Popes and Ex Catheda

[USMC]

John Higgins:

From A Quo Primum Pope Benedict XIV, 1751:

This was directed to the primates of Poland. While not infallible on its face (remember I have doubts about retroactive infallibility anyway), references in the document point to numerous pontiffs and numerous countries.

John

Isn’t it good to see the Popes concern for Christians?

Today the Jews have taken over the finance of the world, as most people are aware of. They are the ones pulling the strings in the world today - and the Jews are completely antichrist.

From reading the quote you gave (and thank you for providing it) it is clear that the Popes saw this developing and tried to stop it. Good for them.

But, as has been said that, was not an infallible, or even doctrinal matter: it was a prudential matter to be applied to a certain area; as such it can be modified.

What cannot change are doctrinal teachings that have been handed down by the apostles and defined as true by the Church. This is the unchanging “deposit of faith” that Catholics are bound to adhere to, and which, obviously, cannot be changed.

 

[Amadeus]

I would like to add my understanding of the Catholic Church’s charism of infallibility.

Only God is infallible!

However, He granted (“delegated”) that charism of infallibility to His Church, which He Himself established. We, Catholics, believe that THAT Church which Christ established “subsists in” the Catholic Church.

Now, how then does the Catholic Church exercise or “express” such infallibility?

I think this is where the questions of “infalliblity” and “ex cathedra” should be clarified.

The Catholic Church believes and teaches that there are 3 organs in the Church through which she can exercise the charism of infallibility:

(1) through an Ecumenical Council, under the presidency of the Pope;

(2) through the Pope in union (consultation) with the Bishops throughout the world; and

(3) through the Pope, singly, when declaring **ex cathedra **certain truths about faith and morals.

“Ex cathedra” pronouncements are attachable only to the Pope’s charism of infallibility [Organ No. (3)] and not to the 2 other organs. Organ No. (1) and Organ No.(3) constitute the “Extraordinary Magisterium” of the Church, while Organ No.(2) is the “Ordinary Magisterium” of the Church.

For a papal pronouncement to be infallible, it must be issued under the guidelines of number (3) above, which was defined by Vatican I and confirmed by Vatican II. Based on those guidelines, there are only 2 “ex cathedra” papal pronouncements (infallible declarations) we have thus far and were contained in the:

(1) Apostolic Constitution Ineffabilis Deus, in which Pope Pius IX defined, in one sentence (the ex cathedra pronouncement) of the 32-page document, Mary’s immaculate conception (1854); and

(2) Apostolic Constitution Munificentissimus Deus, in which Pope Pius XII, in one sentence (the ex cathedra pronouncement) of the 23-page document, declared the dogma of the Assumption (1950).

“Papal Infallibility” is a negative definition of the Pope’s authority and is, therefore, self-limiting! Thus far, the 2 above have been the only ex cathedra declarations of the Popes in our Church history. Other infallible statements were pronounced through organ No. (1) or through organ No. (2)

Normally, an “ex cathedra” pronouncement is contained in a Papal Encyclical which led some to believe that Pope John Paul II came close to issuing an ex cathedra pronouncement in his Encyclical “Ut Unum Sint” and on the ban against the ordination of women.

On the contrary, these pronouncements merely gave out previously defined articles of dogma as though they were up for discussion. Obviously, this is not the Church’s Magisterium contradicting itself, but represents the current Pope’s own personal opinions.

While a papal document may contain infallible truths, the entire document is not infallible. Infallible truths are discerned by their conformity to the unchanging teachings of the Church.

Such discernment becomes unnecessary when they are clearly contained in an “ex cathedra” pronouncement like in the two occasions adverted to above.

 

[Brian_Ingram]

Amadeus:

For a papal pronouncement to be infallible, it must be issued under the guidelines of number (3) above, which was defined by Vatican I and confirmed by Vatican II. Based on those guidelines, there are only 2 “ex cathedra” papal pronouncements (infallible declarations) we have thus far and were contained in the:

(1) Apostolic Constitution Ineffabilis Deus, in which Pope Pius IX defined, in one sentence (the ex cathedra pronouncement) of the 32-page document, Mary’s immaculate conception (1854); and

(2) Apostolic Constitution Munificentissimus Deus, in which Pope Pius XII, in one sentence (the ex cathedra pronouncement) of the 23-page document, declared the dogma of the Assumption (1950).

“Papal Infallibility” is a negative definition of the Pope’s authority and is, therefore, self-limiting! Thus far, the 2 above have been the only ex cathedra declarations of the Popes in our Church history. Other infallible statements were pronounced through organ No. (1) or through organ No. (2)

Normally, an “ex cathedra” pronouncement is contained in a Papal Encyclical which led some to believe that Pope John Paul II came close to issuing an ex cathedra pronouncement in his Encyclical “Ut Unum Sint” and on the ban against the ordination of women.

On the contrary, these pronouncements merely gave out previously defined articles of dogma as though they were up for discussion. Obviously, this is not the Church’s Magisterium contradicting itself, but represents the current Pope’s own personal opinions.

While a papal document may contain infallible truths, the entire document is not infallible. Infallible truths are discerned by their conformity to the unchanging teachings of the Church.

Such discernment becomes unnecessary when they are clearly contained in an “ex cathedra” pronouncement like in the two occasions adverted to above.

Ex cathedra means literally “from the chair”, a theological term which signifies authoritative teaching and is more particularly originally the name of the seat occupied by a professor or a bishop, cathedra was used later on to denote the magisterium, or teaching authority.

It has been deduced (in error) by many in the Church that the Pope is only speaking ex cathedra when he is speaking in his Solemn or Extraordinary Magisterium and not in his ordinary infallible magisterium

The lack of clear ideas on the pope’s Ordinary Magisterium appeared in full with Pope Paul VI’s encyclical, Humanae Vitae, and more recently with Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, in which Pope John Paul II repeated the Church’s refusal to ordain women.
The infallible guarantee of divine assistance is not limited solely to the acts of the Solemn Magisterium; it also extends to the Ordinary Magisterium, although it does not cover and assure all the latter’s acts in the same way" (Fr.Labourdette, O.P., *Revue Thomiste *1950, p.38). Since the pope alone possesses the same infallibility conferred by Jesus Christ upon his Church i.e., the pope plus the bishops in communion with him, cf. Dz.1839), we must conclude that only the pope, in his Ordinary Magisterium, is infallible in the same degree and under the same conditions as the Ordinary Magisterium of the Church is.

**The *Dictionnaire de Théologie Catholique *under the heading of “papal infallibility” (vol. VII, col.1699ff) makes the following distinctions: *1) *there is the “infallible or ex cathedra papal definition in the sense defined by Vatican I” (col.1699); 2) there is the “infallible papal teaching which flows from the pope’s Ordinary Magisterium” (col.1705); 3) there is “non-infallible papal teaching” (col.1709).

**Similarly, Salaverri, in his *Sacrae Theologiae Summa *(vol. I, 5th ed., Madrid, B.A.C.) distinguishes the following: 1) Extraordinary Infallible Papal Magisterium (no. 592ff); 2) Ordinary Infallible Papal Magisterium (no. 645ff); ***3) ***Papal Magisterium that is mere authenticum, that is, only “authentic” or “authorized” as regards the person himself, not as regards his infallibility (no.659ff).

Pax

Brian

**

 

[Amadeus]

Dear Brian:

Thank you for your additional clarification.

However, I might have failed to see where the “ex cathedra” requirement, as defined by Vatican I, is “attachable” to the other 2 sources of infallible pronouncements, except only when the Pope, singly, exercises his own charism.

Could it be said, then, that infallible pronouncements made by the other 2 organs are deemed “ex cathedra” by virtue of their “natural” or God-given teaching authority?

If not, “ex cathedra” pronouncements should belong only to the Pope’s exercise, singly, of his charism of infallibility as defined by Vatican I and confirmed by Vatican II. This is the “limiting” factor that I adverted to previously.

 

[dcdurel]

Amadeus wrote:
"For a papal pronouncement to be infallible, it must be issued under the guidelines of number (3) above, which was defined by Vatican I and confirmed by Vatican II. Based on those guidelines, there are only 2 “ex cathedra” papal pronouncements (infallible declarations) we have thus far and were contained in the:

1. Apostolic Constitution Ineffabilis Deus, in which Pope Pius IX defined, in one sentence (the ex cathedra pronouncement) of the 32-page document, Mary’s immaculate conception (1854); and
   (2) Apostolic Constitution Munificentissimus Deus, in which Pope Pius XII, in one sentence (the ex cathedra pronouncement) of the 23-page document, declared the dogma of the Assumption (1950).
   “Papal Infallibility” is a negative definition of the Pope’s authority and is, therefore, self-limiting! Thus far, the 2 above have been the only ex cathedra declarations of the Popes in our Church history."

This is another common error. It ignores the definition the Church gives:
Lets learn this definition again, because it is only by learning this definition we can refute these false views.

Vatican I says:
“. . . the Roman Pontiff, when he speaks ex cathedra, that is,
when, acting in the office of shepherd and teacher of all
Christians, he defines, by virtue of his supreme apostolic
authority, doctrine concerning faith or morals to be held by
the universal Church, possesses through the divine assistance
promised to him in the person of St. Peter, the infallibility
with which the divine Redeemer willed his Church to be endowed
in defining doctrine concerning faith or morals; and that such
definitions of the Roman Pontiff are therefore irreformable
because of their nature, but not because of the agreement of
the Church.” [First Dogmatic Constitution on the Church of Christ]

The Four Tests of Infallibility
There are, clearly, four tests of infallibility:
The Pope must be
(1) intending to teach
(2) by virtue of his supreme apostolic authority
(3) a matter of Faith or morals
(4) to be held by the universal Church.

Notice, this definition does NOT require that it be a new teaching. It does NOT require that is be a teaching separate from other Ecumenical Council, nor separate from a teaching of the Pope and bishops together, nor does it require to be a teaching separate from the constant apostolic tradition handed down through the Church.
It could be a teaching that has already been taught these other ways. It is still an ex-cathedra teaching, thus the Pope is teaching infallibly when he meets the four requirements.

Thus, unless the Popes are missing one of the four tests of infallibility when they teach, then the are teaching ex-cathedra and they are teaching infallibly.

Using these four simply tests, it can easily be seen that the Popes constantly teach infallibly,** and we could not begin to number the the amount of infallible ex-cathedra teachings that have been given during the history of the Church. **

 

[Brian_Ingram]

Amadeus:

Dear Brian:

Thank you for your additional clarification.

However, I might have failed to see where the “ex cathedra” requirement, as defined by Vatican I, is “attachable” to the other 2 sources of infallible pronouncements, except only when the Pope, singly, exercises his own charism.

Could it be said, then, that infallible pronouncements made by the other 2 organs are deemed “ex cathedra” by virtue of their “natural” or God-given teaching authority?

If not, “ex cathedra” pronouncements should belong only to the Pope’s exercise, singly, of his charism of infallibility as defined by Vatican I and confirmed by Vatican II. This is the “limiting” factor that I adverted to previously.

A bishop is said to have a seat or cathedra and usually his church is a cathedral, however his cathedra or office in itself does not carry the charism of infallibility, individually or collectively. It is only in union with the Pope that bishops collectively enjoy the charism of infallibility. It however does not follow that the Pope is infallible because he is in union with the bishops.

Pax

Brian

 

[Amadeus]

Dear Brian:

I agree with your last post.

But what we are trying to resolve is the term “ex cathedra” as a qualifier for the Pope’s singular charism of infallibility when defining doctrines concerning the faith or morals.

The term was generally referred to as the “chair” from which a bishop issued his teachings and the like but it has come to mean strictly as the “teaching office” or the “chair” of the Pope in the exercise, singly, of his charism of infallibility.

No other bishop, in his singular capacity, has this charism of infallibility except the Pope as dogmatically defined by Vatican I and confirmed by Vatican II.

Because of this dogmatic definition of the Pope’s singular charism of infallibility, we have thus far only 2 “ex cathedra” pronouncements of the Popes: the Dogma of the Immaculate Conception and the Dogma of the Assumption.

All the other 250 or so dogmas of the Catholic Church as listed by Dr. Ott were pronounced either by Ecumenical Councils or by the body of bishops in union with the Pope.

 

[Brian_Ingram]

Amadeus:

Dear Brian:

I agree with your last post.

But what we are trying to resolve is the term “ex cathedra” as a qualifier for the Pope’s singular charism of infallibility when defining doctrines concerning the faith or morals.

The term was generally referred to as the “chair” from which a bishop issued his teachings and the like but it has come to mean strictly as the “teaching office” or the “chair” of the Pope in the exercise, singly, of his charism of infallibility.

No other bishop, in his singular capacity, has this charism of infallibility except the Pope as dogmatically defined by Vatican I and confirmed by Vatican II.

Because of this dogmatic definition of the Pope’s singular charism of infallibility, we have thus far only 2 “ex cathedra” pronouncements of the Popes: the Dogma of the Immaculate Conception and the Dogma of the Assumption.

All the other 250 or so dogmas of the Catholic Church as listed by Dr. Ott were pronounced either by Ecumenical Councils or by the body of bishops in union with the Pope.

From Lumen Gentium (25)
" And this is the infallibility which the Roman Pontiff, the head of the college of bishops, enjoys in virtue of his office, when, as the supreme shepherd and teacher of all the faithful, who confirms his brethren in their faith,(166) by a definitive act he proclaims a doctrine of faith or morals… For then the Roman Pontiff is not pronouncing judgment as a private person, but as the supreme teacher of the universal Church, in whom the charism of infallibility of the Church itself is individually present, he is expounding or defending a doctrine of Catholic faith."

So the Pope by a definitive act expounds a doctrine (the Marian Dogmas) by his solemn magisterium or defends an existing doctrine (woman’s ordination) in his** ordinary magisterium **he is teaching from the Papal Chair (ex cathedra), not his bishop one or any other authority he may have, for it only in his office of Pope that he is infallible both in the ordinary and the solemn magisterium.
It makes no sense to say that when he is teaching in the solemn magisterium he is speaking ex Cathedra or “teaching office” but when teaching in his ordinary infallible magisterium he is not. If not then what office is he exercising?

Pax

Brian

 

[Catholic2003]

Brian Ingram:

It makes no sense to say that when he is teaching in the solemn magisterium he is speaking ex Cathedra or “teaching office” but when teaching in his ordinary infallible magisterium he is not. If not then what office is he exercising?

This “ordinary infallible magisterium” of the Pope seems to be an SSPX thing. Has this concept actually been taught by the true Catholic magisterium?

For example, Father Peter Joseph does not have an entry for it in his chart on the magisterium.

 

[dcdurel]

Amadeus:

Because of this dogmatic definition of the Pope’s singular charism of infallibility, we have thus far only 2 “ex cathedra” pronouncements of the Popes: the Dogma of the Immaculate Conception and the Dogma of the Assumption.
.

Again, this is incorrect. The Dogma of the Immaculate Conception and the Dogma of the Immaculate Conception were simply new dogmas that Catholics were not required to believe before. Ex cathedra statements are not restricted to new dogmas. There are no restrictions ot ex cathedra teachings. Thus, the Pope in defending the teachings against artificial contraception and the teachings on women priests meet the exact same condictions for ex cathedra statements that the Marian dogmans met.

The Four Tests of Infallibility
The Pope must be
(1) intending to teach
(2) by virtue of his supreme apostolic authority
(3) a matter of Faith or morals
(4) to be held by the universal Church.

Unless one of these 4 are missing, the Pope is teaching
ex cathehdra

Notice how no one even attempts to say which of the four tests are missing in the non-marian dogmas. That is because none are missing.

Thus, they will try every other excuse in the book to water down the ex cathedra nature of the Pope’s teachings, from demanding that they be new teachings, that they must be approved by other bishops, cardinals, the Vatican Curia, or that they must be approved by theologians. That last one is a joke. Pope’s very often write encyclicals to refute the errors of theologians. The LAST group we would need approval of for determining the ex cathedra teachings would be theologians.

 

[Brian_Ingram]

Catholic2003:

This “ordinary infallible magisterium” of the Pope seems to be an SSPX thing. Has this concept actually been taught by the true Catholic magisterium?

For example, Father Peter Joseph does not have an entry for it in his chart on the magisterium.

If we restrict the solemn magisterium of the Pope to only proclaiming new dogma, which is a very rare event, and not to defend and further clarify existing doctrine, then we virtually emasculate his teaching office. To do so is clearly against the teaching on the Pope infallibility as outlined in LG25. If we are to limit it so, then we have to say he is teaching infallible in the ordinary magisterium when he defends doctrine.

It has to be remembered that the Church at Vatican 1 and 2 did not endower the Petrine office with infallibility. This was given by Christ (Luke 22) to protect his church from error and give its faithful certainty in its teachings, something that is missing in the Church today.

Pax

Brian

 

[Catholic2003]

dcdurel:

Notice how no one even attempts to say which of the four tests are missing in the non-marian dogmas. That is because none are missing.

How quickly you forget the discussion in this thread (posts #206ff, in response to #194). The intent is what is missing.

dcdurel:

Thus, they will try every other excuse in the book to water down the ex cathedra nature of the Pope’s teachings,

That’s Pope Benedict XVI all right, always trying to water down the Church’s teachings. I guess “truly faithful” Catholics should just ignore whatever he has to say.

 

[Catholic2003]

Brian Ingram:

If we restrict the solemn magisterium of the Pope to only proclaiming new dogma, which is a very rare event, and not to defend and further clarify existing doctrine, then we virtually emasculate his teaching office. To do so is clearly against the teaching on the Pope infallibility as outlined in LG25. If we are to limit it so, then we have to say he is teaching infallible in the ordinary magisterium when he defends doctrine.

The common usage nowadays is to divide the papal magisterium into two categories: (1) infallible acts of teaching; and (2) non-infallible acts of teaching.

The first category is referred to, synonymously, as ex cathedra, or the extraordinary papal magisterium, or the solemn papal magisterium. The second category is referred to as the ordinary papal magisterium or the authentic papal magisterium.

The first category includes all infallible acts of papal teaching, as defined by both Vatican I and Vatican II. I don’t see that either of those councils restrict the exercise of papal infallibility to new doctrine.

 

[Brian_Ingram]

Catholic2003:

The first category includes all infallible acts of papal teaching, as defined by both Vatican I and Vatican II. I don’t see that either of those councils restrict the exercise of papal infallibility to new doctrine.

Nor do I. However those who say that the only two examples of infallible Papal teaching are the Marian dogmas do just that.

Pax

Brian

 

[Catholic2003]

Brian Ingram:

Nor do I. However those who say that the only two examples of infallible Papal teaching are the Marian dogmas do just that.

Do you have any evidence for this? I was not aware that the people who favor the “two ex cathedra pronouncements” theory are using an additional criterion related to the novel nature of the proposed doctrine.

 

[Brian_Ingram]

Catholic2003:

Do you have any evidence for this? I was not aware that the people who favor the “two ex cathedra pronouncements” theory are using an additional criterion related to the novel nature of the proposed doctrine.

I am not sure what you mean “I was not aware that the people who favor the “two ex cathedra pronouncements” theory are using an additional criterion related to the novel nature of the proposed doctrine”
What ‘additional criteria’ and what ‘novel proposed doctrine’?

Pax

Brian

 

[Catholic2003]

Brian Ingram:

Catholic2003:

I don’t see that either of those councils restrict the exercise of papal infallibility to new doctrine.

Nor do I. However those who say that the only two examples of infallible Papal teaching are the Marian dogmas do just that.

Let me try again.

I interpreted your “do just that” as “restricting the exercise of papal infallibility to new doctrine”.

I’m not aware of any other acts of the papal magisterium (besides the Marian dogmas) that have been manifestly demonstrated as being ex cathedra except for the fact that they reiterate known dogma.

 

[Brian_Ingram]

Catholic2003:

Let me try again.

I interpreted your “do just that” as “restricting the exercise of papal infallibility to new doctrine”.

I’m not aware of any other acts of the papal magisterium (besides the Marian dogmas) that have been manifestly demonstrated as being ex cathedra except for the fact that they reiterate known dogma.

Then you are restricting ex cathedra statements to defining dogmas and not defending existing teachings and Traditions of the Church which is clearly against LG25
"And this is the infallibility which the Roman Pontiff, the head of the college of bishops, enjoys in virtue of his office, … For then the Roman Pontiff is not pronouncing judgment as a private person, but as the supreme teacher of the universal Church, in whom the charism of infallibility of the Church itself is individually present, [when]he is expounding or defending a doctrine of Catholic faith.(43)*

Also in LG25 it teaches “This religious submission of mind and will must be shown in a special way to the authentic magisterium of the Roman Pontiff, even when he is not speaking ex cathedra;”

In other words in the authentic magisterium the Pope can speak either infallible or not, which is contrast to your claim that the authentic magisterium of the Pope is never infallible

Pax

Brian

 

[Catholic2003]

Brian Ingram:

Then you are restricting ex cathedra statements to defining dogmas and not defending existing teachings and Traditions of the Church

No, I am not. It is perfectly possible that the Pope can promulgate an ex cathedra teaching that defends an existing doctrine. In fact, then Cardinal Ratzinger left open the possibility that this might occur in the future with respect to the doctrine that women cannot be ordained as priests.
Brian Ingram:

In other words in the authentic magisterium the Pope can speak either infallible or not, which is contrast to your claim that the authentic magisterium of the Pope is never infallible

In the currently accepted terminology, “authentic” is a synonym for “non-infallible”. All infallible acts of the papal magisterium are called ex cathedra, extraordinary, or solemn. But this is just nomenclature; it does not affect the dogma of papal infallibility.

 

[dcdurel]

Catholic2003:

In the currently accepted terminology, “authentic” is a synonym for “non-infallible”. All infallible acts of the papal magisterium are called ex cathedra, extraordinary, or solemn. But this is just nomenclature; it does not affect the dogma of papal infallibility.

There is no Church teaching anywhere that “authentic” is a synonym for “non-infallible”. Again, this is non-sense made up by some dissident theologians.

In fact, even in the popes’ non ex cathedra teachings, in their teachings of the ordinary magisterium they are also infallible.

Pope Pius XII made this clear in Humani generis:
“Nor must it be thought that the things contained in Encyclical Letters do not of themselves require assent on the plea that in them the Pontiffs do not exercise the supreme power of their Magisterium. For these things are taught with the ordinary Magisterium, about which it is also true to say, ‘He who hears you, hears me.’ [Lk 10. 16]. . . If the Supreme Pontiffs, in their acta expressly pass judgment on a matter debated until then, it is obvious to all that the matter, according to the mind and will of the same Pontiffs, cannot be considered any longer a question open for discussion among theologians.”

We notice: (1) These things are protected by the promise of Christ in Lk 10. 16, and so are infallible, for His promise cannot fail.

This has been the case through history. The Pope’s have never taught error even in their ordinary magisterium.

Others have pointed out they are infallible because of the teaching of the Church that all must give religous submission of mind and will to even the ordinary teachings. Since the Church cannot ever be in error in matters of belief, then even in their ordinary teachings the Popes must be infallible. Indeed, they always have been.

We must face facts. The only ones who regulary teach error are the thelogians and scripture scholars. They are totally untrustworthy. We never know when they are teaching the truth and teaching error. Even today, not a sinlge theologian has any idea what the content of the Gospel is.