Apologeticae sive Theologiae Fundamentalis, Tomus II (Pars Altera): Demonstratio Catholica

We have already proved¹ that the pope speaking ex cathedra is infallible. It remains for us to explain when the pope is to be judged to speak ex cathedra, that is, which doctrinal acts of the supreme pontiff constitute cathedral decrees in general and in particular.

1. Cathedral decrees in general. The Vatican Council indicates the conditions of cathedral decrees clearly enough when it declares the Roman Pontiff to be infallible, "when he speaks ex cathedra, that is, when, discharging the office of pastor and doctor of all Christians, by his supreme apostolic authority he defines a doctrine concerning faith or morals to be held by the whole Church". By the force of these words four conditions are required for cathedral decrees:

a) On the part of the subject, that is, of the defining pontiff, it is required that he actually discharge the papal office. He who acts in several persons or lays claim to several offices does not always act in his supreme person and office. Therefore the pope is not infallible if he acts as a private doctor, writing a book on a religious matter, or as bishop of the Roman diocese, preaching in some church of the city, or as patriarch of the West. The pope, however, enjoys infallibility when, "discharging the office of pastor and doctor of all Christians, by his supreme apostolic authority," he teaches.

b) On the part of the object, that is, of the matter, it is required that he propose "a doctrine concerning faith or morals". What pertains to the doctrine of faith or morals we have distinctly set forth in the question on the object of the ecclesiastical magisterium² simply so called. For papal infallibility embraces the whole and only the object of the ecclesiastical magisterium simply so called, because the supreme pontiff enjoys "that infallibility with which the divine Redeemer willed His Church to be endowed in defining doctrine concerning faith or morals".³

c) On the part of the term it is required that the decree oblige all the faithful. While the pope, therefore, judges these or those particular causes and affairs, he indeed acts as the ultimate judge, holding the supreme power; but his judgment is particular, and hence not infallible, as e.g. the decree of Paul V condemning the doctrine of Galileo concerning the motions of the heavenly bodies. It is not, however, required that the papal decision be directed to the whole Church; indeed, the pope can speak infallibly even if he writes to one region or person,⁴ provided that he prescribes the matter "to be held by the whole Church".

d) On the part of the form it is required that the pope define, i.e. peremptorily settle the controversy by a definitive sentence, by which he compels the Church to absolutely firm assent. "Any manner of proposing doctrine does not suffice, even while the pontiff discharges the office of supreme pastor and doctor, but a manifested intention of defining the doctrine, that is, of putting an end to fluctuation concerning some doctrine or matter to be defined, is required."⁵ If, therefore, the pontiff counsels or warns or exhorts that all adhere to a certain opinion; if he earnestly commends or orders that a certain doctrine be taught in all schools, without, however, fully and manifestly revealing the intention of defining the matter peremptorily, he is not considered to speak ex cathedra. Hence, as long as it seems doubtful to prudent men whether the pontiff willed to define or not, so long his decree does not carry an absolute obligation. But if it is certain that the pontiff willed to define, it matters nothing whether he used this or another formula, since cathedral decrees are not bound to a certain fixed formula of words.

2. Cathedral decrees in particular: given the conditions that are to be given, they are found chiefly in the following pontifical instruments:

a) The pope speaks ex cathedra in the most solemn manner by issuing dogmatic constitutions, that is, those bulls by which judgments of faith are promulgated in the form of ecclesiastical laws, with penalties added against gainsayers, e.g. the constitution "Unigenitus" and "Auctorem fidei" against the Jansenists, or the constitution "Ineffabilis Deus" on the Immaculate Conception. Most closely akin to the constitutions are the encyclical letters to the whole Church, insofar as they contain dogmatic matters to be communicated to all the faithful and to be strictly held by all. Sometimes even apostolic letters, although written only "in forma brevis" or not directed to the whole Church, contain cathedral definitions properly so called. Moreover, the Roman Pontiff not infrequently speaks ex cathedra when he approves in a solemn and most full manner the decrees of the Roman congregations⁶ or of particular councils⁷ in a solemn and most full manner.⁸ Finally, the two syllabi deserve special mention, by which Pius IX and Pius X comprehended and condemned the errors of the more recent age.

b) The Syllabus of Pius IX⁹ is a collection of modern errors excerpted from the various allocutions, encyclicals, and letters of Pius IX and transmitted to the bishops together with the bull "Quanta cura" (8 Dec. 1864). Now the collection itself was not excerpted by the pontiff, but only at the pontiff's command, and was transmitted to the bishops; hence it does not seem to be a cathedral decree. Nevertheless, the individual propositions (eighty) of the collection had already been "noted," i.e. condemned, at other times and earlier, in those various allocutions, encyclicals, and letters of Pius IX. And indeed they were and are condemned definitively and infallibly. This is evident both from the fact that the pontiff absolutely obliges the whole Church to reject all and each of the condemned propositions, and from the fact that the whole Church, teaching and learning, shudders with one voice at the condemned propositions. Beware, however, lest you infer that all and each of the noted propositions are heretical. For in what sense each has been noted, or what theological censure has been branded upon them, must be learned partly from the nature of the object that is noted, partly from the words of the document in which the individual propositions are noted.¹⁰

c) The Syllabus of Pius X is a collection of modernist errors, which the pope first (3 July 1907) noted by the decree "Lamentabili" of the Holy Office¹¹ and afterwards (7 Sept. 1907) systematically delineated and reprobated in the encyclical "Pascendi".¹² Now the most grave formulae which the pontiff uses either in approving the decree "Lamentabili" or in writing his own encyclical "Pascendi" abundantly sound of a cathedral definition. But since the modernists nevertheless strove to escape the peremptory force of both documents, Pius X by "motu proprio" (18 Nov. 1907) repeated and confirmed both documents, adding the penalty of excommunication against contradictors, "who should defend any of the propositions, opinions, and doctrines reprobated in either document" and, by so offending, champion "the errors of the modernists, that is, the summary of all heresies".¹³ Finally, by the "oath against the errors of modernism" (1 Sept. 1910) the same pontiff commanded that all and each of the things "that have been defined, asserted, and declared by the inerrant magisterium of the Church, especially those heads of doctrine which directly oppose the errors of this time," be embraced and received, and likewise he orders that one adhere with one's whole soul to "all the condemnations, declarations, and prescriptions that are contained in the encyclical letters 'Pascendi' and in the decree 'Lamentabili'".¹⁴ Hence the errors of the modernists comprehended in those documents are certainly condemned ex cathedra.¹⁵