Monarchia (III, xiii, 1-7)

(1) Positis et exclusis erroribus quibus potissime innituntur qui romani Principatus auctoritatem dependere dicunt a romano Pontifice, redeundum est ad ostendendum veritatem huius tertie questionis, que a principio discutienda proponebatur: que quidem veritas apparebit sufficienter si, sub prefixo principio inquirendo, prefatam auctoritatem inmediate dependere a culmine totius entis ostendero, qui Deus est. (1) Having stated and ruled out the errors on which those who claim that Roman sovereign authority derives from the Roman Pontiff principally base their case, we must return to demonstrate the truth of the third question we proposed from the beginning to discuss. This truth will emerge with sufficient clarity if, conducting our inquiry in the light of the principle established earlier, I show that the said imperial authority derives directly from the summit of all being, that is from God.
(2) Et hoc erit ostensum vel si auctoritas Ecclesie removeatur ab illa -- cum de alia non sit altercatio -- vel si 'ostensive' probetur a Deo inmediate dependere. (2) And this will be demonstrated whether the church's authority is shown to have no bearing on it - given that there is no quarrel about any other authority - or whether it is proved positively that it derives directly from God.
(3) Quod autem auctoritas Ecclesie non sit causa imperialis auctoritatis probatur sic: illud, quo non existente aut quo non virtuante, aliud habet totam suam virtutem, non est causa illius virtutis; sed, Ecclesia non existente aut non virtuante, Imperium habuit totam suam virtutem: ergo Ecclesia non est causa virtutis Imperii et per consequens nec auctoritatis, cum idem sit virtus et auctoritas eius. (3) That the authority of the church is not the cause of imperial authority is proved in this way: a thing cannot be the cause of the power of something else if that something else is fully functional when the first thing does not exist or exerts no influence; but the empire had all its authority at a time when the church did not exist or had no influence; therefore the church is not the cause of the empire's power, nor therefore of its authority, since its power and its authority are the same thing.
(4) Sit Ecclesia A, Imperium B, auctoritas sive virtus Imperii C; si, non existente A, C est in B, inpossibile est A esse causam eius quod est C esse in B, cum inpossibile sit effectum precedere causam in esse. Adhuc si, nichil operante A, C est in B, necesse est A non esse causam eius quod est C esse in B, cum necesse sit ad productionem effectus preoperari causam, presertim efficientem, de qua intenditur. (4) Let the church be A, the empire B, the authority or power of the empire C; if, when A did not yet exist, C was in B, it is impossible for A to be the cause of C's being in B, since it is impossible for an effect to exist before its cause. Besides, if when A is not yet functioning, C is in B, then of necessity A is not the cause of C's being in B, since to produce an effect the cause must operate first (especially the efficient cause, about which we are here speaking).
(5) Maior propositio huius demonstrationis declarata est in terminis; minorem Cristus et Ecclesia confirmat. Cristus nascendo et moriendo, ut superius dictum est: Ecclesia, cum Paulus in Actibus Apostolorum dicat ad Festum: «Ad tribunal Cesaris sto, ubi me oportet iudicari»; cum etiam angelus Dei Paulo dixerit parum post: «Ne timeas, Paule, Cesari te oportet assistere»; et infra iterum Paulus ad Iudeos existentes in Ytalia: «Contradicentibus autem Iudeis, coactus sum appellare Cesarem, non quasi gentem meam habens aliquid accusare, sed ut eruerem animam meam de morte». (5) The major premiss of this proof is clear from the terms in which it is formulated; the minor premiss is confirmed by Christ and by the church. Christ confirms it by his birth and his death, as was said earlier; the church when Paul in the Acts of the Apostles says to Festus: "I stand at Caesar's judgment seat, where I ought to be judged"; and again when the angel of God said to Paul a little later: "Fear not, Paul; thou must be brought before Caesar"; and again, later, Paul said to the Jews who were in Italy: "But when the Jews spake against it, I was constrained to appeal unto Caesar, not that I had aught to accuse my nation of, but to deliver my soul from death".
(6) Quod si Cesar iam tunc iudicandi temporalia non habuisset auctoritatem nec Cristus hoc persuasisset, nec angelus illa verba nuntiasset, nec ille qui dicebat «Cupio dissolvi et esse cum Cristo» incompetentem iudicem appellasset. (6) For if Caesar had not at that time had authority to judge temporal matters, Christ would not have assented to this, nor would the angel have pronounced those words, nor would the man who said "I desire to depart and to be with Christ" have been appealing to a competent judge.
(7) Si etiam Constantinus auctoritatem non habuisset, in patrocinium Ecclesie illa que de Imperio deputavit ei de iure deputare non potuisset; et sic Ecclesia illa collatione uteretur iniuste, cum Deus velit oblationes esse inmaculatas iuxta illud Levitici: «Omnis oblatio, quam conferetis Domino, absque fermento erit». (7) Indeed if Constantine had not had authority, he could not legitimately have handed over into the church's guardianship those things of the empire's which he did hand over; and thus the church would benefit by that donation unjustly, since God wishes offerings to be spotless, in accordance with the words of Leviticus: "No offering, which ye shall bring unto the lord, shall be made with leaven".