the authority of judgments ex cathedrâ when we affirm, with the great masters in theology, that there are certainly judgments of that kind only when the Pope employs the most certain means which God gives him to avoid error; that is to say, the concurrence of the bishops?'
If I understand these words, they mean:—
1. That no judgments are certainly ex cathedrâ except when the Pontiff acts with the concurrence of the bishops.
2. That the Pontiff is bound to employ the means which is the most certain to avoid error; namely, the concurrence of the bishops.
The doctrine maintained by me, under the guidance of every great master of theology of all Schools, Dominican, Franciscan, Jesuit, so far as I know, excepting only theologians of the Gallican school,[1] is, that judgments ex cathedrâ are, in their essence, judgments of the Pontiff, apart from the episcopal body, whether congregated or dispersed. This concurrence of the episcopal body may or may not be united to the act of the Pontiff, which is perfect and complete in itself. It is to the Cathedra Petri, apart from the Episcopate, that the faithful and pastors of all the world throughout Christian history have had recourse. For instance, the condemnation of Pelagianism by Innocent the First, and of Jansenius
- ↑ Of this I think sufficient proof was given in the Pastoral of 1867. But I may refer to Aguirre, Defensio Cathedræ Petri; Gonzalez, De Infallib. Rom. Pontificis; Schrader, De Unitate Romana; Theoph. Raynaud, Αὐτὸς ἔφα; who expressly prove this point by ample quotations. The words of Peter de Marca, p. 106 supra, are alone enough.
