Is the Pope Averse to Nature of Infallable Declarations?

[rr1213]

The following statement is found in a BBC article (last paragraph):

“So, is Pope Benedict likely to make any infallible statements? Unlikely, says Mr Walsh, who believes that the present Pope is averse to the nature of such definitions.”

news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/5355758.stm

True? False? Anyone know what he’s talking about here about Benedict being averse to “the nature” of such statements?

 

[sara888]

The following statement is found in a BBC article (last paragraph):

“So, is Pope Benedict likely to make any infallible statements? Unlikely, says Mr Walsh, who believes that the present Pope is averse to the nature of such definitions.”

news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/5355758.stm

True? False? Anyone know what he’s talking about here about Benedict being averse to “the nature” of such statements?

Infallibility is attached to his office, not his person. Infallibility is something he enjoys in virtue of his office, when, as the supreme shepherd and teacher of all the faithful, who confirms his brethren in their faith.Infallibility belongs to the Pope in a special way since Christ gave him primacy

Matthew,. 16:17-10 you are Peter, and on this rock, I will build my church, and the powers of death gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

AngelJan

 

[Della]

The following statement is found in a BBC article (last paragraph):

“So, is Pope Benedict likely to make any infallible statements? Unlikely, says Mr Walsh, who believes that the present Pope is averse to the nature of such definitions.”

news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/5355758.stm

True? False? Anyone know what he’s talking about here about Benedict being averse to “the nature” of such statements?

I believe he means that Benedict is personally not the kind of person who would want to make infallible statements–that he doesn’t usually operate that way. However, I think no pope yearns to make infallible statements as a part of their reign. None of them is “itching” to make dogma when simply restating already held doctrine will do. Do you see what I mean?

 

[rr1213]

…

 

[vern_humphrey]

Clearly the author has a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature and application of the doctrine of infallibility.

The best definition of infallibility I know is “an objective standard by which one may know the true teaching of the Catholic Church.” There are three such standards:

1. The ordinary magisterium, the teachings of the Catholic bishops under the supervision of the Pope, worldwide.
2. The extraordinary magisterium, an ecumincal council of the bishops under the Pope who meet to consider and rule on matters in dispute.
3. The Pope speaking ex cathedra ("as the Church.) This latter is very rare.

By and large, the Church is reluctant to use the karisma of infallibility. Rulings are made only when necessary to preserve the Deposit of Faith and the unity of the Church. The Pope, absent an urgent need for him to exercise his karisma, is naturally reluctant to do so.

 

[Joe_Kelley]

I think recent popes have been reluctant to declare Papal statements infallible for two reasons: 1. It is a sore point in Ecumenical Relations. They see no need to make these discussions more contentious. 2. Some at both extremes have become reluctant to accept any Church teaching unless it is declared infallible by the pope. The popes wish to correct this error by emphasizing the infallibility of the ordinary magisterium, as set forth by Vern.