Could you please provide the website you've gotten that list from, sir? And, for the sake of record, are you refering to Ven. Cardinal Caesar Baronius (1538-1607)?
Vatican I documents: Here's a link to the basic documents of the first Vaticn council; please see Session 4: 18 July, 1870. In particular, I'd like to draw your attention to chapter 4, sections 6 and 9:
"Therefore, faithfully adhering to the tradition received from the beginning of the Christian faith, to the glory of God our savior, for the exaltation of the Catholic religion and for the salvation of the Christian people, with the approval of the Sacred Council, we teach and define as a divinely revealed dogma that when the Roman Pontiff speaks EX CATHEDRA, that is, when, in the exercise of his office as shepherd and teacher of all Christians, in virtue of his supreme apostolic authority, he defines a doctrine concerning faith or morals to be held by the whole Church, he possesses, by the divine assistance promised to him in blessed Peter, that infallibility which the divine Redeemer willed his Church to enjoy in defining doctrine concerning faith or morals. Therefore, such definitions of the Roman Pontiff are of themselves, and not by the consent of the Church, irreformable" (section 9).
As you can see, the council is not saying that the Pope cannot be wrong in his personal beliefs, only that when he solemnly defines a docrine relating to faith and morals "Ex cathedra", he cannot - by a grace of the Holy Spirit - teach error. Below is the reason that this is extended.
"For the Holy Spirit was promised to the successors of Peter not so that they might, by his revelation, make known some new doctrine, but that, by his assistance, they might religiously guard and faithfully expound the revelation or deposit of faith transmitted by the apostles.
Indeed, their apostolic teaching was embraced by all the venerable fathers and reverenced and followed by all the holy orthodox doctors, for they knew very well that this See of St. Peter always remains unblemished by any error, in accordance with the divine promise of our Lord and Savior to the prince of his disciples: I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail; and when you have turned again, strengthen your brethren" (section 6).
So that is the view of the council. There were very few voting cardinals who had doubts on the docrine itself - 20% opposed the docrine being defined because they feared it may cause trouble. The necessity was realized, however, because the question was of growing importance, and so the consideration moved forward. It was passed with only two dissenting votes; both of whom acknowledged the dogma, after it was defined.
"On Monday, 18 July, 1870, one day before the outbreak of the Franco-German War, 435 fathers of the council assembled at St. Peter's under the presidency of
Pope Pius IX. The last vote was now taken; 433 fathers voted
placet, and only two, Bishop Aloisio Riccio of Cajazzo,
Italy, and Bishop Edward Fitzgerald of
Little Rock,
Arkansas, voted
non placet." (
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Vatican Council; under The Question of Papal Infallibility, section 4).
Bishop Fitzgarld of Little Rock, who was the most opposed to the docrine, would afterword say "Holy Father, now I believe."
As for your long list, I'm sure that if I answered every one of them, you still would not believe in the dogma, so I doubt the use of my answering, but I will attempt a few, and we may look at more if you like.
The accusation against Pope Honorius is one that comes up quite a bit. But it is not accurate to say that he taught or promulgated that Christ had only one will; he did nothing. Looking back, we can say with certainty that Christ has two wills - one human and one divine - but as that was not as clear during Pope Honorius' time, it seems strange to accuse him when he did not officially act on it at all. Ronald Knox says "To the best of his human wisdom, he thought the controversy ought to be left unsettled, for the greater peace of the Church. In fact, he was an inopportunist. We, wise after the event, say that he was wrong. But nobody, I think, has ever claimed that the pope is infallible in
not defining a doctrine."
The accusation against Pope Clement XIV is almost laughable. Certainly, the Pope reserves the right to instate or reinstate religious communities; that is not dogma, that's administration. In addition, Clement XIV was not a very
good administrator. He was, in fact, a puppet of the ruling bodies in France; rulers that had their eyes on the lands the Jesuits owned. The suppression of the Jesuits was imprudent and political, but not dogmatic or docrinal in any sense of the terms.
