The Pope's Encyclical

[Ortho]

m134e5:

The view on love, as it is defined in this encyclical, most certainly is. I hope you are not asking if you can be excused from showing the charity and love to others that this encyclical instructs us to show.

If the view on love is infallible, what about the rest of the encyclical? Infallble?

 

[Ortho]

dulcissima:

Benedict says himself in the introduction to the encycical that the first part is more speculative.

OK. That eliminates the first part as being infallible.

 

[fix]

Ortho:

I would say it is a sham if an encyclical just published cannot be defined as infallible or fallible.

As I observe things, the infallible status of a proposition is determined by each individual Catholic. They say it is impossible to list all the infallible teachings since there is 2,000 years to cover. Well, a single encyclical that has just been published should pose no problem.

I’d suggest a big red stamp at the Vatican. Anything that is published that is infallible should get the stamp and be put in a special collection at the Vatican library. Then it would be easy.

Perhaps this will help you?:

…Catholics are bound to believe also doctrines definitively proposed by the Magisterium, not as divinely revealed, but as logically or historically connected with doctrines divinely revealed. Doctrines definitively proposed are also irreformable and set forth infallibly in the same three ways.

The assent (theological faith) required of Catholics is the same for doctrines definitively proposed as for doctrines divinely revealed, except that in the latter case it is based on the authority of the Word of God, and in the former case it is based on the Holy Spirit’s guidance of the Magisterium.

Examples: Priestly ordination restricted to men; illicitness of euthanasia, prostitution, fornication, and contraception; that canonized Saints are in heaven…

ewtn.com/vexperts/showresult.asp?RecNum=374982&Forums=0&Experts=0&Days=2003&Author=&Keyword=ordinary+magisterium&pgnu=1&groupnum=0&record_bookmark=6&ORDER_BY_TXT=ORDER+BY+ReplyDate+DESC&start_at=

 

[papa_k]

I haven’t thoroughly digested the entire encyclical, but I did not notice, nor have heard, that any new doctrine was defined in it. Infallbility is normally associated with the defining of a true doctrine of faith, or a canonization of a saint. When a pope speaks infallibly he says so, and it could be in an encyclical, but usually not. Encyclicals are like letters to the faithful, very much to be listened to. They can contain infallible truths, like any letter you might personally write yourselves, if you are faithfully communicating the truths of the faith. Letters can contain untruths, but not likely in the case of a pope, who has done his homework.

It is not the point to respond to any papal letter with a question of is this infallible or not, but to receive the instruction and exhortation in an open manner.

Mostly, I find encyclicals to be insights, exhortations, reflections, and usually are of contemporary relevence to the faithful of the time, and possibly for future generations to come.

 

[Fergal]

Pope Pius XII held that Papal Encyclicals can be infallible:

It is not to be thought that what is set down in Encyclical letters does not demand assent in itself, because in this the popes do not exercise the supreme power of their magisterium. For these matters are taught by the ordinary magisterium, regarding which the following is pertinent: “He who heareth you, heareth Me.” (Luke 10:16); and usually what is set forth and inculcated in Encyclical Letters, already pertains to Catholic doctrine. But if the Supreme Pontiffs in their acts, after due consideration, express an opinion on a hitherto controversial matter, it is clear to all that this matter, according to the mind and will of the same Pontiffs, cannot any longer be considered a question of free discussion among theologians.

—Humani Generis

 

[Jasny]

Ortho:

Does that mean the recent papal encyclical is infallible?

As i said above the document is not infallable. It is usually reserved to the statements.

There are levels of documents and an encylical is the highest of the ordinary mag.

The burden is not to prove whether it is infallable. The burden would be to show that an point is in contention with what we have always held as Catholics.

Capital punishment and contraception are good examples.

Pro Cap. Pun. try to show it has always been held by Catholics
But pro contraception have never shown that contraception has always been held to be Catholic.

 

[Ortho]

What I observe is very logical and well thought statements on infallibility in general. When discussing the topic of infallibility, many writers are very clear.

However, when it comes time to test a particular statement, document, or teaching against those standards, they don’t seem to work.

Has the current pope added anything to the collection of infallible teachings? How about the last pope? What was the last item added to the infallible collection?

 

[byHisGrace]

Adonia:

Bravo to Pope Bennedict on his recent encyclical! His words on love, talking about both the physical and spiritual were inspiring. I really like this man! From his previous office where from what I had heard about him, he was a rigid idealoque, (of which I had no problem him being such) to his understanding of the human experience and his ability to connect the here and now with the beauty of God really reasonates with me.

Adonia,
I couldn’t agree more with you on how inspiring this encyclical is.
Even more fascinating is how it builds on the teachings of Paul VI and JP II. What you heard about Pope Benedict in his “previous” office, I would submit to you was a gross mischaracterization of the man and his writings. I hear people or the media comment on their surprise that he appears gentle and pastoral and how he’s had to change because of his role, that where before he was rigid, and now he isn’t. Anyone who has read anything he’s written over the years knows that to be false. As head of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith he was every bit as pastoral as he is now. The fact that he stood uncompromisingly for truth irritated people then. He hasn’t changed in his outlook or his love. And in this encyclical there is no compromise either.

I, like you, feel blessed to have this special man as the Servant of the Servants of God.
May God bless you!

 

[Adonia]

byHisGrace:

Adonia,
I couldn’t agree more with you on how inspiring this encyclical is.
Even more fascinating is how it builds on the teachings of Paul VI and JP II. What you heard about Pope Benedict in his “previous” office, I would submit to you was a gross mischaracterization of the man and his writings. I hear people or the media comment on their surprise that he appears gentle and pastoral and how he’s had to change because of his role, that where before he was rigid, and now he isn’t. Anyone who has read anything he’s written over the years knows that to be false. As head of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith he was every bit as pastoral as he is now. The fact that he stood uncompromisingly for truth irritated people then. He hasn’t changed in his outlook or his love. And in this encyclical there is no compromise either.

I, like you, feel blessed to have this special man as the Servant of the Servants of God.
May God bless you!

Very well said. It’s true, I only knew about Cardinal Ratzinger by mostly by what I had heard in “the press”. At that time I was focused on John Paul the Great as our pastoral leader. Even though I believed at the time that the Cardinal was a conservative (in accord with Church teachings), and I tend to lean that way myself. But it is his humility from the get go that endeared me to this Pope. God has indeed blessed us in making him our Pontif. May God bless you also!