So what would happen if the Pope changed dogma?

  • Thread starter Thread starter nocoastlayman
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
nocoastlayman said:
How can it not happen? What if we got a truly evil but charismatic pope? People are fallible and anything could happen though I am sure God wouldn’t let that happen.
Click to expand...
Defining a dogma is protected by the Holy Spirit.

Tis an impossibility like a square circle to define a dogma that was contrary to the truth.

People maybe fallible but Popes are infallible when doing such.
 
nocoastlayman said:
Popes are men too and even with infallibility , it doesn’t mean mistakes won’t happen. All I know is that at the point a pope did this, he would cease to be the pope.
Click to expand...
Yes actually it does. APope can not define what is contrary to truth as being truth. Anymore than he can make a square circle. It is not that a Pope would cease to be Pope but that he would be* protected* from defining error as truth. He cannot define God as being not a Trinity. He is protected from doing such.
 
Bookcat said:
Yes actually it does. APope can not define what is contrary to truth as being truth. Anymore than he can make a square circle. It is not that a Pope would cease to be Pope but that he would be* protected* from defining error as truth. He cannot define God as being not a Trinity. He is protected from doing such.
Click to expand...
Can one Pope say that torture is morally allowable, and another say it is not morally allowable?
Can one Pope say that a Jew cannot be saved, and another say that a Jew can be saved?
 
Tomdstone said:
Can one Pope say that torture is morally allowable, and another say it is not morally allowable?
Click to expand...
Theoretically yes a Pope could make personal mistake in judging a question. But that is not concerning defining a dogma.
 
Bookcat said:
Theoretically yes a Pope could make personal mistake in judging a question. But that is not concerning defining a dogma.
Click to expand...
Can one Pope write a papal bull saying torture is allowed, and another saying no.
Can one pope make an official statement at an ecumenical council that Jews cannot be saved, and another say that a Jew can be saved.
 
Bookcat said:
Lets not keep asking the same questions…🙂

What I noted is regarding defining infallible dogmas.
Click to expand...
Well, let’s not dodge the issue. If the question is not answered properly then perhaps it needs to be restated to insure that a proper response is given. Here’s what you said:
Bookcat said:
Theoretically yes a Pope could make personal mistake in judging a question. But that is not concerning defining a dogma.
Click to expand...
It is not only a question of a personal mistake OR a dogmatic definition. There are magisterial statements which fall in between and require the assent of Catholics, even though they may not be infallible dogmas.
Have there been personal mistakes made by Popes in any of the official papal encyclicals written throughout the history of the Catholic Church, or are Catholics required to take these official encyclicals as teachings to which they must adhere? Are Catholics required to assent to the teachings given by Catholic Popes at Ecumenical Councils or can they simply write these teachings off as personal mistakes? I thought that Catholics are required to assent to magisterial documents of the Catholic Church.
I don’t think that you can legitimately write it off as just a personal mistake of a Pope if he says in an official capacity that Jews can or cannot be saved.
 
nocoastlayman said:
But I guess the point is that the actual Church hasn’t fallen. But I do agree with your point that at some point something could happen. Popes are men too and even with infallibility , it doesn’t mean mistakes won’t happen. All I know is that at the point a pope did this, he would cease to be the pope.
Click to expand...
It has NEVER happened in 2,000 years, so I think its very safe to TRUST the Holy Spirit!. God Bless, Memaw
 
Tomdstone said:
Some theologians (Father Sullivan) say that the teaching on women priests is not infallible dogma and therefore can be changed.
Click to expand...
Then he would be disputing JP II who ***definitively ***declared no female ordination. Just because someone doesn’t like the answer does not mean it has not indeed, been answered correctly. And can we leave the “renegades” out of the equation, just this one time?
Can one Pope say that torture is morally allowable, and another say it is not morally allowable?
Click to expand...
Popes, historically, have at times promoted certain things as personal theological opinion and not within the scope of the papal office.
 
Bookcat said:
No for it could not happen. One ought not be concerned about what cannot happen.
Click to expand...
I’ve never quite understood this, no matter how many theological opinions I read. While I believe without dispute in the indefectibility of the Church, how does the Holy Spirit protect Her while never denying free will to any man? If it were the deliberate intent of man to declare dogmatic error (and you likewise believe schism to be impossible) then how would it be prevented? I’m thinking here of the “smoke of Satan within the Church” that has been admitted now by more than one pope. The closest answer I got to my question was written by Michael Davies who quoted the Constitution of the Church and likewise said it was impossible, yet I did not understand his thesis.
 
nocoastlayman said:
First of all I mean this in all seriousness. Lets say the Pope did change Dogma by doing something like saying that Abortion is okay or that women can be priests. What would happen to the church? Would the Pope in that case be kicked out? Would the laity be responsible to kick him out? Do we form a “new” church and leave the official but now heretical church? I know this probably will never happen but have any theologians ever speculated on what if this happened. Also how does this effect infallibility if the Pope does something not a part of Dogma?
Click to expand...
What would happen if an unstoppable force hit an immovable object?
 
Joie_de_Vivre said:
What would happen if an unstoppable force hit an immovable object?
Click to expand...
It depends on how big the unstoppable force was. If it was a mosquito, and the immovable object was a cement block wall, probably not too much would happen to the wall, but the mosquito would be stopped and so it would no longer be unstoppable.
 
Tigg said:
I’ve never quite understood this, no matter how many theological opinions I read. While I believe without dispute in the indefectibility of the Church, how does the Holy Spirit protect Her while never denying free will to any man?
Click to expand...
One would have to ask God…but one practical way perhaps could be…“well Pope Xanthos …you think you are going to try to define that God is four persons …but the night before…you will be standing before me for your particular judgment”…
 
Tomdstone said:
It depends on how big the unstoppable force was. If it was a mosquito, and the immovable object was a cement block wall, probably not too much would happen to the wall, but the mosquito would be stopped and so it would no longer be unstoppable.
Click to expand...
The force is unstoppable, that is that nothing is capable of stopping it and the immovable object is unable to be moved by any force.
 
Joie_de_Vivre said:
The force is unstoppable, that is that nothing is capable of stopping it and the immovable object is unable to be moved by any force.
Click to expand...
I’d like to see an example of such. I’d also like to see an example of a square circle.
 
Tomdstone said:
It is not only a question of a personal mistake OR a dogmatic definition. There are magisterial statements which fall in between and require the assent of Catholics, even though they may not be infallible dogmas.
Click to expand...
A magisterial statement which is not intended as doctrine or dogma does not fall under the notion of infallibility.

Could a Pope make a statement, not intended as doctrine or dogma, which is in error? Asked and answered: yes.
Have there been personal mistakes made by Popes in any of the official papal encyclicals written throughout the history of the Catholic Church
Click to expand...
Not every word in a papal document is a statement of doctrine or dogma. Therefore, by definition, not every word in a papal document is protected by infallibility.
, or are Catholics required to take these official encyclicals as teachings to which they must adhere?
Click to expand...
Now you’ve moved on to a different question. Earlier, you were asking about assent to doctrine and dogma. Now, you’re asking about assent to assertions that are neither doctrinal nor dogmatic. Yes, there are teachings which fall outside these categories. Yes, Catholics are called to obey the teachings found in encyclicals, even if they’re not, strictly speaking, ex cathedra statements.
Are Catholics required to assent to the teachings given by Catholic Popes at Ecumenical Councils or can they simply write these teachings off as personal mistakes? I thought that Catholics are required to assent to magisterial documents of the Catholic Church.
Click to expand...
Correct.

Even if the statements aren’t intended as ‘irreformable’, Catholics are to assent to them.
I don’t think that you can legitimately write it off as just a personal mistake of a Pope if he says in an official capacity that Jews can or cannot be saved.
Click to expand...
It would be important to look at the statement in context, in order to discern what exactly was being said. 🤷
 
Tomdstone said:
I’d like to see an example of such. I’d also like to see an example of a square circle.
Click to expand...
Now you finally understand, that is why the question of “what would happen if the Pope changed dogma?” is silly.
 
Emily2014 said:
With God all things are possible.
Surely we should remain open-minded to the possibility of change?
Click to expand...
That phrase is not meant in that way.

Only possible things for God. God cannot for example - not be God. Etc.

Open minded that truth would not be truth?

No that would not be the way.
“The object of opening the mind, as of opening the mouth, is to shut it again on something solid.” ~ GK. Chesterton

chesterton.org/open-mind/
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top