What official infallible declaration of any Pope on morals would you as a non-Catholic Christian object to and why?

[Anna_Scott]

I believe in all Catholic doctrine through the grace of God…but what I meant was that my focus is on Christ and the sacraments and Word of God…the communion of saints lived out in the daily rhythm of life in our liturgical year.

I am getting through John Paul II’s remarks on the Church and hope it will give you the understanding and perspective…

Kathleen,
I understand. Christ/Holy Trinity, the Sacraments, and the Word of God are my focus also.

We really are not that far apart in our beliefs.

Peace,
Anna

 

[KathleenGee]

No, Anna, we are not…so it is in Christ and His Holy Spirit…our first reality…and the Holy Father, when he is speaking with authority…resonates totally with our belief…so it is nothing outlandish or ‘off’…very much in communion with our faith everywhere…haven’t had chance yet …

 

[KathleenGee]

Now here is something very interesting…

Cardinal Levada is taking Pope Benedict to task for lacking clarity regarding the Assisi event…and Pope Benedict is known for his theological clarity…more so than JPII.

www.zenit.org/article-35028?1=english

Cardinal Levada says Pope Benedict should know better.

 

[kylemccloughan]

The infallible declarations of a Pope is held to Faith and Morals and not the personal thoughts or feelings of the man himself. With that said I am curious as to what official infallible declaration that any Pope has ever made on Morals only,(Not on Faith) that any non-Catholic Chritian here on Catholic Answers Forum objects to and why? I am not really interested in debating you on any of the objections but really would like to learn some view points.

I would object to most all of them specifically because the doctrine of papal infallibility wasn’t even established until the 1800’s. The Assumption was even made dogma until 1950! That was put into place by the same pope that signed a concordat with the Nazi’s in Germany. With all due respect, I think the whole thing is a sham.

 

[KathleenGee]

I would trust Pope Pius XII.

The Jewish organization, Pave the Way, went to the Vatican to do their own investigation of Pope Pius XII. They were given free access to the Vatican Library and researched all the documents. What they found caused them to do more research.

They left saying that there was no one more than Pope Pius XII who helped the Jews than he. The Jewish people in Rome dedicated a memorial to him for his work.

The Jewish organization also found more documents under different topics, and their only question was why wasn’t the Church more forthcoming in defending itself with these documents???

www.pavetheway.org

I grew up under the threat of communism and its disinformation program, the most sophisticated in the world. Pope Pius XII was among those smeared by this propaganda machine beginning with the play, ‘The Deputy’.

 

[Anna_Scott]

I would object to most all of them specifically because the doctrine of papal infallibility wasn’t even established until the 1800’s. The Assumption was even made dogma until 1950! That was put into place by the same pope that signed a concordat with the Nazi’s in Germany. With all due respect, I think the whole thing is a sham.

kylemccloughan,

First, welcome to CAF. These are great forums.

We may respectfully disagree with any belief or point of view; but to say “the whole thing is a sham” is offensive, as is the reference to the Pope and Nazi’s. Catholics are our brethren in Christ, regardless of our disagreements. I am an Anglican too, and I hold those in Communion with Rome in high regard.

I know you are new. So, I urge you to read the forum rules, and then start again.
Link: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=2

Peace,
Anna

 

[Ranp]

I would object to most all of them specifically because the doctrine of papal infallibility wasn’t even established until the 1800’s. The Assumption was even made dogma until 1950! That was put into place by the same pope that signed a concordat with the Nazi’s in Germany. With all due respect, I think the whole thing is a sham.

Sounds like this person needs to read the book The Myth of Hitler’s Pope by Rabbi David G. Dalin.

If this persona had any real knowledge of the history of the Catholic Church they would know that many things that have always been parts of Holy Tradition are only defined as dogma through papal infallibility after those things are questionals about it. So while it is true that the Assumption was not made dogma until 1950s the Assumption have been part of Holy Tradition for the previous 1,900 years!

Ran

 

[Anna_Scott]

I would object to most all of them specifically because the doctrine of papal infallibility wasn’t even established until the 1800’s. The Assumption was even made dogma until 1950! That was put into place by the same pope that signed a concordat with the Nazi’s in Germany. With all due respect, I think the whole thing is a sham.

kylemccloughan,

I just visited your user profile and I see that you listed Martin Luther as one of your heroes. Have you read Martin Luther’s On the Jews and Their Lies? Link: humanitas-international.org/showcase/chronography/documents/luther-jews.htm

This is one of the worst anti-Jewish writings I’ve ever read. Hitler even quoted Martin Luther in Mein Kampf to justify his atrocities against the Jewish people. I am telling you this because we have to be careful about our accusations. Sometimes those we call our “heroes” could not cast the first stone.

Regarding the Assumption of Mary, I, as an Anglican Catholic, in the Anglican Communion, accept this belief.

Peace,
Anna

 

[kylemccloughan]

Sounds like this person needs to read the book The Myth of Hitler’s Pope by Rabbi David G. Dalin.

If this persona had any real knowledge of the history of the Catholic Church they would know that many things that have always been parts of Holy Tradition are only defined as dogma through papal infallibility after those things are questionals about it. So while it is true that the Assumption was not made dogma until 1950s the Assumption have been part of Holy Tradition for the previous 1,900 years!

Ran

Your statement is false. I don’t mean to be rude or brash here, but that is just wrong. The Assumption was heresy before it was declared dogma. The Immaculate Conception was refuted by Thomas Aquinas before it was made dogma. You can’t declare something and then do mental gymnastics to say that it always was. It doesn’t work that way.

 

[kylemccloughan]

kylemccloughan,

I just visited your user profile and I see that you listed Martin Luther as one of your heroes. Have you read Martin Luther’s On the Jews and Their Lies? Link: humanitas-international.org/showcase/chronography/documents/luther-jews.htm

This is one of the worst anti-Jewish writings I’ve ever read. Hitler even quoted Martin Luther in Mein Kampf to justify his atrocities against the Jewish people. I am telling you this because we have to be careful about our accusations. Sometimes those we call our “heroes” could not cast the first stone.

Regarding the Assumption of Mary, I, as an Anglican Catholic, in the Anglican Communion, accept this belief.

Peace,
Anna

I respect your beliefs and your suggestions but I believe that I am entitled to choose my own personal heroes for personal reasons.

 

[kylemccloughan]

kylemccloughan,

First, welcome to CAF. These are great forums.

We may respectfully disagree with any belief or point of view; but to say “the whole thing is a sham” is offensive, as is the reference to the Pope and Nazi’s. Catholics are our brethren in Christ, regardless of our disagreements. I am an Anglican too, and I hold those in Communion with Rome in high regard.

I know you are new. So, I urge you to read the forum rules, and then start again.
Link: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=2

Peace,
Anna

I appreciate your concern. Thank you for it. But I believe if you look at some of my responses to earlier posts, you could easily see the condescending remarks made toward me and the combative unloving remarks that i think i have the right to at least address. I’m not here to insult and demean folks at all, but I am also not going to be anyone’s doormat.

 

[KathleenGee]

Well, it is also something to accuse and believe such things about Pius…

 

[Anna_Scott]

I respect your beliefs and your suggestions but I believe that I am entitled to choose my own personal heroes for personal reasons.

I never said you don’t have the right to choose your personal heroes. I’m simply pointing out that you’re not in a position to cast any stones in regards to the Pope and Nazi Germany, when your “personal hero” provided material for Hitler’s Mein Kampf, used to justify the atrocities against the Jewish people. I doubt Martin Luther could have imagined his writing would be used in such a way; but sadly it was.

Yet, I do not hold Lutherans or any Protestants accountable for Martin Luther’s lapse into antisemitic writing.

Reminding you of Martin Luther’s writing was probably not the best way for me to respond on this thread. I should have sent you a PM. To anyone I may have offended, I apologize.

My point is that there is plenty of dirt in the history of Christendom. Digging it up serves no good purpose.

I appreciate your concern. Thank you for it. But I believe if you look at some of my responses to earlier posts, you could easily see the condescending remarks made toward me and the combative unloving remarks that i think i have the right to at least address. I’m not here to insult and demean folks at all, but I am also not going to be anyone’s doormat.

What “combative unloving remarks” are you talking about? Your first post on this thread contained the insults. So you weren’t responding to anything anyone said to you.

Your first post on this thread:

I would object to most all of them specifically because the doctrine of papal infallibility wasn’t even established until the 1800’s. The Assumption was even made dogma until 1950! That was put into place by the same pope that signed a concordat with the Nazi’s in Germany. With all due respect, I think the whole thing is a sham.

What does Pope Pius XII and Nazi Germany have to do with “official infallible declarations of any Pope,” which is the topic of this thread? You just slipped that “dig” into your post; and for what purpose? Then you insulted the Catholic faith by saying, “I think the whole thing is a sham.”

If you disagree with the “Assumption,” then cite your sources with specific quotes. Make a case for what you believe, but without the insults.

Peace,
Anna

 

[GaryTaylor]

Thomas Aquinas comes up often as of lately in regards to the Immaculate Conception. Basically their is an overlap it time with Aquina’s and the Council of Basil. Aquinas died in 1274, the IC was approved at Basil in 1431. For this to have happened it would have to have been constantly promoted by Christians of this period, yet not approved as the “Dogma of the Faith”. From this perspective one can more accurately see St Thomas Aquina’s dilemma and his position and official stance. By Martin Luthers time his stance is also obvious. My point is only that current-day Lutherans and Protestants in general emphasize Mariology far less than the “Protestant Reformers” did (Luther, pehaps the most overlooked) You see ths issue? Uphold what Thomas Aquina’s never said, but ignore Luther?

Here’s a link for Thomas Aquinas.

search.yahoo.com/r/_ylt=A0oG7mLngBlOfRMAsnhXNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTE1N2hhc2k2BHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDMQRjb2xvA2FjMgR2dGlkA1ZJUDA3OV8xNDc-/SIG=11p0fbpdi/EXP=1310315847/**http%3a//www.the-pope.com/stThomas.html

Anyway, let me further help you in this topic research. As to the link and its referrence…

… here is what Aquinas did say (Summa Theologiae III:27:4):

"I answer that, God so prepares and endows those, whom He chooses for some particular office, that they are rendered capable of fulfilling it, according to 2 Cor. 3:6: ‘(Who) hath made us fit ministers of the New Testament.’ Now the Blessed Virgin was chosen by God to be His Mother. Therefore there can be no doubt that God, by His grace, made her worthy of that office, according to the words spoken to her by the angel (Lk. 1:30,31): ‘Thou hast found grace with God: behold thou shalt conceive,’ etc. But she would not have been worthy to be the Mother of God, if she had ever sinned. First, because the honor of the parents reflects on the child, according to Prov. 17:6: ‘The glory of children are their fathers’: and consequently, on the other hand, the Mother’s shame would have reflected on her Son. Secondly, because of the singular affinity between her and Christ, who took flesh from her: and it is written (2 Cor. 6:15): ‘What concord hath Christ with Belial?’ Thirdly, because of the singular manner in which the Son of God, who is the ‘Divine Wisdom’ (1 Cor. 1:24) dwelt in her, not only in her soul but in her womb. And it is written (Wis. 1:4): ‘Wisdom will not enter into a malicious soul, nor dwell in a body subject to sins.’

"We must therefore confess simply that the Blessed Virgin committed no actual sin, neither mortal nor venial; so that what is written (Cant 4:7) is fulfilled: ‘Thou art all fair, O my love, and there is not a spot in thee,’ etc. "

What we “can’t assume” is what Aquina’s did not say, and this in fact becomes the basis of this arguement from what I see. Aquinas “never” endorsed the idea that Mary was sinful. He absolutely never did this

Its safe to assume Thomas Aquina’s was in fact still working this theory out and would in fact provide the later ground-work for the theory. Now in seeing this, one begins to see just how old in fact the Immaculate Conception is. BTW as far the Assumption? You will note; Thomas Aquina’s comments on Marys “redemption”? That I believe relates to the Assumption also.

As someone correctly stated a few posts back…None of this is new in regards to Mary. The contemplation of Mary has been in existance as stated above for 1900 years now. And can be tracked much deeper than this period we are talking here. Well Martin Luther himself should give you a time window in the IC, its no surprize in regards to Luthers stance. What Happened in Mexico in the 15th with Consecration and Converstion alone is amazing…9-Million don’t convert in 10 years for NO REASON. Obviously something profound happened there. How else can Mexico be explained but through Mary?

God Bless, Gary

 

[KathleenGee]

(For Kyle,

Check out www.NCRegister.com…the article on ‘Benefactor of Mankind’…regards the Seven Lies about Catholic History by Diane Moczer. The lie about Pope Pius is one of the biggest mischaracterizations in recent history.

Also brought up is Thomas E. Wood, ’ How the Catholic Church Built Western Civilization’.)

 

[Anna_Scott]

The Immaculate Conception was refuted by Thomas Aquinas before it was made dogma. You can’t declare something and then do mental gymnastics to say that it always was. It doesn’t work that way.

kylemccloughan,

Regarding the Immaculate Conception:

GaryTaylor addressed the beliefs of Thomas Aquinas in Post #354 (excellent post.)

Pope John Paul II quoted Martin Luther during the audience on March 21, 2001, emphasizing ecumenical understanding of Mary’s Magnificat: Link: mariedenazareth.com/1239.0.html?&L=1

(emphasis with color, bold & italic type, & underlining is mine throughout)

This is an excellent article, with many quotes of Martin Luther, regarding the Blessed Virgin Mary:

Virgin Mary : catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?id=788
**Martin Luther’s Devotion to Mary
by Dave Armstrong **

A quote of Martin Luther in the article:
*" ** It is a sweet and pious belief that the infusion of Mary’s soul was effected without original sin; so that in the very infusion of her soul she was also purified from original sin ***and adorned with God’s gifts, receiving a pure soul infused by God; thus from the first moment she began to live she was free from all sin" (Sermon: “On the Day of the Conception of the Mother of God,” 1527).

She is full of grace, proclaimed to be entirely without sin—something exceedingly great. For God's grace fills her with everything good and makes her devoid of all evil." (Personal {"Little"} Prayer Book, 1522).

Regarding Luther, the article goes on to say:

“. . . . .His views of Mary as Mother of God and as ever-Virgin were identical to those in Catholicism, and his opinions on the Immaculate Conception, Mary’s “Spiritual Motherhood” and the use of the “Hail Mary” were substantially the same. He didn’t deny the Assumption (he certainly didn’t hesitate to rail against doctrines he opposed!), and venerated Mary in a very touching fashion which, as far as it goes, is not at all contrary to Catholic piety.”

Another interesting article:

THE PROTESTANT REFORMERS ON MARY
Link: catholicapologetics.info/apologetics/general/mary.htm

"Martin Luther:

Mary the Mother of God

Throughout his life Luther maintained without change the historic Christian affirmation that Mary was the Mother of God:

    "She is rightly called not only the mother of the man, but also the Mother of God ... It is certain that Mary is the Mother of the real and true God."1

Perpetual Virginity

    Again throughout his life Luther held that Mary's perpetual virginity was an article of faith for all Christians - and interpreted Galatians 4:4 to mean that Christ was "born of a woman" alone.

    "It is an article of faith that Mary is Mother of the Lord and still a Virgin."2

The Immaculate Conception

Yet again the Immaculate Conception was a doctrine Luther defended to his death (as confirmed by Lutheran scholars like Arthur Piepkorn). Like Augustine, Luther saw an unbreakable link between Mary’s divine maternity, perpetual virginity and Immaculate Conception. Although his formulation of the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception was not clear-cut, he held that her soul was devoid of sin from the beginning:

"But the other conception, namely the infusion of the soul, it is piously and suitably believed, was without any sin, so that while the soul was being infused, she would at the same time be cleansed from original sin and adorned with the gifts of God to receive the holy soul thus infused. And thus, in the very moment in which she began to live, she was without all sin…"3

Assumption

Although he did not make it an article of faith, Luther said of the doctrine of the Assumption:

"There can be no doubt that the Virgin Mary is in heaven. How it happened we do not know.“4”

Would you explain why you do not believe in the Immaculate Conception, when Martin Luther (listed as one of your heroes) defended this doctrine until his death?

Peace,
Anna

 

[KathleenGee]

In’Crossing the Threshold of Hope’, JPII starts off with people’s concern that he is called Holy Father or Your Holiness…His response is to not be afraid of such titles. When Christ refers to not fear. He is referring both to God and to man.

Christ is the sacrament of the invisible God. And JPII is saying to not be afraid of God Who became man. Peter was the one who said “You are the Messiah, the Son of the Living God!” Right before denying Christ, Peter was appointed primary apostle, the Rock. At the Resurrection, John stepped aside, acknowledged Peter’s primacy, and allowed him to enter the tomb first. At Pentecost Peter was the first to speak to the Israelites and travellers, spoke of the wrong the world did in crucifying Christ on the cross, upheld Christ’s resurrection, and then called all people present to convert and be baptized.

The pope is the Vicar of Christ in communion with all bishops that is tied to each priest and to each believer. Christ placed upon the Peter–pastoral duties in preserving unity that transcends local cultures and regions. The papacy is to strengthen the brethren in faith, Luke 22:32.

The Petrine duties also work for ecumenism, and to 'search constantly for ways that will help preserve unity. The Holy Spirit is at work in the world that recognizes the primacy of Peter noting his interest and concern, prayers and guidance.

John Paul II reaffirms in this that among all Christian churches, the Catholic Church alone possess and teaches the fullness of the Gospel. He himself personally came to know that in the sacraments, and particularly at Mass.

We have only One God and Christ established only One Church. Christ is the mediator between God and humanity. There is no other salvation that can bring us eternal life except through Christ. The Church is the Body of Christ.

Christians are baptized into the Church. Lumen Gentium: “The Church is in Christ as a sacrament, or a sign and instrument, of intimate union with God and of the unity of the entire human race.” When we are baptized, we are gathered by the Holy Spirit becoming part of His mystical body.

We are gathered together in Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and we are saved in the Church 'by being brought into the Mystery of the Divine Trinity, into the mystery of the intimate life of God. "This cannot be understood by looking exclusively at the visible aspect of the Church. The Church is a living body.

We are not in the true church instituted by Christ made by our hands or of our works and merits. Christ instituted only one church, but "it is not proclaiming ecclesiocentrism.

The Catholic Church is proclaiming Christocentrism in all of its aspects, and therefore is profoundly rooted in the Mystery of the Trinity. At the heart of the Church is Christ and His sacrifice celebrated in a certain sense on the altar of all creation, on the altar of the world. Christ “is the firstborn of all creation” (Col. 1:15; through His resurrection He is also the ‘firstborn from the dead’ (Col 1:18). Around His redemptive sacrifice is gathered all creation, which is working out its eternal destiny in God. If this process causes pain, it is, however, full of hope, as St. Paul teaches in his letter to the Romans 8:23-24.

‘He who is in Rome knows that those on the far side of the earth are his members. In Christ the Church is a communion in many different ways.’ We are work as parts in communion as a whole. And we are constantly drawing on Christ’s blood receiving His redemption. Christ constantly ‘enters into God’s sanctuary thus obtaining eternal salvation’. The Mass is said 24 hours a day around the world. Thus Christ is the object of our salvation.

The sphere of salvation can include other interpretations…but the essential is that we retain…all of us…our bonds of charity for salvation. "People are saved through the Church, they are saved in the Church, but they are always saved by the grace of Christ. Besides the formal membership in the Church, the sphere of salvation can also include other forms of relation to the Church. Paul VI expressed this same teaching in his first encyclical, Ecclesiam Suam, when he spoke of the various circles of the dialogue of salvation, which are the same as those indicated by the Council as the spheres of membership in and of relation to the Church. This is the authentic meaning of the well-known statement “Outside the Church there is no salvation”.

He also says, 'It would be difficult to deny that this doctrine is extremely open. It cannot be accused of an ecclesiological exclusivism. Those who rebel against claims allegedly made by the Catholic Church probably do not have an adequate understanding of this teaching…‘Although the Catholic Church knows that it has received the fullness of the means of salvation, it rejoices when other Christian communities join her in preaching the Gospel. This is the proper context for understanding the Council’s teaching that the Church of Christ “subsists” in the Catholic Church.’

‘The invisible mystery and dimension of the Church is larger than the visible structure and organization of the Church…which itself is in service of the mystery.’

The Church, as the mystical Body of Christ penetrates and embraces all of us. The spiritual, mystical dimensions of the Church are much greater than any sociological statistics could ever possibly show.’

So as a Roman Catholic, not only do we base our one faith and one baptism in the Lord through His apostles, but for the sake of communion and upholding the common shared faith, we also uphold and affirm Christ’s primacy of Peter.

 

[kylemccloughan]

I never said you don’t have the right to choose your personal heroes. I’m simply pointing out that you’re not in a position to cast any stones in regards to the Pope and Nazi Germany, when your “personal hero” provided material for Hitler’s Mein Kampf, used to justify the atrocities against the Jewish people. I doubt Martin Luther could have imagined his writing would be used in such a way; but sadly it was.

Yet, I do not hold Lutherans or any Protestants accountable for Martin Luther’s lapse into antisemitic writing.

Reminding you of Martin Luther’s writing was probably not the best way for me to respond on this thread. I should have sent you a PM. To anyone I may have offended, I apologize.

My point is that there is plenty of dirt in the history of Christendom. Digging it up serves no good purpose.

What “combative unloving remarks” are you talking about? Your first post on this thread contained the insults. So you weren’t responding to anything anyone said to you.

Your first post on this thread:

What does Pope Pius XII and Nazi Germany have to do with “official infallible declarations of any Pope,” which is the topic of this thread? You just slipped that “dig” into your post; and for what purpose? Then you insulted the Catholic faith by saying, “I think the whole thing is a sham.”

If you disagree with the “Assumption,” then cite your sources with specific quotes. Make a case for what you believe, but without the insults.

Peace,
Anna

I think you have made a spectacle out of this unnecessarily. I have stated facts. Is it not a fact that the Assumption was made dogma in 1950; the same year Pope Pius signed a concordat with the Nazis? You calling that a dig is just your opinion. That’s it. Enough on this already.

 

[KathleenGee]

In 1950, Hitler was already dead.

It took the Church 1850 years to declare the Immaculate Conception…

 

[kylemccloughan]

kylemccloughan,

Regarding the Immaculate Conception:

GaryTaylor addressed the beliefs of Thomas Aquinas in Post #354 (excellent post.)

Pope John Paul II quoted Martin Luther during the audience on March 21, 2001, emphasizing ecumenical understanding of Mary’s Magnificat: Link: mariedenazareth.com/1239.0.html?&L=1

(emphasis with color, bold & italic type, & underlining is mine throughout)

This is an excellent article, with many quotes of Martin Luther, regarding the Blessed Virgin Mary:

Another interesting article:

Would you explain why you do not believe in the Immaculate Conception, when Martin Luther (listed as one of your heroes) defended this doctrine until his death?

Peace,
Anna

Did Martin Luther adhere to those beliefs after he left Rome? Maybe he did and maybe he didn’t. He would most certainly have adhered to it as a Roman Catholic out of requirement without question. The IC is not doctrine of the ACNA because it is nowhere supported by Scripture and in the opinion of many Anglican theologians, it is refuted by Mary declaring God as her savior. I believe that the Mary of Scripture and the picture that the Roman Catholic church paints Mary to be are strikingly different.