The Bull Cum ex Apostolatus Officio of Paul IV

and the Universal Peaceful Acceptance of a Pope

Reconciliation with the Dogmatic Fact

and the Infallibility of the Church

Table of Contents

1. Introduction
2. The Doctrine of the Universal and Peaceful Acceptance of a Pope
3. The Bull Cum ex Apostolatus Officio of Paul IV

    3.1. Nature and Object of the Bull

    3.2. Pertinent Text and Interpretation

4. Reconciliation between the Bull and Universal and Peaceful Acceptance
5. Faithful Catholic Perspective
6. Conclusion

List of Sources

1. Introduction

The question concerns the reconciliation between, on the one hand, the Universal and Peaceful Acceptance (UPA) of a pope by the entire Church, which constitutes an infallible dogmatic fact guaranteeing his legitimacy, and, on the other hand, the bull Cum ex Apostolatus Officio of Pope Paul IV (15 February 1559), which seems to indicate that a heretic prior to his election cannot be pope, even if he is accepted by “all”. We propose a just interpretation: the “all” designates the cardinals mentioned previously in the bull, and a public heretic could not be accepted by the entire Church without that implying an impossible failure of the infallible Church.

Let us examine this step by step, setting forth the certain teaching.

2. The Doctrine of the Universal and Peaceful Acceptance of a Pope

Catholic doctrine teaches that the universal and peaceful acceptance of a pope by the Church is an infallible dogmatic fact, proving that he is truly pope. This follows from the infallibility of the Church, which cannot adhere to a false pastor.

Saint Thomas Aquinas, in the Summa Theologica (IIa-IIae, q. 1, a. 10), explains that the Church, assisted by the Holy Ghost, cannot err in matters of faith, including in the recognition of her visible head: “Such unity (of the Church in the faith) could not be preserved if a question of faith raised in a matter of faith could not be decided by him who presides over the whole Church, so that the whole Church might firmly hold his sentence.” [1]

Pre-1963 theologians, such as Cardinal Billot in his Tractatus de Ecclesia Christi (3rd ed., 1909, vol. I, thesis XXIX, p. 609; development pp. 620–621), affirm that this acceptance is an infallible rule because the peaceful and universal acceptance of a pope by the Church is an infallible sign and effect of his legitimate election and of his true papacy. [2]

Likewise, the theologian Van Noort, in Christ’s Church (1957), specifies that this is a certain teaching, founded on the promise of Christ to Peter (Mt 16, 18) and to the Church. [3]

3. The Bull Cum ex Apostolatus Officio of Paul IV

3.1. Nature and Object of the Bull

The bull Cum ex Apostolatus Officio of Paul IV is a disciplinary and penal law, not an infallible dogmatic definition. It aims to protect the Church from heretics by declaring null the elevation of such a man. [4]

Many authors hold that certain parts also express underlying doctrinal principles concerning the incompatibility between heresy and jurisdiction. In other words: the automatic nullity belongs to legislation; the underlying theological principle belongs to a prior doctrine. [5]

The constitution of Paul IV was modified and then replaced in positive law by Saint Pius V, Gregory XV, Pius X, and finally by the Code of 1917. Consequently, even if one admits the most rigorous interpretation of Paul IV, the proper juridical force of the penal provisions no longer existed in the twentieth century. [6]

3.2. Pertinent Text and Interpretation

Here is an extract from the pertinent paragraph (no. 6), in Latin followed by its English translation:

Latin:

Adjicientes quod si ullo unquam tempore apparuerit aliquem Episcopum, etiam pro Archiepiscopo, seu Patriarcha, vel Primate se gerentem, aut praedictae Romanae Ecclesiae Cardinalem, etiam ut praefertur, Legatum, seu etiam Romanum Pontificem ante ejus promotionem, vel in Cardinalem, seu Romanum Pontificem assumptionem a fide Catholica deviasse, aut in aliquam haeresim incidisse, seu schisma incurrisse, vel excitasse, aut commisisse, promotio, seu assumptio de eo etiam in concordia, et de unanimi omnium Cardinalium assensu facta, nulla, irrita, et inanis existat […]

Translation:

Adding that, if it should appear at any time whatsoever that a bishop, even one presenting himself as archbishop, patriarch or primate, or a cardinal of the said Roman Church, even a legate as previously indicated, or even the Roman Pontiff, had, before his promotion or his elevation to the cardinalate or to the Roman pontificate, departed from the Catholic faith, or had fallen into some heresy, or had incurred, stirred up or committed schism, his promotion or his elevation, even if accomplished in concord and with the unanimous assent of all the cardinals, is null, invalid and of no effect […]

It must be noted with precision that the “unanimi omnium Cardinalium assensu” (unanimous assent of all the cardinals) refers explicitly to the cardinals, mentioned in the immediate context of the bull. It is not a reference to the entire Church. The bull treats of a cardinalitial election, not of post-electoral acceptance by the universal ecclesial body. [8]

The same paragraph §6 of the bull employs the word “all” a second time. It must be understood in context: it concerns the body of cardinals and not the entire Church, clergy and faithful in every corner of the world. [8]

4. Reconciliation between the Bull and Universal and Peaceful Acceptance

The reconciliation is logical and certain: UPA concerns acceptance by the entire Church (bishops, clergy and faithful), which is infallible and cannot adhere to a public heretic, because that would contradict the indefectibility of the Church (promised by Christ).

Saint Robert Bellarmine, in De Romano Pontifice (Book II, chap. 30, English translation by Ryan Grant, 2015, after the Latin edition of Ingolstadt of 1588), teaches that if a pope fell into public heresy after his election, he would lose the office ipso facto, but that a notorious heretic before the election could not be accepted peacefully by the Church, because the Church cannot err in recognizing her pastor. [9]

Cardinal Louis Billot teaches (Tractatus de Ecclesia Christi, 3rd ed., Prato, Ex officina libraria Giachetti, Filii et Soc., 1909, volume I, thesis XXIX, p. 609):

id saltem necessario admittendum : pacificam universalis Ecclesiae adhaesionem fore semper infallibile signum legitimitatis personae Pontificis, adeoque et existentiae omnium conditionum quae ad legitimitatem ipsam sunt requisitae.

Translation:

This at least must necessarily be admitted: the peaceful adhesion of the universal Church will always be an infallible sign of the legitimacy of the person of the Pontiff, and therefore also of the existence of all the conditions required for that very legitimacy.

Thus, the case of a public heretic accepted by all the members of the Church is impossible in divine law, because the Church, assisted by the Holy Ghost, cannot be heretical. The bull of Paul IV, in aiming at the cardinals, envisages a limited scenario in which a vitiated election could occur, but infallible UPA prevents it from imposing itself upon the entire Church.

5. Faithful Catholic Perspective

In a faithful Catholic perspective, and as it is certain that the See of Peter has been vacant since the public heresy of Paul VI in Lumen Gentium in 1964, this confirms that the occupants after 1963 are not true popes, because their “acceptance” is neither universal nor peaceful among true Catholics, and rests upon prior or manifest heresies. [10]

This explanation is founded on the certain teaching of the Church; if some aspect belongs to a probable theological opinion (such as the precise application to historical cases), it is presented as such, but the basic doctrine is sure.

6. Conclusion

Catholic doctrine, set forth with certainty in this study, demonstrates that the bull of Paul IV, as a disciplinary measure aimed at the cardinals, does not contradict the infallibility of the dogmatic fact of Universal and Peaceful Acceptance, which guarantees the legitimacy of a pope by the adhesion of the entire Church. This reconciliation rests on Thomistic logic and the divine assistance promised to the Church, excluding any possibility of collective error in the recognition of her pastor. Thus, the certain teaching affirms the indefectibility of the Church in the face of heresy, confirming the vacancy of the Apostolic See since 1964. [10]

List of Sources

Saint Thomas Aquinas, Summa theologiae, IIa-IIae, q. 1, a. 10, corpus. Latin text: Corpus Thomisticum, https://www.corpusthomisticum.org/sth3001.html. See note 1.

Louis Billot, Tractatus de Ecclesia Christi sive continuatio theologiae de Verbo incarnato, vol. I, De credibilitate Ecclesiae, et de intima ejus constitutione, 3rd ed., Prato, Ex officina libraria Giachetti, Filii et Soc., 1909, thesis XXIX, pp. 609 and 620–621. Copy provided.

Gérard Van Noort, Dogmatic Theology, vol. II, Christ’s Church, translation and revision by John J. Castelot and William R. Murphy, Westminster (Maryland), The Newman Press, first published December 1957; copy consulted: second printing, 1959, p. 112. See note 3.

Paul IV, Cum ex Apostolatus officio, 15 February 1559, Bullarium supplied in photographs, constitution XIX, pp. 840–842, especially § 6, p. 842, left column. The complete title and date of this edition of the Bullarium do not appear on the photographs received.

Robert Bellarmine, De Romano Pontifice / On the Roman Pontiff, De Controversiis, vol. I A, Books I–II, English translation by Ryan Grant after the Latin of Ingolstadt, 1588, Mediatrix Press, 2015, Book II, chap. XXX; pp. 318–323 of the PDF file provided, especially pp. 322–323. These numbers designate the pages of the file, not a printed pagination.

Sacred Scripture, Gospel according to Saint Matthew, 16, 18. French text: https://www.aelf.org/bible/Mt/16.

Pietro Maria Passerini de Sextula, Tractatus de electione Summi Pontificis, Rome, Sumptibus Ioannis Casonii, Typis Nicolai Angeli Tinassij, 1670, question XXXII, pp. 163–164, especially p. 164, nos. 27–29. Copy provided; pp. 171–172 of the PDF file.

Joseph Fessler, La vraie et la fausse infaillibilité des papes, translated from the German, Paris, E. Plon et Cie and Charles Douniol et Cie, 1873, pp. 105–106. Facsimile: https://www.liberius.net/livres/La_vraie_et_la_fausse_infaillibilite_des_papes_000000207.pdf.

Codex iuris canonici (1917), canon 6, notably nos. 2–6. Text consulted: https://www.clerus.org/bibliaclerusonline/es/ew5.htm. Scope to be distinguished from the alleged succession of pontifical acts: see note 6.

Second Vatican Council, dogmatic constitution Lumen gentium, 21 November 1964. Official French text: https://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19641121_lumen-gentium_fr.html. See note 10.