Do you acknowledge Gadium et Spes as infallible?
No, I do not. An Ecumenical Council (such as V-2) MAY teach infallibly, but does not always teach infallibly (just as a Pope MAY teach infallibly, but does not always teach infallibly).
I don’t know if this is dogma but this from the didache the apostles wrote and used it to teach
I’m just curious: what, in your opinion, would the Church have to do in order to “acknowledge… [an] infallibly promulgated” magisterial document, or to “recognize… as infallible” a document of Vatican II?
Well, it’s not my opinion.
There are LOTS of people who want to whip out their Kaptain Katholic decoder rings and attempt to apply their five-point Vatican-1 infallible checklist to prior Papal teachings. But I’m pretty sure that’s not actually what the Church taught by the term manifestly evident. If I had to guess, I would think that the Church reserved to herself the ability to define what is “manifestly evident” (and what is not), and not to random Catholic scholars or laypeople who wish to overlay their interpretation of Vatican-1 upon historic Papal teachings,
vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_25031995_evangelium-vitae_en.html
Why do you believe the Church would produce such a document?
There is a false premise in your question. The false premise is that everything True is defined dogmatically. Dogma are not defined as dogmatic until there is some question as to the subject, and then the issue generally continues unresolved for an extended period. Since, from earliest times, abortion was known to be the intrinsic evil of killing and innocent child in her mothers womb, it was never dogmatically defined. The very idea that it is licit to kill and innocent child was first propagated in law barely 50 years ago.
Paul VI solemnly promulgated every document of Vatican II using language as or more solemn than any other ecumenical council. His language was much more solemn than the approval given to the Council of Nicaea by Pope Saint Sylvester. All the portions concerning faith and morals do qualify as infallible. I don’t see how how some “traditional Catholics” accept Paul VI as Pope, but because they have problems with Vatican II, they do not recognize its teachings as infallible.
I was under the impression that the Roman Pontiff alone possessed the Magisterium and therefore Conciliarism is a heresy. Other words, no matter how many bishops you have they are not infallible without a Roman Pontiff approving their decisions and also a Roman Pontiff can make definitions by himself which are irreformable, no matter what certain members of the Church think of his definitions later in time.
According to Trent dogmatic statements are for all people, to determine truth from error
God protected the definition of Papal infallibility for a reason. Therefore it was true since the death of the last apostle. There are no new doctrines. The Roman Pontiff did not make the doctrine true by defining Papal infallbility. He was simply asserting what was already true. I believe it to be heretical to assert otherwise… God protected this definition so that individual Catholics can determine what the Church teaches more easily. When the Pope declares something on faith or morals meeting the criteria it is something God protects from error regardless of “the consent of the church”. The rest of the Church may not recognize a document as infallible but if the Roman Pontiff approves it as a document of a general council or meets the criteria from Vatican I, it is by that very fact an ex cathedra statement and not by the consent of the church.
It was not my intention to make an assertion. I was honestly interested in finding out more about what the Popes have taught on this matter and if the Popes have condemned abortion with the fullness of their authority.
The earliest dogmatic document was not Christian at all. It was from Greek pagans and dates about 500 years before Christ. The Hippocratic Oath,
Before starting this thread I was convinced the Church had not and I was seeing if I could prove myself wrong.
A quick note on this – ultrasound was in fact invented in the late 1950s, in Scotland; it was commercially available in the US in the early 1960s. They were not commonly used for pregnancies until the 1970s – but it was most certainly around well before Roe v. Wade.
I’m not sure of the intent of your question. It doesn’t really matter. Abortion has been treated and understood as the sin of murder since men had ideas and wrote them. In addition to the Oath I posted which has been taken by physicians since 500 BC, God condemned murder in general in the OT as a part of the 10 commandments. No religious dogma is necessary however to establish the immorality of killing human beings. It is a “natural law” and written in our hearts. It has always been assumed and known until sometime in the 20th Century A.D., and my guess is that this would be when the Church of Jesus Christ would have found it necessary to be spoken of directly by the Roman Pontiff. These references have been made by others below. As well as the Church Fathers.