 |
|
Dr Strangelove
|
|
In advance of the inevitable I'd like to say that my heart goea out to all the good Catholic posters at 'poly and all the faithful catholics around the world. may you be pleasently surprised by hios successor.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Maquiladora
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Alexander's Horse
That sounds a little strange. |
I thought so too. Too dirty minded.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
molly bloom
|
 |
Lundenwic
Oct 2001
time: 15:32
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Winston
Nonsense, anything's possible. How else would they ever change their stance on anything. |
You're not a Roman Catholic Winston, are you ?
Nothing is necessarily 'possible' where Church doctrine (and/or politics) is concerned, viz., papal infallibity and the repercusions of popes 'retiring' :
'What worries Catholics most in the current crisis in the Church is precisely the "problem of the Pope." We need very clear ideas on this question. We must avoid shipwreck to the right and to the left, either by the spirit of rebellion or, on the other hand, by an inappropriate and servile obedience. The serious error which is behind many current disasters is the belief that the "Authentic Magisterium" is nothing other than the "Ordinary Magisterium,"
The "Authentic Magisterium" cannot be so simply identified with the Ordinary Magisterium. In fact, the Ordinary Magisterium can be infallible and non-infallible, and it is only in this second case that it is called the "Authentic Magisterium." The Dictionnaire de Théologie Catholique [hereafter referred to as DTC - Ed.] under the heading of "papal infallibility" (vol. VII, col.1699ff) makes the following distinctions: 1) there is the "infallible or ex cathedra papal definition in the sense defined by Vatican I" (col.1699); 2) there is the "infallible papal teaching which flows from the pope's Ordinary Magisterium" (col.1705); 3) there is "non-infallible papal teaching" (col.1709).
Similarly, Salaverri, in his Sacrae Theologiae Summa (vol. I, 5th ed., Madrid, B.A.C.) distinguishes the following: 1) Extraordinary Infallible Papal Magisterium (no. 592ff); 2) Ordinary Infallible Papal Magisterium (no. 645ff); 3) Papal Magisterium that is mere authenticum, that is, only "authentic" or "authorized" as regards the person himself, not as regards his infallibility (no.659ff).
While he always has full and supreme doctrinal authority, the pope does not always exercise it at its highest level, that is at the level of infallibility. As the theologians say, he is like a giant who does not always use his full strength. What follows is this:
1) "It would be incorrect to say that the pope is infallible simply by possessing papal authority," as we read in the Acts of Vatican I (Coll.L ac. 399b). This would be equivalent to saying that the pope's authority and his infallibility are the same thing.
2) It is necessary to know "what degree of assent is due to the decrees of the sovereign pontiff when he is teaching at a level which is not that of infallibility, i.e., when he is not exercising the supreme degree of his doctrinal authority" (Salaverri, op.cit., no.659). '
In and out the houses:
" The following is an illustrative quote from Eric Tuttobene and Greg Loren Durand's treatise Ex Cathedra: An Historical and Scriptural Analysis of Papal Infallibility [1] which cites specific historical events, all of which have a direct bearing on this controversy. We hope the consideration of these events will resolve the issue all together.
"Victor I (189-199) first approved of Montanism in 192, and then later condemned it. Honorius (625-638) taught the heresy of Monotheism, which denied that Christ simultaneously possessed two separate natures-human and divine. He was later condemned as a heretic by the Third Council of Constantinople in 680. Marcellinus (296-304) entered the Temple of Vesta and offered incense to the pagan goddess. Liberius (352-366) consented to the condemnation of Athanasius, the 'great defender of the Deity of Christ,' and made a profession of Arianism that he might be recalled from exile and reinstated in his seat. …Gregory I (590) declared that anyone who believed it was not necessary to take both the bread and wine at Mass was to be excommunicated; Innocent III (1215) stated that anyone who believed it was necessary was to be excommunicated. Paschal II (1099-1118) and Eugene III (1145-1153) authorized dueling; Julius II (1503-1513) and Pius VII (1800-1823) forbade it. Hadrian II (867-872) declared civil marriages to be valid; Pius VII condemned them. Sixtus V (1585-1590) published an edition of the Bible and recommended it to be read; Pius VII condemned the reading of it, claiming the edition to be full of errors. Clement XIV (1769-1774) abolished the order of the Jesuits; Paul III (1534-1549) permitted it and Pius VII re-established it. The list of such errors is quite lengthy, but the foregoing examples sufficiently prove our point."
The point we wish to convey through the above quote is that over the centuries a number of Popes have contradicted other Popes on matters of faith and morals. These contradictions ought to resolve the question of Papal infallibility once and for all: how can an infallible statement contradict an equally infallible statement? "
How indeed. Pope's who have retired in the past have been given a signally bad press.
I noted that the Vatican has said he is 'serene'- I take this to be Vatican-speak for 'he may be dying in extreme pain and distress and mental confusion, but we sure aren't going to let you lot know about it' .
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:32.
Apolyton Time is 00:32. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
02-04-2005 02:19
ACK!
|