When Popes are wrong...

[Dominus Fidelis]

Ok, so I've been reading abit about the Reformation and Pope Leo lately, since it was Reformation Day in our separated brethren's churches...

Of course we are to submit to Papal authority on matter that are declared ex cathedra, because we believe the Pope is infallible when speaking ex cathedra on matters of faith and morals.

Given Luther was right about not selling indulgences...was he wrong for not listening to the Pope on that matter and submitting to Papal authority?

(Dont be confused...I dont think Luther was right for going off the deep end with the whole faith alone thing.)

How does this effect us today? If the next Pope were to be a joke like Pope Leo was and was teaching a bunch of nonsense (use your imagination here), how should a faithful Catholic react?

I guess I am asking if we have to listen to everything a Pope says even if it seems wrong and is not declared ex cathedra, ie binding on all the faithful.

 

[Dream]

Very good question, I was going to post something like this but you beat me to it.

I look forward to reading the responses.

 

[Irenaeus]

Defens,

One should do what Catherine of Siena did with the Popes at Avignon - Pray, obey as much as it is with your conscience, and continue to love Holy Mother Church.

 

[Dream]

Defens,

One should do what Catherine of Siena did with the Popes at Avignon - Pray, obey as much as it is with your conscience, and continue to love Holy Mother Church.

So what if the Pope starts saying that abortion is acceptable. Should I still obey him?

 

[Irenaeus]

DreamTheater,

That won't happen. He is infallible in faith and morals...or at least, (I think) in an official declaration.

 

[Dream]

DreamTheater,

That won't happen. He is infallible in faith and morals...or at least, (I think) in an official declaration.

But if you study history, you'll find out that there some very terrible popes. I remember reading about one (don't remember his name), but he was such a terrible pope that a lot of Catholics prayed that God would take his life.

 

[Irenaeus]

Dear Brother,

I think you are confusing infallibility with impeccability.

A joke goes that some Popes were so bad the Holy Spirit kept them busy so that they wouldn't harm the Church and her doctrine.

Alexander VI had several illegitimate children, lived in an extravagent papal court, and was even perverse enough to demand to watch his children consummate their marriages... he was a very troubled and sinful.

Popes, like individual members of the Church, can be sinners. We are all sinners...we can even be scandalous sinners. However, sinfulness does not affect infallibility. Infallibility, or cleanness in doctrine as the official teacher of the Catholic Church, is guaranteed by the Holy Spirit. This has never failed to be true.

 

[Credo]

"You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Irenaeus again."

Excellent post, Irenaeus! You are indeed wise beyond your years.

 

[nyj]

So what if the Pope starts saying that abortion is acceptable. Should I still obey him?

Let us deal with what we know has happened. Dealing with "what if's" does not help the discussion whatsoever.

 

[Irenaeus]

Thank you for your ten cents, nyj.

 

[RhetorTheo]

The Pope is not infallible on faith and morals when speaking ex cathedra if he contradicts the constant teaching of the Church.

 

[Dominus Fidelis]

RhetorTheo-

I'm sensing there is something more you would like to say?

 

[Irenaeus]

Rhetor -

The Pope cannot speak ex cathedra at all when he contradicts a formerly defined doctrine. Something can be further defined, but not redefined.

To illustrate this, especially in the Ecumenical Councils, like the first four, our Christology was very slowly developed and codified, even though these things defined by the Council were believed by thousands of Christians before hand.

1 Nicea defended the Trinity. 1 Constantinople then saw a need to defend the Holy Spirit, specifically. Then a good deal of Ephesus was about Christ, and his human and divine natures. Chalcedon was similar to Ephesus in that regard. In this way, councils, like Papal ex cathedras, may build on one another, as they all find their rock in the Deposit of Faith, implicitly or explicitly.

As Venerable John Henry Newman said, a doctrine is not defined until it is attacked.

 

[RhetorTheo]

RhetorTheo-

I'm sensing there is something more you would like to say?

First, Irenaeus is right, the Pope does not speak ex cathedra unless he is infallible.

The conditions required for ex cathedra teaching are mentioned in the Vatican decree: ... His teaching cannot contradict anything the Church has taught officially and previously. It may clarify and explain, but never alter what has come before.

The problem is that with the structure of authority, the exception for contradicting previous doctrine has no teeth. As with our Constitution ("the Constitution says what the Supreme Court says it says"), the teachings of the Church are whatever the Pope says it is.

If the Pope says the Church has always taught that abortion is a moral good, those who disagree would be excommunicated, prior writings that oppose abortion would be reinterpreted or left out, new catechisms written, etc. We would be told, "Abortion was taught against in the early Church because of its use in hiding the evidence of fornication and adultery, not to protect the life of the unborn. Although it is a sin to abort if done with that intent, it is not sinful to abort if there are grave reasons for it, such as financial, familial or health reasons. This is simply a clarification and refining of the prior teaching. The church has always taught that there is no life until quickening...." The devout Catholics (not excommunicated) would rally behind the Pope's teaching. By the time the Pope would be out of office, the makeup of the Church would have changed to prevent the prior teachings from returning without another major upheaval. Of course, none of this would ever happen.

 

[RhetorTheo]

We all know that the Church never has changed any doctrines, even an iota, and cannot ever change any doctrines because the gates of Hell will not prevail against the Church. So why did Vatican I put in a requirement that Catholics are to use to determine whether a Pope's statement is ex cathedra? If it's impossible for a Pope to ever change doctrine, did Vatican I err?

 

[Irenaeus]

RhetorTheo,

I believe Vatican I made those indications to avoid the confusion of the faithful (clergy and laity) who may not be able to differentiate between an official dogmatic statement or a pastoral decision, or personal opinion.

It would solve a lot of confusion if the "arenas of ex cathedra" were defined.