
William of Ockham the first book attributes to the pope, on the grounds that the entrusting was done indefinitely and simply. But I will discuss this with you later.
Therefore I turn to another argument to prove that by the words, "Feed," etc. Christ did not appoint Peter as superior to the other apostles. It seems, therefore, that often an indefinite statement is not equivalent to a universal but can be verihed even of a singular. Since, therefore, Christ said, "Feed," etc. indefinitely, this can be understood ofsome sheep without being understood oftherm all, and consequently without being understood ofthe apostles. Ictherefore cannot be shown by those words that blessed Peter was superior to the rest of the apostles.
Master Some think that this argument can be answered easily.
Although both in things judged and in other matters it is not always the case that a statement uttered indefinitely should be understood generally, nevertheless, when power over some is entrusted to someone, a statement uttered indefinitely should be understood generaily, in such a way that no one is then understood to be exempt unless he can be proved exempt by something else.
The reason for this is given:'* Just as "judges should not be uncertain," therefore — because "similar judgment must be made of similar cases" — when power or prelacy is entrusted to someone over others by a statement uttered indefinitely, just as "neither procurators nor tutors nor arbitrators" (as both the canon and civil laws testify and reason recommends), so also prelates and subjects,
"should not be uncertain." Indeed "all should be understood who have the same thing in common," unless it can be shown from elsewhere that some must be excepted; otherwise subjects would in that case be uncertain. Therefore by the words, "Feed my sheep," all Christ's faithful should be understood, lest the sheep to be fed by Peter should be uncertain, unless it can be shown from elsewhere that some are excepted. This cannot be shown of the apostles, as many say who answer all the arguments by which it is shown that the apostles were excepted from Peter's power.
Chapter 22 Student Bring forward still other arguments, but only a few, to prove Peter's superiority in respect of the other apostles.
"! The quotation marks in the rest of this paragraph are guesswork; the sources have not been found.
A Dialogue, Part 1, Tract § Master It is proved in the following way. What has been believed from the times of the apostles until our own time by prelates and doctors of the Church succeeding one another in a continuous s¢ries and by the peoples subject to them should be held firmly by all Catholics.
It seems possible to prove this clearly by a text of Augustine in his book Against the Manicheans, quoted in Decretum, dist. rr, c. Palam, when he says: "It is clear that in a doubtful matter the authority of the Catholic Church, which is confirmed by those very well established sees of the apostles in a series of bishops succeeding one another down te our own day and by the consent of so many peoples avails to faith." Nevertheless, because some say (as is clear above) that texts other than those of the writers of canonical Scripture and of general councils should not be accepted,'* this is proved by reason. Even according to the opponents, the universal Church cannot err, therefore what the universal Church has thought and does think should be held firmly.
But the universal Church includes only the prelates of the Church and the peoples subject to them; therefore what the prelates of the Church succeeding one another in a continuous series and the peoples subject to them have believed from the times of the apostles to our own times must be believed firmly. But the prelates of the Church from the apostles themselves to these times, with the peoples subject to them, have held and thought that Peter was superior to the other apostles. Pope Anacletus held this (as quoted above!*'), and he could not have been ignorant of the truth in this matter. Also blessed Pope Clement, a disciple of the apostics, thought the same; as we read in dist. 80, c. Jv ils, he said,
"Among the apostles themselves the appointment was not equal, but one was above all," and none other than Peter. Eusebius of Caesarea also thought this. Because he was steeped in the teachings, traditions and writings of those who were disciples of the apostles and of those educated by those disciples, he was not ignorant of what preceding [generations] thought, and it must in no way be presumed that he knowingly taught falsehood; none of the prelates of the Church or doctors afterwards contradicted him, and consequently by being silent they all consented to him. He says, therefore, in the Ecclesiastical History, which blessed Jerome' translated, ih
'® See Marsilius, pp. 274-5, 371:
"? In chapter 1g {not translated).
Hillam of Ockham Book u, chapter 14: "In the times of Claudius, the mercy of divine providence fed Peter, the most approved of all the apostles and the greatest, by the greatmess of his faith and virtue deservedly the chief of the leaders, to the city of Rome as if to fight against the common destruction of the human race: a leader and general of his army, knowing how to wage the divine battles and how to command the camp of the virtues." Blessed Jerome thinks this, and blessed Ambrose, blessed Augustine, blessed Pope Marcellus, and blessed Cyprian, as is explicitly clear in their texts quoted in various places above. But it seems far from all likelihood that those men — most careful students of the canonical Scriptures, of histories, of chronicles, of records of deeds, of the customs and traditions of the universal Church - did not know what the apostles and their disciples thought concerning something so necessary to the whole Church of Christ, and it must by no means be presumed about them that they knowingly taught falsehood, it must therefore be held that the above assertion came down to them from the aposties themselves through chronicles and histories worthy of belief, some of which we perhaps do not have, and through the tradition and custom of the universal Church continued down to them. All other prelates and doctors of the Church from the tme of blessed Sylvester down to our own times have held the above assertion, as could be shown in many ways. And Catholic peoples have agreed with the above prelates and doctors in the same assertion, because no Catholic people has been found to contradict them. Therefore this assertion must be attributed to the universal
Church and consequently must be held firmly.
Student Perhaps some will say that not all Christian peoples have thought this. It is said that the Greeks, who were Christians and Catholics before the Romans, do not hold this, and so not all Christian peoples have believed this down to our own times.
Master This answer is attacked by others. While the Greeks were Catholics they agreed in this, following the teaching of Catholic doctors. We do not read, and it does not seem probable, that before they divided from the Roman Church the people of the Greeks did not follow the teaching of Catholic Greek doctors, and their doctors taught the above assertion publicly and left it in writings. For Eusebius of Caesarea, who was a Greek and expert in the writings of all the Greek doctors (as is limpidly clear from A Dialogue, Part i, Tract 1 the Lvelestastical History which he wrote}, taught this and wrote it, as is clear from what was said above. While the Greeks were Catholics, therefore, they held the above opinion. Their errors after they divided themselves from the Roman Church are in no way an obstacle to the above argument; it must therefore be held, following the Latins, that Peter was superior to all the others.
Student Some might perhaps answer the above argument in another way, by saying that although all the Christian peoples agreed with their prelates and doctors in that assertion, not ail from among the people did, and the truth of faith can be preserved in a few of the people; therefore the above argument does not succeed, Master That answer is refuted by this, that according to the Apostle, in Romans chapter 8,!*? "With the heart we believe unto justice, but with the mouth confession is made unto salvation," namely, when the faith is endangered.
It would not have been enough, therefore, for some few of the people to have held the contrary assertion in their hearts, if it were Catholic, unless they had also confessed it with their mouths, publicly contradicting those who were in error. Since, therefore, we do not read that, from the . times of the apostles and their disciples up to the time of our fathers, any, even a few, from the Christian peoples, publicly contradicted the assertion we have been speaking of, it must be held that this assertion should be ascribed to the universal Church.
But the universal Church cannot at any time, even for a short time, err against the faith and in matters of right belonging to the faith or to good morals (though according to some it can err in matters of fact, namely in regarding someone as pope or as a good man, though he is not, and in similar matters}. The above assertion must therefore be believed firmly.
A Dialogue, Part Ii Tract II, On the Rights of the Roman Empire .
A Dialogue, Part i, Tract 1, On the Rights of the Roman Empire Prologue page = 235 Book 1, Does it belong to the advantage and utility ofthe whole human race for the whole world to be under one emperor or secular ruler in temporal matters? In what excellences or graces, virtues, and characteristics should an emperor of the world be outstanding? From whom has the Roman Empire proceeded, from men or from God? Can the Roman Empire licitly be destroyed, diminished, divided, or transferred?
Eleven arguments for the opinion that the whole world would be best ruled in temporal matters by one secular ruler, not inappropriately called emperor, and that the peace and quiet of the whole of human society cannot be well enough provided for by any other formofgovernment
Six arguments for the opinion that it is not beneficial to the world for the totality of mortals to be subject ta one emperor or secular ruler
3 Anargument for the opinion that itwould be beneficial for one ruler, not a secular but an ecclesiastic, to rule over the totality of mortals
4 An argument for the opinion that the world would be ruled best if manv held lordship of the world together A Dialogue, Part itt, Tract 1
Three arguments for the opinion that it is beneficial that governments and lordships ofmortals should vary according to the diversity, quality, and necessity of the times
6 Argument in accordance with the last opinion against the conclusion of the first argument in chapter 1 7 Reply to the first argument in chapter 1
8 Reply in accordance with the opinion stated in chapter 5 to the second argument in chapter z g Reply to the third argument in chapter 1
10 Replies to the remaining arguments in chapter 1 Replies to the arguments in chapter 2 12 Reply to the argument in chapter 3
13 Reply to the argument in chapter 4 14 In what excellences or graces, virtues, and characteristics should an emperor of the world be outstanding? Is an emperor ofthe world obliged to have the true and Catholic faith?
15 [fan emperor of the world is a Catholic, is he obliged to have skill in divine Scripture? Should the emperor be skilled in the civil laws? Should an emperor have outstanding knowledge of secular affairs?
16 Should an emperor always and in every case carry out the rigor of justice?
Is it permissible for an emperor to revoke, not fulfill, or postpone something he has promised? Are power, riches, and liberality appropriate to an emperor?
Book 3. Does the emperor have any power in spiritual matters, or is he capable of this sort ofpower?
If the right to elect the highest pontiff can belong to the emperor, whence does he have it?
6 An argument that the Romans have the right to elect the highest pontiff by divine faw, extending divine law to include all natural law
7 Replies to arguments in chapter 5 for the view that the highest pontiff alone has the right to determine who shall elect his successor
Prologue Student The divine Scriptures, as we know, praise the Romans, at the time when they were working to acquire world empire, with many great expressions of praise, as we clearly read in the book of Machabees.' After the tract about the power of the pope and clergy, therefore, let there be added a tract on the rights of the Roman Empire, which some of the learned try to derive from sacred literature: especially since it was on the occasion of the Roman Empire that disagreement about the orthodox faith began among some, whose deeds (as also those of many others) we will try to discuss in the tracts to follow, to which these first two tracts of the third part of our dialogue are preparations and preambles.
And let the present tract contain five books. Let the first inquire ' whether it is beneficial to the whole human race for one emperor to be over the whole world; by what excellences or graces, characteristics, and virtues the emperor of the world should be conspicuous; from whom the Roman Empire has proceeded; and whether it can by right be destroyed or annulled, diminished, divided, or transferred. Let the second investigate what rights the Emperor of the Romans has over temporal matters. Let the third examine whether the Emperor of the Romans has any power over spiritual matters, ar is capable of power over spiritual matters. Let the fourth explore whether an emperor of the Romans is obliged, of necessity for salvation, to defend the rights of the Roman Empire (and, if they have been disturbed, to restore them), by arms and power if he cannot do so otherwise, against any attacker, invader, or anyone who in any way impedes them ~ even against the pope, cardinals, and clergy, if they attack, invade, or impede the rights of the Roman
Empire - notwithstanding any sentence, ordinance, constitution, or process whatever of pope or cardinals or of anyone else whatever.
Let the fifth treat of rebels, traitors, destroyers, dividers, and usurpers of the Roman Empire or of any part of it.
Master Perfect knowledge of the things you mention as needing treatment could be more clearly drawn and more solidly defended from bocks of sacred theology, of both laws (that is, canon and civil, and of moral philosophy, and from the histories of the Romans, of emperors and highest pontiffs, and of other nations.
* Machahees chapter &, William of Ockham Of these I have hope of obtaining only the Bible, the Decretum, and the five books of the Decretals. Therefore, lest perhaps we make a work that is imperfect and even ridiculous, it seems wiser to desist altogether, Student Although at present we cannot make a perfect work, yet since (as | believe) others have not so far at all attempted a special work on a matter so necessary (seeing that it touches the whole human race), it will be useful not to be completcly silent, so as to summon those who have plenty of books to make perfect works.
For from the disputation we are about to have those who are zealous for truth, justice, and the commonwealth will, I think, see plainly that a great many truths about the above matters are hidden
(to the detriment of the common good) from those who direct others by ruling, advising, informing, or teaching; and experts who are lovers of what is just and useful will be stirred up to produce thoroughly researched works on the above matters ~ works effectively dispreving the false things we will report and supporting with undeniable arguments and authorities the true things we will relate: for in this tract, as in the whole of this dialogue, we will not say anything except in reporting. Accordingly, concerning the matters to be investigated you will report judgments or opinions that are true and false, solid and fantastical, and you should try to defend them pretty strongly. For often not only the assertion and explanation of truths, but also persuasive though sophistical arguments for false and fantastical judgments occasion advance in manifesting, publishing, and exalting the truth, both because they' exercise the abilities of the studious, and because their unreasonableness makes the contrary truth shine out more clearly, since opposites placed side by side appear more clearly and truth hard pressed shines more into light, and truth is made bright by questioning, opposing, disputing, and answering conflicting arguments.
Such a useful work, therefore, must by no means be given up because of shortage of books, especially since you can find in the above-named books, which you can obtain, many things relating to the matters to be discussed, and you can, when appropriate, cite many things you have read thar I think you have not altogether forgotten, reporting them either verbatim or in substance.
? That is, sophistical arguments.
A Dialogue, Part m1, Tract 0 Master Your insistence conquers me, so I will go on to the tract with you.
I do not doubt that if 1 explained in it what I think about the matters to be investigated, it would suffer the excessive calumnies of the malignant, to the prejudice of truth and to the detriment of justice. In this tract, therefore, just as you wish,
| will not indicate at all which of the reported opinions I] think should be approved. Truth will not thereby incur danger but avoid it, since I do not believe that anyone would adhere to the truth more firmly because of my approvai, but [ fear that, from the malice of hatred, envy and rancor, many would attack it more sharply and more wickedly by both words and deeds - which I am not ignorant is done in connection with other matters by some, prompted by envy against me. However, if ever [ notice that the truth can be advanced by the expression of what I hold, I will not delay to publish it in express words. Therefore, since you quite wish this tract to be written, move on quickly to begin it.
Student If it were not at all beneficial that one emperor or ruler should govern all the provinces of the world, then, since the Romans took for themselves government over the whole world, the rights of the Empive would have to be regarded, deservedly, not as rights, but as injuries and injustices and cruel tyrannies. Since | am about to investigate many aspects of the rights of the Roman Empire, f have therefore decided to ask, first of all, whether ir belongs to the advantage and utility of the whole human race for the whole world to be under one emperor or secular ruler in temporal matters.
Relate the diverse and opposing opinions about this.
Master One opinion on the question you propose is that the world would be best ruled in temporal matters by one secular ruler, not inappropriately called emperor, and that the peace and quiet of the whole of human society cannot be well enough provided for by any other form of government.
Student Try to argue for that opinion.
Master That opinion seems provable in many ways. [1] The form of government most beneficial to the whole world is that by which William of Ockham the bad are restrained more casily, more justly, more severely, more effectively, and more salutarily, and the good live more quietly among the bad, For it is chiefly on this account that rulers and princes are appointed, as blessed Peter testifies. In his first epistle, chapter 2[:14], he asserts that governors have been sent by kings to punish evil doers and to praise the good. Blessed Paul agrees with him, teaching in Romans 13[:3-4] that the secular powers are from God for the terror of the wrongdoers and the security of the good. He says: "Do you wish, then, not to be afraid of the power?
Do what is good, and you will have praise from him. For he is God's minister to you for good. But if you do what is evil, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword without reason." Blessed
Augustine followed the opinion of those holy apostles. As we read in 23, 4. 5, c. Non frustra, he says: "Not in vain have been established the power of the king, the law of the judge, the tongs of the torturer, the weapons of the soldier, the discipline of the ruler, the severity also of the good father. All these have their modes, causes, reasons and uses. Since all these are feared, the bad are restrained and the good live more quietly among the bad."
With these' reason seems not at ail to disagree. For secular rulers are established for the same reason as laws are made, and thus rulers are the ministers of the law and the emperor is called "the fiving law." But laws are made so that the audacity of the bad may be restrained and the goad live safely, dist. 4, Factae sunt leges, and Extra, in the prologue, at Ideogue lex preditur. The government of rulers has been established, therefore, so that the bad may be restrained and the guod live quietly. But by the government of one secular ruler with power over the whole world the bad are restrained more easily, more justly, more severely, more effectively, and more salutarily, and the good live more quietly among the bad: First, because such a world ruler would have greater and surer power for repressing the bad more strongly and defending the good more pawerfully; without power the bad are in most cases not restrained and the good are not safe. Also, because there would be fewer oppressors of the good and encouragers of the bad. Also, because if there were not one world ruler but several with no superior, very many would be readier and more daring to raise rebellions
? That is, Peter, Paul, and Augustine.
A Dialogue, Part 1, Tract it and wars than if all obeyed one ruler. And thus we see that wars between kings, princes, and communities whe refuse to obey one tuler are, as a rule, more dangerous, more difficult te moderate, and crucier than wars between subjects obedient to ane secular ruler, And in times of rebellion and war the bad grow insolent and the good are disturbed in many ways. It is therefore beneficial to the whole world that there be one ruler and prince of the world, with power over all mortals.
{2}) Further, just as spiritual matters are controlled by priests and ecclesiastics, so are temporal matters by secular rulers and laymen, as blessed Peter testifies. In appointing Clement, as we read in 11, q1, ¢. Stcut enim, he says: "For just as it is a fault of impiety for you, Clement, to neglect study of the word of God to undertake secular cares, so for any of the laity it is a fault if, for their part, they do not faithfully attend to the things that belong to the practice of the common life.' And he says the same to the same Clement, as we read in the same cansa and question, c. Te guidem: "Christ does not wish today to appoint you judge or arbiter of secular cases, lest, being suffocated by the present cares of men, you be unable to devote yourself to the word of God. Let the laity, for their part, show themselves devoted to these works which we have said are less appropriate for you." Blessed Paul seems to confirm this teaching of blessed Peter, saying in Corinthians 6[:4], "If therefore you have secular matters for judgment, appoint as judges those who are more despised in the Church." By these words he seems to suggest that secular matters for judgment should be dealt with by those who are "more despised in the Church," who are the lsity,* just as spiritual matters should be controlled by the clergy. The holy fathers and teachers who lived soon afterwards maintained this apostelic teaching in their writings. As we read in the Decreta, dist. 96, c. Cum ad verum, Pope Nicholas says: "Since
[the world] has come to the truth, let the emperor no longer seize for himself the rights of the pontificate, and fet the pontiff not usurp for himself the name of emperor. For the same mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, distinguished the duties of both powers by their own distinct activities [...] so that * Aceording ta Marsilius, this is che interpretation of the glosses. See Marsilius, pp. 128-9.
William of Ockham Christian emperors would need the pontiffs for eternal life and the pontiffs would use the imperial laws only for the course of temporal affairs. In this way spiritual activity would be distanced from carnal interruptions, and these on God's service would not at all involve themselves in secular affairs; and, in turn, someone involved in secular affairs would not seem to be over divine matters." Blessed Cyprian asserts this same opinion in almost all the same words, as we read in dist. 10, c. Quoniam idem, Pope Nicholas, as we read in the same distinction, c. dmperium, also says, "Your empire should be content with its daily administration of public affairs, and not usurp things that befit priests alone." From these and countless other assertions of the saints, and from sacred canons that we read in the Decreta - at dist. 10, c. Certum and c. Suscipttts, dist. 96, c. Denigue, c. Duo sunt, and c. Sf imperater, and dist. 38, c. Episcopus, and in a great many other places — we gather that, just as spiritual matters are to be controlled by the clergy, so temporal matters are to be controiled by the laity. But even if the whole world were converted to the faith, it would be beneficial to the totality of the faithful to be under one highest pontiff in spiritual matters, not only inasmuch as spiritual matters involve the clergy, but also inasmuch as they involve the laity and secular rulers: therefore in temporal matters also, not only inasmuch as temporal matters involve the laity, but also inasmuch as they involve clerics and the highest pontiff, it is beneficial to the totality of mortals to be under one secular ruler.
[3] Again, a similar judgment must be held concerning whole and part, concerning great matters and small, just ag the same right exists in the whole and in the part, in great matters and in small: Extra, De Appellationibus, c. De appellationibus, 14, q. ult, c. ult., and Extra, De praebendis et dignitatibus, c. Matoribus, But it is beneficial to every particular kingdom, as part of the world, to be subject to one secular ruler; otherwise ali the kingdoms of the world would have to be regarded as wicked or useless or harmful.
Therefore, similarly, it is beneficial for the whole world to be subject to one secular ruler.
[4] Besides, all who have, or can have, community with one another in temporal matters, so that each can alike help and harm the other, are not best governed unless they are subject in temporal matters to one highest ruler:
First, because ali who are such A Dialogue, Part ui, Tract i constitute one people; but according to Solomon, in Proverbs, chapter r1[:14], "Where there is no governor the people will be ruined": therefore unless there is one governor set over all who have such community, there must be a probable fear of their ruin and Joss. For in saying, "where there is nu governor" - not "where there are no governors," — "the people will be ruined," Solomon seems to suggest that no onc people, however great, can stand without one governor. Also, because aH who have community with one another are compared with a sheepfold and a flock, and where there is one sheepfold and one flock there should be one shepherd: as truth himself testifies in John rof:16], where he says, "There will be one fold and one shepherd," and as truth himself also testifies in Matthew 26[:31], where he says, "I will strike the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock will be scattered." In saying
"shepherd" and not "shepherds" he seems to suggest that one flock or fold should have one chief shepherd, not several. Also, because al] who have, or can have, community with one another, become, or can become, one body, one city, one college," one nation, one kingdom, and unless they are well unified they are not at all well ordered; but a body that has no head or several is a monstrous body (and also city, and college, nation, and kingdom).
Therefore all who can have community with one another in temporal matters should be subject to one secular ruler, and otherwise they cannot be best governed, But all mortals, however much they are distant from one another geographically, can have community with one another, so that they become, or should become, unless wickedness separates them, one people, one fold, one flock, one body, one city, one college, one nation, one kingdom. Thus the Apostle says, in Romans 12{:5], "We are one body in Christ, and all members one of another," manifestly suggesting that just as all mortals, not only the faithful but alsa unbelievers, should, renouncing the devil, cling the more firmly to Christ through faith and love, so all, if they are well ordered, should be one body. Thus also Solomon, in Proverbs, chapter 18[:19], says, "Brother helped by brother is like @ firm city," suggesting that just as all mortals are brothers, so, unless wickedness obstructs, they should form one
* Collegium bad ne particular reference to an educational institution. Like snrversidas, it was a term applicable to any body of people: a corporation.
William ofOckham city. Thus also in Wisdom 6[:3] the wise man, rebuking wicked kings, says, "Power has been given to you by the Lord and strength by the most high, who wil] examine your werks and search out your thoughts, because being ministers of his kingdom you have not judged rightly." By these words we are given to understand that although because of the sins of the bad many kings are appointed by the Lord - "who" also, as we read in Job 34[:30]
"makes a hypocrite reign because of the sins of the people" — the whole world is nevertheless one kingdom; therefore it should have ane secular ruler in temporal things.
15] Also, that form of government is best by which discord is removed and taken away from the totality of mortals most effectively and most perfectly, as far as is possible for the present life, and concord and justice chiefly preserved. But if the totality of mortals is subject to one secular ruler, discord among mortals wiil be taken away more effectively than if there are several rulers without a superior: First, because where there is plurality there is discord.
Also, because just as — on the testimony cf truth himself, in Matthew 12[:25] - one particular kingdom divided against itself by discord will be made desolate, so if by having many rulers not at all subject to one they are divided against themselves by discord, the totality of mortals will incur desolation. It is therefore beneficial to the totality of mortals te obey one secular ruler.
[6] Also, thac form of government is beneficial to the totality of mortals by which quarrels and litigations, to which the nature of mortals is inclined, are decided more equitably and more suitably.
Bur quarrels and litigations are decided more suitably among litigants if they have one judge, lord, or ruler than if they have several in no case subject to one. For if litigants, one of whom has inflicted damage or harm on the other and has denied his right, are subject to several kings or rulers without a superior, justice can easily be endangered, and it is not clear under which judge it is safe for both parties to litigate. For the party offended will litigate either under his own lord or a judge appointed by his own lord, or he will litigate under the offender's own king or a judge deputed by him. If the party offended litigates before his own lord or king or a judge appointed by him, he [the judge] may deservedly be suspect to the offender, Extra, De officio indicts delegati, c. Causam quae, and c. Insinuante. But it is dangerous to litigate under a suspect judge.
A Dialogue, Part ui, Tract u Thus also "it is in a way natural to avoid the snares of suspect judges," 3, q.
It is therefore not safe for both parties to litigate under the king or lord of the offended party or a judge appointed by him, And it is also not safe for both parties to litigate under the king or lord of the offender or a judge appointed by him, because, by the above laws, he may be suspect to the offended party. And thus, if the litigants have several lords with no superior, justice can easily be endangered. It is beneficial to the totality of mortals, therefore, to have one highest ruler to whom, as to a common judge, any litigants whatever can have recourse, in whom the equal lordship over both the offended and offending parties will not unreasonably remove suspicion.
[7] Moreover, that form of government or lordship is beneficial to the totality of mortals by which not only inferiors, but also superiors, if they do wrong, can justly be corrected. Otherwise the peace of human society - which is so sweet that for its sake even wars are waged, according to Augustine, as we read in 23, q.
1, c. Noli - cannot be preserved, and fustice - and "to cultivate justice is the highest good in things," according to Gregory, as we read in 12, q. 2, cDevetissimam® — will not be maintained, unless care is taken, as far as possible, that superiors cannot do wrong insolently: as can be gathered, it seems, from the words of Innocent
IIE quoted Extra, De accusationibus, Quatiter et quando.' For if there are many kings or rulers in different parts of the world who have no superior, they will be able freely and with impunity to disturb the peace and rights of lesser people. But if all kings and rulers are subject to one emperor, then not only inferiors, but also superiors, can lawfully be corrected if they de wrong. It is therefore beneficial to the whole world that one emperor should preside over all kings and rulers and have coercive jurisdiction over all mortals.
[8] Further, there should be such connection among all mortais that any of them, in relation to another, is an inferior or a superior, or both of them are inferiors in relation to the same person, so that true harmony may come about among all and each may devote reverence or love to each. This is gathered from a text of Popes
* Rather, c, Si saecudi.
? However, they wished to provide for superiors so that they should nor be accused of crimes unjustly: in such a way, nevertheless, that they should take care not to transgress insolently"; c. 24, col. 1598.
Milliam of Ockham Gregory and Boniface included in dist. 89, c. Ad hoc, where we _fead: "To this [end] the foresight of divine providence appointed that there be different grades and distinct orders, so that while lesser persons showed reverence to the more important, and the more important devoted love to the lesser, a true concord should come about and connection from diversity and the administration of every office be carried on correctly; for the whole could not have lasted on any other plan," But such a connection does not exist among all mortals unless one presides over all the others. It is therefore beneficial to the totality of mortals for the world to be governed by one rulcr.
[9] Again, the form of government that God does not permit among mortals, but takes away, because of the sins of the multitude is better than that which Ged introduces to punish the sins of the multitude. But God ordains that not one but many should have lordship over the totality of mortals to punish the sins of mortals, as Solomon testifies. In Proverbs 28[:2] he says: "For the sins of the land, many are its princes." Simply, therefore, it would be beneficial to the totality of mortals for ail to be subject to one.
[70] Also, if it is not beneficial to the totality of mortals to be under one emperor, this wil] be either on account of human inadequacy, because no one can be found who is adequate to ruling the whole world, or on account of the excessive temporal power of one lord of the whole world by which he could run riot at will over his subjects.
But inadequacy is no objection: just as human inadequacy is also no objection why one man should not preside in spiritual matters over the whole world, even if the totality of mortals were converted to the faith. And excessive power is no objection, because the whole world can, in proportion, resist the cruelty of one emperor of the whole world just as one particular kingdom can resist a king. And the emperor of the whole world would not have greater power over the whole world than 2 king has over a particular kingdom; but the power of the king is no objection why one king should not be over one kingdom, therefore neither is the emperor's power an objection why he should not be over the whole world.
[rr] Moreover, if it is not beneficial for there to be one emperor over the whole world, then it is not just for one to have lordship over all. But if it is not just and not beneficial it is wicked. But it is not wicked for one to rule over al! others, because if it were wicked it