When does the Pope speak infallibly?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Michael_Allen
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

Michael_Allen

Guest
When does the Pope speak infallibly? If he speaks about faith and morals in normal conversation is it infallible? Is he infallible when speaking in his Wednesday addresses?

I’ve never been quite clear on this.

Thank you.
 
If his words make it clear he isintending to definitively bind the entire Church to a doctrinal judgment in the realm of faith and morals, then it is infallible. Theoretically, he could do this orally just as well in written form, so a pronouncement of this sort could be made during a Wednesday address, but he would have to make sure that judgment was made known to all. For this reason, he would usually use a more high profile means of making the message known.

Think of it this way: to be infallible, the Pope has to be definitively laying down the law of belief. He’ll make this clear if he is doing. In his audiences and most of his published documents nowadays, he for the most part is explaining and applying the law of faith in non-definitive way.

This might help too. It’s the offical “relatio” from the First Vatican Council on this topic. A relatio is an explanation given to the voting bishops at the Council:

books.google.com/books?id=4ClPRR0HrHEC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false
 
Thanks very much both.

Just to put a bit of meat on those bones - when would you say was the last time a Pope spoke with the clear intention of infallibility?
 
The official definition of an ex cathedra teaching is in Pastor Aeternus from Vatican I.

Things to note (not covered in the tract):

– A given document can contain a mixture of infallible and non-infallible statements.

– The Church declaring that part of a document is infallible does not necessarily mean the rest is certainly not infallible.

– Just because it’s not infallible, doesn’t mean it’s not binding.

– Just because it’s not formally defined, doesn’t mean it’s not infallible. (A constant teaching of the Church on which all the bishops agree is infallible without having been declared to be such.)

– Infallibility extends to more than just doctrinal definitions. It is almost certain, for example, that the canonization of a saint is infallible (this has not been formally defined, but is currently a highly probable theological opinion). There may be other acts which are infallible, too, but which have not yet been defined as such by the Church.

There is debate over some statements, such as Pope John Paul II’s proclamation in Ordinatio Sacerdotalis that the Church can’t ordain women to the ministerial priesthood. In the end, I think the consensus was that the statement in itself was not infallible but that the teaching it reiterates is infallible, because it is the constant teaching of the Church. But I could be wrong on that.

I don’t know of one between then and 1950, but there could be one. (1950 was Pius XII’s definition of the Immaculate Conception.)
 
I think you’ll get varied answers on the last one–of course I think mine is right, lol :p! IMO, there’s been a tendency to minimize papal infallibility in recent decades (some even say there is only two instances!–compare that to the relatio which says “thousands and thousands”–a bit hyperbolic, but you get the point!).

According to the CDF commentary on the Profesio Fidei, as well as the relatio I linked to earlier, the Pope may definitively judge ex cathedra not just dogma (divinely revealed doctrines to be believed with divine and Catholic faith). It also covers doctrines which are *sententia definitive tenenda *(doctrines, which while not formally revealed, are connected to revelation by logical necessity and which are necessary for defending and expounding upon it. These must be definitively held.). In addition, dogmatic facts are also covered (dogmatic facts are historical facts connected to revelation by necessity–they include canonizations of saints, the validity or invalidity of non-Catholic sacraments, etc.).

So, given all that, it would be the last canonization. However, excluding dogmatic facts, unless I am missing a more recent one, that would probably be in 1995, when Bl. John Paul II in Evangelium Vitae made three such definitive judgments, confirming murder, abortion, and euthanasia as contrary to the moral law. For example:

“Therefore, by the authority which Christ conferred upon Peter and his Successors, in communion with the Bishops-who on various occasions have condemned abortion and who in the aforementioned consultation, albeit dispersed throughout the world, have shown unanimous agreement concerning this doctrine-I declare that direct abortion, that is, abortion willed as an end or as a means, always constitutes a grave moral disorder, since it is the deliberate killing of an innocent human being.”
vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_25031995_evangelium-vitae_en.html

***Regarding Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, which was in 1994, the wording of the definitive judgment follows Vatican II’s definition of papal infallibility essentially word for word. Note, that doctrine was defined as *sententia definitive tenenda (*to be definitively held), so it is not considered a revealed dogma. That may be where some confusion lies. But as I mentioned above, such doctrines may also be proclaimed infallibly by the Pope.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top