Tag Archives: Pope Paul IV

Canon Law, Papal Documents

Why Paul IV’s Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio was not abolished by 1917 Code

4 Comments

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

This is part of the previous article, which I have updated as of today, August 19, 2025
You can read my new translation of Paul IV’s Constitution, here.

What the Code of Canon Law of 1917 abrogated by Canon 6

The argument which arises as to the perpetually validity of the Papal Constitution, « Cum ex apostolatus officio » arose principally upon the occasion of the promulgation of the Code of Canon Law of 1917 (which we cite it from jgray.org), and that due to canon 6 of that code, which reads in Latin:

Can 6. Codex vigentem huc usque disciplinam plerumque retinet, licet opportunas immutationes afferat. Itaque:

1º Leges quaelibet, sive universales sive particulares, praescriptis huius Codicis oppositae, abrogantur nisi de particularibus legibus aliud expresse caveatur;

2º Canones qui ius vetus ex integro referunt, ex veteris iuris auctoritate, atque ideo ex receptis apud probatos auctores interpretationibus, sunt aestimandi;

3º Canones qui ex parte tantum cum veteri iure congruunt, qua congruunt, ex iure antiquo aestimandi sunt; qua discrepant, sunt ex sua ipsorum sententia diiudicandi;

4º In dubio num aliquod canonum praescriptum cum veteri iure discrepet, a veteri iure non est recedendum;

5º Quod ad poenas attinet, quarum in Codice nulla fit mentio, spirituales sint vel temporales, medicinales vel, ut vocant, vindicativae, latae vel ferendae sententiae, eae tanquam abrogatae habeantur;

6º Si qua ex ceteris disciplinaribus legibus, quae usque adhuc viguerunt, nec explicite nec implicite in Codice contineatur, ea vim omnem amisisse dicenda est, nisi in probatis liturgicis libris reperiatur, aut lex sit iuris divini sive positivi sive naturalis.

And which, in English, according to my own unofficial translation reads:

Canon 6. The Code for the most part retains the discipline here-to-fore enforce, though it introduces opportune changes.  And thus:

1°  Any laws you like, whether universal or particular, opposed to the prescriptions of this Code, are abrogated unless concerning particular laws something else is expressly exempted;

2° The canons which cite an old law in its entirety, by the authority of the old law, are, for that reason, also to be judged out of the interpretations received among approved authors.

3° The canons which are congruent with the old law only in part, are to be judged according to the ancient law; when they are discrepant, they are to be dijudicated according to their own sense.

4° In doubt whether any prescribed canon is discrepant with the old law, one is not to recede from the old law;

5° What pertains to the punishments, of which no mention is made in the Code, whether they be spiritual or temporal, medicinal and/or, as they say, vindictive, latae or ferendae sententiae, they are to be held as abrogated;

6° If any of all the other disciplinary laws, which were in force up to now, be not contained either explicitly or implicitly in the Code, it is to be said to have lost all force, unless it be found in approved liturgical books, or a law be of divine, positive or natural right.

RULE OF INTERPRETATION

First, it must be noted that the very introduction to Canon 6, of the 1917 Code as well as section 4° incline that the entire canon be read and interpreted as maintaining in force the parts of all laws which are not contrary to the Code of 1917.

NON APPLICABLE PARTS

Next, sections 2°, 3°, and 4°, do not pertain to the present argument, since they regard canons and not Papal Constitutions.

HOW THE LATIN ‘LEX’ IS TO BE UNDERSTOOD

Next, regarding those parts of Canon 6 which abolish previous laws, we must read the term “law” (lex, leges, legibus) in a strict sense, as “any individual prescription, precept or provision”, and not in the broad sense of any particular document containing such. This is not only juridically sound, but theologically sound, because, when in regard to Papal Decrees of any kind, when there is a clear intention to promulgate an individual prescription which will have perpetual force — as are all the prescriptions in Paul IV’s Constitution — this intention passes into the intention of Christ the King, the High Priest, Who confirms, “Whatsoever you bind upon earth, shall be bound also in Heaven” (Matthew 18:18) — and thus we cannot presume that a subsequent pope who speaks vaguely, not specifying whether he speaks of provisions or entire documents, intends to specifically abolish what he does not specifically name, especially when he already has declared his intention that all previous disciplines are to be maintained in force. — This reading of “law” (lex) is also confirmed in 6° of Canon 6, where it speaks of the divine, positive and natural “law”, all of which can be an individual particular provision, but only one of which, positive law, could refer to a document. The same is implied by the use of the word, “law”, in 2°, 3°, and 4° of the same Canon 6, cited above.

WHAT IS A CONSTITUTION?

Thus, here, it will be helpful to note, that a constitution differs from an individual law, because a law, which Saint Thomas Aquinas defines as “an ordinance of right reason for the common good, promulgated by one who has authority over the community” (Summa Theologica, I-II, Q. 90, a. 4), regards something individual and specific, whether prohibiting or enabling. But a constitution is an assembly of laws of different kinds (e.g. ordinances, prescriptions, commands, sanctions, decrees, institutions, wills etc..) in a single document with a common theme or purpose. — “As to subject-matter, the term “constitution”, if used in a restricted sense, denotes some statute which the Vicar of Christ issues in solemn form either to the whole Christian world or to part of it, with the intention of permanently binding those to whom it is addressed.” (Catholic Encyclopedia, here).  For this reason, “laws” (leges) in the 1917 Code, Canon 6, must be understood as referring to parts of the Papal Constitution, and not the whole document.

PAUL IV’S CONSTITUTION, IN N. 6 REMAIN IN FORCE?

With this clarified, let us proceed to consider the rest of Canon 6, as it specifically regards the censure of Paul IV, in n. 6 of his Constitution, regarding the election of a man who after his election is found to have deviated from the Catholic Faith or fallen into heresy or schism:

As regards section 1°, it is clear that since n. 6 of the Constitution of Paul IV is not opposed to any Canon the Code of 1917, because this Code says nothing about how such an election of such a man is to be regarded, it does not fall under this provision, for to say “opposed” is to signify that it withstands, or is in disagreement; viz. to say one thing, when the other says something else. Juridical opposition occurs when the precept of one directs that a thing to be done while the precept of the other directs that another thing be done. But since in the Code of 1917, there is nothing said about whether the election of a man as Roman Pontiff is to be held to be juridically valid in the case spoken of in n. 6 of Paul IV’s Constitution, there is no “opposition”. In general, the Code of 1917 says nothing about Papal Elections since the law on papal elections was a special particular law published by Saint Pius X.

Also, it is clear that 5° does not apply  to n. 6 of this Constitution, because an election in conformity with a papal law for the election of the Roman Pontiff, cannot be punished, since an election which is according to the laws in force is not a criminal act.  Again, “punishments” (poenae) must be read in a restricted sense, regarding persons not things. Therefore, the censure contained in n. 6 of Paul IV’s Apostolic Constitution, since it does not regard, in the strict sense, a punishment or penal precept against a person, is thus not abolished by this section of canon 6.

Finally, section 6°, does not abrogate this provision of Paul IV. First, because the exclusion of a heretic from being elected is contained in canon 2265 of the 1917 code, and thus to this extent, n. 6 of Paul IV’s Bull is implicitly contained in the code, even if the Code forbids the person from being elected, whereas the Constitution of Paul IV sanctions his election as invalid. — Second because, Paul IV’s, n. 6 requires by the Roman Pontiff, the Supreme Legislator, that things be done by others, to protect the Church, and thus clearly fulfills all the conditions for a law of positive right in the sanction it levels in n. 6 against such an election. — Positive laws are those promulgated by the competent authority, which in the Catholic Church is the pope, and which grant rights which must be protected by others. — But clearly, since the Faithful are obliged by divine law to obey a Roman Pontiff, it certainly pertains to their rights that the Cardinals NOT elect someone who has deviated from the Catholic Faith, fallen into heresy or who partook of some schism. Thus, inasmuch as n. 6 of the Bull Paul IV raises an unassailable bulwark defending this right of the Faithful, its abolition would result in a grave attack against the rights of everyone in the Church. Indeed, the entire Bull of Paul IV is expressly intended and promulgated to protect the whole Church, and thus most certainly is a law of positive right of the highest order.

That the papal Constitution of Pope Paul IV, in regard at least to its sanction of against a papal election of a heretic or schismatic in. n. 6, remained in force after the promulgation of the Code of Canon Law of 1917, is thus morally certain, since the Code of 1917 expressly, thus, excludes laws of this kind in these particulars, from abrogation, when they are not contrary to nor re-integrated in the Code of 1917. However, as regards all other parts of the Constitution, when they were integrated fully or said contrary things than the 1917 code, they were obrogated or abrogated.

REPLY TO ALL CONTRARY OPINIONS OF CANONISTS

Thus, if there be found any commentary on Canon Law which holds that the Constitution of Paul IV was abrogated or obrogated by the promulgation of the 1917 Code of Canon Law, I would expect that it is speaking of all those parts which do not concord with Canon 6, and that its author or authors have considered the meaning of Canon 6, imprecisely, in regard to specific provisions of Paul IV’s Constitution. And if they have done either, then their opinion “that the Constitution of Paul IV has been abrogated” is simply an over generalized, hasty and erroneous formed opinion. — Moreover, once the Code of 1917 is promulgated, the law means what it says, and it no longer means what the canonists who wrote it may have intended, if they did not write that into the text. — This is because this Code was not legislated by an assembly, but promulgated by a Monarch. And thus subsequently its interpretation belongs alone to the Roman Pontiffs, when there arises a question the answer to which someone, whomsoever they be, would have be contrary to the plain meaning of the text. This is the teaching of Saint Alphonsus dei Liguori in his tract on The Interpretation of Laws. — That is why, in reading the law, I always stick to the plain meaning of the text, and do not insert any interpretation which does not arise from the text itself.

But whether this papal constitution in n. 6, was abrogated or obrogated by subsequent legislation is another question.

___________________________________

* After the publication of this article, it was brought to my attention, that the Code of Canon Law of 1917, in canon 188, p.47 of the Kennedy & Sons annotated edition of 1918, explicitly cites Cum ex apostolatus officio in footnote 2: which signifies that the author of that footnote, the eminent canonist Cardinal Gasparri, who supervised the revision of the Code, was of the opinion that the code of 1917 was in harmony with — and did not intend to obrogate or abolish  — the terms of that Papal law in all of its particulars. — Canon 188, 4°, (source) in fact reads, “On account of tacit renunciation (of office) admitted by the law it self, let whatever offices you like be vacant, ipso facto and without any declaration, if the cleric … publicly fails from the Catholic Faith.” — And since obviously Paul IV’s n. 6 is to be read in the context of a man who after his election is discovered to have deviated from the Catholic Faith before his election and remained deviated, the condition is the same as a man who has publicly failed from the Catholic Faith. Here “deficere” signifies both heresy and apostasy, because of its generic sense of “failing” or “being deficient”. In the English language, some authors translate “deficere” as “defect”, and thus might read “a fide catholica defecerit” as “defects from the Catholic Faith”, but since Canon 188, 4°, is the only part of that canon which refers to Paul IV’s Constitution’s prescriptions — where apostasy is not mentioned — it is clear that in the mind of Cardinal Gasparri, the Latin term, “deficere” has the broad sense which includes “heresy”, “schism” or some other “deviation”, and not necessarily a public renunciation of the Faith.

Papal Documents

Paul IV’s “Cum ex apostolatus officio” — New English translation

5 Comments

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

Since there are a plethora of bad translations of this Bull and because of its importance to not only the history of ecclesiastical jurisprudence but to the fact that it has never been abrogated by name — many of which provisions remain in force even unto today, according to what Pope John Paul II declares in his Constitution for the Election of the Roman Pontiff, Universi Dominici Gregis, n. 4 — I have chosen to make an entirely new translation.

This translation I have made directly from one of the most authoritative collections of Papal Bulls, since there are so many errors in the best English translation heretofore published, which attempts to make the text sound eloquent in English and thus obscures many juridical expressions which are customarily used in papal documents.

In addition to the English translation, I have researched the identity of each of the ones signing the Constitution, by using the information at Catholic-Hierarchy.org.  Thus, this edition of the Constitution now has more complete historical information about these holy men of God than any translation heretofore published.

The Latin Text of this Constitution is published below the English translation in PDF format (55 MB).

The three most important juridical principles, which I would draw the reader’s attention to, is that (1) in accord with this bull anyone who is a heretic is to be immediately deposed from office, and the first Catholic who is eligible can take possession of it. Also, that (2) the election of a Cardinal as Pope who beforehand had deviated from the Catholic Faith or fallen into heresy is declared null, irritus and void. Also, that (3) in heresy or a deviation from the Catholic Faith, that even a Roman Pontiff can be refuted and contradicted. —  This Constitution represents the high point in the Counter-Reformation, and if it had been continuously put into effect, the Church would be suffering nearly none Her present woes and maladies. — May a future Pope republish and renew this heavenly decree.

The Constitution, “Cum ex apostolatus”

Paul IV, Bishop
Servant of the Servants of God

February 15, 1559 A. D.

[Translated from the Latin text of the bull found in  Francesco Gaude’s,
Bullarum Diplomatum et Privilelgio, Turin, 1860, Tome VI, pp. 551-556.]

SINCE FROM THE OFFICE OF THE APOSTOLATE, divinely entrusted to Us, beyond the measure of Our merits, the general care of the Lord’s flock looms over Us, and hence from this We are bound for the sake of their faithful custody and salubrious direction, according to the custom of a Shepherd’s watches-at-night, to assiduously keep vigil, and to more attentively look ahead, so that those, who in this Age, with sins forcing them, as ones striving according to their own prudence, rise up more knowingly and more perniciously than usual against the discipline of the orthodox faith, and, who perverting the understanding of the sacred Scriptures with superstitious and fictive inventions, contrive to rend the unity of the Catholic Church and the seamless tunic of the Lord, may be repelled from Christ’s sheep-pen, lest they continue their magisterium of error, who contemn to be disciples of the truth.

§ 1. We, considering this kind of affair to be so grave and dangerous, that (even) the Roman Pontiff, who on earth acts in the place of our God and Lord, Jesus Christ, and who obtains the plenitude of power over nations and kingdoms, and judges all, as one to be judged by no one in this age, may, if he be found to be deviant from the Faith, be refuted; and that, where there is intended greater danger, one is to take counsel more fully and more diligently lest the pseudo-prophets or others having even secular jurisdiction miserably entrap the souls of the simple, and draw the innumerable people, committed to (their) care and government, in things spiritual and temporal, with them into the perdition and ruin of damnation, and lest it happen at some time that We see the abomination of desolation, which was spoken of by Daniel the prophet, in the Holy Place;  desiring as much as We are able with God, for the sake of our pastoral charge [munus], to capture the foxes, striving to demolish the vineyard of the Lord, and keep wolves at a distance from the sheep-pens, lest We be seen to be dumb dogs, not wanting to bark, and be lost with the evil field-workers, and be compared to a mercenary.

§ 2. After having held a mature deliberation over these things with Our venerable brothers, the Cardinals of the Holy Roman Church, with their counsel and unanimous assent, We approve and renew with (Our) Apostolic Authority each and all of the sentences, censures and punishments of excommunication, suspension and interdict and privation and whatever others, had for such (cases) by whatever Roman Pontiffs, Our predecessors, even through their letters extravagantes, or received by the Church of God in sacred councils, and/or published and promulgated  in whatever manner in the decrees and statutes of the holy Fathers, or by sacred canons and constitutions and apostolic ordinances, against heretics and schismatics, and We renew, that they are to be perpetually observed and are to be returned to and ought to be in a flourishing observance, if perhaps they not be in it; and that also whomsoever, who be found or confessed and/or convicted, to have heretofore deviated from the Catholic Faith or fallen into any heresy or to have joined in or excited or committed schisms, or — which God deign to avert by His Clemency and Goodness to all — who will deviate in the hereafter, or fall into heresy, or join in and/or excite or commit schisms, and be found to have deviated or fallen into, or joined and/or excited or committed or will confess or be convicted (of the same), of whatsoever state, grade, order, condition and preeminence they be, even episcopal, archepiscopal, patriarchal, primatial or in any greater ecclesiastical dignity or honor of the Cardinalate, and of whatever land of the Apostolic See they shine forth, as much perpetual as temporal, by the munus of a legation, and/or even with the authority or excellence of a Count, Baron, Marquis, Duke, King and Emperor, and We will and decree, that these incur whatever of the aforesaid sentences, censures and punishments.

§ 3. And nevertheless, considering it to be worthy that those who do not abstain from evils by the love of virtue, be deterred from the same by the fear of punishments; and that Bishops, Archbishops, Patriarchs, Primates, Cardinals, legates, Counts, Barons, Marquises, Dukes, Kings and Emperors, ought to be those who ought to teach others also by their own good example, so that they may continue in the Catholic Faith: in prevaricating they sin more gravely than all others, since they not only destroy their very selves, but also draw into the perdition and pit of destruction the innumerable other peoples, entrusted to their care and government or otherwise subject to them, We, from the counsel and assent of the same, by this Our Constitution to be valid in perpetuity, in hatred of such crimes, than which nothing can be greater or more pernicious in the Church of God, do, from the fullness of (Our) Apostolic Authority, sanction, establish, decree and define that, with the sentences, censures, aforesaid punishments remaining in their strength and efficacy, having their effect, each and all Bishops, Archbishops, Patriarchs, Primates, Cardinals, Legates, Counts, Barons, Marquises, Kings and Emperors, who heretofore, as is aforesaid, have been detected or confessed and/or convicted, to have deviated or fallen into heresy, or joined in, excited and/or committed schisms, or (who) in the hereafter will deviate or fall into heresy or join and/or excite or commit schisms, and be detected to have deviated or fallen into heresy or to have joined in, excited or committed schisms, since in this they are rendered more inexcusable than all others, that beyond the sentences, censures and aforesaid punishments, they be by this very thing, without any service of right or fact, entirely and wholly in perpetuity deprived of their orders and cathedrals, even metropolitan, patriarchal and primatial churches and of the honor of the Cardinalate and munus of any legation whatsoever, and even of active and passive voice, of all authority, and monasteries, benefices and ecclesiastical offices, cum cura or sine cura, (pertaining) to secular or regular Orders of any kind, which, they had obtained by whatever concessions and apostolic dispensations, in title, in comendam and administration or in whatsoever manner you like, in which and/or for which they had any right, and even of whatever fruits, returns and annual proceeds over the similar fruits, returns and proceeds reserved or assigned to them, even by Counts, Barons, Marquises, Dukes, Kings and Emperors, and regarding that, concerning all other things, let them be unable and incapable, and let them be held as relapsed and subverted, in all (places) and for all (times), from this very thing, even if they will have abjured heresy of this kind publicly in judgement; nor let them at any time ever be restored, returned, reintegrated or rehabilitated to their pristine state or cathedrals, metropolitian, patriarchal and primatial churches, or Cardinalates and/or other honor or whatever other greater or lesser dignity, or active and/or passive voice, or authority, or monasteries and benefices, and/or counties, baronies, marquisates, duchies, kingdoms and empire, who indeed have not been relinquished to the judgement of secular authority as ones to be punished with due consideration, unless they are to be brought back to the apparent indications of true penitence and the fruits of condign penitence, from the goodness and clemency of this See, in any monastery or other place of regulars, for doing perpetual penitence on the bread of grieving (doloris) and water of mourning (maestitiae). And that for such ones existing by all (titles), of whatever state, grade, order, condition and preeminence, or enjoying whatever dignity, even episcopal, archiepiscopal, patriarchal and primatial or other greater ecclesiastical, and even the honor of the Cardinalate, or by the mundane authority of a Count, Baron, Marquis, Duke, King or Emperor, let them be obliged to be held, treated and avoided as such and destitute of all human solace.

§ 4. And let those who pretend to hold the right of patronage or of naming the persons suitable to cathedrals, even the ones metropolitan, and patriarchal or primatial churches or monasteries and/or other ecclesiastic benefices, vacated through a privation of this kind, lest these be exposed to inconveniences of a too long vacancy, but be, rather, snatched from the service to heretics, let the same be conceded to suitable persons, who may faithfully direct their peoples in the paths of justice; (and) let them be bound to present other suitable persons to Us or the Roman Pontiff existing at that time, regarding churches, monasteries and benefices of this kind, within the time prescribed by right and/or under the statute of theirs according to the concordats or compacts begun with the said See; otherwise, with the time of this kind elapsed, let the full and free disposition of churches, monasteries and aforesaid benefices devolve in full right to Us and the aforesaid Roman Pontiff, by this very (fact).

§ 5. And, moreover, let those who will have presumed knowingly in any manner whatsoever to receive and/or defend the same thus found or confessed and/or convicted, or favor them and/or believe or teach their dogmas, incur by this very (fact) the sentence of excommunication, and let them be made infamous, nor let them be admitted by voice, person, writings and/or messenger or any procurator to public or private offices or councils or a Synod and/or Council, general and/or provincial, nor to a Conclave of the Cardinals or to any congregation of the Faithful or to the election of anyone, or to give witness, nor let them be able to be admitted; let them also be unable to write wills and to accede to a succession of an inheritance;  in addition, let no one respond to them upon any business.  Wherefore if they perhaps be judges, let their sentences obtain no firmness, nor let any cases be brought to their hearing; and, if they be lawyers, let their patronage be in no manner received; but if if they be messengers, let the credentials made for them be entirely of no strength and/or moment. And moreover let clerics for each and all churches, even cathedrals, metropolitans, patriarchals and primatials, or dignities, monasteries, benefices and ecclesiastical offices, even, as is preferred, those qualified, obtained for them in any manner you will, and both they and laymen, even, as is promoted, qualified and endowed with the aforesaid dignities, in whatsoever kingdoms, duchies, lordships, fiefs and temporal goods possessed by them, stand forth deprived by this very (fact); and let the kingdoms, duchies, lordships, fiefs and goods of this kind be confiscated and let them be as confiscated, and let them become of the right and property of those, who occupy them first, if they have been obedient in the sincerity of the Faith and in unity of the Holy Roman Church, and under Ours and that of Our successors, the Roman Pontiffs, canonically elected.

§ 6. Adding, that if at any time it will have appeared that any Bishop, even acting as an Archbishop or Patriarch and/or Primate, or a Cardinal of the aforesaid Roman Church, even, as as promoted, Legate, or even the Roman Pontiff, before his promotion as a Cardinal or assumption as Roman Pontiff, has deviated from the Catholic Faith or fallen into any heresy, let the promotion or assumption of him, even accomplished in agreement and unanimous assent of all the Cardinals, stand forth as null, irritus and void, and let neither through his undertaking of the munus, consecration, or subsequent government and administration, possession, or as if, and/or enthronement or adoration of him as Roman Pontiff, or obedience proffered to him by all, and whatever course of time in the aforesaid, be able to be said to be convalidated or be convalidated, nor let it be had as legitimate in any of its parts, and let it be judged to have granted or to grant no faculty for such things to those promoted as Bishops or Archbishops and/or Patriarchs, or assumed as Cardinals and/or Roman Pontiff, in things spiritual and/or temporal, but let each and every thing said, done, accomplished and administered in any manner you will by them, and whatever things follow from these, lack force, and let them grant entirely no firmness nor right to anyone; and let these same thus promoted and assumed by this very (fact), without any declaration needed to be made over them, be deprived of all dignity, position, honor, title, authority, office and power; and Let it be licit, for each and all thus promoted and assumed, if they had not before deviated from the Faith nor were heretics, nor joined in or excited and/or committed schisms:

§ 7. for persons subject, both clerics and seculars, and regulars as even lay, and also Cardinals, even those who were present at the election of the Pontiff (who) deviated beforehand from the Faith or (was) a schismatic, or (who) otherwise consented, and proffered obedience to him, and (who) adored him, even castellans, prefects, captains and officials, even of Our beloved City and while Ecclesiastical Estate, even to the same thus promoted and/or assumed by homage or oath and/or obliged or constrained by caution, by obedience and devotion of the same thus promoted and/or assumed immune, (let it be licit) at any time to withdraw, and to avoid them as warlocks, foreigners, publicans  and hesiarchs; and for the same subject persons by fidelity and obedience of future Bishops, Archbishops, Patriarchs, Primates, Cardinals and Roman Pontiffs canonically elected nevertheless, remaining bound, and, (who) regarding the greater of these, thus promoted and assumed, if they wish to continue their government and administration, (let it be licit) to request the assistance of the secular arm to harass [confusionem] the same thus promoted and assumed; nor let those withdrawing from fidelity and obedience to the same thus promoted and assumed, on the occasion of the aforesaid, be, as tearers of the tunic of the Lord, subject to the vengeance of any censures or punishments.

§ 8.  Not withstanding the Apostolic Constitutions and ordinances, and even the privileges, indults and Apostolic Letters to the same Bishops, Archbishops, Patriarchs, Primates and Cardinals and whatever others, under whatsoever tenor and form, and together with whatever clauses and decrees, even (those) Motu Proprio and ex certa scientia, and from the fullness of Apostolic Authority, or even (those) conceded in Consistory or otherwise in any manner and even (those) approved and renewed over and over, and even contained in the Corpus Iuris, and even those by whatsoever capitular conclaves, even (those) strengthened by an oath or Apostolic confirmation and/or by any other firmness, even sworn by Us ourselves.  All of which, presenting their tenor as had in place of express (mentions) even (those) having been inserted word for word, with these otherwise remaining in their force, We especially and expressly derogate at least this time, with all others whatsoever (remaining) contrary.

§ 9. Moreover, so that the present letters might be brought to the knowledge of all, whom it interests, We will that they or their transcriptions — which We decree should be shown full faith after having been subscribed by the hand of a public notary and furnished with the seal of any person constituted in ecclesiastical dignity — be published and affixed upon the doors of the Basilica of the Prince of the Apostles in the City and of the Apostolic Chancery and in the perimeter of the Campo dei Fiori through any of our couriers, and that a copy of the same be placed therein affixed, and that the publication, posting and placing of an affixed copy of this kind suffice and be had as a solemn and legitimate (announcement), and that no other publication ought to be required or expected.

§ 10. Therefore, let it be licit to entirely no one of men to infringe upon this page of Our approbation, renewal, sanction, statute, wills to derogate, decrees and/or with temerarius daring to contradict (it). If, however, any one presume to attempt this, let him know that he will incur the indignation of the Omnipotent God and His Blessed Apostles, Peter and Paul.

Given at Rome, at Saint Peter’s, in the year of the Lord’s Incarnation, One Thousand, Five Hundred, Fifty-Nine, the fourth year of Our Pontificate.

+ I, Paul, Bishop of the Catholic Church
+ I, John du Bellay, Cardinal Bishop of Ostia
+ I, Rodolfo Pio de Carpo, Cardinal Bishop of Porto e Santa Rufina
+ I, Francesco Pisani, Cardinal Bishop of Frascati
+ I, Federico Cesi, Cardinal Bishop of Palestrina
+ I, Pedro Pacheco de Villena, Cardinal Bishop of Albano
+
+ I, Ranuccio Farnese, Cardinal Deacon of Santa Angelo in Pescheria, the Penitentiary Major, Latin Patriarch of Constantinople
+ I, Tiberio Crispi, Cardinal Priest of Sant’Agata dei Goti, Bishop of Sessa Arunca
+ I, Fluvio Giulio della Corgna, Cardinal Priest of Santo Stefano al Monte Celio, Bishop of Perugia
+ I, Giovanni Michele Saraceni, Cardinal Priest of Sant’Anastasia
+ I, Giovanni Ricci, Cardinal Priest of San Vitale, Bishop of Chiusi, Italy
+ I, Giacomo Puteo, Cardinal Priest of Santa Maria in Via
+ I, Girolomo Dandini, Cardinal Priest of San Marcello, Bishop of Imola
+ I, Bernardino Scotti. Cardinal Priest of San Matteo in Merulana, Archbishop of Piacenza
+ I, Diomede Carafa, Cardinal Priest of San Pier Damniani ai Monti di San Paolo, Bishop of Ariano
+ I, Scipio Rebiba, Cardinal Priest of Santa Pudenziana, Archbishop of Pisa
+ Jean Suau, Cardinal Priest of San Giovanni a Porta Latina, Bishop of Mirepoix, France
+ Giannantonio Capizucchi, Cardinal of San Pancrazio, Bishop of Lodi
+ I Taddeo Gaddi, Cardinal Priest of San Silvestro in Capite
+ I Virgilio Rosario, Cardinal Priest of San Simeone Profeta, Bishop of Spoleto
+ I, Francisco Mendoza Bobadilla, Cardinal Priest of Sant’Eusebio, Bishop of Alexandria
+ I, Clemented’Olera, Cardinal Priest of Santa Maria in Ara Caeli
+ I Guido Ascanio Sforza di Santa Fiora, Cardinal Deacon of Santa Maria in Via Lata
+ I, Niccolò Caetani di Sermoneta, Cardinal Deacon of Sant’Eustachio
+ I, Giacomo Savelli, Cardinal Deacon of Santa Maria in Cosmedin
+ I, Girolamo Recanati Capodiferro, Cardinal Deacon of San Giorgio in Velabro, Bishop of Saint Jean du Maurienne, France
+ I, Innocenzo Ciocchi del Monte, Cardinal Deacon of Sant’Onofrio
+ I, Luigi Cornaro, Cardinal Deacon of San Teodoro
+I, Carlo Carafa, Cardinal Deacon of Sainti Vito, Modesto and Crescenzia
+ I, Alfonso Carafa, Cardinal Deacon of Santa Maria in Domnica, Archbishop of Naples
+ I, Vitellozzo Vitelli, Cardinal Deacon of Santa Maria in Portico, Bishop of Citta di Castello
+ I, Giovanni Battista Consigliere, Cardinal Deacon of Santa Lucia in Septisolio

As God is My Help

Given on the 15th of February, 1559, in the 4th of (our) Pontificate

Canon Law, Editorials

How the Catholic Cardinals can 100% guarantee a Catholic be elected Pope

4 Comments

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

Recently Cardinal Burke said the situation becoming apparent among the Cardinal Electors is very grave. Translation: Most of the Cardinals who give interventions are open heretics and the majority of the College applaud them.

Even Cardinal Mueller said “It would be a catastrophe for the Church to elect someone like Pope Francis”.

The only Cardinal I know of who has asked for prayers is Cardinal Burke. Henry Sire, author of the expose’, “The Dictator Pope”, says that Burke is not in danger of being elected.

I do not know one sane Catholic commentator who is not concerned about there heretical majority among the College of Cardinals.

So is there nothing they can do about it, but mumble, whine and ask for us to pray for them?

No, of course not; for there is a strategy to ensure a Catholic pope, and it is based on two things, first a juridical principle and second a legal maneuver in the Conclave.

The Juridical Principe

Declare that if a heretic is elected, that the Catholic Cardinals will publicly denounce his election as juridically invalid

On the grounds of Pope Pau lV’s papal Bull, “Cum ex Apostolatus Officio”, which declared that the election by the College of Cardinals of a man who professed heresy before his election, IS totally NULL and VOID and no Catholic is bound to accept it. — Click the link to see my discussion of this papal bull from 2015.

Such a declaration, signed by Cardinal Electors, of howsoever few in number, has the ability to force the election of a Catholic, by inducing the Cardinals whose consciences are not so clear, that such a great scandal should be avoided.*

The Legal Maneuver in Conclave

Plan A:  Phase 1 — Form a block of 33%+1 of the Cardinal Electors to permanently block the election of everyone but a Catholic

Cardinal Burke, being an expert on Canon Law should be able to explain to the entire College the extent to which the Papal Bull of Pope Paul IV is still in force in such extraordinary conditions such as exist presently in the College of Cardinals.

That explanation supported by a number of Cardinal Electors of the most prominent pedigree and accomplishments, should rally at least 45+ Cardinals to the side of the Catholics, and form a block to any election of any candidate, permanently, since the Papal Law for elections during conclave has no provision to relax the requirement of 66%+1 for a valid election of the next pope. So with such a block, resolved to make no compromise, they have invincible leverage

And this is very doable, and is not a canonical crime, nor does it espouse a canonical opinion which is wild or crazy or made up by grifters on social media.

If they cannot get a Catholic Elected, this legal maneuver can at least prevent any pope from being elected.

Plan A:  Phase 2–Conclave Compromise

The election of a candidate by compromise is not allow in the Conclave. However, the Cardinals can resolve by a vote NOT to elect anyone in accord with the Papal Law, and resolve to leave the election to the Clergy and Laity of the Roman Church, in accord with their Apostolic Rite, a right which would automatically revive on account of the refusal of the entire College to elect a Pope.

The College of Electors then can summon all the clergy of the Church of Rome (Diocese of Rome and suburbican dioceses) to the Paul VI hall and introduce them to the candidates that both groups of Cardinals want, and explain the disagreement which led to their decision to not elect anyone but remit that election to the clergy and faithful. The clergy then will have the grace to chose the Catholic candidate, because in the history of the Church from St. Peter to this day, the faithful of Rome have never elected a heretic. And then both Cardinals and clergy can present the candidate to the Roman Faithful in the Piazza S. Pietro for their acclamation. Thus we would get a Catholic pope.

Thus, though we should be praying, we should not despair, but communicate this information to the Catholic Electors who will vote next week, since this is a nearly fail safe way of saving the Church. You can share this article with Cardinal Burke here.

Plan B — A Catholic Conclave

The fail safe or last resort is, if they cannot form a 46 vote bloc to prevent the election of a heretic indefinitely, that they follow through with their warning to denounce the election of the non-Catholic in accord with the rule of the Papal Bull of Paul IV, Cum ex apostolatus officio. Following this public denunciation which should be made before the election of the heretic is announced, the Catholic Cardinals should gather in a safe place and begin the Conclave again, following the Papal Law, and as soon as they elect a man with 66%+1 votes of the Catholic Cardinals, proclaim him to the world as the true Catholic Pope.

This fail safe is much better than a heretical pope, because entrusting the Church to a heretic is worse than a schism where one side has a worthy Catholic pope and the other has a heretic. And with all or a majority of the Catholic electors supporting the Catholic pope, and the heretical electors supporting the heretic, it will become obvious to Catholics all over the world which is the true pope.

Then the battle will begin, but at least such a battle is winnable, since they would have the Holy Spirit on their side, since they did what is right, within the limits of their own juridical rights, and followed a procedure declared valid in perpetuity by Pope Paul IV, a true Vicar of Christ, which has not been abolished by any subsequent legislation, which deals such such circumstances.

* As Electors, during a sede vacante, they hold the natural right to issue such a declaration, because seeing that the right to elect a pope encompasses naturally the duty to judge candidates, the Cardinal Electors during a valid Conclave, held during a sede vacante, do not usurp the rights of anyone nor damage them. — Remember, whereas no one but a Pope can judge a Cardinal a heretic, when there is a pope, yet when there is no pope, Cardinal Electors have the natural right to manifest which candidates are ineligible on account of prior manifest heresy. In this they do not violate the papal law which guarantees that no un-excommunicated Cardinal can be refused the right to vote and to be elected, they simply respond to the error of electing a manifest heretic as pope, which is a result and condition not addressed in the Papal Law, and therefore, which reasonably can be responded to by appealing to Pope Paul IV’s Bull.

Note, however, I am not saying that laymen or clergy who are not Cardinals can declare whomsoever they do not like as Pope a heretic, and then hold their own Assembly of Apostolic Right, because the ancient right of the whole Church of Rome cannot be appealed to, so long as there are Cardinal Electors willing to elect a pope. And if they won’t call him a heretic, his errors might be great, but that is not sufficient reason to claim, on one’s own authority, the right to judge him. In such a case, Catholics would have to appeal to a Provincial Council in the ecclesiastical province of Rome, to ask the Bishops to remonstrate with the newly elected Pope, once he starts spouting error or heresy. Because outside of a Conclave, no one has canonical authority to discern the pope to be a formal pertinacious heretic, except the Bishops of the Ecclesiastical Province of Rome.