Papal Error?: A Defense of Popes said to have Erred in Fatih

Description

Translated from:De Controversiis Fidei ChristianaeIngolstadt, 1588[Lib. 4](https://isidore.co/calibre/#panel=book_details&book_id=5649)cf. the Christianity StackExchange question "[When did a “formal act of correction” of a pope's statement happen in the past?](https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/53739/1787)" and [this answer](https://christianity.stackexchange.com/a/53747/1787).[Pope St. Marcellinus](https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09640b.htm)> sacrificed to idols, as is certain from the Pontifical of Damasus, the Council of Sinvessanus, and from the epistle of Nicholas I to the Emperor Michael. But Marcelinus neither taught something against faith, nor was a heretic, or unfaithful, except by an external act on account of the fear of death. Now, whether he fell from the pontificate due to that external act or not, little is related, later he abdicated the pontificate, and shortly thereafter was crowned with martyrdom. Still, I believe that he would not have fallen from the pontificate *ipso facto* , because it was certain to all that he sacrificed to idols only out of fear.1586 ed. of *De Romano Pontifice* liber IV caput VIII:> DECIMUS est MARCELLINUS, qui idolis sacrificavit, ut constat ex Pontificali Damasi, ex Concilio Sinvessano, & ex epistola Nicolai I. ad Michaëlem. At Marcellinus nec docuit aliquid contra fidem, nec fuit haereticus, vel infidelis, nisi actu externo ob metum mortis. Utrum autem propter actum illum externum exciderit à pontificatu, an non, parum refert; quandoquidem se ipse pontificatu mox abdicavit, & paulò pòst martyrio coronatus est. Crediderim tamen, non excidisse eum ipso facto à pontificatu, quia satis constabat omnibus, eum solo metu idolis sacrificasse.The *Pontifical of Damasus* has since been shown to be a forgery.