:confused:What were those?
:confused:What was the occasion?
:confused:What brought them about?
:)Peace and kindness,:)
Fred
|
:confused:What were those?
:confused:What was the occasion?
:confused:What brought them about?
:)Peace and kindness,:)
Fred
Since the declaration of Papal Infallibility (under VERY limited circumstances) in 1870 it's been used just once: In 1950 when Pope Pius XII affirmed the Assumption of Mary.
Arguably, though, there were other times before the pronouncement in 1870...
From what I've read, no two scholars agree on the exact number of Papal pronouncements that should be considered Infallible.
RickJ,
Thanks for that.
I have heard that there were 2 or 3 times, but I don't know what they were.
Peace and kindness,
Fred
The "catch" is that the pronouncement affirms prior practice... even before the pronouncement... so that's where the debates lie: in confirming/affirming what pronouncements of previous popes should be considered ex cathedra.
RickJ,
Thanks much for your answer.
It helps somewhat.
But what were the rulings that were spoken from ex-cathedra?
Peace and kindness,
Fred
The Catholic Church doesn't officially define doctrine unless the doctrine is challenged. That is why the Church had not officially defined the doctrine of infallibility until the 19th century. Before then, it was taken for granted.Quote:
Originally Posted by arcura
Experts agree that these pronouncements are ex-Cathedra:
The decree of the Assumption of the Virgin Mary:
MUNIFICENTISSIMUS DEUS
And that of her Immaculate Conception:
Papal Definition of the Immaculate Conception
But, since all Catholic doctrine is infallible anyway, it seems unnecessary to sift through 2000 years of history and figure out which Papal statements are infallible and which aren't.
However, that might be a task you want to undertake. If you do, remember to include 1 and 2 Peter.
:)
Sincerely,
De Maria
An earlier pope actually denounced the belief in papal infallibility, so it has not always been taken for granted even in your denomination.Quote:
Originally Posted by De Maria
Actually, he denounced the idea that he wasn't infallible.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tj3
A group of Franciscan brothers were told to change a house rule that Father Francis of Assissi had set up. They argued that the rule had stood for centuries since Father Francis had presented it to the Pope presiding at that time and it was approved.
The Franciscan brothers argued the rule was protected by the infallibility of the previous Pope.
But that isn't what infallibility is about. Any Pope can change the rules and disciplines of any branch of the Church. Infallibility has to do with teaching doctrine to the ecumenical Church. Not with ettiquette and procedure of a certain order within the Church.
Sincerely,
De Maria
Actually, there is no evidence of belief in infallibility of anyone prior to that.Quote:
Originally Posted by De Maria
Pope Clement I: "Owing to the sudden and repeated calamities and misfortunes which have befallen us… Accept our counsel and you will have nothing to regret… If anyone disobeys the things which have been said by him [God] through us [that you must reinstate your leaders], let them know that they will involve themselves in transgression and in no small danger… You will afford us joy and gladness if being obedient to the things which we have written through the Holy Spirit, you will root out the wicked passion of jealousy…" (Letter to the Corinthians 1:1, 58:2-59:1,63:2[A.D.80]).Quote:
Originally Posted by Tj3
Cyprian of Carthage: "Would the heretics dare to come to the very seat of Peter whence apostolic faith is derived and whither no errors can come?"(Letters 59 [55], 14)[A.D. 256]
Also Augustine, Sermon 131: "Rome has spoken; the case is closed."Quote:
Originally Posted by De Maria
See also Irenaeus, Adversus haereses 3.3.
This says nothing about infallibility.Quote:
Originally Posted by De Maria
This one seems quite elusive. I am trying to have a look at the reference in context.Quote:
Cyprian of Carthage: "Would the heretics dare to come to the very seat of Peter whence apostolic faith is derived and whither no errors can come?"(Letters 59 [55], 14)[A.D. 256]
Pope Clement speaks with confidence that his counsel will be correct.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tj3
Pope Clement believes God is speaking through him. It is reminiscent of what St. Peter said to Ananias:Quote:
If anyone disobeys the things which have been said by him [God] through us
Acts 5
4Whiles it remained, was it not thine own? And after it was sold, was it not in thine own power? Why hast thou conceived this thing in thine heart? Thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God.
Here he confirms that he believes the Holy Spirit is speaking through him.Quote:
[that you must reinstate your leaders], let them know that they will involve themselves in transgression and in no small danger… You will afford us joy and gladness if being obedient to the things which we have written through the Holy Spirit,
Quote:
you will root out the wicked passion of jealousy…" (Letter to the Corinthians 1:1, 58:2-59:1,63:2[A.D.80]).
I could say the same when I read from scripture or if were to be given a word of knowledge from the Holy Spirit.Quote:
Originally Posted by De Maria
That is the basis of the Church's belief in the Pope's and the Church's infallibility.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tj3
So it is akin to me declaring myself as infallible. Okay. I understand now.Quote:
Originally Posted by De Maria
De Maria,
Again you are right in face of Tj3's errored beliefs.
Peace and kindness,
Fred
My beliefs come from an infallible and inerrant source.Quote:
Originally Posted by arcura
Then WHY do YOU interpret some of it incorrectly??
I don't interpret it - it interprets itself. I don't rely on men to interpret scripture. Who do you rely on?Quote:
Originally Posted by arcura
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:48 AM. |