CHAPTER XIII. SUPREMACY CONTINUED PREROGATIVES OF THE POPE. XIV. WHETHER THE POPE IS ABOVE A COUNCIL. They are divided on this subject. 1. Some maintain that the pope is above a council. Baronius, Gelas. I., Pighius, Benedict XIV., Dens, fifth Council of Lateran, cited: 2. Others maintain the superiority of a council. Pope Leo, Council of Constance, Council of Basil, cited: 3. The question much debated: 4: Anciently the pope was considered to be below a council: 5. Their arguments for the superiority of a council from Almain: 6. Opinions of their opponents from Cajetan 7. In the twelfth century, and subsequently, the popes did every thing they pleased in councils. Sentiment of Ennodius, viz., That the pope by virtue of his office was holy. Du Pin cited: 8. The supremacy cannot be supported by universal tradition.-XV. THE INFALLIBILITY OF THE POPE. 1. Distinctions and explanations on questions of right and of fact. Of speaking ex cathedra, and as a private person : 2. Some believe him to be infallible. Dens, Pighius, Bishop Hay, Cajetan, the Jesuits: 3. Some do not believe it. The French divines: 4. The common opinion according to Ferraris: 5. Great diversity of their sentiments. Lieberman cited. Their evasion concerning opinions. Bishop Hay's evasive doctrine. Contests in France in 1661. Doctrine of the Gallic Church censured: 6. The arguments which they bring to support it considered: 7. Arguments against the pope's infallibility. General councils have decided against it: 8. The expositions of some popes are express proofs against their infallibility. Exposition of Jer. i, 10, by five popes: 9. The ancient Christians did not refer to it as a mode of deciding controversies: 10. If the pope were infallible, the consent of the church were unnecessary: 11. Popes have contradicted popes in faith and morals. Instances given: 12. Some have issued, officially, impious and wicked decrees, both in faith and morals: 13. Others have contradicted Scripture: 14. Some have been heretics, and taught heresy: 15. Some have made ignorant and foolish decisions: 16. Some have decided to suit their passions: 17. Others decided sophistically 18. Others have adopted a new creed: 19. Some have decided contrary to general councils: 20. The evasive manner in which they evade the charge of heresy. Their authors cited: 21. Whether he can fall into heresy, or lose faith as a private person. Ferraris cited. Opinion of Dens: 22. Conclusion. XIV. Whether the pope is above a council, is a point on which the Roman Church is divided into two parts. The one maintains that he is above a council; and this part generally believes that he is also infallible. Others believe that he is inferior to a council, and can be corrected by it. 1. Let us hear the statements of those who assert that the pope is above a council. Bellarmine* stands foremost in this division of Roman Catholic sects. And Baronius, the great annalist and supporter of supremacy, reckons this as an error in Hincmar, bishop of Rheims, "That he held as if the canons of councils were of greater authority in the church of God than the decrees of popes, which is an absurd and unreasonable opinion."† Pope Gelasius I. affirms, "That the authority of the apostolic see in all Christian ages has been preferred before the universal church, both the canons of our predecessors and manifold traditions confirm." Nothing can be more destitute of foundation than this declaration. Pighius, who died in 1543, and wrote, among other things, a work * De Concil. ii, 17. + Baron. ann. 992, sec. 56. Apostolicæ vero sedis auctoritas, quod cunctis seculis Christianis ecclesiæ prælata sit universæ, et canonum serie paternorum, et multiplici traditione formatur.-Pope Gelas. I, ep. 8. on the hierarchy in six books, dedicated to Paul III., declares in his sixth book as follows: "Unless I am deceived, it is sufficiently demonstrated from these things, that all the authority of all councils is entirely derived from the authority of the apostolic see; from it alone they receive their authority and force; that it was always the controller in all councils, and the infallible rule of orthodox faith, and not the contrary. Councils, without the authority of the pope, however full and universal, not only can err, but have frequently erred even in the definition and business of faith. But the pope never erred, but was the rule of orthodox faith, which he received from the beginning pure from the chief apostles; he hath continually preserved it, and will preserve it to the end. He always succoured erring councils."*. Benedict XIV., who was elected in 1740, affirms that "the pope is above a council."† Dens, after explaining that the inquiry is not concerning a council collected with the pope, but, "It is inquired whether a general council taken by itself without the pope, but nevertheless legitimately called. is above the pope? "Answer. The French hold the affirmative: out of France it is generally maintained that the pope is above a council, so that he can transfer it, dissolve it," &c.‡ The fifth Council of Lateran, sess. xi, says, "It is manifest that the Roman pontiff hath a power embracing authority over general councils." On this Bailly observes, "We do not acknowledge the fifth Lateran Council as œcumenical, so that to this day, as Bellarmine says, it remains a question among Catholics."|| 2. There are others who are of the opinion that a council is superior to a pope. Pope Leo, in his ninety-third letter, directed to Theodoret, having learned that the orthodox faith had triumphed over the errors of the Nestorians and Eutychians in the Council of Chalcedon, expressed his joy "that the council had confirmed by its judgment, which was not subject to amendment, the doctrines which he asserted." On this Du Pin observes,¶ "These words are very remarkable, because they evidently prove to us, that there is no judgment but that of a universal * Satis ergo, ni fallor, ex his demonstratum est, omnem prorsus actionem concilio. rum omnium ex unius apostolicæ sedis auctoritate dependere; ab eâ sola suam auctoritatem, suum robor accipere; eam esse fuisseque semper conciliis omnibus moderatricem et orthodoxæ fidei regulam infallibilem, non vice versá; illa siquidem hujus auctoritate seclusâ, quantumvis frequentia et universalia non solum errare posse, sed errasse frequenter, etiam in fidei definitione et negotio: hanc vero nunquam, sed nor. mam orthodoxæ fidei, ut eam ab initio accepit ab apostolorum principibus illibatam, conservasse perpetuo, et conservaturam ad finem; errantibus conciliis hanc semper succurisse. Pighius, de Hierarchia, lib. vi. See Du Pin, Ecc. Hist., tom. iii, p. 393. + Qui (Romanus pontifex) supra concilium est.-Benedict XIV., de Synod., lib. xiii, c. xii, sec. 2, tom. iii, p. 502. Quæritur ergo, utrum concilium generale, seorsim sumptum sine pontifice, sed tamen legitime congregatum, sit supra pontificem? Responsio. Affirmativam tuentur Galli: extra Galliam communiter sustinetur pontificem esse concilio generali superiorem, adeò ut possit illud transferre, dissolvere, &c.-Dens, de Eccles., n. 95, tom. ii, p. 440. Solum Romanum pontificem, tanquam super omnia concilia auctoritatem habentem, potestatem habere constat.-Conc. Lat. v, sess. xi. Bailly, de Eccles., c. 14, art. iv, tom. ii, p. 504. Ecc. Hist., tom. i, p. 474. council, which may not be re-examined, and that the judgment of the pope himself is subject to amendment." Leo was elected pope in 440, and died in 461. Almain maintained, against Cardinal Cajetan, that, the pope is inferior to a council.* The Council of Constance, held A. D. 1415, in its fifth session declares, "This holy synod decrees and declares, that being legitimately assembled in the Holy Ghost, forming a general council and representing the Catholic Church, hath its power immediately from Christ; which every person of every condition or dignity, even the papal, is bound to obey in those things which concern the faith and the extirpation of the aforesaid schism, and the reformation of the church in its head and members.-Whosoever, of any condition, state, or dignity, even papal, who pertinaciously disdains to obey the commands and statutes of this synod, and any other general council lawfully assembled, should be subjected to proper penance and properly punished, unless he repent." The Council of Basil confirmed the decision of the Council of Constance respecting the power of the pope. They decreed, "First, That it is a verity of the Catholic faith, that the holy general council has power over the pope and every other person. Secondly, That the general council being lawfully assembled, cannot be dissolved, translated, nor adjourned by the authority of the pope, without its own consent. Thirdly, He that does obstinately resist these truths ought to be accounted heretical."‡ The faculty of divinity of Paris in their declaration made to the king, in 1663, declare, in their fifth article, "That the pope is not above a council."§ 3. This is a question vigorously debated among Romanists; but the greater number, as Eneas Sylvius, afterward Pius II., said, adhere to the pope's side, because he disposes of benefices, but councils give none. As the pope has been the supreme executive power in the Church of Rome, and has therefore the gift or confirmation of benefices, he has so far gained by this tremendous power, that the authority of councils has been entirely subverted, and the greater number of bishops have fallen in with his opinions. 4. But anciently the pope was not understood to be above councils; for "greater is the authority of the world than of one city." This has been so fully shown in various places that we need not enlarge. 5. Let us look at the arguments adduced by Romanists themselves that a council is superior to the pope. to prove * Du Pin, Ecc. Hist., iii, 385. + Hæc sancta synodus decernit et declarat quod ipsa in Spiritu Sancto legitime congregata concilium generale faciens et Ecclesiam Catholicam repræsentans, potestatem immediate a Christo habet, cui quilibet cujusque status vel dignitatus, etiamsi papalis existat, obedire tenetur in his quæ pertinent ad fidem et extirpationem dicti schismatis et reformationem dictæ ecclesiæ, in capite et in membris.-Quicumque cujuscumque conditionis, status, et dignitatus, etiam papalis, qui mandatis et statutis hujus synodi et cujuscumque alterius concilii universalis legitime congregati, pertinaciter obedire contempserit, nisi respuerit, condignæ pœnitentiæ subjiciatur, et debite puniatur.-Conc. Constantiense, sess. v. Du Pin, tom. iii, p. 38; Conc. Basil, sess. xxxiii, and xxxviii. Perhaps the greatest champion among them.in favour of this point is Almain, who wrote in the sixteenth century, and was the antagonist of Cardinal Cajetan, who maintained the opposite views. We will give an outline of his arguments as collected by Du Pin.* In his treatise on the authority of the church and councils, he laid it down as a principle, "that Jesus Christ gave the ecclesiastical power immediately to his church; he concludes against Cajetan, that the church, or general council that represents the church, are superior in power to the pope. He proves this proposition, 1. By the testimony of St. Augustine, who, speaking of Pope Miltiades' decree, says, that supposing he had not determined aright, recourse might have been had to a full council of the universal church. 2. By the twenty-first canon of the eighth general council, which allows that the general councils should examine the decisions of popes. 3. By the testimony of Pope Damasus, who remitted the judgment of Bonosus to the council. 4. Because, according to St. Augustine's opinion, St. Peter received the keys, as he represented the church. 5. Because it would be a strange thing, if the pope should make an ill use of his authority, that there should be no power that could hinder him from ruining the church and ruining himself. 6. Because the pope being a son of the church, he ought to submit to it. 7. Because when there is a double election, so that there are two who pretend a right to the papacy at the same time, it is necessary there should be, à judge who has power to determine which of the two has the just title. This judge must be the superior, and cannot be any other than the church. 8. Because St. Jerome and the popes themselves do acknowledge this superiority in the church, and in the council as representing the church, which indeed is founded on the light of nature: so that the general council, whether the pope be assisting in it or not, as it represents the whole Catholic Church, is always superior to the pope." "It is objected against this doctrine, 1. That the pope is head of the universal church. 2. That it was only to St. Peter that Jesus Christ said, Feed my sheep; and that thereby he constituted him monarch of the church and sole and universal pastor; and that the members of his council are his sheep. 3. That the pope is bishop of the whole church, as every bishop is of his own diocess. 4. That the pope has a sovereign power in the church, and consequently there can be no power above it, or equal to it. 5. That the pope is the immediate vicar of Jesus Christ, and not of the apostles. And, 6. That the general councils receive their authority from the pope." Almain proceeds to answer these objections, which contain the leading principles of those who maintain the superiority of the pope to a council. It were needless to our purpose to adduce those arguments by which this class of Romanists support their doctrines. Bailly enumerates them briefly in his Tract de Ecclesia, chapter fourteenth, to which the reader is referred. We will, however, give the principles which he deduces from his arguments, and which are the following: "That the power of the pope is not exercised or governed by his own will, but according to the received rules of the church, and the canons, especially those made by general councils." "That the government of the church is monarchical, but mixed, or re Ecc. Hist., tom. iii, p. 285. gulated by aristocracy. 1. It is monarchical. For a monarchical government is that in which some one person is superior, who should have the right of introducing laws, and to whom obedience is due. But in the church the pope is superior to others; he hath the right of introducing laws, and obedience is due to him, unless the church objects. This is the doctrine of Cardinal de Alliaco, Gerson, Almain, and constantly of the sacred faculty of Paris. 2. This government is not purely monarchical, but it is regulated by aristocracy: for the power of the pope is not absolute, nor is it altogether independent, but is tempered by the authority of bishops, who are the (optimates) nobles who receive their authority from Christ, and who, taken collectively, are united in a general council, and are superior in authority to the Roman pontiff." Almain maintained that the final decision of matters of faith belongs to a general council. Cajetan maintains that it belongs to the pope, and that all his decrees in matters of faith are infallible. Almain asserts the contrary, that the pope may be deceived in judging; and he proves this proposition from the numerous facts in which popes contradicted each other in their decrees. 6. Cajetan was the champion of the pope for the superiority of the see of Rome. In his Tract on the Comparison of the Authority of the Pope and a Council,* he maintains, "That the pope's authority is sovereign in the church, and that Jesus Christ gave the keys only to St. Peter, that he and his successors might enjoy the sovereignty in the church; that the apostles, as such, were all equal, and received their apostleship immediately from Christ: but if they be considered as sheep of Christ, they belonged to Peter, whom Christ constituted the only and sovereign pastor of the flock. There are five several things in which the power of Peter differed from that of the other apostles, viz., 1. It belonged to Peter according to the natural order, but to the rest of the apostles by a special grace. 2. He was constituted the vicar general of Jesus Christ; whereas the other apostles were only lieutenants or delegates. 3. He was invested with authority and power over the other apostles; whereas they had no authority over each other. 4. The power of the other apostles was to cease in their persons; whereas that of Peter was to continue in his successors. 5. The power of the apostles was only executive, whereas the power of Peter was legislative." These are distinctions which were little heard of before his time; and which Cajetan founded on frivolous conjectures. For instance, to prove that the apostles had only an executive power, he adduces the words in the preface of the mass, where it is said of the apostles, That they are the vicars of the work of Jesus Christ, quos operis tui vicarios ; on which he observes, That they are not said absolutely to be the vicars of Jesus Christ, but the vicars of his work, that is, vicars for executing. The answers that he gives to the objections which he proposes against himself are similar to the foregoing. He further maintains, "That if we take the church and the council in conjunction with the pope, they have no more power or authority than the pope alone has; and that the church and council, without the Tractatus de Comparatione auctoritatis Papæ et Consilii; for an account of which see Du Pin, Ecc. Hist., tom. iii, p. 364. |