How an Heretical Pope Loses His Office
When we inquire about how or when a
heretical Pope loses his office, what we are really asking is what is required
before Christ will sever the bond that unites the man (the Pope) to the papal
office (the Pontificate).
To further clarify this point, there is
a distinction between the 1) papal office, 2) the man who occupies it, and 3) the
bond that joins the two. Only Christ has
the authority to make a man pope (e.g. by joining the man to the office
following the election), and only Christ has the authority to disjoin the man
from the office for the crime of heresy.
When will Christ do so?
The Church has never taught how or when Christ would sever the bond uniting the man to the office. All we have are theologian opinions, which vary greatly. One opinion (which has never been condemned by the Church) maintains that Christ will never sever the bond (will never disjoin the Pope from the Papal Office) regardless of how heretical he becomes. The more common opinion, however, is that He will do so; but precisely when, how, and what must precede it has never been taught by the Magisterium.
When will Christ do so?
The Church has never taught how or when Christ would sever the bond uniting the man to the office. All we have are theologian opinions, which vary greatly. One opinion (which has never been condemned by the Church) maintains that Christ will never sever the bond (will never disjoin the Pope from the Papal Office) regardless of how heretical he becomes. The more common opinion, however, is that He will do so; but precisely when, how, and what must precede it has never been taught by the Magisterium.
The various opinions of the theologians and
canonists regarding this issue fall into the category of speculative theology,
or “questions of law”. Only the Magisterium
has the authority to settle such questions, and it has never done so. [1]
Anyone who maintains that one theological
opinion is certainly correct is usurping
the authority that belongs to the Magisterium alone.
Bellarmine himself did not present his
opinion on how a Pope loses his office as being a fact, nor did he declare that the other opinions (even those that
are highly unlikely) were certain wrote.
For example, in De Romano Pontifice, where he discusses how a heretical Pope would
lose his office, he referred to the opinions with which he disagrees by using
phrases such as “not proven to me” (second opinion), “exceedingly improbable”
(third opinion) or “to my judgment,
this opinion cannot be defended” (fourth opinion). He never declared that they were all certainly wrong and that his opinion was
certainly correct, since he knew full
well that only the Church alone has the authority to settle such “questions of
law” definitively; and until it does so, theologians are free to disagree.
Therefore, it is not permitted to use a theological
opinion as a certain premise to
arrive at a certain conclusion. Much less is it permitted to publicly declare a
conclusion to be a fact, when it is founded upon an opinion that itself is not
certain.
[1] “No canonical
provisions exist regulating the authority of the College of Cardinals sede Romana impedita, ie., in case the
pope became insane, or personally a heretic; in such cases it would be
necessary to consult the dictates of right reason and the teachings of history”
(Original Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol III, p. 339).
