Council of Constance Contradicts

  • Thread starter Thread starter austinbond
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

austinbond

Guest
After reading en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_Constance about the ecumenical council in Constance, something stuck out at me saying that all the bishops had more power than one even if it was the Pope. Would this contradict Vatican I with papal supremacy? Please help me understand this.
 
If something was not declared dogmatically, and was only a matter of custom, I would think that one council maybe could reverse a decision made at an earlier one. I don’t know a lot about it. Maybe they don’t mean the same thing - I’m not familiar and don’t have time right now to research - maybe look in the Catholic Encyclopedia online or an internet catholic dictionary. There’s some theory called concilliorism or something like that which I think the church denied, if I’m remembering right.
 
The human person has a gender - male or female - and this goes beyond the physical body - so maybe you could say the soul of each individual is either male or female - not sure on this philosophy stuff- I may have worded this wrong. But as far as the bridal image goes, in philosophy, I think the feminine is sometimes considered passive - that the female part in a marital relationship is in some way passive. Consequently, the bridal, feminine image would be appropriate for each individual, in a sense, since we are recipients of graces - this is not to say we don’t do anything or cooperate with grace, though.
 
40.png
austinbond:
After reading en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_Constance about the ecumenical council in Constance, something stuck out at me saying that all the bishops had more power than one even if it was the Pope. Would this contradict Vatican I with papal supremacy? Please help me understand this.
Click to expand...
One needs to also understand which canons of a Council were approved by the pope. A Council might produce 25 canons and the pope only approve 23 of them, in effect nullifying the other two. A Council is not above a pope, a pope is above a Council. In the sense that he must authorize a Council and approve it’s canons before they can take effect.
 
Another point is that Councils DO have authority over Popes; no Pope can alter what has been previously decided by Council. The key is that it is the Bishop of Rome that approves the Council, the acting Pope at the time establishes the rulings of the Council. All future Popes are absolutely bound to this, however, so there is actually no contradiction between that decree and Vatican I.

It’s really not a matter of the Pope being over the Council, or the Council being over the Pope. The Bishop of Rome is the lynch-pin of the Ecumenical Council, and always has been. He doesn’t tell the Council what to decide, but his ratification makes the Council Ecumenical in nature and universally binding. It’s not actually a matter of seperate powers at all, but different applications of the same Apostalic authority.
 
Let’s go to the source (the links are to the council documents themselves):
piar.hu/councils/ecum16.htm
16. Council of Constance (1414-1418), was held during the great Schism of the West, with the object of ending the divisions in the Church. It only became legitimate when Gregory XI had formally convoked it. Owing to this circumstance it succeeded in putting an end to the schism by the election of Pope Martin V, which the Council of Pisa (1403) had failed to accomplish on account of its illegality. The rightful pope confirmed the former decrees of the synod against Wyclif and Hus. This council is thus only ecumenical in its last sessions (XLII-XLV inclusive) and with respect to the decrees of earlier sessions approved by Martin V.

piar.hu/councils/ecum20.htm
20. First Vatican Council was summoned to the Vatican by Pius IX. It met 8 December, 1869, and lasted till 18 July, 1870, when it was adjourned; it is still (1908) unfinished. There were present 6 archbishop-princes, 49 cardinals, 11 patriarchs, 680 archbishops and bishops, 28 abbots, 29 generals of orders, in all 803. Besides important canons relating to the Faith and the constitution of the Church, the council decreed the infallibility of the pope when speaking ex cathedra, i.e. when as shepherd and teacher of all Christians, he defines a doctrine concerning faith or morals to be held by the whole Church.
 
But what I still don’t understand is did they infallibly say that all the bishops can override the Pope?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top