Pope St Pius X explains what loving the Pope really entails.
#45
(11-20-2012, 11:51 AM)Mithrandylan Wrote: Besides, there's only been two ex-cathedra statements, and neither of them have to do with Jesus being God or the Holy Trinity.  There's far more to the faith than the very rare instances of ex-cathedra. 

I hope I don't take this thread too off course, but this idea of "only two" is one of the whose wide-spread things that doesn't pass the common sense test.  Why would St. Francis de Sales in the 17th century defend the dogma of papal infallibility (using the "cathedra" terminology at that), if it had never happened? For that matter, why were the Protestants attacking it? Why would an ecumenical Council deal with this if it had only happened once ever? Popes didn't realize they could pass definitive judgments on doctrines of faith and morals for over 1800 years? It doesn't pass the smell test.

In the relatio on papal infallibility at the First Vatican Council, some bishops wanted to define a process for the Pope to follow when passing such definitive judgments.  The relator said that couldn't be done since already "thousands and thousands" of such judgments have been issued by the Pope without any uniform procedure.  Granted, he was speaking hyperbolically, but why would he say this if there was only one?

After the Council, the debate centered around the infallibility of secondary stuff which implied a doctrinal judgment(like the apporbation of religious orders), not really about past doctrinal judgments. For example, Cardinal Newman, who was definitely more conservative when it comes to extending the reach of papal infallibility, lists a whole slew of examples (not intended to be exhaustive) that took the form of lists of propositions definitively judged and condemed by the Pope to contrast them with the Syllabus of Errors, which he argued pointed to documents which had varying levels of authority.  St. Francis de Sales, in his defense of papal infallibility, listed Benedict XII's constitution issued to definitvely settle the beatific vision controvery.  In audience, John Paul II listed the Bull of Boniface VIII of having the same dogmatic value as definitions on the same topic in two ecumenical Councils.  In regards to the Trinity, until recently, the Tome of Leo was universally seen to fit the bill. The reason the Council of Chalcedon happened is because some opposed his definition and the Council was called so those opposing position could be refuted and the whole episcopate gathered together could solemnly assent to his judgment (cf. Letter 120 of St. Leo explaining this reasoning for the Council).  

I don't know when the idea of just two such definitions came about (it wasn't before, during, or immediately after the First Vatican Council). I'm guessing the extraordinary ceremonial fanfare accompanying the two most recent Marian definitions caused some to think all papal definitions must be like that.

Reply


Messages In This Thread
Re: Pope St Pius X explains what loving the Pope really entails. - by SaintSebastian - 11-20-2012, 01:25 PM



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)