H
Hesychios
Guest
Very interesting.
But then, what right does a mere Pope then have to make these statements?
Can he authoritatively make his own authority a theological opinion?It’s becoming circular.
- Status
But then, what right does a mere Pope then have to make these statements?
Can he authoritatively make his own authority a theological opinion?It’s becoming circular.
H
Hesychios
Guest
The early Popes were a result of ‘Greeks’ or possibly even also Hellenized Jews migrating west (the church in the city of Rome used Greek in the liturgy for that reason).
The Popes after Theodore I were primarily named by the imperial government in either Constantinople or Ravenna. There are some Byzantine architectural church ruins in Rome from this period.
I did not check your list against anything, I will assume it is mostly correct.
The ‘eastern’ bishoprics in southern Italy and Sicily did not disappear. They have been fully Latin bishoprics for centuries though.
P
Phillip_Rolfes
Guest
It was already circular. Can the pope authoritatively make his own theological opinion (and that of the West) authoritative?Very interesting.
But then, what right does a mere Pope then have to make these statements?
It’s becoming circular.
P
Phillip_Rolfes
Guest
Thank you, Ignatius. All glory to God.
L
LoyalViews
Guest
Speaking Ex Cathedra, we must.
P
Phillip_Rolfes
Guest
A problem is that most lists of “ex cathdra” statements from the Pope don’t match up to one another. That’s not really a concern for Eastern Catholics per se, but primarily a concern for those who attempt to defend papal infallibility.
P
Phillip_Rolfes
Guest
For that matter, the Roman Church does not have a definitive list of “Ecumenical Councils.” It’s merely widely accepted in the West that the 14 councils held after the 1054 Schism are “Ecumenical.” That doesn’t make them Ecumenical ipso facto, however. So it would seem that the Pope might not be contradicting himself by calling them “general synods of the West.”
M
Marc_Anthony
Guest
Wait-if you’re incommunion with Rome, don’t you HAVE to believe in Papal infallibility?A problem is that most lists of “ex cathdra” statements from the Pope don’t match up to one another. That’s not really a concern for Eastern Catholics per se, but primarily a concern for those who attempt to defend papal infallibility.
D
diggerdomer
Guest
No, the Pope is not authorized to teach ex cathedra regarding pizza, as pizza is not a matter of faith and morals (though teenagers may disagree).
D
diggerdomer
Guest
Yes, all Catholics are bound to accept the Church’s teaching on infallibility, correctly understood.
D
diggerdomer
Guest
The Catholic Church DOES have a definitive list of ecumenical councils (as named by the Catholic Church, granting non-Catholics may not accept them, and different adjectives like “general” may be appropriate).
You can view them and their teachings here:
piar.hu/councils/
Your points regarding “ecumenical” are important, and valid, but like it or not the Catholic Church does identify 21 councils as ecumenical.
D
diggerdomer
Guest
It is a concern for all Catholics. All Catholics share the same Catholic beliefs…a tautology, I admit. This includes the Church’s teaching on infallibility.A problem is that most lists of “ex cathdra” statements from the Pope don’t match up to one another. That’s not really a concern for Eastern Catholics per se, but primarily a concern for those who attempt to defend papal infallibility.
You’re right, though, in observing that there is no universally agreed upon or explicit and exhaustive list of “ex cathedra” statements.
P
Phillip_Rolfes
Guest
Both Pope Paul VI and our current Holy Father would disagree with you here. As I’ve said before, Paul VI referred to the 14 post-Schism councils as “general synods of the West.” And if Benedict XVI can affirm that the Orthodox would not be bound by any of the “dogmas” defined by the Roman Chuch since the Schism, then that relegates the 14 post-Schism councils to the realm of (gasp) “general synods of the West.” That also relegates any other “dogmas” define by Rome since the Schism to the realm of theological opinion (theologoumenon). That being said, however, it is the theological opinion of the West, and as such must be embraced by Western Christians as the authentic patrimonial heritage (i.e. tradition) of the West. But that tradition cannot be binding on Easterners. To make it such would be to supplant our own ancient and venerable tradition. To paraphrase St. Augustine: In essentials, unity. In non-essentials, diversity. In all things, charity.
P
Phillip_Rolfes
Guest
I know many Eastern Catholics who don’t. I also know of Eastern Catholic bishops who denied papal infallibility publicly and still remained in the good graces of Rome. Eastern Catholics believe in the infallibility of the Church, not in the infallibility of one man. All bishops, including the Bishop of Rome, have the responsibility to preach the Gospel in accordance with the Apostolic Faith and Tradition that has been handed down to them. When they do so, then they are infallible.
P
Phillip_Rolfes
Guest
**
Nice website, but show me a dogmatic list from a Pope (not from the Roman Curia, they are not the Magisterium) that lists 21 Ecumenical Councils. I can almost guarantee you that you won’t find any. And even if you did, it’s been overturn by later Popes and was, therefore, never dogmatic to begin with.**
M
Marc_Anthony
Guest
Just wanted to say, St. Augustine has the best quotes. I love that quote given by Phillip Rolfes. Really helped clear things up for me, anyway. St. Augustine just has a way of cutting right to the meat of an issue.
P
Phillip_Rolfes
Guest
He can, at times, be very poignant. He did have his faults, like everyone else, however. But I’ve always enjoyed his sayings and what little I’ve read of him.
M
Marc_Anthony
Guest
Oh, of course he had his faults. Everybody does and did. But his sayings are great.
M
mardukm
Guest
I believe that, like the issue of Primacy, there is an Absolutist Petrine view to infallibility, a High Petrine view, and a Low Petrine view.
The touchstone of the different views revolves around the Vatican decree that bishops teach infallibility only when they are teaching in union with the Pope.
The Absolutist Petrine view interprets this to mean that all infallibility flows from papal infallibility; i.e., the infallibility of the body is a function of the infallibility of the head. The unique feature of this view is that it believes that papal infallibility can be exercised without the body.
The High Petrine view interprets this to mean that infallibility is primarily collegial in nature. The infallibility of the body is one and the same the infallibility of the head, and vice-versa. One cannot be exercised without the other, implicitly or explicitly.
The Low Petrine view either denies papal infallibility altogether, or believes that papal infallibility is a function of the infallibility of the Church. The unique feature of this view is that it believes the Church can exercise its infallibility without the head.
I adhere to the High Petrine position, and I believe this is the official teaching of the Catholic Church as reflected by the Vatican Councils.
Blessings
M
mardukm
Guest
I tend to agree. When I came into Catholic Communion, I certainly did not have to profess a certain number of Ecumenical Councils to in order to become Catholic.
Blessings,
Marduk
- Status