Bellarmine · De Potestate Summi Pontificis in Temporalibus · On the Power of the Supreme Pontiff in Temporal Matters, against William Barclay
Chapter 28: A Digression on the Opinion of the Chapter Inter corporalia, on the Translation of a Bishop
Our translation, from the Latin of the Opera Omnia (Paris: Vivès, 1870–74), vol. XII, De Potestate Summi Pontificis in Temporalibus adversus Gulielmum Barclaium, a treatise of 1610. The Latin source text is public domain; this English rendering is released with the site. Scripture quotations follow Bellarmine's Vulgate citations, rendered in Douay-Rheims wording where he quotes exactly. Click “Show the Latin” for the original (raw OCR of the scan; scanning errors remain — the scan itself is the authority).
In the twenty-eighth chapter Barclay inveighs against the canonists, whom he says attribute all power, divine and human, to the Pontiff, from a false interpretation of the words of Pope Innocent III which are found in the chapter Inter corporalia, on the translation of a bishop. For there Innocent says that the bond of the spiritual marriage which is between a bishop and his Church is stronger than the bond of the carnal marriage between man and woman. And since man cannot dissolve the bond of carnal marriage, according to that of Matthew 19, What God hath joined together, let no man put asunder, while the Pope not rarely dissolves the bond of spiritual marriage, it seems to follow that either Innocent wrote what is false, or wished to make the Pope equal to God.
But since this disputation does not pertain to our purpose, and Barclay inserted this digression in his book only to have occasion to carp at the canonists, for in this chapter too he boldly writes that nothing is more ignorant than the mere canonists, and in the following chapter he does not fear to say that Innocent IV and John Andreae, easily the princes of the canonists, explained this passage of Innocent III most ineptly, I shall not be long in confuting this chapter. For neither do the canonists, among whom many most learned men are found, need my defence, nor am I so skilled in the science of the canons as to dare to profess myself the patron of the canonists. This one thing it pleased me to note, that Barclay seems a calumniator when he says the canonists attribute divine authority to the Supreme Pontiff from the words of Innocent wrongly understood. For that is so far from the truth that on the contrary some of them, on account of that canon, do not fear to detract from the Pontiff, or to correct him. The gloss certainly, where Innocent says the spiritual bond is stronger, corrects, saying: worthier, not stronger; and Hostiensis in the Summa, on election, number 21, as Barclay himself reports in this place: That reason, he says, is not sufficient, saving the authority and reverence of him who gives it. Lastly, neither Innocent IV, nor John Andreae, nor the Abbot of Palermo, nor Ancarano, nor any other of those whom I could see, attribute divine power to the Supreme Pontiff from the words of Innocent III, as Barclay calumniously says.
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
CAPUT XXVIII. Digressio circa sententiam cap. Inter corpo¬ ralia , de translatione Episcopi. [ In cap. 28, invehitur Barclaius in Canoni- stas, quos dicit potestatem omnem divinam, et humanam Pontifici attribuere , ex ora¬ tione verse sententiae verborum Innoeentiilll. Pontificis, queo habentur cap. inter corpora¬ lia, de translatione Episcopi. Ibi enim Inno¬ centius dicit, fortius esse vinculum conjugii spiritualis, quod est inter Episcopum , et Ecclesiam, quam sit vinculum conjugii car¬ nalis inter verum, et mulierem. Et quoniam vinculum conjugii carnalis homo solvere non potest, juxta i.lud Matth. xix. Quos Deuscon- junxit, homo non separet , Vincuium autem conjungii Spiritualis non raro Papa dissoivit • videtur sequi, ut, aut falsum scripserit Inno¬ centius, aut Papam Deo sequare voluerit. 86 DE POTESTATE PAP/E Sed quoniam hsec disputatio ad institutum nostrum non pertinet, et Barclaius, ideo so¬ lum hanc digressionem libro suo inseruit, ut occasionem haberet Canonistas carpendi : nam, et in hoc capite audacter scribit, nihil esse meris Canonistis imperitius ; et in cap. sequenti non veretur dicere, 1 nnocentium IV. et Joannem Andream canonistarum facile prin¬ cipes ineptissime hunc locum Innocentii 111. explicavisse : propterea non ero in hoc capite confutando prolixior. Nam neque ca- nonistee, inter quos multi viri doctissimi inve¬ niuntur, defensione mea indigent , neque ego scientiam canonum ita calleo, ut audeam me patronum canonistarum profiteri. Illud unum annotare placuit, Barclaium calumniatorem videri, dum dicit canonistas summo Ponti¬ fici divinam auctoritatem ex verbis Innocen¬ tii perperam intellebtis, tribuere. Id enim tantum abest a vero, ut contra potius non¬ nulli eorum propter istum canonem Pontifici detrahere, aut illum colligere, non vereantur. Glossa certe, ubi Innocentius dicit, fortius esse vinculum spirituale, corrigit, dicens, di¬ gnius, non fortius : et Ostiensis in Summa,- de Elect. num. 21. ut ipse hoc loco Barclaius refert : Illa, inquit, ratio non est sufficiens, salva auctoritate, et reverentia reddentis. Denique neque Innocentius IV. neque Jo. Andreas, neque Abbas Panormetanus, neque Ancaranus, neque ullus alius ex iis quos vi¬ dere potui, ex verbis Innocentii III. divinam potestatem summo Pontifici tribuunt, ut Barclaius calumniatur.