Where can Non-Catholics go to find an official document listing all Infallible excathedra states made by various Popes?

  • Thread starter Thread starter 1Tim215Mommy
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
eamonnroma said:
I think that is fairly obvious that the ‘majority’ of Catholics use contraception. Use the evidence of your eyes when you are in church. How many families do you see with 7, 8 or 9 children? Why not? Because they use contraception
Click to expand...
Wow all…“assumption” you don’t read minds and gaze into the future and predict others contraceptive use.

This is question and answer, not assumption and conjecture.
 
Eamonroma…

What is the birthrate of Catholic families in your country? I find it so so sad that Italian Catholics have been secularized.

Catholic Hispanics, many of them nominal at that, come here to live and now their birthrates are going down, and becoming part of the contracepting culture.

My question regards the use of contraception of Christian couples in general throughout the world.

Our country has powers that are deliberately wanting mass immigration to come in so it can be the voting block to remove any voice of the remaining Christian, however fragmented block, that we have here.

Countries that have many orphans due to the lack of Christian marriages, also refuse to let them be adopted by couples in our country who cannot conceive.
 
1TimothyMom…

Sorry you cannot follow me. I am speaking in the spirit of communion. The Council verified that there were heretical concepts that he held, but likewise his teaching on the two wills was infallible.

It appears you are condemning the papacy by this one pope.

I just read on another post from a Lutheran who is realizing that the Holy Father speaks for all of us. He is speaking in the Living Revelation of Christ present for today. I do not see this universal figure in Orthodoxy.

I see reason for differences for both sides but I see no justification or put downs for the Great Schism. I sense even filial clannishness in schisms where one’s ties are more valued than universal communion of Christians in One Church. I see attitudes of thought digging in and getting ‘stuck’, with no room for forgiveness and common reciprocity.

Last night I prayed for all this division and that the Church, and this I mean Latin and Orthodox, be healed. Pulling back after the Nicene Creed and condemning each other how the Holy Spirit proceeds is not reflecting the truth of the Gospel Christ has called us to live out.
 
The new repetitive slogan I hear on several threads posts is “Your not thinking with the mind of the Church” (Spencer for example)

I think it should be mandatory with those who paint with such a broad stroke to include what exactly they think the mind of the Church is. No sense speculating on disillusioned words which miss the mark.

Put the truth up for what it is, its refreshing.
 
KathleenGee said:
1TimothyMom…

Sorry you cannot follow me. I am speaking in the spirit of communion. ** The Council verified that there were heretical concepts that he held, but likewise his teaching on the two wills was infallible.**

It appears you are condemning the papacy by this one pope.

I just read on another post from a Lutheran who is realizing that the Holy Father speaks for all of us. He is speaking in the Living Revelation of Christ present for today. I do not see this universal figure in Orthodoxy.

I see reason for differences for both sides but I see no justification or put downs for the Great Schism. I sense even filial clannishness in schisms where one’s ties are more valued than universal communion of Christians in One Church. I see attitudes of thought digging in and getting ‘stuck’, with no room for forgiveness and common reciprocity.

Last night I prayed for all this division and that the Church, and this I mean Latin and Orthodox, be healed. Pulling back after the Nicene Creed and condemning each other how the Holy Spirit proceeds is not reflecting the truth of the Gospel Christ has called us to live out.
Click to expand...
If by infallible you mean it is correct or orthodox, then fine, but if by infallible you mean he was speaking infallibly (to the whole church), i.e., then you are wrong. Do you mean the former, i.e., that he was right?
 
Yes. But likewise I am also struggling grasping the details, so your posts are helping me pull things together. I personally cannot see any justification of rejecting papal infallibililty because of when it was define and what the Church was facing in the breakdown of common Christian unity, particularly having live in this country with so many different Christian churches in one neighborhood. They all believe in Christ but do not want to worship with each other in Christ.

The other as I have been reflecting on this thread and another concerning Orthodoxy, why condemn the papacy because of some of the teachings of Pope Honorious? I consider the stature of popes I am mostly familiar with going back to those of the late 1800’s, such as Pope Leo to the great Pope Pius XII. Christ did not leave us orphans. He gave us Pius. I am reading his exoneration by the Jewish organization, “Pave the Way”…
 
tdgesq said:
This is really the correct answer. All teachings of the extraordinary Magisterium (and infallible teachings of the ordinary Magisterium, for that matter), including the decrees of Ecumenical Councils, must be fully assented to by Catholics. Having an official list of all teachings of the extraordinary Magisterium, whether from the Pope or from Ecumenical Councils, makes no more sense to Catholics than it would make sense to Orthodox that there must be some definitive list of dogmatic decrees from the first seven Ecumenical Councils.

More to the point, sacred Orthodox Traditions that may or may not be contained in the texts of a council are still part of the deposit of Orthodox faith. If I were to demand an “official list” from the Orthodox of those, I would expect the reply to be “why would I need that? I know what the Traditions of my Church are as handed down by my bishops and taught to me by my Church.” Even so, Catholics do know of ex cathedra decrees from Popes without the need of an official list.

No one seriously contests that Ineffabilis Deus and Munificentissimus Deus don’t contain dogmatic utterances from a Pope. Orthodox (and even some Catholics) might claim that the Pope doesn’t have the power to do that, but there’s no doubt that he did declare that those are universal truths that must be believed by all the Catholic faithful. The notion that without a list Catholics just can’t know whether declarations made by Popes are infallible obviously isn’t accurate.
Click to expand...
Exactly. All I have to do is read a Papal document, and I will know whether or not the Pope intended it to be infallible. That’s because the Church tells us what criteria make a statement infallible, and I have the ability to read.
 
livingwordunity said:
Exactly. All I have to do is read a Papal document, and I will know whether or not the Pope intended it to be infallible. That’s because the Church tells us what criteria make a statement infallible, and I have the ability to read.
Click to expand...
But that means I’d have to read the document… I want the condensed 1-minute version 😃
 
The Holy Father speaks in the Living Revelation of Christ when he speaks to the world, to all humanity that invites us into the life of Christ. He also represents the communion of Christianity.

But as far as ‘truth’ is, first and foremost, Truth is the full deposit of faith in Jesus Christ that exists in the Catholic Church

First degree of truth is the teaching magisterium of the Church and this is when the Church is adhering to the current Council. At present we are in uniformity and communion with Vatican II Council. This is the full communion is the Holy Father, bishops, and faithful.

The second degree of truth is in essence our universal Catholic Catechism.

Third degree of truth are papal encyclicals and not all carry the same weight of truth. Your local diocese is ever ready to present encyclicals and their perspective on truth for our life in the Church.

Also, in the past, when Pope Emeritus Benedict was Cardinal overseeing orthodoxy of our faith, through the Holy Father, he was allowed to make a definitive – meaning binding – statement that women could not be ordained to the priesthood. This happened towards end of 1994. I heard shortly after some Catholic women religious were leaving the Church to join the Episcopalian church because it allows women ordination.
 
Was the thing John Paul II said about women’s priests being impossible said ex cathedra?
 
VanSensei said:
Was the thing John Paul II said about women’s priests being impossible said ex cathedra?
Click to expand...
No. It was an affirmation of the infallible teaching of the ordinary Magisterium. It is infallible, but not because the Pope the declared it ex cathedra.
 
Gosh, 1Tim, is it something I said (below) :D? I mean, this is the third time I’ve posted and you still haven’t answered. I can tell you read posts as you’ve responded to people ‘above’ and ‘below’ me, and I think my question is quite germane to the discussion. Please, won’t you address it?
Tantum_ergo said:
I understand that you were dealing with several people here, 1Tim, but it seems that you have addressed every poster who spoke to you, except for me.

So I’ll repeat. . .

Ah. But tell me, did the Orthodox (or East) before 1054, or after 1054, teach on infallibility in regard to faith and morals at all, or, to be more exact, did they teach on the nature of Truth that would not change?

Infallibility is not a magic bullet. It is simply an assurance that something in regard to faith and morals which is revealed by God as Truth will not, at some point, be revealed as NOT true.

IOW, are the moral/faith teachings found in Scripture, Sacred Tradition, and the Magesterium absolute truths which can be depended on 100%, or not?

Does the Orthodox Church now teach that the Real Presence is found in the Eucharist, and that the Trinity is Three Divine Persons in One God? Will the Orthodox Church ever teach that the Eucharist is only symbolic, or that God is a Quartet?

If not, then those two points, at least, are infallible teachings of the Orthodox Church, are they not? Do you need to have a ‘list’ to maintain that the Truth of this, or other teachings will never change?

It reminds me of the people who cringe at words like “purgatory’ because 'that word isn’t in the BIBLE”. . .well heck, the word “BIBLE” is not in the Bible, nor is the word TRINITY there, but we surely believe those things are true, exist, and will not change.

What really is the difference, 1Tim, with a belief that the teachings of the Church on faith and morals(whether it is you speaking of the Orthodox, or me speaking of the Catholic) are protected by the Holy Spirit from being wrong? (Because from what you say, you DO believe that you are guided to 100% truth by the Holy Spirit)
Click to expand...
 
Tantum Ergo,

Your post speaks most reasonably and admirably.

To condemn infallibility because of some reflections of a certain pope as one of the rationals to the break apart the universal Christian Church – in the face of forthcoming dismantling of Christianity, is no justification for the Great Schism.

Your post speaks most reasonably of essentially same beliefs and form.

Yes, both Churches excommunicated each other. The Catholic Church does not teach heresy, and to say that she does is heresy.
 
I would like to speak for the OP, I do not want to put words into his/her mouth, but I do think I understand the reservations they have with infallible statements by the Pope.
  1. The posters on here need to be less sensitive: I do not believe the OP wanted to get into a discussion about the authority of the papacy. Obviously this is a relevant issue when discussing the topic, but it is not necessary to get into apologetics. If they had the same view of the Pope as you did, they wouldn’t be asking these questions. Attacking only puts the OP on the defensive, and doesnt allow the converstation to be as nuanced as it could be.
  2. The perspective of the Orthodox follows this line of reasoning. If Catholics are bound to believe all the magesterium (whether explicitly infallible or not), then the need for papal infallibility seems unecessary. Orthodox believers are committed to believe things because it is TRUE first, and then because it is affirmed by the Church and the Councils. Sometimes it seems that the Roman Catholic position is to believe things because it is MAGESTERIUM first, and then assume it is true.
  3. To emphasize this further, there is a different mechanism for determining truth in each traditions. In the Orthodox tradition, truth is usually “what has been believed by all men at all times (using the language of Vincent.” If anyone teaches against this, reguardless of thier station or office then they are in error. The Catholic tradition discerns what is true in the same manner, but also adds philosophy and papal doctrine in the mix. It has been catholic tradition to (at times) believe the logical systems of theologians/philosophers are more true than the faith of the Early Fathers.
  4. To determine and condemn heresy the Othodox have a collegial heirarchy. The deacons and priests are responsible to the Bishop, the Bishop to their superiors, and so on to the level of Patriarch. If the divide is so great that the Patriarchs and bishops are greatly split, an Ecumenical Council is held as the ultimate standard. In the West, the heirarchy is more monarchical. This means that the priests are disciplined by the Bishops, the Bishops by their superiors, and eventually up to the Pope ( who can discipline everyone).
  5. Finally, it is good to understand that the Orthodox do not believe that the Pope has JURISTICTION outside of the Western See. The thought of the Pope making binding statements of faith outside of his juristiction by the words “Thus saith the pope…” (to be flippant) seems a breach of decorum at best, and of the Council of Constantinople (?) at worst. I think many Orthodox would not have a problem if the Pope was granted extrodinary magisterial powers in his juristiction, but not in the juristiction of the East.
 
relstudent said:
I would like to speak for the OP, I do not want to put words into his/her mouth, but I do think I understand the reservations they have with infallible statements by the Pope.
  1. The posters on here need to be less sensitive: I do not believe the OP wanted to get into a discussion about the authority of the papacy. Obviously this is a relevant issue when discussing the topic, but it is not necessary to get into apologetics. If they had the same view of the Pope as you did, they wouldn’t be asking these questions. Attacking only puts the OP on the defensive, and doesnt allow the converstation to be as nuanced as it could be.
  2. The perspective of the Orthodox follows this line of reasoning. If Catholics are bound to believe all the magesterium (whether explicitly infallible or not), then the need for papal infallibility seems unecessary. Orthodox believers are committed to believe things because it is TRUE first, and then because it is affirmed by the Church and the Councils. Sometimes it seems that the Roman Catholic position is to believe things because it is MAGESTERIUM first, and then assume it is true.
  3. To emphasize this further, there is a different mechanism for determining truth in each traditions. In the Orthodox tradition, truth is usually “what has been believed by all men at all times (using the language of Vincent.” If anyone teaches against this, reguardless of thier station or office then they are in error. The Catholic tradition discerns what is true in the same manner, but also adds philosophy and papal doctrine in the mix. It has been catholic tradition to (at times) believe the logical systems of theologians/philosophers are more true than the faith of the Early Fathers.
  4. To determine and condemn heresy the Othodox have a collegial heirarchy. The deacons and priests are responsible to the Bishop, the Bishop to their superiors, and so on to the level of Patriarch. If the divide is so great that the Patriarchs and bishops are greatly split, an Ecumenical Council is held as the ultimate standard. In the West, the heirarchy is more monarchical. This means that the priests are disciplined by the Bishops, the Bishops by their superiors, and eventually up to the Pope ( who can discipline everyone).
  5. Finally, it is good to understand that the Orthodox do not believe that the Pope has JURISTICTION outside of the Western See. The thought of the Pope making binding statements of faith outside of his juristiction by the words “Thus saith the pope…” (to be flippant) seems a breach of decorum at best, and of the Council of Constantinople (?) at worst. I think many Orthodox would not have a problem if the Pope was granted extrodinary magisterial powers in his juristiction, but not in the juristiction of the East.
Click to expand...
If it was not clear before, the above post is my understanding of the OP’s reservations. They should not be taken as representative of my beliefs, and any attempt to refute the above statments will not be answered by me.
 
relstudent said:
If it was not clear before, the above post is my understanding of the OP’s reservations. They should not be taken as representative of my beliefs, and any attempt to refute the above statments will not be answered by me.
Click to expand...
I don’t see where she has “any” issue typing a 100-words a minute and speaking assertive for herself? 🤷

But your chivalry is admirable. 👍
 
relstudent said:
If it was not clear before, the above post is my understanding of the OP’s reservations. They should not be taken as representative of my beliefs, and any attempt to refute the above statments will not be answered by me.
Click to expand...
Glad you added that, since I didn’t pick it up from the previous post. (Perhaps if you had prefaced it with “So 1Tim215Mommy is this what you’re saying … ?” then it would have been clearer.)
 
eamonnroma said:
I think that is fairly obvious that the ‘majority’ of Catholics use contraception. Use the evidence of your eyes when you are in church. How many families do you see with 7, 8 or 9 children? Why not? Because they use contraception
Click to expand...
Or, they aren’t having sex due to being too busy and too tired.

Or, they are using Natural Family Planning.

Not everyone has sex every day or even every week.
 
1Tim215Mommy said:
Where can Non-Catholics go to find an official document listing all Infallible excathedra states made by various Popes?
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, no such list exists. Theologians have tried to draw up such lists. Different theologians produce different lists. It is unusual for the Pope to specifically say this is an infallible, ex cathedra document. It is known there are documents where the Pope hasn’t specifically declared the document so but it is. It is these latter documents that the theologians disagree over. If on the other hand you were looking for what the Roman Catholic Church believes you wouldn’t go far wrong with the Catechism.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top