COUNCILS
433
COUNCILS
From the notion that the council is a court of judges
le following inferences may be drawn: (1) The bish-
ps, in giving their judgment, are directed only by
leir personal conviction of its rectitude; no previous
)nsent of all the faithful or of the whole episcopate is
■quired. In unity with their head they are one solid
)llege of judges authoritatively constituted for uni-
■d, decisive action — a body entirely different from a
xly of simple witnesses. (2) This being admitted,
le assembled college assumes a representation of their
jlleagues who were called but failed to take their
■ats, provided the number of those actually present
not altogether inadequate for the matter in hand. !ence their resolutions are rightly said to rest on uni- ?rsal consent: universali conscnsii conslituta, as the imiula runs. (3) Further, on the same supposition, le college of judges is subject to the rule obtaining in 1 a.ssemblies constituted for framing a judicial sen- !nce or a common resolution, due regard being paid ) the special relations, in the present instance, between lehead and the members of the college: the co-oper- tive vertlict embodies the opinion of the majority, icluding the head, and in law stands for the verdict of le whoie assembly; it is communi sensu constitulum '.stablished by common consent). A majority ver- ict, even headed by papal legates, if disconnected om the personal action of the pope, still falls short f a perfect, authoritative pronouncement of the hole Church, and cannot clairii infallibility. Were le verdict unanimous, it would still be imperfect and lUible, if it did not receive the papal approbation, he verdict of a majority, therefore, not endorsed by le pope, has no binding force on either the dissen- ent members present or the absent members, nor is le pope bound in any way to endorse it. Its only alue is that it justifies the pope, in case he approves ., to Bay that ho confirms the decision of a council, or ives his own decision sacro approbante concilio (with lie consent of the council). This he could not say if e annulled a decision taken by a majority including is legates, or if he gave a casting vote between two qual parties. A unanimous conciliary decision, as istinct from a simple majority decision, may under ertain circumstances, be, in a way, binding on the ope and compel his approbation — by the compelling ower, not of a superior authority, but of the Cath- lie truth shining forth in the witnessing of the whole 'hurch. To exert such power the council's decision lust be clearly and unmistakably the reflex of the lith of all the absent bishops and of the faithful.
To gain an adequate conception of the council at rork it should be viewed under its twofold aspect of udging and witnessing. In relation to the faithful he conciliar a.ssembly is primarily a judge who pro- lounces a verdict conjointly with the pope, and, at the ame time, acts more or less as witness in the case, ts position is similar to that of St. Paul towards the irst Christians: quod accepistis a me per multos testes. n relation to the pope the council is but an assembly )f authentic witnesses and competent counsellors vhose influence on the papal sentence is that of the nass of evidence which they represent or of the pre- )aratory judgment which they pronounce; it is the )nly way in which numbers of judges can influence )ne another. Such influence lessens neither the dig- lity nor the efficiency of any of the judges; on the )ther hand it is never required, in councils or else- nrhere, to make their verdict unassailable. The Vati-
- an Council, not excluding the fourth session in which
sapal infallibility was defined, comes nearer than any former council to the ideal perfection just described, [t was composed of the greatest number of bishops, both absolutely and in proportion to the totality of bishofiB in the Church; it allowed and exercised the right of discussion to an extent perhaps never wit- nessed before; it appealed to a general tradition, present and past, containing the effective principle of IV.— 28
the doctrine under discussion, viz. the duty of sub-
mitting in obedience to the Holy See and of coivforming
to its teaching; lastly it gave its final definition with
absolute unanimity, and secured the greatest majority
— nine-tenths — for its preparatory judgment.
VIII. Infallibility of Geneb.al Councils. — All the arguments which go to prove the infallibility of the Church apply with their fullest force to the infalli- ble authority of general councils in union with the pope. For conciliary decisions are the ripe fruit of the total life-energy of the teaching Church actuated and directed by the Holy Ghost. Such was the mind of the Apostles when, at the Council of Jerusalem (.\cts, XV, 28), they put the seal of supreme authority on their decisions in attributing them to the joint action of the Spirit of God and of themselves: Visum est Spiritui sancto et nobis (It hath seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us). This formula and the dogma it enshrines stand out brightly in the deposit of faith and have been carefully guarded throughout the many storms raised m councils by the play of the human element. From the earliest times they who rejected the decisions of councils were themselves re- jected by the Church. Emperor Constantine saw in the decrees of Xicaea "a Divine commandment" and Athanasius wrote to the bishops of Africa: "What God has spoken through the Council of Nica;a en- dureth for ever." St. Ambrose (Ep. xxi) pronounces himself ready to die by the sword rather than give up the Nicene decrees, and Pope Leo the Great expressly declares that " whoso resists the Councils of Nicffa and Chalcedon cannot be numbered among Catholics" (Ep. Ixxviii, ad Leonem Augustuni). In the same epistle he says that the decrees of Chalcedon were framed instruente Spiritu Sancto, i.e. under the guid- ance of the Holy Ghost. How the same doctrine was embodied in many professions of faith may be seen in Denzinger's (ed. Stahl) "Enchiridion symbolorum et definitionum", under the heading (index) "Concilium generale representat ecclesiara universalem, eique ab- solute obediendum" (General councils represent the universal Church and demand absolute obedience). The Scripture texts on which this unshaken belief is based are, among others: " But when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will teach you all truth . . ." (John, xvi, 1.3); "Behold I am with you (teaching] all days, even to the consummation of the world " (Matt., xxviii, 20); "The gates of hell shall not prevail against it [i.e. the Church]" (Matt., xvi, IS).
IX. Pap.al and Conciliar Infallibility. — Papal and conciliar infallibility are correlated but not iden- tical. .^ council's decrees approved by the pope are infallible by reason of that approbation, because the pope is infallible also extra concilinm, without the sup- port of a council. The infallibility proper to the pope is not, however, the only formal adequate ground of the council's infallibility. The Divine constitution of the Church and the promises of Divine assistance made by her Founder, guarantee her inerrancy, in matters pertaining to faith and morals, independently of the pope's infallibility: a fallible pope supporting, and supported by, a council, would still pronounce in- fallible decisions. This accounts for the fact that, before the Vatican decree concerning the supreme pontiff's ex-cathedra judgments, oecumenical councils were generally held to be infallible even by those who denied the papal infiUlibility; it also explains the con- cessions largely made to the opponents of the papal privilege that it is not necessarily implied in the infal- libility of councils, and the claims that it can be proved separately and independently on its proper merits. 'The infallibility of the council is intrinsic, i.e. springs from its nature. Christ promised to be in the midst of two or three of His disciples gathered to- gether in His name; now an (I'cumeiiical council is, in fact or in law, a g.athering of all Chri.st's co-workers for the salvation of man through true faith and holy
