- Feb 5, 2002
- 182,314
- 65,985
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Female
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
In recent years, I have been surprised to find that progressive modernists, hyper-papalist conservatives, and sedevacantists support similar positions when it comes to interpreting the teachings of the Pastor Aeternusconstitution (1870) concerning the infallibility of the Pope. Of course, their reasons are different. And yet, they support the interpretation that, besides being infallible, the Pope is indefectible. In other words, a pope in office cannot be (or become) heretical. To understand their positions, we must simply and clearly summarize the dogma of infallibility.
When the Supreme Pontiff defines ex cathedra a teaching concerning faith or morals, he cannot err. A special charism given to the Church by the Lord Jesus Christ himself protects the Holy Father from any error. Explicitly defined as dogma in the constitution Pastor Aeternus, issued in the context of the First Vatican Council under Pope Pius IX in 1870, this teaching was defined as follows:
Continued below.
onepeterfive.com
When the Supreme Pontiff defines ex cathedra a teaching concerning faith or morals, he cannot err. A special charism given to the Church by the Lord Jesus Christ himself protects the Holy Father from any error. Explicitly defined as dogma in the constitution Pastor Aeternus, issued in the context of the First Vatican Council under Pope Pius IX in 1870, this teaching was defined as follows:
Continued below.
The Hyperpapalist Interpretation of Pastor Aeternus: Why Modernists and Sedevacantists are Both Wrong
When modernists, hyperpapalist conservatives, and sedevacantists agree.
onepeterfive.com
