II. Answers to the Reasons against the Definition.
On the other hand it is urged:
1. That if the Episcopate, priesthood, and people, are, with so few exceptions, unanimous in receiving with submission and assent the Pontifical Acts, there would not only be no risk in promulgating such a decree, but they would rejoice to see the formal reason of that Catholic submission justified by an authoritative definition; or, if the number of those who refuse submission be more numerous, a necessity thereby is proved for the declaration of the truth.
2. That the Decree of the Council of Florence ought to be sufficient; and would be, if it were not misinterpreted by those who deny the infallibility of the Supreme Pontiff, speaking ex cathedrâ. The existence of this misinterpretation by Gallicans and by Anglicans shows that the decree is not sufficient.
3. That the doctrine of the infallibility of the Pope, held, as it is alleged, by all but a small number, is already subject to the questions as to the form and mode of its exercise. These questions will not become less clear by being defined; and by being made more clear, the complications which now arise from want of a clear declaration will be avoided. Erroneous or doubtful opinions give rise to complications; but truth excludes doubt and obscurity in proportion as it is precisely defined.
4. That if the bishops were not unanimous as to the making of a definition, no doubt the prudence of
C
