Saint Robert Bellarmine (1), also, said “the Pope heretic is not deposed ipso facto, but must be declared deposed by the Church.”
SOURCE: (1) https://archive.org/stream/SilveiraImplicationsOfNewMissaeAndHereticPopes/Silveira%20Implications%20of%20New%20Missae%20and%20Heretic%20Popes_djvu.txt
FIRST PART: ROBERT BELLARMINE’S STATEMENTS
The Five Opinions Dealing with the Hypothesis of a Pope Heretic
Expounded by Saint Robert Bellarmine
In the analysis of the divers opinions of the theologians over the hypothesis of the Pope heretic,
we will adopt the classification presented by Saint Robert Bellarmine. Even today this is entirely valid
in as much as the studies about the matter have made practically no progress in the last centuries. For
this reason, many recent authors order the matter following in the footsteps of the great doctor of the
Counter- Reform (1). When, nevertheless, it appears to us that the division of St. Robert Bellarmine does
not distinguish with precision all the nuances which characterize certain schools, we will suggest sub-
divisions within his classification.
He enumerates five opinions worthy of study (2):
1 - the Pope can not be a heretic;
2 - falling into heresy, even merely internal, the Pope ipso facto loses the Pontificate;
3 - even though he falls into heresy, the Pope does not lose his charge;
4 - the Pope heretic is not deposed ipso facto, but must be declared deposed by the Church;
5 - the Pope heretic is ipso facto deposed in the moment in which his heresy becomes manifest.
In establishing this classification, Saint Robert Bellarmine only sought to order the matter in a
manner convenient for the exposition of the reasons and objections which can be alleged in relation to
each opinion. It was not his purpose to make a complete and systematic presentation of the principal
positions which have been taken, in the course of the centuries, over the theological hypothesis of a
Pope heretic. He does not refer, for example, to the doctrine of conciliarism, which had enormous
importance in the past, and which, although of condemned by the Church, (3) is sprouting up again in
numerous progressive writings. The great Jesuit Saint did not set out clearly the logical criteria
according to which he ordered the matter. All this creates a certain difficulty
(1) See, for example: Wernz-Vidal , lus Cart., tom. II, pp. 433 ff.; Cocchi , Comment, in Codicem..., vol. Ill, p. 25-
26; Reqatillo . Inst. Juris Canonici, vol. I, p. 299.
Others adopt the classification of Saint Robert Bellarmine, but they introduce small alterations into it: Bouix ,
Tract de Papa, tom. II, pp. 654 ft.; Sipos , Ench. luris Can., p. 156, item d.
(2) De Romano Pontifice, lib. II, cap. XXX. - We will not consider, here, observations which Saint Robert
Bellarmine makes about this matter in other passages of his writings.
(3) See Denz.-Sch., systematic index, item G4db.
SECOND PART: DIVERSE OPINIONS STATED ON BELLARMINO STATEMENTS
POSITION OF EACH OPINION
IN THE CLASSIFICATION OF
ST. ROBERT BELLARMINE (*)
OBSERVATIONS
PRINCIPAL
DEFENDERS
INDEX (pages of this
work in which each
opinion is studied)
A - The Pope cannot fall into heresy
FIRST OPINION in the
Classification of Saint
Robert Bellarmine
In the exposition of this opinion, we subdivide
its followers into three groups (pp. 147-148):
1 . Authors according to whom this opinion con-
stitutes a truth of faith (Matthaeucci);
2. authors according to whom this opinion is by
far the most probable (Card. Billot);
3. authors according to whom this opinion ap-
pears to be only more probable that the oth-
ers (Saint Robert Bellarmine, Suarez).
St. Robert Bellarmine
(**)
Suarez (**)
Matthaeucci
Bouix (**)
Billot (**)
Chapter about this op-
inion (146-155);
Card.Billot (146-147);
Suarez (147,154-155);
St.R.Bellarmine( 155);
Salaverri(155); refut-
ation based on Script-
ure and Tradition
(148-153); we do not
follow this opinion
(172 ff.)
B - Theologically one cannot exclude
the hypothesis of a Pope heretic
Stated by Saint Robert
Bellarmine on saying that
the first opinion is not
certain
See the following
items (***)
Explanation by refer-
ences (p. 156)
I - By reason of his heresy, the
Pope never loses the Pontif-
icate
THIRD OPINION of the
classification of Saint
Robert Bellarmine
Of the 136 authors whose positions on the hypo-
thesis of a Pope heretic we examined, the only
defender of this opinion is Bouix.
Bouix (**)
Chapter on this opin-
ion (158-160); we do
not follow this opin-
ion (172 ff.)
II - The Pope heretic loses the Pon-
tificate
Expounded by Saint Robert
Bellarmine together with
the fourth opinion
See the following
items (***)
Saint Robert Bellar-
mine (169 ff.); object-
ions Bouix (158 ff.);
we follow this opin-
ion (172)
1) He loses the Pontificate in
the very moment in which he
falls into internal heresy,
that is, before manifesting
it externally
SECOND OPINION of the
classification of Saint
Robert Bellarmine
Opinion abandoned by the theologians today.
Torquemada
Chapter on this opin-
ion (156-157); an
abandoned opinion
(157)
2) He loses the Pontificate
when his heresy turns
manifest
FIFTH OPINION of the
classification of Saint
Robert Bellarmine
In expounding this opinion we subdivide those who
follow it into three groups (pp. 170-171):
1 . Authors who understand by “manifest” a heresy
merely exteriorized;
2. Authors who understand by “manifest” a heresy
which, in addition to being exteriorized, has
come to the knowledge of others;
3. Authors who understand by “manifest” a heresy
which becomes notorious and publicly divulged
(Wernz-Vidal).
Some authors do not make entirely clear to which
of these three schools they affiliate themselves
(Saint Robert Bellarmine, p. 171).
St. Robert Bellarmine
(**)
Billot (**)
Cano
Chapter on this opin-
ion (168-171); Saint
Robert Bellarmine
(168-169); Pietro Bal-
lerini (169-170); sub-
division (170-171);
evaluation (171); we
follow this opinion,
embracing the subdiv-
ision n. 3 (172-176)
3) He loses the Pontificate only
upon the declaration of his
heresy by a council, by the
Cardinals, by groups of Bishops,
etc.
Expounded by Saint Robert
Bellarmine together with
the fourth opinion
See the following
items (***)
Exposition and refut-
ation by Saint Robert
Bellarmine (164-167);
we do not follow this
opinion (175)
a) This declaration would be
a deposition properly so
called
Saint Robert Bellarmine
does not list this opin-
ion, because it is here-
tical
Under the form of neo-conciliarism, this opinion
is sprouting up in numerous progressive writings.
Conciliarists:
Gerson, Pierre
D’Ailly, etc.
Opinion condemned
by the Church (161,
note 1); neo-concil-
iarism (161, note 3)
b) This declaration would not be
a deposition properly so
called, but a mere act de-
claring the loss of the Pon-
tificate by the Pope heretic
FOURTH OPINION in the
classification of Saint
Robert Bellarmine
As to who ought to make this declaration, see
the passage of Suarez which we cite on pp. 163-164.
Cajetan
Suarez (**)
Chapter on this opin-
ion (161-167); Suarez
(161-164); refutation
by Saint Robert Bell-
armine (164-167); we
do not follow this
opinion (175)
(*) As we have already noted, we refer here only to the classification presented by Saint Robert Bellarmine in De Romano Pontifice, lib. II,
cap. XXX.
(**) The authors marked by two asterisks judge it more probable that a Pope could not fall into heresy, but do not consider this position to be
certain. For this reason, they analyse the possibility of a Pope who would become a heretic and they take a position concerning the problem
of his eventual lose of the Pontificate. Therefore, do not find it strange, that the names of these authors appear two times in the column
“principal defenders” of the different opinions: among those who follow the thesis that the Pope will never fall into heresy (first opinion of the
classification of Saint Robert Bellarmine), and among those who make pronouncements concerning the lose of the Pontificate by a heretic
Pope (according to the fifth opinion of the classification of Saint Robert Bellarmine). Concerning this subject, see pp. 154-155.
(***) In view of the criteria adopted for the enunciation of the “divers opinions”, it becomes clear that position B, B-ll, and B-ll-3 constitute
generic opinions, which become more specific from what follows immediately after. This being so, we de not indicate the “principal
defenders”, who are obviously those of the opinions that follow.
__________________________