'Of these four opinions, the first is heretical: the second not propriè heretical, for we see still that it is tolerated in the Church; yet it appears to be altogether erroneous, and proximate to heresy.'
It is to be borne in mind that Bellarmine wrote this before the Four Articles of 1682 had been framed or censured.
'The third opinion is probable, but not certain.
'The fourth opinion is most certain, and to be asserted.[1]
Bellarmine in later years reviewed his 'Controversies,' and wrote of this point as follows:—
'This opinion is more rightly the common judgment of Catholics; for opinion implies uncertainty, and we hold this judgment to be certain.' And again, 'I said that the opinion of those who teach that infallibility of judgment resides not in the Pope, but in the General Council, is not plainly heretical, but erroneous and proximate to heresy. We do not, indeed, venture to pronounce that opinion plainly heretical, because they who follow it have, neither they nor their books, been condemned by the Church. Nevertheless, it seems to us so manifestly erroneous, that it may deservedly be declared by the judgment of the Church to be heretical.'
In the Pastoral of 1867, I gave a number of quotations by which the strange misconceptions or misinterpretations of objectors are sufficiently precluded.
The words ex cathedrâ exclude all acts of the Pontiff as a private person or as a private Doctor, and confine the character of infallibility to those acts which
- ↑ Bellarm. Controv. de Summo Pontif. lib. iv. cap. 2.
