宗座的不可破坏性:梵蒂冈第一次大公会议是否正式排除了异端教皇的想法?

IF 0.6 2区 哲学 0 RELIGION THEOLOGICAL STUDIES Pub Date : 2023-11-29 DOI:10.1177/00405639231206089
Emmett O’Regan
{"title":"宗座的不可破坏性:梵蒂冈第一次大公会议是否正式排除了异端教皇的想法?","authors":"Emmett O’Regan","doi":"10.1177/00405639231206089","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"During the prelude to the First Vatican Council, the idea of a heretical pope was used as the primary argument against the solemn definition of papal infallibility. The medieval canonists and conciliarists had allowed for the notion of papal heresy by making a strict distinction between the apostolic seat itself and the individual occupants of the throne of Peter. However, when we examine the text of Pastor Aeternus in light of the contents of the official Relatio, which was drawn up at the council to explain the meaning of this document, we find that the above distinction used by the conciliarists was formally proscribed with an anathema. This article will argue that in doing so, the Council Fathers definitively excluded the possibility of a heretical pope.","PeriodicalId":46353,"journal":{"name":"THEOLOGICAL STUDIES","volume":"6 1","pages":"634 - 656"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Indefectibility of the Apostolic See: Was the Idea of a Heretical Pope Formally Excluded at the First Vatican Council?\",\"authors\":\"Emmett O’Regan\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00405639231206089\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"During the prelude to the First Vatican Council, the idea of a heretical pope was used as the primary argument against the solemn definition of papal infallibility. The medieval canonists and conciliarists had allowed for the notion of papal heresy by making a strict distinction between the apostolic seat itself and the individual occupants of the throne of Peter. However, when we examine the text of Pastor Aeternus in light of the contents of the official Relatio, which was drawn up at the council to explain the meaning of this document, we find that the above distinction used by the conciliarists was formally proscribed with an anathema. This article will argue that in doing so, the Council Fathers definitively excluded the possibility of a heretical pope.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46353,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"THEOLOGICAL STUDIES\",\"volume\":\"6 1\",\"pages\":\"634 - 656\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"THEOLOGICAL STUDIES\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00405639231206089\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"RELIGION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"THEOLOGICAL STUDIES","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00405639231206089","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在梵蒂冈第一次大公会议的前奏中,异端教皇的观点被用作反对教皇无误性这一庄严定义的主要论据。中世纪的教规学家和教权派通过严格区分使徒席位本身和彼得宝座上的个人,允许教皇异端的概念。然而,当我们根据大公会议上为解释这份文件的含义而起草的官方 Relatio 的内容来研究 Pastor Aeternus 的文本时,我们会发现,匡复派所使用的上述区别已被正式以 "诅咒"(anathema)的形式禁止了。本文将论证大公会议的教父们这样做是明确排除了异端教皇的可能性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The Indefectibility of the Apostolic See: Was the Idea of a Heretical Pope Formally Excluded at the First Vatican Council?
During the prelude to the First Vatican Council, the idea of a heretical pope was used as the primary argument against the solemn definition of papal infallibility. The medieval canonists and conciliarists had allowed for the notion of papal heresy by making a strict distinction between the apostolic seat itself and the individual occupants of the throne of Peter. However, when we examine the text of Pastor Aeternus in light of the contents of the official Relatio, which was drawn up at the council to explain the meaning of this document, we find that the above distinction used by the conciliarists was formally proscribed with an anathema. This article will argue that in doing so, the Council Fathers definitively excluded the possibility of a heretical pope.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
103
期刊最新文献
Synodality and Charisms: A Pentecostal Perspective on Hierarchical and Spiritual Gifts in the Life and Mission of the Church Book Review: Guth, Karen V.: The Ethics of Tainted Legacies: Human Flourishing after Traumatic Pasts Book Review: Hadley, Christopher M., SJ: A Symphony of Distances: Patristic, Modern, and Gendered Dimensions of Balthasar’s Trinitarian Theology Book Review: Scott, John T.: Rousseau’s God: Theology, Religion, and the Natural Goodness of Man Book Review: DeMeuse, Eric: Unity and Catholicity in Christ: The Ecclesiology of Francisco Suárez, S.J.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1