S
sambos671
Guest
Good. I’ll quote you.I’m amazed at how many people choose to use Wiki. Any one of us could write and entry on any subject!
When I’m done here, maybe I’ll post a Wiki entry on neuro-surgery.
- Status
P
Peter_J
Guest
P
philipmarie
Guest
NIn Mary, Queen of Patriarchs,
No. There are many theological mistakes here. Let me explain:
EVERY Papal Bull is ex cathedra, unless the Pope does not sign it with the Fihserman’s ring. The Ring is a sign of His authority and power.
Not only that, but even Encyclicals that are sealed with the fishermans ring and which have to do with faith and morals are ex cathedra. And it is absolutely false to say that there were only two documents which were ex cathedra. This horrible lie is totally destroyed by the HUGE number of Papal Bulls signed with the Ring.
As for the ex cathedra thing being rare, it isn’t. That a Pope should define as an article of faith a doctrine on faith and morals is very rare, and even then it is not as rare as it is! We have the definition of the Immaculate Conception, The Assumption of Mary and Papal Infallibility itself; we have Unam Sanctam, Excerabilis and other documents.
And another thing: the Pope does not speak ex cathedra ONLY hwne defining a doctrine on faith and morals but also when He speaks as Pope and teacher of all Catholics without defining any article of faith. Canonizations are infallible, not like how some crazy heretics who call Pius X an anti-pope say; encyclicals are infallible (most of them anyway); Bulls are infallible.
The Pope is not infallible as a private person. When a certain Pope Paschal was forced by some stupid king to allow lay investure, the Pope did not even err in faith and morals; He merely made a ***NON-***ex cathedra document allowing lay investure. Honorius I was almost an anti-pope and He later was anathemized as a heretic. And He didn’t even speak ex cathedra when He showed his approval of the monotelith heresy!
So there, I hope that solved your problem! Call upon Mary to guide you and teach you the truth. She definitely will never fail you!
No. There are many theological mistakes here. Let me explain:
EVERY Papal Bull is ex cathedra, unless the Pope does not sign it with the Fihserman’s ring. The Ring is a sign of His authority and power.
Not only that, but even Encyclicals that are sealed with the fishermans ring and which have to do with faith and morals are ex cathedra. And it is absolutely false to say that there were only two documents which were ex cathedra. This horrible lie is totally destroyed by the HUGE number of Papal Bulls signed with the Ring.
As for the ex cathedra thing being rare, it isn’t. That a Pope should define as an article of faith a doctrine on faith and morals is very rare, and even then it is not as rare as it is! We have the definition of the Immaculate Conception, The Assumption of Mary and Papal Infallibility itself; we have Unam Sanctam, Excerabilis and other documents.
And another thing: the Pope does not speak ex cathedra ONLY hwne defining a doctrine on faith and morals but also when He speaks as Pope and teacher of all Catholics without defining any article of faith. Canonizations are infallible, not like how some crazy heretics who call Pius X an anti-pope say; encyclicals are infallible (most of them anyway); Bulls are infallible.
The Pope is not infallible as a private person. When a certain Pope Paschal was forced by some stupid king to allow lay investure, the Pope did not even err in faith and morals; He merely made a ***NON-***ex cathedra document allowing lay investure. Honorius I was almost an anti-pope and He later was anathemized as a heretic. And He didn’t even speak ex cathedra when He showed his approval of the monotelith heresy!
So there, I hope that solved your problem! Call upon Mary to guide you and teach you the truth. She definitely will never fail you!
M
Matthew_Holford
Guest
Although it is not explicit in the OP I am assuming that OP is talking about dogmas decreed by the Supreme Pontiff and these being defined as infallible. The current understanding of papal infallibility was defined by the First Oecumenical Council at the Vatican (Vatican I). Since Vatican I there has only be one use of this and that was when Pius XII issued the dogma on the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary.
Infallibility is often misunderstood both within and without the Catholic Church. It is not that the very person of the Pope is infallible but that the teaching given is infallible. It must be specifically declared as such.
Infallibility is often misunderstood both within and without the Catholic Church. It is not that the very person of the Pope is infallible but that the teaching given is infallible. It must be specifically declared as such.
M
mardukm
Guest
Dear brother Philipmarie,
Yes, all bulls are ex cathedra, but not all bulls are infallible. In fact not all ex cathedra statements are infallible. Ex cathedra is only one of the criteria necessary for a papal act to be regarded or recognized as infallible.
I’d like to add that papal infallibility was not defined ex cathedra. Ex cathedra refers to an exercise of the unique authority of the Chair of Peter. Papal infallibilty was not defined by the unique authority of the Chair of Peter, but by the authority of an Ecumenical Council.
Blessings,
Marduk
I agree with most of your statements here with some exceptions.
Yes, all bulls are ex cathedra, but not all bulls are infallible. In fact not all ex cathedra statements are infallible. Ex cathedra is only one of the criteria necessary for a papal act to be regarded or recognized as infallible.
I’d like to add that papal infallibility was not defined ex cathedra. Ex cathedra refers to an exercise of the unique authority of the Chair of Peter. Papal infallibilty was not defined by the unique authority of the Chair of Peter, but by the authority of an Ecumenical Council.
Blessings,
Marduk
P
philipmarie
Guest
You left something out! True, not all ex cathedra statements are infallible; the only ex cathedra statements which are infallible are those concerning Faith and Morals (Cum ex apostolatus Officio is infallible as it speaks on faith and morals).
R
ron77nyc
Guest
Catholics must accept all infallible teachings proclaimed from the chair “ex-cathedra” but no one, not even the pope is clear about what falls into that category so how could it not cause confusion? One way to end the confusion would be for the Vatican to put all infallible statements into one book. They can call it “Infallible Proclamations of the Popes.” I believe it has never been done because the magisterium itself cannot agree on what has been declared infallible and there have been contradictions in papal proclamations.
M
mardukm
Guest
Yes, I left that out. I specifically said that ex cathedra is only one of the criteria.
Thank you for pointing out the other.
Blessings,
Marduk
C
CHESTERTONRULES
Guest
This is still Church teaching. The question is: “Who is outside of the Church?”
The Catechism teaches that all Christians, Catholic or not, subsist within the Catholic Church even if they are not in full communion with the Church.
R
ron77nyc
Guest
In 1302 it was infallibly declared that only those in submission to the pope could be saved. To be “In the Church” meant that you were a Roman Catholic in submission to the pope. The Eastern Orthodox were excluded.
“That there is only One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church we are compelled by faith to believe and hold, and we firmly believe in her and sincerely confess her, outside of whom there is neither salvation nor remission of sins…Furthermore we declare, state and define that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of all human beings that they submit to the Roman Pontiff.”
POPE BONIFACE VIII Unam Sanctam (November 18, 1302 AD)
G
Genesis315
Guest
The only requirements for a the charism of infallibility to be invoked is that the Pope is acting in his role as teacher of the universal church, that his proclamation is definitive (a “definition”), and that it is in the realm of faith and morals. It doesn’t amtter what category the document is labelled as (as these catechories are relatively new distinctions).
What is usally lacking is the character of definitiveness. St. Francis de Sales compared it to a king laying down the law. When the Pope lays down the law of faith for the whole Church we can receive it with faith knowing it to be true. In the past, this is all the Pope would really do as a teacher–he would intervene to definitvely settle some dispute, confirm a Council decisions as binding on the whole Church, etc.
In the last couple centuries though Popes have also sent out long explanatory letters. These are more like commentary on the law than actually laying it down, although they may contain instances of this as well.
What is usally lacking is the character of definitiveness. St. Francis de Sales compared it to a king laying down the law. When the Pope lays down the law of faith for the whole Church we can receive it with faith knowing it to be true. In the past, this is all the Pope would really do as a teacher–he would intervene to definitvely settle some dispute, confirm a Council decisions as binding on the whole Church, etc.
In the last couple centuries though Popes have also sent out long explanatory letters. These are more like commentary on the law than actually laying it down, although they may contain instances of this as well.
C
CHESTERTONRULES
Guest
This was not infallible teaching. We now have a more inclusive definition of what it means to be part of the Church.
M
mardukm
Guest
This is, of course, mitigated by the doctrine of invincible ignorance, which the scholastics accepted.
Blessings
G
Genesis315
Guest
It definitely is–it is definitive (he is defining), it is binding on all, and it proclaims a dogma of faith. It is just another formulation of the dogma that outside the Church there is no salvation. It simply adds that this Church is the one subject to the Roman Pontiff.
Pope John Paul II lists it with the other two definitions of this dogma here in this audience on the topic:
Pope John Paul II:
vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/audiences/alpha/data/aud19950531en.html
R
ron77nyc
Guest
Here is Jimmy Akin explaining infallibility.
jimmyakin.org/2004/06/two_instances_o.html
“The reason is that papal canonizations of saints are infallible. In the course of performing a canonization, the pope states “we declare and define that Blessed N., is a saint” (example). This triggers the Church’s gift of infallibility, which Vatican I teaches “the divine Redeemer willed his Church to enjoy in defining doctrine concerning faith or morals” (source). Consequently, the verb “define” has come to be used as a trigger word for infallible papal statements. If you see a pope say “we define” or “I define,” it is a signal that he is making a definition and thus exercising the Church’s gift of infallibility. (This is not the only way in which he can do this, but it is the standard way.)”
Look at Unam Sanctam: “Furthermore we **declare, state and define **that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of all human beings that they submit to the Roman Pontiff."
POPE BONIFACE VIII Unam Sanctam (November 18, 1302 AD)
C
CHESTERTONRULES
Guest
What do you do with this?
“Outside the Church there is no salvation”
846 How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers?335 Re-formulated positively, it means that all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body:
Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and Baptism, and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through Baptism as through a door. Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it.336
847 This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church:
Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation.337
848 "Although in ways known to himself God can lead those who, through no fault of their own, are ignorant of the Gospel, to that faith without which it is impossible to please him, the Church still has the obligation and also the sacred right to evangelize all men."338
G
GaryTaylor
Guest
The Church is … the Mystical Body of Jesus Christ.
R
ron77nyc
Guest
I agree with the above reasoning. Salvation is from Christ the head through the Church however the Lateran Council, Unam Sanctam and the Council of Florence did not say what the Church says today. These councils took place from approximately 1200-1500 AD. At that time there were Jews, Muslims, Hindus and Eastern Orthodox Christians who were all condemned to eternal punishment because they were not in submission to the pope. If the Church back in that era had the gift of infallibility then those statements cannot be changed. If the Church is correct today, which I believe it is, then the Church was teaching error from 1200-1500 AD and probably before and after that time. The Church has always taught the necessity of baptism and confession for salvation. In the past there was no hope for the unbaptized or even those baptized outside the Church.
Fulgentius of Ruspe
“Anyone who receives the sacrament of baptism, whether in the Catholic Church or in a heretical or schismatic one, receives the whole sacrament; but salvation, which is the strength of the sacrament, he will not have, if he has had the sacrament outside the Catholic Church [and remains in deliberate schism]. He must therefore return to the Church, not so that he might receive again the sacrament of baptism, which no one dare repeat in any baptized person, but so that he may receive eternal life in Catholic society, for the obtaining of which no one is suited who, even with the sacrament of baptism, remains estranged from the Catholic Church” (The Rule of Faith 43 [A.D. 524]).
P
philipmarie
Guest
The catechism is not infallible. And when we say that ‘outside the Church there is NO salvation’, we are meaning the Mystical Body of Christ and the Mystical body of Chirst are only those in Communion with the Catholic Church (including all who are baptized Catholics(not baptized Lutherans or Episcopolians), and cathecumens (baptism of desire is a dogma Mr. ‘I am an ultra proud heretic’ Feeney).
St. Cyprian of Carthage: “There is one God, and one Christ, and there is one Church, and one Chair founded by the voice of the Lord upon a Rock. **Another altar cannot be constituted **or a new priesthood be made, beside the one altar and the one priesthood. Whosoever gathereth elswhere, scattereth. Whatsoever by human madness is instituted, so that the divine disposition is violated, is adulterous, is impious, is sacrilegious” (Epist. ad Pleb. xl. n. 5).
This is not the opinion of a Saint, as this Saints voice is the voice of the Church. We have so many instances of Saints saying that outside the Church there is no salvation that it is impossible to say them all here.
We do not need a book declaring that this and this document is infallible (obviously, a book is handy to see the documents. We have TAN’s 1957 version of Denzinger sources of Catholic Dogma; it currently is the best and the only version one should buy, not the Vatican II one which removes every reference to extra eccliasam nulla salus). We know a document is ex cathedra when the Pope Himself, in the document speaks as the Holy Father, or the Pope and signs the document with the fisherman’s ring.
The Pope is not only infallible when He defines an article of faith but also when he explains or details a doctrine (whether he mentions anything new or not). Becuase if the Pope only speaks infallibly when He defines a doctrine on faith and morals we would have nobody have recourse to. If the Pope explains, we can be sure that He is spekaing the truth because He is infallible; not only that, but whenever somebody speaks about some doctrine, we have the Pope and the Church’s teachings to compare with this somebodies sayings and therefore, doctrine is preserved.
St. Cyprian of Carthage: “There is one God, and one Christ, and there is one Church, and one Chair founded by the voice of the Lord upon a Rock. **Another altar cannot be constituted **or a new priesthood be made, beside the one altar and the one priesthood. Whosoever gathereth elswhere, scattereth. Whatsoever by human madness is instituted, so that the divine disposition is violated, is adulterous, is impious, is sacrilegious” (Epist. ad Pleb. xl. n. 5).
This is not the opinion of a Saint, as this Saints voice is the voice of the Church. We have so many instances of Saints saying that outside the Church there is no salvation that it is impossible to say them all here.
We do not need a book declaring that this and this document is infallible (obviously, a book is handy to see the documents. We have TAN’s 1957 version of Denzinger sources of Catholic Dogma; it currently is the best and the only version one should buy, not the Vatican II one which removes every reference to extra eccliasam nulla salus). We know a document is ex cathedra when the Pope Himself, in the document speaks as the Holy Father, or the Pope and signs the document with the fisherman’s ring.
The Pope is not only infallible when He defines an article of faith but also when he explains or details a doctrine (whether he mentions anything new or not). Becuase if the Pope only speaks infallibly when He defines a doctrine on faith and morals we would have nobody have recourse to. If the Pope explains, we can be sure that He is spekaing the truth because He is infallible; not only that, but whenever somebody speaks about some doctrine, we have the Pope and the Church’s teachings to compare with this somebodies sayings and therefore, doctrine is preserved.
C
CHESTERTONRULES
Guest
Here’s what the pope had to say:
- The Doctrinal Value of the Text
vatican.va/archive/catechism/aposcons.htm
- Status