Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit!
You're currently viewing Catholic CyberForum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our online cyberparish, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.
Join our community!
Messages posted to this board must be polite and free of abuse, personal attacks, blasphemy, racism, threats, harrassment, and crude or sexually-explicit language.
If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Papal Infallibility; and Infallibility of the Church
Topic Started: Monday, 21. January 2008, 23:07 (2,410 Views)
Rose of York
Member Avatar
Administrator
pete
Saturday, 18. December 2010, 01:18
Quote:
 
"To indulge in intercourse without intending children is to outrage nature, whom we should take as our instructor" (II, 9-10)

Thanks for that information Katy, dose this imply that all married couples should desist from sexual intercourse after the menopause?
The couple are not doing anything to impede God's plan so they are not bound to abstain.
Keep the Faith!

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
OsullivanB

It's a new refrain for an old song:

"It's the old wot gets the pleasure and the young wot gets the blame."
"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance - that principle is contempt prior to investigation." Herbert Spencer
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mairtin
Member Avatar

KatyA
Friday, 17. December 2010, 22:44
I thought HV simply confirmed what the Church had always taught regarding contraception ...
It's not that simple. It is commonly perceived that the Papal Commission set up to investigate contraception recommended changes in Church teaching. They didn't do so, what the Cardinals and Bishops did was to overwhelmingly conclude that allowing contraception within marriage would not contradict traditional teaching - that is a very important difference.

HV did not change Church Teaching, it expanded the Teaching and that is the problem it has created; if the Church wanted to change the position on contraception within marriage, then it is now almost impossible for her to find a way of doing so without rejecting HV and creating a different storm over that.

Quote:
 
... so it wouldn't matter what the format was.
The Vatican is an extremely bureaucratic organisation, the equivalent of the Civil Service. I'm sure that every word within such an important document let alone the format for issuing it would be very carefully weighed up and nuanced.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mairtin
Member Avatar

In all the fuss about the Pope's comments in Light of the World about condoms and HIV, little attention has been paid to his comments about married Catholics who cannot accept the Church's position on contraception - I don't have the quote to hand but he called for greater understanding to be shown towards such couples, he may even have used the word 'tolerance'.

I get the distinct feeling that Pope Benedict accepts that HV has done more harm than good but he knows that any attempt to directly change it will create other major problems so he has deliberately started a process where it will become less and less the focus of attention for practical decisions and individual areas will be decided in their own right; it is most unlikely that HV will ever be formally repealed - the Church doesn't go in for that sort of thing - but I think it will eventually fade into virtual oblivion like Casti Connubi or Pascendi Dominici Gregis.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mairtin
Member Avatar

Didn't find the exact quote I was thinking about for but I found a summary of his comments; I'm going to move discussion on it to the existing Humanae Vitae thread.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Gerard

Penfold2
Friday, 17. December 2010, 20:41
:deadhorse:
On another thread reference was made to the churches teaching on contraception
Quote:
 
though I have doubts about infallibility and consider the issue of contaception to need some updating (post 44 on Homosexuality)
the churches teaching on contraception has never been declared infallible by any Pope, though I suspect a few parish priests have taken the lazy way out of an argument and declared it so. I wish not to go over old ground but there are many misconceptions about Papal infallibility and its teaching on contraception is one of them.


PS, I post in this thread so as not to detract from the positive discussion on the thread from which I have taken the quote,

I would like to clarify that when I posted the quoted sentence I did, in fact, consider them two separate things.

Mairtin,

Let me also clarify what I mean about this and earlier statements about infallibility. I am extremely uneasy about any claim by humans to infallibility. It seems to me to be an attribute of God and not available to humans. Others will argue the case but it seems too unlikely to me. However, I still believe the Church is guided - and guided strongly, even to something approaching infallibility. But when I say that notice that I used the word Church rather than Pope. When a doctrine is ancient, is in the Scriptures, has been agreed at Ecumenical Councils, agreed by the Church Fathers and widely held by the laity then we have something approaching infallible.

Having read a little of Newman I would say my stance is very close to what his was before the declaration at V1. However, I am unable to perform the intellectual somersaults he did and so I am stuck with the earlier position.


Gerry
"The institutional and charismatic aspects are quasi coessential to the Church's constitution" (Pope John Paul II, 1998).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
PJD

For some Gerry it is easier to turn aside from intellectual somersaults when inconvenience discourages.

PJD
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mairtin
Member Avatar

Gerard
Saturday, 18. December 2010, 16:58
Let me also clarify what I mean about this and earlier statements about infallibility. I am extremely uneasy about any claim by humans to infallibility. It seems to me to be an attribute of God and not available to humans. Others will argue the case but it seems too unlikely to me. However, I still believe the Church is guided - and guided strongly, even to something approaching infallibility.
We're not too far apart from each other on this, Gerry, I have always been of the view that the Holy Spirit certainly guides the Church but He doesn't dot the i's and cross the t's.

I am very dubious about any one man, pope or not, having the gift of infallibility but I would have a completely different feeling about the bishops acting collectively. I don't want to drift back into Humane Vitae and, as Penfold pointed out, it is not an infallible teaching but it does illustrate the principle; the single biggest problem I have with it is that the overwhelming majority of the bishops who investigated the matter came up with a conclusion directly opposite to what the Pope decided to implement.
Edited by Mairtin, Sunday, 19. December 2010, 12:28.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Gerard

PJD
Sunday, 19. December 2010, 11:31
For some Gerry it is easier to turn aside from intellectual somersaults when inconvenience discourages.

PJD
True PJD there may be different motives ...

But I find some of Newman's axioms untenable. He seems not to allow faith and doubt to coexist and he forces his intellect to accept new doctrines by an act of will rather than by reason.

Gerry
"The institutional and charismatic aspects are quasi coessential to the Church's constitution" (Pope John Paul II, 1998).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Penfold
Member Avatar

Gerard
Sunday, 19. December 2010, 13:53
to accept new doctrines by an act of will rather than by reason.

Gerry
Surly that is the essence of Faith, if one acted only by reason then God and most of what we believe would be wiped away.

O and Luther's beliefs were almost the same as Pope Leo X and even closer to Paul III who started the great reform that we now know of as the Council of Trent. So being close to someone in theology is not a claiming a great deal especially when that person is not around to refute the claims you make on their behalf.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Gerard

Fair enough.

I claim the doubts on my own behalf.

Gerry
Edited by Gerard, Sunday, 19. December 2010, 19:08.
"The institutional and charismatic aspects are quasi coessential to the Church's constitution" (Pope John Paul II, 1998).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Gerard

Penfold2
Sunday, 19. December 2010, 17:36
Gerard
Sunday, 19. December 2010, 13:53
to accept new doctrines by an act of will rather than by reason.

Gerry
Surly that is the essence of Faith, if one acted only by reason then God and most of what we believe would be wiped away.

O and Luther's beliefs were almost the same as Pope Leo X and even closer to Paul III who started the great reform that we now know of as the Council of Trent. So being close to someone in theology is not a claiming a great deal especially when that person is not around to refute the claims you make on their behalf.


I guess thats the trick my brain refuses to perform. I have read that faith and reason are not supposed to contradict. When they do some seem to choose faith. I choose reason.

Newman's writings are available and extensive - probably so that people could discuss them. Perhaps even quote them. Perhaps even compare them with their own beliefs.

Anyway, I am just as pleased to have my take on it being close to Mairtin's views. This is not an inconsequential view - I think Hans Kung belongs in this group?

And should that not be Pope Paul III's beliefs were closer to Luthers?

Gerry
Edited by Gerard, Sunday, 19. December 2010, 20:41.
"The institutional and charismatic aspects are quasi coessential to the Church's constitution" (Pope John Paul II, 1998).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
tomais

And exactly what constitutes the individals cortex complexities that parallels can be drawn ans seen as exacts?
We are far away from understanding the physical complexities of ourselves- even as to what constitutes beliefes.
Over all many people come together to find similarities- but-our neurological complexitites,( too many complexitites-ed) have a long way to go before that are laid out for cool examination.
So we are,are we not simply left with intermeadrities which in all honesty,( what ever that is-Ed) which we take for an honest base for disputation.
All swans are white.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Gerard

Except the black ones.

Oh! and also the ducks.

Gerry
"The institutional and charismatic aspects are quasi coessential to the Church's constitution" (Pope John Paul II, 1998).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Penfold
Member Avatar

Gerard
Sunday, 19. December 2010, 18:51
And should that not be Pope Paul III's beliefs were closer to Luthers?

Gerry
No Luther was close to Paul III since as Pope his is the standard by which others are judged.
Since defined in the Vat I only one dogma has been declared infallible, The Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary by Pope Pius XII on November 1, 1950 in his Apostolic Constitution Munificentissimus Deus.
Through history there have been very few dogmas which have been recognised as infallible. As a scientist I would have thought you would welcome a few certainties and that is precisely what Infallibility does. In a sense that is why not being a scientist I will defer to the knowledge and experience of a scientist and why I prefer to accept the authoritative teaching of church dogma to the Pope.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · General Catholic Discussion · Next Topic »
Add Reply