What I have now advanced is admitted by all theologians, as appears from the following axiom of Cardinal Bellarmine, a member of your Society: "General and lawful councils are incapable of error in defining the dogmas of faith;but they may err in questions of fact." In another place he says: "The pope, as pope, and even as the head of a universal council, may err in particular controversies of fact, which depend principally on the information and testimony of men." Cardinal Baronius speaks in the same manner: "Implicit submission is due to the decisions of councils in points of faith; but, in so far as persons and their writings are concerned, the censures which have been pronounced against them have not been so rigourously observed, because there is none who may not chance to be deceived in such matters."I may add that, to prove this point, the Archbishop of Toulouse has deduced the following rule from the letters of two great popes- St.Leon and Pelagius II: "That the proper object of councils is the faith; and whatsoever is determined by them, independently of the faith, may be reviewed and examined anew: whereas nothing ought to be re-examined that has been decided in a matter of faith; because, as Tertullian observes, the rule of faith alone is immovable and irrevocable." Hence it has been seen that, while general and lawful councils have never contradicted one another in points of faith, because, as M.de Toulouse has said, "it is not allowable to examine de novo decisions in matters of faith"; several instances have occurred in which these same councils have disagreed in points of fact, where the discussion turned upon the sense of an author; because, as the same prelate observes, quoting the popes as his authorities, "everything determined in councils, not referring to the faith, may be reviewed and examined de novo." An example of this contrariety was furnished by the fourth and fifth councils, which differed in their interpretation of the same authors.The same thing happened in the case of two popes, about a proposition maintained by certain monks of Scythia.Pope Hormisdas, understanding it in a bad sense, had condemned it; but Pope John II, his successor, upon re-examining the doctrine understood it in a good sense, approved it, and pronounced it to be orthodox.Would you say that for this reason one of these popes was a heretic? And must you not consequently acknowledge that, provided a person condemn the heretical sense which a pope may have ascribed to a book, he is no heretic because he declines condemning that book, while he understands it in a sense which it is certain the pope has not condemned? If this cannot be admitted, one of these popes must have fallen into error.I have been anxious to familiarize you with these discrepancies among Catholics regarding questions of fact, which involve the understanding of the sense of a writer, showing you father against father, pope against pope, and council against council, to lead you from these to other examples of opposition, similar in their nature, but somewhat more disproportioned in respect of the parties concerned.
同类推荐
热门推荐
弥补遗憾之超女与花满楼
一浅蓝长衫的人从身边经过,她忙扑过去,抱住那人的小腿,大喊:“救命啊,我好饿啊——”那人竟给了一锭银子!抬眼望去,高富帅?还那么温柔、善良!好男人啊,她决定继续抱着不能放。--情节虚构,请勿模仿