When can you ignore Non infallible statments

  • Thread starter Thread starter FCS
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
F

FCS

Guest
If a Pope made a non infallible statement several centuries ago that is really weird do you still have to believe it?

Thanks guys
 
Last edited:
No. Most popes make statements that are not infallible that are later, changed, proven false or you can just disagree with.
 
Thank you so much, I was kind of worried there!

What if you can’t find any statements that contradict the original ones? Does that mean you still have to believe them?
 
Last edited:
The threads you’ve started here make me think you have some scrupulous tendencies, or at least are very prone to anxiety. I’d suggest you avoid seeking reassurance on CAF and consult a trusted priest.
 
You do not have to believe it. As long as the Pope did not speak Ex Cathedra, you are free do disagree.
 
That’s up to you. Obviously in 2000 years of hundreds popes there are billions of words you can delve into. Is that fodder for this thread? No. If you want to PM me or start a thread I can talk specifics with you. I’d be happy to.
 
Hoosier-Daddy said:
That’s up to you. Obviously in 2000 years of hundreds popes there are billions of words you can delve into. Is that fodder for this thread? No. If you want to PM me or start a thread I can talk specifics with you. I’d be happy to.
Click to expand...
I ask for clarification because I think your blanket ‘no’, is misleading a seeking Catholic. The fact is that if a Pope makes a statement that concerns faith or morals, we are required to believe.
 
I’m sorry you think that is misleading. But your explanation if what is required is not correct. Pope Francis speaks of the errors of clericalism often including his own position as the vicar or Christ. And he invites disagreement. The idea of blindly following the Pope is not what faith or theology is built on. Many many theologians differ with popes historically. Many saints have as well.
 
Last edited:
Hoosier-Daddy said:
I’m sorry you think that is misleading. But your explanation if what is required is not correct. Pope Francis speaks of the errors of clericalism often including his own position as the vicar or Christ. And he invites disagreement. The idea of blindly following the Pope is not what faith or theology is built on. Many many theologians differ with popes historically. Many saints have as well.
Click to expand...
“Blindly follow a Pope” is a charge normally made by Protestants. As Catholics we submit to the ‘statements’ made by the Pope for the benefit of the ekklesia as protected by the Holy Spirit. I can’t recall or say I have ever seen in history, such a statement having been proven false or changed as erroneous. I seriously urge the OP not to take that advice to heart.
 
Last edited:
Protestant charge or not. We do not blindly follow a Pope. Ever. If you wish to discuss via PM you are welcome to.
 
Hoosier-Daddy said:
Protestant charge or not. We do not blindly follow a Pope. Ever. If you wish to discuss via PM you are welcome to.
Click to expand...
“… religious submission of mind and will must be shown in a special way to the authentic magisterium of the Roman Pontiff, even when he is not speaking ex cathedra.” - Lumen Gentium.

I urge the OP not to believe it is good for faith to develop a religious laissez faire attitude towards Papal statements.
 
Yes,that eating for pleasure only, even if it does not pose health risks is a sin. It was made in the 1600s
 
No, before that, if you scroll up a bit, it says that these were errors condemned by the Pope.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top