In "De Auctoritate Summi Pontificis” Disputatio III, Articulus II, XVII De Depositione Papae & Seq. (translated by Fr. François Chazal), John of St. Thomas admits that his opinion is problematic on the point of jurisdiction: “Concerning the second point, namely by whose authority the declaration and deposition is to be made, there is dissent among theologians, and it does not appear by whom such a deposition is to be made, because it is an act of judgment, and jurisdiction, which can be exercised by no one over the pope.” Since the solemn definition of the universal primacy of jurisdiction of the Roman Pontiff, it is heresy for anyone to say that anyone or any synod, council, or body can ever pronounce a judgment on a reigning pontiff, who is the supreme judge of all questions of doctrine; and, upon assuming office acquires directly from God the absolute power of jurisdiction over the whole world - ("plenam absolutamque iurisdictionem supra totum orbem acquirit" - Pius XII, Vacantis Apostolicae Sedis)
Not surprisingly, Don Paolo entirely misrepresented this quotation from John of St. Thomas as well. JST is not "admit[ting] that his own opinion is problematic." All he's saying is theologians disagree amongst themselves about how a Pope can be declared a heretic and deposed, since the Church cannot exercise any juridical authority over the Pope. He is pointing to the difficulty that the theologians have attempted to resolve, and which has resulted in the various theological opinions concerning how an heretical Pope can be "deposed". He then goes on to list the four theological opinions that Cajetan commented on - two extreme opinions and two middle opinions - as well as the opinion held by Bellarmine and Saurez, which, in reality, Cajetan himself only briefly mentioned in a sentence or two in his entire book (the ipso facto loss of office theory that Cajetan refuted was what Bellarmine lists as the 2nd Opinion, not the 5th Opinion).
Here is the sentence that Don Paolo took entirely out of context, followed by the next two paragraphs:
John of St. Thomas: "However, concerning the second point—namely, by whose authority the declaration and deposition are to be accomplished—there is disagreement among theologians, for it is not apparent who should effect the deposition, since it is an act of judgment and jurisdiction, and no one can exercise these in relation to the Pope. Cajetan (in opusculo de potestate papae, capite 20) relates two explanations that are extreme opposites, and two others that are in the middle. One of the extremes is that the Pope, by the very fact that he is a heretic [i.e. has lost the virtue of faith], is deposed without any human judgment [this is what Bellarmine lists as the 2nd Opinion]. The other extreme is that there is a power that is superior to the Pope without any qualification, and this power is able to judge him [i.e., Conciliarism]. Of the two intermediate opinions, the one holds that the pope does not recognize anyone as superior absolutely, but only in the case of heresy [Semi-Conciliarism]. The other holds that there is no power on earth that is superior to the Pope, whether absolutely or in the case of heresy; but there is a ministerial power [i.e., the opinion of Cajetan].
"Even as the Church has a ministerial power in the election of a Pope—not as to the conferring of power, since this is done immediately by Christ, as we have said in the first article; but in the designation of the person—so, too, in the deposition (which is the destruction of the bond by which the papacy is joined to this particular person) the Church has a ministerial power and deposes the Pope ministerially, while it is Christ who deprives him of the papacy authoritatively.
"Of these two [intermediate] explanations, Azorius (2, tom. 2, cap. 7) adopts the first, which holds that the Church is superior to the Pope in the case of heresy; while Cajetan adopts the latter and treats of it at length. Bellarmine, however, reports his opinion and attacks it in his work De Romano Pontifice, bk. 2, ch. 30, objecting especially to these two points: namely, that Cajetan says that the Pope who is a manifest heretic is not ipso facto deposed; and also that the Church deposes the Pope in a real and authoritative manner. Suarez also, in the disputation that we have frequently cited, sect. 6, num. 7, attacks Cajetan for saying that, in the case of heresy, the Church is superior to the Pope, not insofar as he is Pope, but insofar as he is a private individual. Cajetan, however, did not say this; he only said that, even in the case of heresy, the Church is not absolutely superior to the Pope, but instead is superior to the bond between the papacy and the person, dissolving it in the same way that she forged it at his election; and this power of the Church is ministerial, for only Christ our Lord is superior to the Pope without qualification. Hence, Bellarmine and Suarez are of the opinion that, by the very fact that the Pope is a manifest heretic and declared to be incorrigible, he is deposed [ipso facto] by Christ our Lord without any intermediary, and not by any authority of the Church."
Comment: In context, it is quite obvious that JST is not saying that his own opinion is problematic, as Fr. Kramer claimed.
What else is noteworthy is that JST correctly points out that both Bellarmine and Suarez objected to Cajetan's opinion. Suarez attempted to refute it in De Fide, disp x, and mentions Cajetan by name when doing so. What this obviously proves is that Suarez did not hold the opinion of Cajetan (which Bellarmine lists as the 4th Opinion), as many people today mistakenly believe. They reason they believe he did is because they lack a clear understanding of the difference between the 2nd and 5th Opinions (both of which involve an ipso facto loss of office), and between the 5th and 4th Opinions (which both require human judgment before the loss of office occurs). As a result, they conclude that Bellarmine believes an heretical Pope is ipso facto deposed without antecedent human judgment (2nd Opinion), if he manifest his heresy by external acts (i.e., if his heresy is externally occult), and then conclude that Suarez held the 4th Opinion, since he explicitly says human judgment and a declaration is required before the ipso facto loss of office takes place.
Topic: Tony La Rosa: Benedict XVI Is the True Pope! (Read 22503 times)