The pope is head at most of a particular church

Loserth pp. 28.8–32.8

¶128.8–30.11

28Si dicatur secundo quod manet continue eadem ecclesia propter unitatem capitis scilicet pape, non tollitur quin adhuc tot sunt ecclesie quot erant pape; quod est contra decretalem. Similiter, querendo de quiditate illius ecclesie, patet, cum sit date persone, ipsa non dependet ab ipso capite in racione ecclesie, cum decapitata ab isto capite manet eque sancta et sana; cum tamen iuxta responsionem hoc caput et hec ecclesia consequerentur se in morte et vita (nam sequitur expositorie: iste persone sunt hec ecclesia que durabit per totam vitam illius hominis): ergo iste persone sic durabunt, et per idem desinent, isto papa mortuo, quod nec oportet de ecclesia materiali nec spirituali, cum stat quod iste sit primus mortuus, tota ecclesia sua superstite. Nec oportet quod iste sit capitaneus omnium istorum in viacione, quia stat quod sit prescitus, aliis in ampliori gracia eciam secundum presentem iusticiam et finaliter perseverantibus ac viam oppositam viantibus. Similiter, eadem ecclesia apostolica cui Petrus presidebat manet modo et manebit continue, ut dicit ista opinio cum decreto. Iste ergo papa non potest esse caput super ista totali ecclesia, quia tunc haberet ex equo tot capita quot papas, et per consequens, talis ecclesia successiva non capit suam unitatem ab isto papa, cum habuit unitatem eandem quam modo, antequam ipse fuerit, sicut et habebit post eius corrupcionem. 29Quomodo ergo caperet esse suum a membro tam accidentali, cum more fluminis labentis ecclesia illa habet nunc unum et nunc alium in facie seculi presidentem? Nulla ergo istarum viarum et specialiter ista verificat quod quicunque fuerit Romanus pontifex, sit caput universalis ecclesie cui oportet omnem christianum de necessitate salutis obedire. Si dicatur tercio quod manet eadem ecclesia hominum a principio mundi usque ad novissimum electum (sicut dicit beatus Gregorius, XIX° Homiliarum, cum aliis sanctis), et illa capit unitatem a capite Deo et capite Christo qui a principio mundi manet in causis secundis, et habet membra fidem eius tenencia et quicunque fuerit papa pro tempore suo, oportet quod tota pars illius ecclesie secum conversans sit sibi subiecta ut capiti et abbati. Et ista responsio est subtilior quam priores. Sed non videtur mihi salvare decretalem ad sensum expositum sed pocius infringere illum sensum; quod videtur multipliciter. Nam primo patet quod preter istam ecclesiam oportet ponere aliam superiorem ex omnibus angelis et hominibus compositam cuius ista est pars. Et per consequens, ista non est universalis ecclesia, cum sit particularis, quia aliter forent due; quod est contra conclusionem secundam dicte decretalis. De totali autem que est omnes ecclesie extra quam non est salus nec possunt esse multe tales est nobis sermo. Item, quilibet Christi vicarius est filius talis ecclesie, quomodo igitur pater vel caput? Item, quilibet nostrum sicut et istorum paparum ignorat si sit membrum talis ecclesie: omnino ergo non debet presumere quod sit capitaneus omnium illorum propter apostolos et alios sanctos ignotos qui secundum aliam formam dominati sunt sue ecclesie. 30Item, cum sancti pape post mortem non perdunt dignitatem capitalis regiminis sue ecclesie, videtur quod manent capita ecclesie sue in patria; illa enim dignitas foret illis laureola. Nam sicut nullum membrum ecclesie potest desinere esse membrum ecclesie, sic videtur quod nullum caput cuiuscunque particularis ecclesie potest desinere esse caput eiusdem ecclesie, et per consequens, sunt mille particulares ecclesie, quarum capita sunt multorum paparum capita. Non ergo est verum quod unica est mater ecclesia cuius oportet quemcunque Romanum pontificem esse caput.

If it is said, second, that the same church remains continuously because of the unity of the head, namely the pope, this does not remove [the consequence] that there are still as many churches as there were popes; which is against the decretal.¹ Similarly, inquiring into the quiddity of that church: it is clear, since it is [certain] given persons, that it does not depend on that head in its character as a church, since, beheaded of that head, it remains equally holy and sound. And yet according to the reply this head and this church would follow each other in death and in life (for it follows expositorily: these persons are this church, which will last through the whole life of that man): therefore these persons will so last, and by the same token will cease when this pope is dead; which need not be so either of the material or of the spiritual church, since it can be that he is the first to die, his whole church surviving.² Nor need this [pope] be the captain of all these in their wayfaring, for it can be that he is foreknown, while others are in ampler grace, even according to present justice, and finally persevere, and are on the road the opposite way.³ Similarly, the same apostolic church over which Peter presided remains now and will remain continually, as this opinion says, with the decree. This pope, therefore, cannot be head over this total church, since then it would have equally as many heads as popes; and consequently such a successive church does not take its unity from this pope, since it had the same unity as now before he existed, as it will also have after his corruption.⁴ 29How then would it take its being from a member so accidental, since, after the manner of a gliding river, that church has now one, now another, presiding in the face of the world? None of these ways, then, and this one especially, verifies that whoever is Roman pontiff is head of the universal church, whom every Christian must obey of necessity for salvation.

If it is said, third, that the same church of men remains from the beginning of the world to the last elect (as the blessed Gregory says, Homilies 19, with other saints),⁵ and that it takes its unity from the head God and the head Christ, who from the beginning of the world remains in second causes, and has as members those holding his faith; and that, whoever is pope for his time, the whole part of that church living with him must be subject to him as head and abbot:⁶ this reply is subtler than the former ones. But it does not seem to me to save the decretal in the sense expounded, but rather to break that sense; which is seen in many ways. For first it is clear that besides this church one must posit another, higher one, composed of all angels and men, of which this is a part. And consequently this is not the universal church, since it is particular; for otherwise there would be two, which is against the second conclusion of the said decretal. But our discourse is of the total church, which is all the churches, outside which there is no salvation, and of which there cannot be many.⁷ Again, every vicar of Christ is a son of such a church: how then [is he] father or head? Again, each of us, as also each of these popes, is ignorant whether he is a member of such a church: he ought, then, by no means to presume that he is captain of all of them, because of the apostles and other unknown saints who, according to another form, have exercised lordship over their church.⁸ 30Again, since holy popes after death do not lose the dignity of the chief rule of their church, it seems that they remain heads of their church in the homeland; for that dignity would be an aureole for them.⁹ For just as no member of the church can cease to be a member of the church, so it seems that no head of any particular church can cease to be head of that same church; and consequently there are a thousand particular churches, whose heads are the heads of many popes. It is not true, then, that there is only one mother church, of which every Roman pontiff must be head.

¶230.12–31.2

30Item, tempore ante incarnacionem fuerunt multe particulares ecclesie quarum quelibet iam est eadem ecclesia, sed triumphans que quondam fuit militans, et illarum nullus Romanus pontifex fuit caput preter Christum; nec dubium quin ille ecclesie distinguuntur ab universali ecclesia et ab aliis particularibus ecclesiis: ergo multe sunt particulares ecclesie, et per consequens, una universalis ecclesia ex eis collecta; que sub iurisdiccione nullius Petri vicarii tamquam capitis sunt subiecte. Non enim patet evasio, loquendo de predestinatis fidelibus (de quorum numero non est Christus), quin ecclesie ille differunt ab invicem, sicut multitudines illarum personarum distinguuntur ab invicem, et si ecclesia dicit aggregata per accidens, tunc illa aggregata distinguuntur tam secundum subiecta quam secundum formas aggregatas longe plus quam Petrus albus et Petrus musicus. Si enim Deus servasset totam ecclesiam militantem tempore viacionis Christi usque hodie conversantem in Anglia et creasset novas ecclesias, sicut de facto fecit in Francia et alibi, tunc distinguerentur. Quare ergo modo non distinguuntur? Notemus ergo ecclesiam quam talis primo et per se regit, et invenietur quod 31non sit unica columba Christi, quia bene est isti, si sit abiectum membrum illius ecclesie.

Again, in the time before the incarnation there were many particular churches, each of which is now the same church, but triumphant, that once was militant; and of these no Roman pontiff was head except Christ. Nor is there doubt that those churches are distinguished from the universal church and from the other particular churches: therefore there are many particular churches, and consequently one universal church gathered from them; and these are subject to the jurisdiction of no vicar of Peter as head.¹⁰ For no escape is evident, speaking of the predestinate faithful (of whose number Christ is not), from [the conclusion] that those churches differ from one another as the multitudes of those persons are distinguished from one another; and if "church" signifies things aggregated by accident, then those aggregates are distinguished, both according to their subjects and according to the aggregated forms, far more than white Peter and musical Peter.¹¹ For if God had preserved the whole church militant of the time of Christ’s wayfaring, living until today in England, and had created new churches, as in fact he did in France and elsewhere, then they would be distinguished. Why, then, are they not distinguished now? Let us note, then, the church which such a [pope] rules first and of itself, and it will be found that 31it is not the one dove of Christ; for it is well with him if he is an abject member of that church.¹²

¶331.3–31.12

31Conformiter arguitur contra quamcunque opinionem in ista materia, querendo sollicite de quiditate illius ecclesie. Nam ista ecclesia que complete viat pro tempore Christi non potest esse alia quam ista eadem ecclesia, et sic de qualibet alia ecclesia singulari. Ex quo patet quod continue est alia et alia ecclesia, vians ad alietatem personarum ex quibus componitur; non enim valet negare sillogismum expositorium nec ei similem, nisi subsit plana diversitatis racio exprimenda etc.

In conformity [with this] it is argued against any opinion in this matter, by inquiring carefully into the quiddity of that church. For that church which is wholly a wayfarer in the time of Christ cannot be other than that same church; and so of every other singular church. From which it is clear that it is continually another and another church, on the way according to the otherness of the persons of which it is composed; for it is not valid to deny an expository syllogism, nor one like it, unless a plain ground of diversity underlies it, which must be stated, etc.¹³

¶431.13–31.18

31Ideo dicunt doctores periciores quod dominus papa non est caput universalis sed particularis ecclesie, dum tamen perseveranter vixerit tamquam papa, sicut dicit septima conclusio capituli proximi; et sic videtur concedendum quod de possibili sit papa ipso superior hic in terris.

Therefore the more expert doctors say that the lord pope is head not of the universal but of a particular church, provided, however, that he has lived perseveringly as a pope [should], as the seventh conclusion of the preceding chapter says; and so it seems it must be granted that there may possibly be one superior to the pope himself here on earth.¹⁴

¶531.19–31.32

31Posito quod unus alius perfeccius doceat et regat plurem populum conformiter legi Christi, sicut potest esse de summo sacerdote ecclesie Asiane, videtur tamen mihi quod non debemus contendere circa illud de inesse, quod iste quicunque conversans nobiscum sit talis, sed supponere excellenciam Romani pontificis super aliis eciam quoad Deum, quia certum est quod non est superior nisi fuerit superior quoad Deum. Ex quibus videtur mihi quod nullus Romanus pontifex cui non sit facta specialis revelacio assereret vel opinaretur quod subesse sibi sit de necessitate salutis cuiuslibet christiani. Nam (ut logici arguunt) multi sunt christiani pro suo tempore qui non subsunt sibi, sicut nec ipsemet qui est precipuus christianus.

Supposing that some other teaches more perfectly and rules a larger people in conformity with the law of Christ, as may be the case with the high priest of the Asian church, it seems to me nevertheless that we ought not to contend about that as a matter of fact, [namely] that this one, whoever he is, living among us, is such; but [ought] to suppose the excellence of the Roman pontiff over others even with respect to God, since it is certain that he is not superior unless he is superior with respect to God.¹⁵ From which it seems to me that no Roman pontiff to whom a special revelation has not been made would assert, or hold as an opinion, that to be subject to him is of necessity for the salvation of every Christian. For (as the logicians argue) there are many Christians in his time who are not subject to him, as neither is he himself, who is the chief Christian.¹⁶

¶632.1–32.8

32Item, iuxta sepe dicta non sic assereret quod sit predestinatus, eo quod non est de substancia fidei catholice quod iste sit predestinatus. Ideo si assit sibi firma spes de hoc, oportet quod ex dono supernaturali fiat sibi specialis revelacio, sed si non sit predestinatus, non est capitaneus in ecclesia sancta Dei. Ergo non sic assereret quod subesse sibi tamquam capiti ecclesie sit de necessitate salutis cuiuslibet christiani.

Again, according to what has often been said, he would not so assert that he is predestinate, because it is not of the substance of the catholic faith that this man is predestinate. Therefore, if he has a firm hope of this, it must be that a special revelation is made to him by a supernatural gift; now if he is not predestinate, he is not captain in the holy church of God. Therefore he would not so assert that to be subject to him as head of the church is of necessity for the salvation of every Christian.¹⁷

Notes

1 The second objection to the third reply (the first ends at 28.7). Non tollitur quin: "this does not remove [the consequence] that"; tollere here is not the disputation’s "dispose of an objection". A reads unitatis; A₁ erunt pape.
2 Cum sit date persone: the church is these given persons, so it does not depend on the pope in racione ecclesie, in what makes it a church. Sequitur expositorie: by an expository syllogism, one whose middle term is singular ("these persons"); the reply ties the church’s life to the pope’s, which the facts deny: he may die first. Materiali … spirituali: the church as building and as people.
3 Prescitus: "foreknown", Wyclif’s term for one God foreknows will be damned (explained at its first occurrence in the work). Secundum presentem iusticiam: according to the grace they now have, as against final perseverance. Viam oppositam viantibus: the others go the opposite way to the foreknown pope, to the homeland. Loserth’s side-note gives "reprobate" for prescitus.
4 Ista opinio cum decreto: the defenders’ view, which they hold together with "the decree", most likely Unam sanctam (not identified further). Successiva: a whole whose parts succeed one another, like time or a river (the glossary, ), hence more fluminis labentis. Corrupcionem: his death, in the philosophers’ sense of a thing ceasing to be.
5 Gregory, Hom. in Evang. 19.1, the church ab Abel iusto usque ad ultimum electum (PL 76:1154B). Wyclif’s reference (the MSS): XXIII Moral. cap. I; Loserth corrects to XIX Homiliarum and cites Greg. Opp. I, p. 1510. B’s margin: Gregorius electum.
6 Manet in causis secundis: Christ remains at work through second causes, so that the pope is his instrument (B’s margin repeats the phrase; Loserth’s side-note: "immanent in second causes"). Membra fidem eius tenencia: "members holding his faith". Abbati: the pope as abbot of the community, a monastic figure for headship.
7 Aliter forent due: if this church were universal there would be two universal churches, it and the higher one of angels and men. B reads forent secundo (29.23–24). De totali autem: adversative, against the particular church just conceded.
8 Propter apostolos … dominati sunt sue ecclesie: the unknown saints who ruled their church "according to another form" (another form of rule) may be the true heads, so the pope cannot presume he is captain of them all. Dominari: here neutral, "exercise lordship".
9 Capitalis regiminis: "chief rule", the rule proper to a head. Laureola: the theologians’ aureole, the special crown of martyrs, virgins and doctors (the glossary). If the dignity lasts, dead popes stay heads.
10 Nullus Romanus pontifex … preter Christum: Christ is the only "Roman pontiff" who was head of the churches before the incarnation. Que … sunt subiecte: the many particular churches. Petri vicarii: "vicar of Peter", the pope as Peter’s vicar. 30.20 iurisdiccione: Loserth’s correction (MSS ittrediccione, OCR).
11 Ecclesia dicit aggregata per accidens: we take dicit as "signifies" (the logician’s sense) with the neuter plural aggregata as object, matched by illa aggregata next. Petrus albus et Petrus musicus: the stock example of things accidentally one (the same subject under two accidental forms); churches differ by subjects and forms, so far more. B distinccionem ab invicem (30.23).
12 Talis: such a pope. Columba: the "one dove" of Cant. 6:8, which Unam sanctam cites for the church’s unity (ch. 1). Bene est isti: it is well with him if he is so much as an abject member: he is not its head.
13 Viat and vians are the verb of viator. Ad alietatem personarum: the church is a different wayfaring church as its persons are different. The expository syllogism (n. 2) cannot be denied unless a ground of diversity is shown. A reads querendo querendo (31.4).
14 Septima conclusio capituli proximi: Loserth refers to p. 19, l. 18. B reads capituli XXI for proximi. Dum tamen … tamquam papa: we take the perfect subjunctive as conditional ("provided he has lived"). A and B’s margins: Conclusionis responsio.
15 Iste quicunque conversans nobiscum … talis: we take it as the pope among us, whoever he is, being the superior teacher and ruler; the alternative ("that the Asian priest is such") has no nobiscum. Summo sacerdote ecclesie Asiane: unidentified, perhaps a hypothetical eastern patriarch. B circa idem.
16 Ut logici arguunt: the pope is himself a Christian not subject to himself, so the universal cuiuslibet christiani fails. A’s margin at 31.27: Ha, ha; A and B: Conclusio.
17 The argument: no one may assert he is predestinate without revelation; only the predestinate is captain in the church; so the pope may not assert that subjection to him as head is necessary to salvation. Sic: "so", i.e. as of faith. Assit sibi firma spes: we read "has a firm hope", i.e. certainty.

How the Latin of this chapter was established

Plate readings; page · reading · note):
- 28: expositorie [NW]
- 28: viacione (print has viacione) [NW]
- 30: fuit (f with crossbar)
- 30: vicarii
- 30: Christus
- 31: abiectum
- 31: Christi
- 31: Christi
- 32: assit (print has assit) [NW]
- 30: Item
- 31: non (132a folio mark glued; reading is non)
- 32: sepe
OCR scars corrected in the Latin: 28.8 eademb for eadem (alinea letter b glued); 31.27–28 lsalutis for salutis (stray l).
29.10 XIX° Homiliarum: Loserth’s correction of the MSS' XXIII Moral. cap. I (n. 5).
Variants noted but not affecting the English: 28.9 A unitatis; 28.10 A₁ erunt pape; 30.6 A sicut videtur; 30.10 B est unum; 30.11 A quemcunque; 31.22 B circa idem.