E
Emilyfromohio
Guest
Alright, so the Pope is infallible in spiritual matters when he is speaking in persona Christi But, when is he speaking in persona Christi vs. when he is not speaking in persona Christi?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
L
LilyM
Guest
Persona Christi has nothing to do with Papal Infallibility. Every priest is in persona Christi (standing in Christ’s place) when they celebrate the sacraments, for example.
You might be thinking of ‘ex cathedra’ - one of the requirements for Papal Infallibility is that the Pope be speaking ex cathedra. Below is a good article on Papal infallibility (which explains ex cathedra in the bolded section). source: newadvent.org/cathen/07790a.htm
"Explanation of papal infallibility
The Vatican Council has defined as “a divinely revealed dogma” that “the Roman Pontiff, when he speaks ex cathedra – that is, when in the exercise of his office as pastor and teacher of all Christians he defines, by virtue of his supreme Apostolic authority, a doctrine of faith or morals to be held by the whole Church – is, by reason of the Divine assistance promised to him in blessed Peter, possessed of that infallibility with which the Divine Redeemer wished His Church to be endowed in defining doctrines of faith and morals; and consequently that such definitions of the Roman Pontiff are irreformable of their own nature (ex sese) and not by reason of the Church’s consent” (Densinger no. 1839 – old no. 1680). For the correct understanding of this definition it is to be noted that:
It should be observed in conclusion that papal infallibility is a personal and incommunicable charisma, which is not shared by any pontifical tribunal. It was promised directly to Peter, and to each of Peter’s successors in the primacy, but not as a prerogative the exercise of which could be delegated to others. Hence doctrinal decisions or instructions issued by the Roman congregations, even when approved by the pope in the ordinary way, have no claim to be considered infallible. To be infallible they must be issued by the pope himself in his own name according to the conditions already mentioned as requisite for ex cathedra teaching."
You might be thinking of ‘ex cathedra’ - one of the requirements for Papal Infallibility is that the Pope be speaking ex cathedra. Below is a good article on Papal infallibility (which explains ex cathedra in the bolded section). source: newadvent.org/cathen/07790a.htm
"Explanation of papal infallibility
The Vatican Council has defined as “a divinely revealed dogma” that “the Roman Pontiff, when he speaks ex cathedra – that is, when in the exercise of his office as pastor and teacher of all Christians he defines, by virtue of his supreme Apostolic authority, a doctrine of faith or morals to be held by the whole Church – is, by reason of the Divine assistance promised to him in blessed Peter, possessed of that infallibility with which the Divine Redeemer wished His Church to be endowed in defining doctrines of faith and morals; and consequently that such definitions of the Roman Pontiff are irreformable of their own nature (ex sese) and not by reason of the Church’s consent” (Densinger no. 1839 – old no. 1680). For the correct understanding of this definition it is to be noted that:
Code:
* what is claimed for the pope is infallibility merely, not impeccability or inspiration (see above under I).
* the infallibility claimed for the pope is the same in its nature, scope, and extent as that which the Church as a whole possesses; his ex cathedra teaching does not have to be ratified by the Church's in order to be infallible.
* infallibility is not attributed to every doctrinal act of the pope, but only to his ex cathedra teaching; and*** the conditions required for ex cathedra teaching are mentioned in the Vatican decree:***
** o The pontiff must teach in his public and official capacity as pastor and doctor of all Christians, not merely in his private capacity as a theologian, preacher or allocutionist, nor in his capacity as a temporal prince or as a mere ordinary of the Diocese of Rome. It must be clear that he speaks as spiritual head of the Church universal.
o Then it is only when, in this capacity, he teaches some doctrine of faith or morals that he is infallible (see below, IV).
o Further it must be sufficiently evident that he intends to teach with all the fullness and finality of his supreme Apostolic authority, in other words that he wishes to determine some point of doctrine in an absolutely final and irrevocable way, or to define it in the technical sense. These are well-recognized formulas by means of which the defining intention may be manifested.
o Finally for an ex cathedra decision it must be clear that the pope intends to bind the whole Church. To demand internal assent from all the faithful to his teaching under pain of incurring spiritual shipwreck (naufragium fidei) according to the expression used by Pius IX in defining the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin. Theoretically, this intention might be made sufficiently clear in a papal decision which is addressed only to a particular Church; but in present day conditions, when it is so easy to communicate with the most distant parts of the earth and to secure a literally universal promulgation of papal acts, the presumption is that unless the pope formally addresses the whole Church in the recognized official way, he does not intend his doctrinal teaching to be held by all the faithful as ex cathedra and infallible. **
E
Emilyfromohio
Guest
Cool thanks. But what I don’t get is what do you mean by “clear”? Does he have to come out and clearly say he is speaking ex cathedra?
V
Victorious
Guest
The thing to keep in mind is that the Pope cannot err in matters of faith and morals. He cannot define a heresy as a dogma of the Church, or define a dogma of the Church as a heresy. He cannot come out and declare that which is gravely sinful, like abortion, to be virtuous, or proclaim a virtue, such as charity, to be sinful. If a Pope were determined to do any of these things, the Holy Spirit would prevent him from doing so. The Church is always under divine guidance, such that God will never allow the truths of the faith to be brought to nothing.
When I think of the divine guidance of the Church, two crisis moments in her history immediately spring to mind. The first is when Clement VII refused to annul the marriage of Henry VIII and Catherine of Aragon, even though so many prominent personages were in favor of annulment, and even though he knew it would be the excuse for England to break away from Rome. Hillaire Belloc points out that for Clement to have failed to decide the case on its merits would have vitiated the papacy and all its claims to being the final arbiter in faith and morals. The other moment is when Paul VI issued Humanae Vitae, upholding the Church’s immemorial teachings on contraceptives, even though the papal commission studying the question recommended changing this teaching, and even though public opinion supported such a change. The howls of the world and those who were of the world are a strong indicator of how right Paul VI was. Who knows what he might have done without the Holy Spirit to guide him? and Who else but the Holy Spirit would or could have moved him to take such a hard road?
A wise old priest of my acquaintance once said: If the Holy Father tells you to use brown shoe polish on black shoes, forget it. But if he talks about faith and morals…you’d better pay attention!
When I think of the divine guidance of the Church, two crisis moments in her history immediately spring to mind. The first is when Clement VII refused to annul the marriage of Henry VIII and Catherine of Aragon, even though so many prominent personages were in favor of annulment, and even though he knew it would be the excuse for England to break away from Rome. Hillaire Belloc points out that for Clement to have failed to decide the case on its merits would have vitiated the papacy and all its claims to being the final arbiter in faith and morals. The other moment is when Paul VI issued Humanae Vitae, upholding the Church’s immemorial teachings on contraceptives, even though the papal commission studying the question recommended changing this teaching, and even though public opinion supported such a change. The howls of the world and those who were of the world are a strong indicator of how right Paul VI was. Who knows what he might have done without the Holy Spirit to guide him? and Who else but the Holy Spirit would or could have moved him to take such a hard road?
A wise old priest of my acquaintance once said: If the Holy Father tells you to use brown shoe polish on black shoes, forget it. But if he talks about faith and morals…you’d better pay attention!
E
Emilyfromohio
Guest
No, I totality understand that… I was just asking about logistics lol.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.