Question II: Whether one who doubts about the articles of faith is a heretic

The FIRST opinion is negative. Cited by Cano lib. 12. de locis cap. 9. Tannerus disp. 1. quaest. 8. dub. 5. num. 83. Diana follows it primo Tom. 2. p. tract. 2. miscell. resol. 53. Many say the same with these, concerning one suspending the act of judgment. Sanch. consents T. 1. lib. 2. cap. 7. Portel addit. ad dub. Reg. v. Haeresis, Puteanus 2. 2. quaest. 21. art. 2. disp. 2. Ballaeus num. 3.

BUT the common opinion proclaims as a heretic him who voluntarily and pertinaciously doubts concerning the faith, judging that thing to be doubtful, or that it can be otherwise, (which judgment Sanchez, Vasquez 1. 2. disp. 65. and Tannerus loc. cit. with Maldeno call wrongly reflexum; for an actus reflexus has another act for its object, as Coninch. notes disp. 18. dub. 7. num. 86. and Card. Lugo disp. 17. sect. 5. num. 85. but these judgments have the thing itself for their object, saying that that matter of faith is uncertain. Villalob. consents tom. 2. tract. 1. disp. 10. Sylu. 2. 2. quaest. 1. Faber de Sacr. ord. disp. 3. cap. 4. num. 112. Homob. de exam. Eccl. p. 2. tract. 12. cap. 16. Molf. 1. 1. tract. 8. cap. 8. Lara 2. 2. quaest. 11. art. 3. disp. 42. and sixteen others cited by Sanch. Therefore D. Thom. and others proclaim this voluntary judgment pertinacious [to be] heresy, whom Suarez follows disp. 19. sect. 3. Hurtad. disp. 80. sect. 4. §. 21. Coninch. dub. cit. num. 102. Lorca disp. 42. Castro Palao Tom. 1. tract. 4. disp. 3. p. 2. num. 9. and others besides these, with whom Card. Lugo subscribes disp. 20. sect. 1. num. 17. Fulienfis lib. 3. de fide, cap. 7.

I suppose from D. Bonau. in 3. dist. 17. dub. 3. that doubt is properly called the indifference of the judgment of reason, with respect to either part of the contradiction, so that it prefers neither to the other.

I SUPPOSE secondly, from the same D. Bonau. in 4. dist. 13. dub. 4. that Heresy, so called from eligere, is that in which a false opinion is deliberately elected. From which he deduces that to opine is not heresy; just as neither is to doubt. And so he seems [to side] with the former opinion.

S. Doct. also TEACHES in opusc. de profectu religios. cap. 3. that certain doubts about the faith are often assailed by the devil, which are rather to be despised; because, the more we are indignant with ourselves, and dispute with them, the more their rage is kindled. Gerson attends to this admonition tract. de foeda tentatione, alph. 62. lit. O. usque ad T. Sanchez lib. 2. decal. cap. 7. num. 13. and all the others also of the second opinion.

I ASSERT first, with D. Bonau., that one doubting concerning matters of faith is not properly a heretic.

It is PROVED first by the authors of the prior opinion, by the argument of D. Bonau. loc. cit. in 4. taken from D. August. lib. de utilitate credendi, cap. 1. and it is cited cap. Haereticus, 24. quaest. 3. and by D. Hieronymo cap. 5. ad Galat. et ad Tit. 3. and it is cited cap. Haeresis, 24. quaest. 3. and D. Thom. also uses it 1. Corinth. 11. lect. 4. et 2. 2. quaest. 11. art. 2. ad 3. Of the nature of heresy is the pertinacious election of doctrine contrary to the faith: but one doubting precisely does not elect, etc. but is suspended: Therefore.

It is CONFIRMED; for heresy is an error contrary to the faith; but error implies assent, or dissent. It is confirmed, because heresy is opposed to faith; but doubt is a mean.

I ASSERT secondly, that one doubting is an infidel privatively, because he is deprived of the certainty of assent, necessary for retaining the habit of faith.

It is PROVED; for in this sense cap. 1. de haereticis it is said, that one doubting in the faith is an infidel, not contrarily, as if he had an assent contrary to the faith, but privatively, because he lacks the necessary assent. Thus doubt of the faith can be condemned, just as those are condemned who deny that the soul is the form of the body, or doubt about it, as is found Clem. 1. §. Porro; and those who doubt of the immortality of the soul are condemned by Leo X. in Conc. Later. In the same sense the Fathers spoke, whom Franciscus Suarez adduces num. 12. Lorca num. 5. From which the text cap. 1. de haeret. remains exposed [to objection], which is of Pope Stephen, to whom others answer, that one doubting in the faith is called an infidel with respect to the external forum.

A third opinion of OTHERS says, that it is true when he reflects upon his own doubtful thought, and in fact elicits an erroneous judgment concerning matters of faith, so that he may judge them only probable. But these men confound the questions.