In big shift, Pope names 6 women to Vatican senior official roles

[Mark121359]

My understanding is that St John Paul held that the teaching was definitive, which expresses his opinion that it was unchanging. Which is a very high order teaching, but not technically infallible.
In other words, he opined that it was probably infallible, but did not declare it infallible. Which means another Pope or Council could overrule his opinion and change the teaching.

If that were to ever happen, there would be a huge rupture in the Church. I would find it hard to believe that all of the bishops would universally support this complete reversal of two millenia of Catholic Church teaching. It would be catastrophic. Creating historic division. And I personally could never ever attend Mass presided over by a woman “priest.” It would create an enormous dilemma for countless Catholics. It would in my view signify the end of the Church as we know it. But of course, in that rupture, you would find a splinter that would be considered the Remnant Church, true to the traditional teachings. And that’s where you would find me.

 

[TMC]

If that were to ever happen, there would be a huge rupture in the Church.

Probably, which is why I don’t see it happening in my lifetime.

I would find it hard to believe that all of the bishops would universally support this complete reversal of two millenia of Catholic Church teaching.

Its happened before.

It would be catastrophic. Creating historic division.

This has also happened before.

And I personally could never ever attend Mass presided over by a woman “priest.”

You are probably not going to get the opportunity. Maybe your kids.

It would create an enormous dilemma for countless Catholics.

I think this is true.

It would in my view signify the end of the Church as we know it.

I don’t think this is true. Perhaps we will live to find out.

 

[stpurl]

No, one priest’s opinion On whether the statement was ‘definitive’ is what is irrelevant to this discussion.

 

[stpurl]

Or, if I have to make it in words with smaller syllables, to label a statement as ‘definitive’ does not then make the teaching ‘not infallible.’

 

[AlNg]

Its happened before.

Correct. The teaching on torture has been reversed.

 

[pnewton]

I am saying that you present a false dichotomy. In the same way both God and Paul speaks through his writings, on a rare occasion, a pope will make a declaration from his office as the Vicar of Christ. I think this document was the only time, and this subject the only one, that Pope St. John Paul exercised this authority.

No, because according to Father Francis A. Sullivan…

He is not the pope and not an authority. Searching the internet for one or a handful of dissenters had no bearing on any matter. After Vatican I and Vatican II there were a handful of dissenters that actually broke communion with the Church. This was simply a theological dissension on the type of teaching authority.

Every action the Church takes seems to have either a liberal or a traditionalist somewhere that dissents. In this case, the most that happened was a Jesuit questioning the type of authority. Jesuits are the best kind of liberals. They question. Traditionalists should never fear this kind of liberal as the hardest questions are the best way to separate what truth is and isn’t.

 

[twf]

Correct. The teaching on torture has been reversed.

Apples and oranges. The question of women priests is fundamental to the very life of the Church…it is a fundamental question of sacramental theology. Torture is not a doctrine, per se, but rather a prudential application of the Church’s social teaching. The Church has always understood that all men and women must be treated with dignity. Even when “torture” was permitted by the Roman Inquisition, with papal approval, there were strict limitations (e.g. no permanent damage, such as removing limbs). Upon reflection, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, the Church has come to realize that all torture is at odds with her belief in the dignity of every human person.

 

[AlNg]

Torture is not a doctrine, per se, but rather a prudential application of the Church’s social teaching.

i thought that torture was intrinsically evil?

Searching the internet for one or a handful of dissenters had no bearing on any matter.

Father Sullivan is not a dissenter.

 

[TMC]

i thought that torture was intrinsically evil?

It is. As is slavery, which was also once both tolerated and practiced by the Church.

I think it is probably too far of a thread shift to rehash (for the umpteenth time) the many changes the Church has made to its teachings over the centuries. There is broad misunderstanding about what infallibility is, and how teachings can evolve without violating that doctrine, but anyone that has looked even casually at the history of the Church knows that teachings change and evolve.