The Indefectibility of the Apostolic See: Was the Idea of a Heretical Pope Formally Excluded at the First Vatican Council?

IF 0.6 2区 哲学 0 RELIGION
Emmett O’Regan
{"title":"The Indefectibility of the Apostolic See: Was the Idea of a Heretical Pope Formally Excluded at the First Vatican Council?","authors":"Emmett O’Regan","doi":"10.1177/00405639231206089","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"During the prelude to the First Vatican Council, the idea of a heretical pope was used as the primary argument against the solemn definition of papal infallibility. The medieval canonists and conciliarists had allowed for the notion of papal heresy by making a strict distinction between the apostolic seat itself and the individual occupants of the throne of Peter. However, when we examine the text of Pastor Aeternus in light of the contents of the official Relatio, which was drawn up at the council to explain the meaning of this document, we find that the above distinction used by the conciliarists was formally proscribed with an anathema. This article will argue that in doing so, the Council Fathers definitively excluded the possibility of a heretical pope.","PeriodicalId":46353,"journal":{"name":"THEOLOGICAL STUDIES","volume":"6 1","pages":"634 - 656"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"THEOLOGICAL STUDIES","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00405639231206089","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

During the prelude to the First Vatican Council, the idea of a heretical pope was used as the primary argument against the solemn definition of papal infallibility. The medieval canonists and conciliarists had allowed for the notion of papal heresy by making a strict distinction between the apostolic seat itself and the individual occupants of the throne of Peter. However, when we examine the text of Pastor Aeternus in light of the contents of the official Relatio, which was drawn up at the council to explain the meaning of this document, we find that the above distinction used by the conciliarists was formally proscribed with an anathema. This article will argue that in doing so, the Council Fathers definitively excluded the possibility of a heretical pope.
宗座的不可破坏性:梵蒂冈第一次大公会议是否正式排除了异端教皇的想法?
在梵蒂冈第一次大公会议的前奏中,异端教皇的观点被用作反对教皇无误性这一庄严定义的主要论据。中世纪的教规学家和教权派通过严格区分使徒席位本身和彼得宝座上的个人,允许教皇异端的概念。然而,当我们根据大公会议上为解释这份文件的含义而起草的官方 Relatio 的内容来研究 Pastor Aeternus 的文本时,我们会发现,匡复派所使用的上述区别已被正式以 "诅咒"(anathema)的形式禁止了。本文将论证大公会议的教父们这样做是明确排除了异端教皇的可能性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
103
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信