Tomorrow. Day of reparation for the Pachamama rituals

[Rubee]

Practically speaking, here are the type of things i’m talking about … the discipline of unmarried priests can be changed. The Church teaching on the death penalty has been developed to make it inadmissible. Or a more complex issue like freedom of conscience. Pope Gregory XVI in an 1832 encyclical condemned freedom of conscience in society as an “absurd and erroneous teaching or rather madness”. Pope Leo XIII condemned “the modern liberties” and opposed the equality and participation of citizens in civic and political life. He wrote that “the untutored multitude” must “be controlled by the authority of law”. Vatican II, however, accepted religious liberty for all human beings.

You’ve said a whole bunch there with tons of crazy implications that I must only assume you’re taking statements out of their contexts.

1. What did the church teach against religious liberty?
2. As to “untutored multitudes”, I wholeheartedly agree with the Pope. There’s a reason propaganda works. Democracy assumes a certain capacity and level of knowledgability on the voter’s part that simply has no connection to reality. Still, I don’t know that the church has ever taught against democracy so I’m not sure what you’re referring to here.
3. The church’s teaching on the death penalty can never be inadmissible. Maybe you need to educate yourself better on what exactly the church taught back then versus now: When you find a plain contradiction and not a mere ‘apparent’ contradiction, then your point will be better supported.

Bottom line: The church never teaches error in matters of faith and morals: Never. Not in any ‘level of teaching.’ You can have individuals speculating who it turns out are wrong but there’s not a single ‘level of teaching’ in which the Catholic Church teaches wrong things in any capacity as long as the subject is faith and morals: None.

What you must do is ask when the Church can be said to be teaching, especially when you have the source of the teaching being an individual rather than a council or universal consensus, which is the case with Papal documents. The Pope, when not speaking ex cathedra, which is 99% of the time, does not bind the Church and can be in error: That’s because in that capacity he’s speaking as a Bishop, even the highest Bishop, as a priest, as a Christian, and even just as a man: All different ways in which he acts as an individual and not as ‘the Catholic Church’. In those instances, ‘the Catholic Church’ is not teaching, rather her members are. That’s an important distinction to draw.