Pope John Paul II speak from the seat of Peter?

  • Thread starter Thread starter journey00
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

journey00

Guest
First, I apologize if this is not in the correct forum…I may post in a different forum if I find a more appropriate one.

A friend of mine told me that Blessed Pope John Paul II never spoke from the seat of Peter in matters of faith and moral while he was Pope.
  1. Is that correct?
  2. Why didn’t he?
  3. When he added the luminous mysteries, that is not considered speaking from the seat of Peter…right?
Thank you everyone & God bless. :signofcross:
 
It means he never officially, formally, pronounced a dogma of the faith. Actually, that has only been done twice in that manner: 1854 and 1950. There was just no need for him to do so.

Something like the Luminous Mysteries is not a matter of dogma…
 
I’ll give this one a try…
  1. Its my understanding that JPII never spoke “ex cathedra”.
  2. As to why? I don’t know. He certainly probably could have said something regarding Faith and Morals.
  3. The Luminous mysteries are an option for Catholics. They are not doctrine. The events of the Luminous mysteries in themselves are true but as an addition to the Rosary, like I said, an option.
Now I’m sure this will stimulate some conversation 🙂
 
First, I apologize if this is not in the correct forum…I may post in a different forum if I find a more appropriate one.

A friend of mine told me that Blessed Pope John Paul II never spoke from the seat of Peter in matters of faith and moral while he was Pope.
  1. Is that correct?
  2. Why didn’t he?
  3. When he added the luminous mysteries, that is not considered speaking from the seat of Peter…right?
Thank you everyone & God bless. :signofcross:
The Rosary is a private devotion. It does not fall under the umbrella of faith and morals, but under the umbrella of piety. The truth is that the Rosary has been modified many times and there are many versions of it. If you travel around between the Eastern Catholic Churches, you’ll see some variations. The same will happen if you travel between the major religious orders of men. The most common version in the Latin Church is the Dominican Rosary, to which Bl. John Paul added the Luminous mysteries. This is not the first time that additions have been made to the Dominican Rosary. The original rosary, prayed long before St. Dominic was very simple, without mysteries and without the extra prayers at the beginning and end. It was St. Dominic who organized it into 15 decades and later Dominicans added the mysteries. The Holy See has never added or deleted anything. This was probably the first time that a pope contributed to the development of the Rosary. Most of the time, the Rosary was modified by the religious orders, each according to their customs and their piety. For example, Franciscans have only seven decades to the Rosary and 14 mysteries – the 7 Joys of Mary are said through the year except on Fridays and Lent, then you say the 7 Sorrows of Mary.

As to whether Bl. John Paul ever spoke from the Chair of Peter, that’s a misnomer. Many people confuse the term Ex Cathedra with papal infallibility. To speak Ex Cathedra is to make an infallible pronouncement and to declare from the Chair of Peter adds more emphasis to it.

However, that does not mean that the Pope must speak EX Cathedra for his pronouncements to be infallible. Whenever the pope speaks on matters that are revealed truth, be they doctrine or morals, they are always infallible, because Truth cannot be in error.

There are a number of statements made by Bl. John Paul that fit into this category. The two most outstanding are the decree on the ordination of women and the decree on abortion. In both cases, the Holy Father invokes the authority of Peter which has been handed down to him and in both cases he is speaking of matters that have been revealed. He is declaring that the Church will assent by faith, not just obedience, to the fact that no woman can ever become a priest and that abortion is always gravely sinful and he attaches the penalty of excommunication to both the ordination of women and abortion. Only the person speaking in the place of Peter can make such a statement.

All Ex Cathedra Statements are infallible, but not all infallible statements are stated from the Chair . . . however, they are binding for all time. No pope can change them, because they are speaking of revealed truths. What the pope is doing is making it clear that this has been revealed and this has been the faith of the Church and will always be the faith of the Church.

In answer to your friend’s comment, the pope has spoken from the Chair of Peter only twice in 2000 years. First, when he declared the Immaculate Conception to be a binding dogma on all Catholics and second when he declared the Assumption of Mary to be binding on all Catholics. Popes have spoken infallibly many times in the past 2,000 years. Each time he declares that something is revealed truth, he is speaking infallibly. Truth cannot be in error.

People use the Ex Cathedra thing as a loophole to get out of certain things. It does not work that way. A statement need not be from the Chair of Peter to be binding and to absolute unquestionable truth. If it comes from the faith of the Church, handed down from the Apostles, it is infallible and requires that Catholics believe it. Many popes have made such statements on different subjects.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
It’s possible that there is a misleading agenda behind statements like your friend made, even though it is literally true in the strictest sense.

Like the previous poster said, just because something’s not said officially “ex cathedra” doesn’t meant the pope isn’t exercising his legitimate teaching authority (as Bl. JPII certainly did!).

Like I said in my previous post, proclaiming something officially “ex cathedra” is very rarely done, and is usually not necessary.

The pope said many, many other binding things, however, involving faith and morals.
 
Fantastic replies!! Thank you for your speedy & knowledgeable replies. I can’t wait to do some follow-up reading on this and share it with my Mom and my friend.

Peace be with you. :signofcross:
 
It’s possible that there is a misleading agenda behind statements like your friend made, even though it is literally true in the strictest sense.

Like the previous poster said, just because something’s not said officially “ex cathedra” doesn’t meant the pope isn’t exercising his legitimate teaching authority (as Bl. JPII certainly did!).

Like I said in my previous post, proclaiming something officially “ex cathedra” is very rarely done, and is usually not necessary.

The pope said many, many other binding things, however, involving faith and morals.
Along these same lines, we must separate doctrine (dogma or moral) from disciplines and laws.

Many people believe that everything that popes put into encyclicals, letters or statements made at councils are eternally binding. That is not the case.

Popes know how to distinguish what has been handed down through revelation and what has been handed down through the authority of the pope.

Any statement that comes from the pope himself is binding until it is changed by another pope. Whereas statements that are grounded in revealed truths are binding and can only be restated, bu not abrogated.

The same applies to laws. Canon Law is binding until another pope changes it. Popes can make Canon Laws, for the long-term or can make specific laws for the short-term. In either case, they must be obeyed.

You have doctrines (faith and morals) – these are binding, because they come from revealed truths.

You have disciplines (such as the form of the mass) – these are binding until another pope changes it.

You have laws (such as Canon Law) – these are binding until they are changed by another pope.

As I said, popes read what their predecessors wrote and said and they know the intent and they know what falls under doctrine and what does not. That which does not fall under doctrine can be changed by any pope. No pope or council can bind a pope. That which falls under doctrine (faith and morals) is forever binding.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
Why do the popes not more commonly speak ex cathedra? Before 1854, wasn’t this so simply because of the fact that ex cathedra pronouncements didn’t quite exist yet (that is, to our knowledge)?
 
Why do the popes not more commonly speak ex cathedra? Before 1854, wasn’t this so simply because of the fact that ex cathedra pronouncements didn’t quite exist yet (that is, to our knowledge)?
It’s not necessary for infallibility. For example, Peter never spoke Ex Cathedra on the Holy Eucharist, no one has. But it remains an infallible dogma.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
A tidbit, though no pope since Pius XII has made any ex cathedra definitions, there were calls for John Paul II to declare a third Marian dogma. I think it was to declare her as Co-Redemptrix?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top